Author Topic: Second post from CALO by Ken Huey  (Read 16249 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Troll Control

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7391
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Second post from CALO by Ken Huey
« Reply #75 on: July 15, 2009, 08:58:57 AM »
Quote from: "TigerEye"
Quote from: "bobpeterson1973"
TigerEye,

I have some questions for you.  

(1) Did Ken Huey explain to you that PCS incorporates "bent wrist control methods with variations."
(2) Did you ask questions about consequences for rule violations?
(3) Did you discuss staff credentials with Ken Huey?
(4) Did you speak with students who were recently enrolled at CALO?
(5) Did you tour the entire campus when you enrolled your son at CALO?
(6) Did you eat a meal with your son to see how staff interacted with students?
(7) Did you ask questions about crisis intervention training and appropriate restraint techniques/procedures?
(8) Did you ask for CALO's business license number and verify it with the appropriate state agency?
(9) Did you speak with the appropriate state agency to see if they received complaints about physical abuse, emotional abuse and sexual abuse?
(10) Did you walk through the dorm your son would be living in?
(11) I don't 'know if you're aware but Ken Huey, Landon Kirk, Caleb Cottle, and Nicole Fuglsang worked at abusive programs.  Do you see this as a red flag?
RE: (12) viewtopic.php?f=9&t=27810

I would say yes to most of the above but not the last (no.11)
And regarding the previous posts, one thing should be clear - what is dangerous behavior by a kid out in the community is not necessarily the same behavior that would be manifested in a controlled setting. Isn't that partly the point of a restrictive setting?  A kid who uses drugs, gets into fights, steals, destroys public property, cuts him or herself, etc. is placed into a setting where that is pretty much impossible - and situations that do arise are nipped in the bud. Do you dig what I am saying? We are not talking about kids who are psychotic, or who have a true conduct disorder, as I think they would probably be excluded from a setting like CALO.

Ithought you said your son was so dangerous to self and others that he had to be placed at CALO or he would be in jail or a lock-down psych facility. If your son could be appropriately placed in a lock-down psych ward or in prison, how could he be appropriately placed at CALO?  This makes no sense whatsover on its face.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
The Linchpin Link

Whooter - The Most Prolific Troll Fornits Has Ever Seen - The Definitive Links
**********************************************************************************************************
"Looks like a nasty aspentrolius sticci whooterensis infestation you got there, Ms. Fornits.  I\'ll get right to work."

- Troll Control

Offline AuntieEm2

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 330
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Second post from CALO by Ken Huey
« Reply #76 on: July 15, 2009, 10:53:20 AM »
Quote
Quote
Guess what? Last weekend when I saw him he said that after CALO he wants to go back to the wilderness program, because the people there were "chill." Go figure....
Oddly, his preferred destination was not "home"...Guest

This speaks volumes.

My observations after reading posts here and at other sites, and after talking personally with survivors, is that the majority of (though not all) teens sent to programs do not have close relationships with their parents afterwards. They say they go through the motions. They appear agreeable and compliant around their parents, but privately do not trust their parents again.

I can understand this. I imagine how it would feel to have the very people whom you are supposed to be able to trust completely a) allow you to be forcibly transported, usually in handcuffs, b) turn you over to the care of strangers, often thousands of miles from home, c) end their daily parental contact with you, just a few minutes on the phone every week or two for a year or more, and d) deny all your requests to return home. Personally, I would not trust or love these people/parents again.  

That said, I can often understand how parents can be victims in this environment as well, though they do not endure anywhere near the sort of suffering and abuse the teens endure.

Few, if any, parents realize the program will most likely cost them their relationship with their child in addition to hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Auntie Em
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
Tough love is a hate group.
"I have sworn...eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." -Thomas Jefferson.

Offline TigerEye

  • Posts: 49
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Second post from CALO by Ken Huey
« Reply #77 on: July 15, 2009, 11:15:07 AM »
Quote from: "Guest"
Quote
OK, then. We have confirmed that CALO takes deeply disturbed kids like arsonists who are dangers to themselves and their families. Just wanted to get that cleared up so we can talk about CALO's population more intelligently.

Do they mix in more-or-less normal kids with the dangerous ones like your boy? Or is there a general population and some sort of special housing unit where they keep the really bad ones?

This is all any parent needs to know.  Dangerous population, mixed together, living together and untrained, uneducated "coaches" facilitating "therapy."  I'd run from this place.  This "treatment model" is crazy!

For those of you 'who' haven't noticed yet, "TigerEye" is not a CALO parent.

Right. Alot you know! Read back, knucklebrain.
And btw, what is "normal," anyway? Are YOU "normal?"
And for the purposes of argument, why would you case so much about my identity?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Re: Second post from CALO by Ken Huey
« Reply #78 on: July 15, 2009, 12:08:08 PM »
Your agenda, your credibility…
Ken Huey might be better off at least taking the time to answer some of the more pointed questions…the ones you’ve been dodging.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Troll Control

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7391
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Second post from CALO by Ken Huey
« Reply #79 on: July 15, 2009, 12:25:14 PM »
Quote from: "TigerEye"
Quote from: "Guest"
Quote
OK, then. We have confirmed that CALO takes deeply disturbed kids like arsonists who are dangers to themselves and their families. Just wanted to get that cleared up so we can talk about CALO's population more intelligently.

Do they mix in more-or-less normal kids with the dangerous ones like your boy? Or is there a general population and some sort of special housing unit where they keep the really bad ones?

This is all any parent needs to know.  Dangerous population, mixed together, living together and untrained, uneducated "coaches" facilitating "therapy."  I'd run from this place.  This "treatment model" is crazy!

For those of you 'who' haven't noticed yet, "TigerEye" is not a CALO parent.

Right. Alot you know! Read back, knucklebrain.
And btw, what is "normal," anyway? Are YOU "normal?"
And for the purposes of argument, why would you case so much about my identity?

Well, because it speaks to your motive for defending the indefensible.  Once more, you are asking us to believe two mutually exclusive pieces of information:  One, that your kid is so dangerously deranged that he would be appropriately placed in a lock-down psych ward or in prison (your words, not mine); and two, that CALO is a safe environment, free from dangerous attendees (Ken Huey's words, not mine).

Obviously, your kid a is dangerous.  Arson is a dangerous crime with a potential for many fatalities in dorm-style housing.  It also happens to be very, very highly correlated with sexual abusers.  Considering that CALO accepts these very dangerous types, it's hard to reconcile why any parent would send a "struggling teen" there, as it seems to be populated with dangerous and potentially deadly offenders.

I just want you to characterize CALO fairly.  It cannot be both a safe environment for struggling teens and suitable for kids who belong in prison or lock-down psych wards, as you stated your kid does.  

I'm just pointing out your logical fallacies here.  Don't shoot the messenger.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
The Linchpin Link

Whooter - The Most Prolific Troll Fornits Has Ever Seen - The Definitive Links
**********************************************************************************************************
"Looks like a nasty aspentrolius sticci whooterensis infestation you got there, Ms. Fornits.  I\'ll get right to work."

- Troll Control

Offline psy

  • Administrator
  • Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 5606
  • Karma: +2/-0
    • View Profile
    • http://homepage.mac.com/psyborgue/
Re: Second post from CALO by Ken Huey
« Reply #80 on: July 15, 2009, 12:31:58 PM »
Quote from: "TigerEye"
Quote
This is all any parent needs to know.  Dangerous population, mixed together, living together and untrained, uneducated "coaches" facilitating "therapy."  I'd run from this place.  This "treatment model" is crazy!.

Right. Alot you know! Read back, knucklebrain.
And btw, what is "normal," anyway? Are YOU "normal?"
Nobody is normal.  The point I think the guest is trying to make is that certain aspects of the program' population and staff scare the crap out of him, especially based on knowledge of what has happened in other programs where these volatile "ingredients" are combined.

Personally, I'd really like to know what a survey of the "student" population would reveal (in terms of supposed "issues").  I'd like to know whether the student population is uniform or greatly varied, and if the student's issues vary, to what extent.  If you don't know this, perhaps you should educate yourself.  If I had a daughter and she was was, for example, a victim of severe abuse, i wouldn't want her around other kids who have a history of abuse or violent behavior.  Even if nothing happens, I couldn't see her being very safe.  Furthermore, I wouldn't feel her being very safe at all in the hands of untrained "coaches" and indeed, other students actually leading the supposed therapy, especially without the supervision of trained professionals (if that is indeed the case).
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
Benchmark Young Adult School - bad place [archive.org link]
Sue Scheff Truth - Blog on Sue Scheff
"Our services are free; we do not make a profit. Parents of troubled teens ourselves, PURE strives to create a safe haven of truth and reality." - Sue Scheff - August 13th, 2007 (fukkin surreal)

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Re: Second post from CALO by Ken Huey
« Reply #81 on: July 15, 2009, 12:41:10 PM »
It is a possibility that TigerEye is Maminka.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Troll Control

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7391
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Second post from CALO by Ken Huey
« Reply #82 on: July 15, 2009, 12:57:42 PM »
Maybe so, but that's immaterial.  What matters is that TigerEye and Ken Huey offer mutually exclusive depictions of CALO.  Now I just want to know which one is lying.  They can't both be telling the truth.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
The Linchpin Link

Whooter - The Most Prolific Troll Fornits Has Ever Seen - The Definitive Links
**********************************************************************************************************
"Looks like a nasty aspentrolius sticci whooterensis infestation you got there, Ms. Fornits.  I\'ll get right to work."

- Troll Control

Offline M_Hilton

  • Posts: 61
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Second post from CALO by Ken Huey
« Reply #83 on: July 15, 2009, 01:29:11 PM »
Quote from: "Guest"
Maybe so, but that's immaterial.  What matters is that TigerEye and Ken Huey offer mutually exclusive depictions of CALO.  Now I just want to know which one is lying.  They can't both be telling the truth.

AND the only way to do that is go up there and see whats going on...
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Re: Second post from CALO by Ken Huey
« Reply #84 on: July 15, 2009, 01:47:17 PM »
Huh.  Someone told me "Ken Huey" means "free pussy" in Tagalog.  Any truth to that?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Troll Control

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7391
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Second post from CALO by Ken Huey
« Reply #85 on: July 15, 2009, 01:52:35 PM »
Quote from: "M_Hilton"
Quote from: "Guest"
Maybe so, but that's immaterial.  What matters is that TigerEye and Ken Huey offer mutually exclusive depictions of CALO.  Now I just want to know which one is lying.  They can't both be telling the truth.

AND the only way to do that is go up there and see whats going on...

I'll be expecting a full report, soldier.

Seriously, though, if TE is telling the truth, then Ken Huey has some serious explaining to do.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
The Linchpin Link

Whooter - The Most Prolific Troll Fornits Has Ever Seen - The Definitive Links
**********************************************************************************************************
"Looks like a nasty aspentrolius sticci whooterensis infestation you got there, Ms. Fornits.  I\'ll get right to work."

- Troll Control

Offline Ursus

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8989
  • Karma: +3/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Second post from CALO by Ken Huey
« Reply #86 on: July 15, 2009, 03:30:39 PM »
Quote from: "AuntieEm2"
Quote
Quote
Guess what? Last weekend when I saw him he said that after CALO he wants to go back to the wilderness program, because the people there were "chill." Go figure....
Oddly, his preferred destination was not "home"...
This speaks volumes.

My observations after reading posts here and at other sites, and after talking personally with survivors, is that the majority of (though not all) teens sent to programs do not have close relationships with their parents afterwards. They say they go through the motions. They appear agreeable and compliant around their parents, but privately do not trust their parents again.

I can understand this. I imagine how it would feel to have the very people whom you are supposed to be able to trust completely a) allow you to be forcibly transported, usually in handcuffs, b) turn you over to the care of strangers, often thousands of miles from home, c) end their daily parental contact with you, just a few minutes on the phone every week or two for a year or more, and d) deny all your requests to return home. Personally, I would not trust or love these people/parents again.  

That said, I can often understand how parents can be victims in this environment as well, though they do not endure anywhere near the sort of suffering and abuse the teens endure.
Good point.

Often the pretense of familial relations is kept up for a few months or even years, but once the realization of what happened sinks in fully, some kids opt for a complete break from the family in order to preserve their sanity and integrity.

Btw, extreme measures need not always have occurred. A more critical contributing factor seems to be the extent to which the parents "bought into" the program.

Quote
Few, if any, parents realize the program will most likely cost them their relationship with their child in addition to hundreds of thousands of dollars.

It could also cost them their relationship with their grandkids.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
-------------- • -------------- • --------------

Offline AuntieEm2

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 330
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Second post from CALO by Ken Huey
« Reply #87 on: July 15, 2009, 04:02:09 PM »
Quote
It could also cost them their relationship with their grandkids.
Another good point, Ursus. We've certainly heard people say that here.

It's not surprising that teens form close friendships while in the programs. Unless I've misunderstood, this becomes their new "family," day and night for years. The old family is not to be trusted; the new family understands firsthand what they're going through. The old family is absent; the new family is present.

My niece's parents defend what they did as their choice as parents; I say they resigned as her parents when they handed her over to the escort service and the program.
 
Auntie Em
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
Tough love is a hate group.
"I have sworn...eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." -Thomas Jefferson.

Offline Troll Control

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7391
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Second post from CALO by Ken Huey
« Reply #88 on: July 15, 2009, 05:55:01 PM »
Quote from: "Ursus"
Quote from: "AuntieEm2"
Quote
Quote
Guess what? Last weekend when I saw him he said that after CALO he wants to go back to the wilderness program, because the people there were "chill." Go figure....
Oddly, his preferred destination was not "home"...
This speaks volumes.

My observations after reading posts here and at other sites, and after talking personally with survivors, is that the majority of (though not all) teens sent to programs do not have close relationships with their parents afterwards. They say they go through the motions. They appear agreeable and compliant around their parents, but privately do not trust their parents again.

I can understand this. I imagine how it would feel to have the very people whom you are supposed to be able to trust completely a) allow you to be forcibly transported, usually in handcuffs, b) turn you over to the care of strangers, often thousands of miles from home, c) end their daily parental contact with you, just a few minutes on the phone every week or two for a year or more, and d) deny all your requests to return home. Personally, I would not trust or love these people/parents again.  

That said, I can often understand how parents can be victims in this environment as well, though they do not endure anywhere near the sort of suffering and abuse the teens endure.
Good point.

Often the pretense of familial relations is kept up for a few months or even years, but once the realization of what happened sinks in fully, some kids opt for a complete break from the family in order to preserve their sanity and integrity.

Btw, extreme measures need not always have occurred. A more critical contributing factor seems to be the extent to which the parents "bought into" the program.

Quote
Few, if any, parents realize the program will most likely cost them their relationship with their child in addition to hundreds of thousands of dollars.

It could also cost them their relationship with their grandkids.

Yes indeed.  Even TheWho, the most vainglorius of program pimps, admits that his daughter came home from ASR (with no diploma, BTW, she never graduated from there), hooked up with her old friends, started drinking heavily and doing drugs, cut him off from her life, and dropped out of school completely.  Somehow TheWho hold this up as a "success story" which illustrates the Orwellian nature of program-speak.  Failure is success.  Neat and tidy.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
The Linchpin Link

Whooter - The Most Prolific Troll Fornits Has Ever Seen - The Definitive Links
**********************************************************************************************************
"Looks like a nasty aspentrolius sticci whooterensis infestation you got there, Ms. Fornits.  I\'ll get right to work."

- Troll Control

Offline TigerEye

  • Posts: 49
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Second post from CALO by Ken Huey
« Reply #89 on: July 16, 2009, 12:55:54 AM »
You guys have totally lost me...I don't know what the hell you are talking about on this thread anymore...Let's see, earlier somebody said that kids shouldn't be sent to residential unless they are dangerous to themselves or others. I responded that in my kid's case, and in most cases at this RTC that was true. Then I explained that "dangerous" in terms of behavior in the general outside world is different than what might be expected in a controlled, therapeutic environment. The community resources, the parents, the schools can't keep these kids (or themselves) safe.
Then somebody said that "dangerous" kids like mine should be kept separate from the "normal" ones. Then nobody could define normal. Then there was a lot of speculation about who I am, why I don't answer all of the "pointed" questions with which bobpeterson would like to pin me against the wall, since I am supposedly such an evil bitch of a parent. And then it was that either Ken or I were lying.

WTF! I have lost interest in this supposed "dialogue"...
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »