Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform > Aspen Education Group
Aspen Education Group deceptively markets short term invalid
Whooter:
--- Quote from: "Guest" ---Lawsuit clearly states the defense lawyers are from "Aspen Education Group" and those lawyers made the case that Aspen programs offer no therapy or treatment. I take them at their word over the poster here obsessed with trying to turn the truth upside-down (aka TheWho, Whooter, John D. Reuben, et al).
Why do we need TheWho's opinion on this when the court record shows Aspen provides no treatment?
I believe the court records, not some hack troll from STICC (an Aspen feeder group).
--- End quote ---
Looks like you are wrong. Here is a link to the court records that Ursus posted. Look at the bottom of the page #2:
2 The parties seem to agree that although Trudy Godat was not licenced, one member of Matthew Pence's "treatment team" was a licenced therapist.
Court Records
Troll Control:
--- Quote from: "Guest" ---Lawsuit clearly states the defense lawyers are from "Aspen Education Group" and those lawyers made the case that Aspen programs offer no therapy or treatment. I take them at their word over the poster here obsessed with trying to turn the truth upside-down (aka TheWho, Whooter, John D. Reuben, et al).
Why do we need TheWho's opinion on this when the court record shows Aspen provides no treatment?
I believe the court records, not some hack troll from STICC (an Aspen feeder group).
--- End quote ---
Aspen's program also says that all couselors are therapists on their website, indicating legal licensure, but in court they said their counselors are not therapists and that they are unlicensed. They either lied in court or are advertising falsely. Either way, they can't be trusted to tell the truth to parents.
And, if the 'counselor' was working on a 'treatment team' with a 'licensed therapist' then that would mean that the counselor was 'under the supervision of a licensed therapist' which Aspen denied at the hearing. Apparently, this 'therapist' had no ties to the 'counselor' or the 'treatment team' assigned to the boy.
Whooter:
--- Quote from: "Guest" ---
--- Quote from: "Guest" ---Lawsuit clearly states the defense lawyers are from "Aspen Education Group" and those lawyers made the case that Aspen programs offer no therapy or treatment. I take them at their word over the poster here obsessed with trying to turn the truth upside-down (aka TheWho, Whooter, John D. Reuben, et al).
Why do we need TheWho's opinion on this when the court record shows Aspen provides no treatment?
I believe the court records, not some hack troll from STICC (an Aspen feeder group).
--- End quote ---
Aspen's program also says that all couselors are therapists on their website, indicating legal licensure, but in court they said their counselors are not therapists and that they are unlicensed. They either lied in court or are advertising falsely. Either way, they can't be trusted to tell the truth to parents.
And, if the 'counselor' was working on a 'treatment team' with a 'licensed therapist' then that would mean that the counselor was 'under the supervision of a licensed therapist' which Aspen denied at the hearing. Apparently, this 'therapist' had no ties to the 'counselor' or the 'treatment team' assigned to the boy.
--- End quote ---
Harless was the director of North Star. she wasnt working for a licensed person. Why dont you read the Court Records?
The court agrees with defendants that Harless's alleged disclosure of Matthew Pence's confessions to police was not an extreme transgression of the bounds of socially tolerable conduct. Matthew Pence's IIED claim therefore fails as a matter of law.
Court Records
Troll Control:
But their website says all counselors are therapists.
See? http://http://www.northstarcenter.com/drugtreatmentterms.html#honorcode
So are they advertising falsely or did they lie in court. We have to get to the bottom if it. Both statements can't be true, but they were both made by Aspen.
Ursus:
--- Quote from: "Guest" ---
--- Quote from: "Guest" ---
--- Quote from: "Guest" ---Lawsuit clearly states the defense lawyers are from "Aspen Education Group" and those lawyers made the case that Aspen programs offer no therapy or treatment. I take them at their word over the poster here obsessed with trying to turn the truth upside-down (aka TheWho, Whooter, John D. Reuben, et al).
Why do we need TheWho's opinion on this when the court record shows Aspen provides no treatment?
I believe the court records, not some hack troll from STICC (an Aspen feeder group).
--- End quote ---
Aspen's program also says that all couselors are therapists on their website, indicating legal licensure, but in court they said their counselors are not therapists and that they are unlicensed. They either lied in court or are advertising falsely. Either way, they can't be trusted to tell the truth to parents.
And, if the 'counselor' was working on a 'treatment team' with a 'licensed therapist' then that would mean that the counselor was 'under the supervision of a licensed therapist' which Aspen denied at the hearing. Apparently, this 'therapist' had no ties to the 'counselor' or the 'treatment team' assigned to the boy.
--- End quote ---
Harless was the director of North Star. she wasnt working for a licensed person. Why dont you read the Court Records?
The court agrees with defendants that Harless's alleged disclosure of Matthew Pence's confessions to police was not an extreme transgression of the bounds of socially tolerable conduct. Matthew Pence's IIED claim therefore fails as a matter of law.
Court Records
--- End quote ---
Whooter, you addressed one claim out of the five, and try to make it appear as if that were the whole case.
I would strongly suggest that people follow the link and read for themselves. This was a request for summary judgment brought by both parties, and the court was unable to rule on the last three of five claims. These were:
III. Third Claim - Negligent Provision of Mental Health Tx
IV. Fourth Claim - Breach of Confidential Relationship
V. Fifth Claim - Punitive Damages[/list]
As soon as I posted the case last night, Whooter began with a veritable barrage of obfuscating and misleading posts, quoting parts that were discussion material as if they were conclusion material, and ignoring the ruling on its face.
Presumably, this case continued to trial. However, I have been unable to find any mention of it. Does anyone know whether Aspen settled this out of court to prevent further exposure of the issues raised?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version