Way more kids praise programs than attack them, why is that?

[Anonymous]

Before you start your explanation, I hope you consider refraining from using the term "brainwashing", since this is not accurate.

If 1,000 kids say a program is just fine, and 4 kids complain that it was abusive, what would you believe? That is the choice parents have today and why the 'anti program movement' is nothing more than a few websites and the crazy people who run them.

[Anonymous]

If 1,000 kids say a program is just fine

That is a pretty big "if".  If my grandmother had wheels she'd be a shopping cart. :roflmao:

[Antigen]

If 1,000 kids say a program is just fine, and 4 kids complain that it was abusive, what would you believe?

And if frogs had wings then they wouldn't bump their asses on the ground when they hopped. But that's just not the case.

Before you start your explanation, I hope you consider refraining from using the term "brainwashing", since this is not accurate.

Ok then, I won't say it. How do you explain yourself?

[Ursus]

Before you start your explanation, I hope you consider refraining from using the term "brainwashing", since this is not accurate.

Ok then, I won't say it. How do you explain yourself?

Why and how is the term not accurate? Seems to me that such a shoe fits many a foot in these parts!  

[Anonymous]

To begin with the program i attended spent much of the 11 months i was there threatening me not to complain. in order to leave you had to sign a contract and write an essay about how great the program is and agree to the directors that you won't say anything bad or have contact with any students from the program. when i got home i was often threatened by my mother over every little thing that she would send me back if i did not do what she wanted. i was sent to the program because i have Asperger's and depression and my father just wanted a normal child. the program i was at thought Asperger's meant i did not know it was wrong to lie and steal. it took me three years before i could trust a therapist to tell her what happened to me. After leaving the ranch i suffered severe anxiety. The problem is many people don't get the help they need so they become self destructive and cannot get themselves together to speak out. i am lucky but it took 4 and half years of therapy before i am now brave enough to post online. i am not posting the name of the place i went to because i hear they cleaned up some of the worst behavior however i am sure it is not the ideal situation for most teens in need of help. the program i went to the complaints far outnumber happy customers especially those from 2001-2004 when the program was much worst.

i have never done drugs, i don't drink, never been arrested and am now a junior in college. now that i have found this site i feel i finally found a place were the truth is being told.

[Ursus]

the program i was at thought Asperger's meant i did not know it was wrong to lie and steal.

Generally speaking, kids who have Asperger's are less likely to lie... They often have an obsession for this thing called "the truth." I bet your program did not know very much about Asperger's.

[FemanonFatal2.0]

Even taking into account that OP is certainly a troll, I still feel its important to discuss this issue.

I believe it really boils down to the person you are and the experience you had with the program. Whether you are a parent, former detainee or just an interested party chances are you will either adhere to the opinion that the methods employed by the troubled teen industry can easily be classified as child abuse, or you think that for some reason these teens deserved the harsh treatment. I know that seems to be an over generalization but long story short it comes down to whether you have the capasity for empathy or not.

I actually find it funny, talking to my old program friends and aquaintences how many of them still believe that whole dead, insane or in jail bit... I mean you want proof of brainwashing?... How about the fact that they all give you the same line, without any evidence of that actually being the truth in their personal experience. Like our guest above said, most of us returned to bad behavior after we left far surpassing our childish attempts of rebellion before the program... and what do you know... were still here.

Not to mention the fact that many people actually enjoyed the fact that they were given absolute power over others, and were actually encouraged to mentally and physically abuse other students. For some, a situation like the program is the perfect outlet for their violent desires and these kinds of people have no mind to turn around and stand against a program that taught them that abuse was okay, as long as you think the victim deserved it.

Same goes for the parents... too many parents are just trigger happy to see someone else punishing and controlling their child. They feel they failed as a diciplinarian and that they lost respect from their child and the only way to gain that back is to let them live in hell for a few years so they might come home greatful and respectful. and sure that ruse can be upkept with threats of being sent back... but only for so long. Most times that just backfires and they get a kid who's lost even more hostile and disrespectful.

Thing is, this over generalized estimate of 1000 to 4 is probably not coming from a very reliable source... in my personal experience, talking to hundreds of former students not just from the school I went to but many many others, I find that your estimate is way off. I say more accurately its about 2 to 100, and a majority of that percentage could really care less and just want to move on with their lives. A lot of it has to do with the experience they had, for instance not everyone was physically abused, and every program had a different level of mental and emotional trauma. Just because a former student isn't pissed off enough to join the cause doesn't automatically mean they approve of the program... in fact most people choose to stay ignorant to the truth about the illegal and unethically activities of the program because they just don't feel like dealing with that massive realization.

It takes dedication to stand against the program and sadly... only about 4 out of 1000 really have what it takes to make a difference.

[Anonymous]

Well now Femanon Fatal,
That was some speech, I enjoyed your reason. I have to say your explaination was the best I have heard in a while. You posted on alot of different points and it all rolled together.
Thanks...WOW
Love it here really do.....
 :shamrock:  :shamrock:  :shamrock: ...........Danny.....

[Whooter]

A few random thoughts
I think the reason more kids praise programs then attack them is because more kids were helped by them.  I really don’t think they look back on their time there as abusive the same as kids don’t look back on their lives at home as abusive.  They don’t feel their parents were abusive because they were held accountable for their actions and had to face consequences like staying in their room or missing a Friday night out.

The kids who attend programs all know why they were sent there and had plenty of notice and or opportunity to adjust their behavior prior to being sent, but just just chose not to.

I can see, by reading here on fornits, why many would conclude that all programs are abusive.  If there were a web site dedicated to talking about the abuses in public schools and how they were raped and humiliated by staff and teachers and omitting any positive experiences they had I think many would be leaning towards home schooling .  Another example, I am sure that the kids who lived through the Columbine experience feel all the parents must be brainwashed into thinking that our public school system is safe and continue to this day sending our innocent kids to school to be slaughtered after seeing first hand that kids can get shot there.  We must conclude that these parents have no feeling for their own kids safety or why would they send them off like that?

Many of the parents who send their kids to programs speak to other parents who had kids in the same school or speak to the kids themselves.  So they are getting first hand information of the schools success.  If you add this to the studies that some of these schools have done it is easy to conclude that the overwhelming majority of the kids who attend a program do well and continue on a healthy path after graduating.

Also, the absence of these children on websites, like fornits,  is understandable.  If a 1,000 people buy a flat screen from Walmart and 4 of them have trouble with their sets how many people do you think Walmart would hear from?  The people who are happy are not going to take the time to call up customer service and thank them for such a great TV.  The people who speak out are the ones who are unhappy, they don’t represent the majority, it is quite the opposite.



...

[Ursus]

The kids who attend programs all know why they were sent there and had plenty of notice and or opportunity to adjust their behavior prior to being sent, but just just chose not to.

You reveal more than you realize in that statement. Your characterization of the reason that kids get sent to programs is one of punishment and behavior modification, plain and simple. They "just chose not to" adjust their behavior, so this is what they get.

Some kids come from abusive home situations, perpetrated by their parents, which the programs neither attempt to rehabilitate nor even address. I'm not exactly sure what behavior adjustment you think these kids should have effected to prevent their being sent to a program.

If these programs were actually what you claim they are, surely the "non-rotten apples" would be denied admission, and kids suffering from abusive family dynamics would be directed to more appropriate venues?

But ... in real life, this very rarely happens. Rather, it's a one-size-fits-all approach driven by corporate greed and tunnel-visioned ideology, where advancement is measured by confessions of wrong-doing and the ability to coerce others to do same, regardless of the verity of it all. Some programs even fraudulently market themselves as "specialty boarding schools" with some extra-special bonus perks, which include cult-like indoctrination of both the kids and their parents in LGAT seminars.

Some kids really don't do well in that kind of environment, previous maladjusted behavior or not. Utilizing a punitive approach coupled with a milieu of 24/7 peer pressure ... breaks some kids and more or less permanently warps others. That's why one hears tales of abuse. It IS abuse, plain and simple.

[Whooter]

You reveal more than you realize in that statement. Your characterization of the reason that kids get sent to programs is one of punishment and behavior modification, plain and simple. They "just chose not to" adjust their behavior, so this is what they get.

I think it is clear to all of us.  The kids choose not to adjust their behavior and/or they are not responding well to local services which are in place attempting to facilitate positive changes in the child’s behavior.  Some kids refuse to work with the local people and therefore need to be helped off site.  This is where the boarding schools come in.  I dont see it as punishment but rather many parents have informed their children of what the next step will be if local services are not successful or if they are not willing to work together.

Some kids come from abusive home situations, perpetrated by their parents, which the programs neither attempt to rehabilitate nor even address. I'm not exactly sure what behavior adjustment you think these kids should have effected to prevent their being sent to a program.

Many programs are very effective in helping kids in abusive home situations.  A big step is getting them away from the home where the abuse occurs, so boarding school is a good choice in this example.  The schools, I am aware of, work with the parents to change the home situation.

If these programs were actually what you claim they are, surely the "non-rotten apples" would be denied admission, and kids suffering from abusive family dynamics would be directed to more appropriate venues?

The programs that I am familiar with will not accept a child who is violent and will suggest other methods/therapies to these parents.  Many programs require the child to be evaluated locally prior to being admitted to better understand the childs struggles.  This insures that each particular program can better insure the success of each child in their program.

But ... in real life, this very rarely happens. Rather, it's a one-size-fits-all approach driven by corporate greed and tunnel-visioned ideology, where advancement is measured by confessions of wrong-doing and the ability to coerce others to do same, regardless of the verity of it all. Some programs even fraudulently market themselves as "specialty boarding schools" with some extra-special bonus perks, which include cult-like indoctrination of both the kids and their parents in LGAT seminars.

You seem to view all boarding schools as being the same.  Aside from what I have read here on fornits I have never seen a one-size-fits-all approach in any of the schools.  The programs provide a very individualized plan for each child.  Many programs are beginning to specialize even further to focus on specific problem areas.

Some kids really don't do well in that kind of environment, previous maladjusted behavior or not. Utilizing a punitive approach coupled with a milieu of 24/7 peer pressure ... breaks some kids and more or less permanently warps others. That's why one hears tales of abuse. It IS abuse, plain and simple.

I agree that programs are not effective with all children.  This is why I would like to see an independent evaluation be mandatory prior to any children being accepted into a program.  This would help to insure the child would be matched with the right program and that the particular child would even benefit from a long term stay.  Some kids don’t do well even after many months of behavior modification and individual therapy.  I don’t expect to ever see a 100% success rate but it is important to find ways to continuously improve the process.



...

[Pile of Dead Kids]

The programs that I am familiar with will not accept a child who is violent

When constructing propaganda, remember not to inadvertently include statements that lead to solutions you don't like. Here, you have given a clear option for kids trying to avoid being part of the Pile.

[Whooter]

The programs that I am familiar with will not accept a child who is violent

When constructing propaganda, remember not to inadvertently include statements that lead to solutions you don't like. Here, you have given a clear option for kids trying to avoid being part of the Pile.

Pile you make a good point, but,I think most kids are aware of this option.  Kids know that if they start punching people out or resorting to other forms of violence then they place themselves in a different category and will have to deal with the consequences of the path they choose.  If kids are not aware I think they should be told, very clearly and upfront,that violence will not be tolerated and will result in the kid being sent home (or another type of placement).

It is better for the school and the other kids if they can determine if a child would resort to violence ahead of time.  It would save the parents and the program a lot of wasted effort and finances.  This is another reason why a mandatory prescreening of all kids prior to acceptance would benefit not only the parents and child but also the program.



...

[Antigen]

FYI, I don't usually spend much time reading responses to Whooter Goebels' trolls, either. So sorry if I missed something good.

Femanon, that IS about the best explanation I've seen. You really do have a gift for getting down to brass tacks without removing too much of the brass. I'd add one thing, though. Maybe 4 in a thousand speak out Maybe not. Seems to me most people vent a little, speak their peace and then get back to the business of living. So ya don't hear from them all the time and maybe forget they came breezing through. But they did.

There's also another even less visible contingent of folks who have reliably provided funding, promotion, recommendations and connections and help of all kinds without ever making much of a public splash. Some are concerned about their careers and/or peace and privacy in their family lives and social circles. Some are just plain shy and disinclined to speak publicly. But there are a lot of them! Enough that we don't have a lot of trouble raising funds when we're in a pinch nor finding any kind of professional talent at need.

Bottom line, I'm thinking that 1000 - 4 stat is probably just about ridiculous.

[Whooter]

FYI, I don't usually spend much time reading responses to Whooter Goebels' trolls, either. So sorry if I missed something good.

Why resort to name calling?   Why do you have this need to label people who have a different opinion than your own?  I don’t agree with many of your opinions but not once have I made disparaging comments against you.

If you are against “prescreening kids” or “independent evaluations” prior to placement then you should argue that point.  If you feel more kids are hurt than helped by programs then argue that to.

As I thought it over I have to say that I was  a little reluctant in engaging you on this topic (particularly in this thread) but I have to say that attacking posters because of their opinions is just wrong in my opinion and falls more under the definition of trolling than any of my posts do.



...