True. There are no studies to go either way. All anybody has on either side is anecdotal. That being said, the wealth of anecdotal evidence I have seen, as well as studies done on the results of the methods used, would seem to suggest that a great deal of harm can from from the majority of the programs out there. That being said, I would love to see an independent study done. I'm quite confident they'll support what I am saying. Even if they don't, just because something "works" does not make it ethical.
I think that is why I disagree so much here and many disagree with me is because we have seen evidence from different sides and have formed our opinions based on them. Personally I believe I am a better judge because I have seen evidence from fornits and from kids who have benefitted from their stay in a program.
Oh. I've seen and talked to both; however the vast majority of the ones with positive opinions I have run into do not maintain that positive viewpoint in the long run. Time is the key. The kool aid wears off. I'd go so far to say I can't recall a single person I have talked to who after years of being out of a program, after exposure to the outside world and alternative viewpoints, will still maintain that it was a beneficial experience. Hell. Like I said. There was a time when I felt the program I was in had helped me. I'm sure you'd find the same with most of those who were in straight, WWASP, or any other independently verifiable hellholes.
How much a kid praises a program has almost nothing to do with how abusive it is. Anecdotal evidence would seem to show an inverse relationship as Straight supporters could be almost fanatical in their defense of the program and WWASP parents are almost as bad. Thought reform is a powerful process that can turn the bizarre or the abusive into salvation in the eyes of a participant.
Most fornits posters have limited exposure and have witnessed only one side of the issue.
I do agree that independent studies would clear up many of our differences, but I wouldn’t expect fornits to accept any study which went against their established believes. Many would find some reason to discredit the findings.
I think the problem is partially that there isn't a truly independent source willing to fund / oversee such an endeavor. Without that, any study, regardless of outcomes, could be called into question (and certainly would be by either side). This is why I prefer to avoid the issue of whether or not a program "works" or not. Is it ethical is what I ask. Are the methods humane? Are the methods abusive? Is it ethical to treat a person without their consent? In my mind those are far more important questions to ask.
Good point. Objectively, you can't say definitively what caused it, however when kids come out of a program and are later diagnosed with PTSD, caused by the program, I think it's fair to assume that some of the suicides could be attributed to the program.
I agree that stressful experiences could cause PTSD and if a child is abused inside a program that could be the result, but how do we know which ones?
Which programs? Well. The only real way to do that is to ask questions of those who have been in the particular program about what they have been through, and compare those experiences with those of others and of similar programs. Some threads on Fornits have done a good job of this as has ISACcorp in gathering information. I think it's also fair to look at the known practices of the school, it's origin, and it's power structure. Keep in mind that the facts of many practices, such as the skits at MBA, are not contested by either side. What Is debated is whether or not those practices constituted abuse, or were in any way beneficial. Personally I can't think of an appropriate therapeutic context for a song about hand jobs but obviously Aspen disagrees. All that is up to a to a jury to decide after considering testimony from both sides, expert witnesses, etc... and I'm quite sure it'll get to that because while some parents might fall for Aspen's bullshit, there will be some who won't be so gullible and who will decide to sue.
We also need to consider the kids like “Nigel’s son” and scores of others who go into programs feeling suicidal and hopeless and come out on a better path and live long happy lives.
Personally. i'm quite sure Nigel's son will come out singing the praises of the program. It'll probably be that way for anywhere from a few weeks to a few years... but what i'm also sure of from experience, is that time will put things in perspective. It's only then Nigel's parents will start to regret their decision.
there is a profusion of data documenting that torture, imprisonment, kidnap and thought reform causes long term brain damage.
There aren't traditional "experiments" on the subject because you can't legally torture someone to collect data about how it alters them--but that doesn't make the available studies only "anecdotal."
You are right. I misspoke. One
can show that a particular program uses thought reform and the effects of that are indeed known... but each organization using thought reform has it's own caveats and the long term effects are not identical. Singer lists a host of different symptoms for a host of different cults. In order prove what symptoms programs produce, there would have to be independent studies. Proving programs increase risks of suicide is not as easy as it seems, regardless of what you or I have seen with our own eyes.
