If You had the chance to speak at NATSAP

[psy]

I would use concrete examples of situations that their members have been involved in.  Psy, you're in an ideal position to speak from your personal experience at Benchmark.

The irony is that if I did, it would likely be in front of Benchmark staff, Jayne, and dozens of ed-cons.  Anybody have a bulletproof vest I can borrow?

Ginger suggested I start this thread to brainstorm some ideas, some of which we've already discussed.  Oz has some great suggestions, and with permission, i'd like to use some of that if and when we speak.

[Anonymous]

sorry, i disagree with oz girl's "definitions" -  they do not define the problem. many programs do not have fences or walls or forced PHYSICAL incarceration yet do trememdous damage to kids.

[psy]

sorry, i disagree with oz girl's "definitions" -  they do not define the problem. many programs do not have fences or walls or forced PHYSICAL incarceration yet do trememdous damage to kids.

I said portions.  Her long list of questions, specifically.  Thought reform, informed consent, social structure of a program, power imbalance, ethics of disclosure, LGATs, and self determination would be included as topics as well.

[psy]

Psy and Antigen would do well to bring security reps. as their plus ones.

If Myself or Antigen get knocked off, it'll look real real bad for them (sort of making martyrs out of us, which they don't want).  It's more likely they'll try and spy on us in order to try and blackmale us (which is sort of pointless since there is nothing we have to hide).

[wdtony]

Could Fornits folk speaking at a NATSAP conference be twisted into the idea that Fornits folk believe that NATSAP is legitimate?

Example:

I was once put on an advisory board for our county school system after I got out of KHK as a student advisor.  I went to all of the meetings only to realize that nothing I said carried any weight and I was only there to give the appearance that the teenage population had a voice about what went on with county/school politics. I was used to make the board appear more inclusionary and any input I gave was laughed at and shot down behind the closed doors of the meetings.


If you go, you will be on their turf, so to speak. They will have all of the control as far as I can tell. It would be like agreeing to go on the "Rush Limabaugh show" in which every time you would try to make a valid point, your audio feed would be cut off and a long rant diverting from your point would redirect the attention from anyone smart enough to question. At such a venue, there is no fair debate because the discourse is controlled by one side. At the end of the day, NATSAP can then claim that you were invited by them which can be used as ammunition to show just how fair they are and if you complain about not being given a fair shot at explaining, you will be ridiculed and laughed at as the radicals they wish to portray you as.

I would be very careful and learn the details about whatever invitation was extended by them. I would say it is more likely they are setting some type of trap rather than wishing to hear your perspectives. Fornits is hurting their bottom line and they want you to go away. If they can't force you, maybe they'll try another tactic. Someone previously mentioned Fornits being a trojan horse but it sounds more like the trojan horse has already been offered by NATSAP.

Any attempt to communicate with Fornits will only be set up for their benefit, remember that. Their goal is not to improve anything for kids. If that were the case, I doubt they would ask people from Fornits. I think this is an attempt to silence critics and exposers so they can increase enrollment and profit margins.

[psy]

All the same, from what I have seen of what this stuff is about, I think I may lean towards agreeing with other posters. In fact, there is probably a better chance of them rubbing off on you, then you rubbing off on them.. That s just my point of veiw anyway.  Thye base their careers on their point of veiw.   I could be wrong, but I would say that the more friendly they are to you, the more cause for concern.  You have to watch yourself that YOU do not start to slip.

That's good advice, but I don't think that's very likely.  I already know what they believe and why they believe it.  It's they who label us druggies and so forth.  If we come off as sane and make arguments they understand...  open their minds a little... who knows.  Let's not forget most of these people live in their own little bubble.  Our goal would be to punch a few holes and inject some new ideas.

[psy]

Could Fornits folk speaking at a NATSAP conference be twisted into the idea that Fornits folk believe that NATSAP is legitimate?

Fornits, itself, is a forum.  If Antigen and myself appear, it will not be in an "official" capacity as some sort of Fornits Official Ambassadors... Just as posters... Just like anybody else here.  Any attempt to paint Fornits itself as having an opinion on anything is absurd...  Just as absurd as claiming a blank piece of paper has an opinion.  They could try, but it would fail, and we'll leave it at that.

[psy]

I hear ya.. I know what you are saying, and again, I am not sure that I am right.

My point is this- Do they really care what Fornits has to say.  I doubt it.. unless they know something I don t know, which is why i made my inquiries b4 waisting the time trying to write a post wiuthout knowing what iit is all about and who you are talking to.

So now if they do not really care, why invite them.  Look, there are challenges everywhere!  I can t seem to look iny possible direction, without seeing infintie amounts of challenges, but you have to pick your battles.

I do not know anything about this.  I am going with what little I could gather from this boards.

If it were me.. I don t know...  Maybe I d go... But only if I was ready and prepared.

Anything like this can go either way.  You would have to be dead on focussed, and confident.

You would have to know what you are going say, and have only that in your mind.  You are going to be smiling with and shaking hands with these people prior to going up b4 them and telling them that their whole lives is a joke.

I would probably have to include something like " Many of the people working in these programs may be redeemable, but your programs are not!"  How do you think they would respond to that?  Honestly, I could put a hole in the room, that would probably have these fuckers crying at night.

But that is me.. That is what I think I can do.  Someone going, in my opinion, should have that mindset, before going, because the ripple effect that you speak of works in both directions!


Basically, you have to be like a trojan horse.  They have thought far ahead.  You have to think further ahead.

But again, I am not even completly sure what I am talking about, becuase I do not know who is being addressed and whose interests are involved here.

Paul

Very good advice nonetheless.

[psy]

Referencing the C.S. Lewis quote, there are certainly robber barons in this industry, I suspect that most however are those that torment with the approval of their conscience.  I think you can at least make a dent, at a minimum get a few programs to rethink their practices and make the experience of the youth in their "care" a little less traumatizing.  At this point a good chunk of the industry are third generation disciples of Lifespring and twentieth generation disciples of Boys Town.  They do what they do because they don't know another way, or it affects their bottom line too much to do otherwise.

This is the core of what Antigen and I were discussing earlier.  The robber barons are out of reach.  The ones that torment with the approval of their own conscience can, in theory, be affected if they start to view what they are doing as at least in part just plain wrong.  We want to cause them to question and to doubt what they "know" to be true.

[wdtony]

I just can't seem to get away from the notion that NATSAP isn't going to be swayed by reason. I don't think you can sit down with terrorists and say," hey guys, here's why what you are doing is wrong". I don't think they hold capacity to understand a point of view they don't already have. If they are aware of Fornits, they are aware of the widespread abuse that they protect and would have done something about it by now.

If anything, it seems that NATSAP wants to learn from you how to better hide from....well, people like you/us as well as the public.

Will any media be there? Would you be given an allotted amount of time to make your case? These things would change my opinion completely.

[Oz girl]

Psy- Sure take what you want from it. That would be great.
 Paul St John- You raise some interesting points. Of course children to not share all of the rights of adults because they don't have the maturity to handle the responsibility that goes with it. But to me this is exactly why this industry is so very wrong because it abuses the responsibility that we hold as adults. I think in s way it also makes encourages a certain lazyness when it comes to adult responsibility. The idea that a parent has a kid that they are struggling with and that in some cases the school community is struggling with & they can warehouse them for a fee to be fixed is distasteful to me. I think adult owe their kids more than that.
Good parents and even regular boarding schools occasionally ground teenagers for a few weeks or remove priviledges like cell phones and video games but this is different to isolating them for extended periods of time. Usually even a grounded kid goes to school or if they are boarders still get to contact family unmonitored and uncensored.
I am not aware of any other countries in the oecd or the western democratic world that do have private for profit places like this that parents can independently send kids to. I know of dictatorships like china that have military boot camps, or of developing countries who have places like this opened by US citizens for mainly American students. Having said that I fear that this concept can spread which is why I think it is important to raise the issue of international law.

As to drug addiction I understand why parents feel they should do whatever it takes to get their kid sober on one level but then on another i don't get why isolation from family is seen as the answer. If mine were dealing with either a mental illness, eating disorder or an addiction so great that they had to live in some sort of hospital or institution for a time, I would feel the need to visit them more not less. I would want the whole family and most of their friends giving them as much love and support as necessary. I would want close knowledge of exactly what sort of therapy they were getting and how they felt the were doing. This cant happen if they are locked away.

[Anonymous]

I just can't seem to get away from the notion that NATSAP isn't going to be swayed by reason. I don't think you can sit down with terrorists and say," hey guys, here's why what you are doing is wrong". I don't think they hold capacity to understand a point of view they don't already have. If they are aware of Fornits, they are aware of the widespread abuse that they protect and would have done something about it by now.

If anything, it seems that NATSAP wants to learn from you how to better hide from....well, people like you/us as well as the public.

Will any media be there? Would you be given an allotted amount of time to make your case? These things would change my opinion completely.

Natsap is worse than any "terrorist." A lot of the so called terrorists have some pretty reasonable grievances.

If any "activist" goes their presence will be used to make NATSAP look like it is addressing the “abuse problem.” And by extension you will give NATSAP integrity of some kind. These people have their own agendas. Why further them?

On the other hand, if anyone wants to go armed with powerful explosives, or fast acting poisonous gas weaponry, or can figure out how to poison the catering.....

[psy]

On the other hand, if anyone wants to go armed with powerful explosives, or fast acting poisonous gas weaponry, or can figure out how to poison the catering.....

Which, like terrorism, would do anything but generate sympathy for a cause.  Can't kill em all. Might as well try to convince them to  at least open their minds a tiny bit about some critical issues.  I don't expect it to end the industry or even convince anybody to quit their job, but if it makes the life of even one kid easier, I think it's worth it.

[Oz girl]

WD tony i dont think convincing them is really the test here. Of course none of those assholes are going to turn around, admit they are wrong and close their schools and programs. But they have asked for a representative to give a view so I say give it to them. Who knows, maybe there will be  parent in the audience who was already sceptical. Even if this is not the case just calling them on their own bs would be fun.

[Ursus]

Geeezzz... Personally, I think they are just fishing for expression of what our points of contention are, so that they can articulate refuting arguments. It'll all appear later as a watered-down "Essay" on Struggling Teens with a title like "Troubled anti-program activists weigh in with suggestions." I can't really see any good coming out of it, at least not in the foreseeable future (maybe I'm just real down on everything tonight).

On the other hand, it'll send a bad message if nobody goes, given that an invitation was extended. So... it would be probably be best to go. Btw, who was invited? Ginger? Or fornits personages in general?