New York State shutting state facilities?

[Whooter]

Missouri is still a very lax state when it comes to laws that apply to children. If I am not mistaken, Missouri is one of the few states where children are allowed to restrain other children in state public and privately owned programs.

@ Whooter, It is not the success of these programs that people are witnessing, it is the "illusion" of success that is purported by these programs. Please correct me if I am wrong. Which program, particularly, would you say is successful?

 I have seen 100% turn around on kids going thru a program and they continue on a healthy path..... I have seen 80% and 60%..... No illusions.....I have also read (here on fornits) about kids who were not as fortunate.  I have been exposed to and therefore am able to see the larger picture where you seem to only have information about a small sub set of kids who come out of programs.  Just because these other kids dont post on fornits doesnt mean they do not exist.  I think we can all agree that fornits doesnt represent an even cross section of kids who attended programs.

I believe children are force fed medications on a daily basis in programs across the country. I have talked to many of the "recently released" and stories of this. I believe that children receive electro-shock "treatment" daily at the Judge Rotenberg Educational Center in Massachusetts, which is no secret.  As for sexual abuse, I believe the loose regulations within this industry allow for many types of abuse to go unseen and therefore do not think it is unlikely that children are sexually abused daily in these programs. To trivialize these terrible things by acting as if they do not occur or to imply that they do not occur as frequently as people opine is to miss the point entirely.

I guess my point above is that not all kids are force fed meds in programs, sexually abused or shocked. just like not all kids are raped by their teachers in public school.  The Missouri model is not going to be immune to these types of problems either.  Predators have a way of getting into the system.  But the steps being taken by the state of NY are good ones in my opinion and the Missouri model and private sector models (or hybrid)  are going to prove to be a much safer alternative to what they have today.  I think this is an area where we can all agree.



...

[blombrowski]

I grant that I came up with the most sensationalist examples that I could think of.  But they all tie back to a specific program where the abuse/mistreatment/maltreatment is/was part of the "treatment".

Some of these methods have been discredited and until recently they still have happened behind closed doors (Mount Bachelor Academy).  Some of these methods have been discredited and they happen in full view (Judge Rotenberg Center).  Some of these methods are no longer used, but the people who used these methods have not expressed any public remorse for using those methods, or doubt their own judgment in using them, and are still working with youth (Family Foundation School, Elan).

There are different levels of critique here.  There are programs whose programming is abusive (Mount Bachelor Academy).  There are programs who have policies and systemic deficiencies that will inevitably lead to abuse (New York State's juvenile justice programs).  There are programs that due to a lack of community integration and community oversight are more likely to attract employees who are likely to abuse kids (Bromley Brook).  There are programs that may not legally abuse kids but are expensive and ineffective, and are effectively committing fraud, by selling the mental health equivalent of Airborne and claiming it actually cures colds (name your program).

In making some reasonable and fair critiques of these issues, in my encounters so far with the industry, I have run into programs who are receptive to these criticisms and are trying to make changes, and I have run into programs who are comfortable doing business as usual.

And the truth is, there's very little in the mental health and substance abuse world that we do that we know works.  The one thing that seems to have evidence behind it, is that the shorter the duration of the program and the more community integrated that program can be, the better the outcomes.  If the privately run programs want to move towards this model more power to them.  It won't be as profitable, but it'll actually serve the youth they work with better.  Is there a private program out there like the Missouri JJ model that serves youth from that youth's community, and only for a limited period of time?

[Whooter]

It seems we agree that when designing a new model that it would be best to avoid those programs which failed to deliver what they promised (as you pointed out above) and that is what the Missouri Model did…

“ The state of Missouri changed its juvenile prison system into a new, more effective model that looks something like a series of therapeutic boarding schools…………They often do therapeutic work in peer groups, where they open up about their pasts, family traumas, and other problems. If they adhere to rules, they receive rewards in the form of visits home, field trips, and other freedoms.

In 2006, only 7% of Missouri teens who finished the therapeutic program were in adult prisons within three years. This compares to 75% in New York and California. No Missouri teens have committed suicide since the overhaul of the system. Nationally, more than 25 teens within juvenile systems kill themselves every year.

"This isn't rocket science," said Mark Steward, director of Missouri's Division of Youth Services. "It's about giving young people structure, love and attention, and not allowing them to hurt themselves or other people. Pretty basic stuff, really."



What Missouri did was take from their research into TBS’s and other privately run programs what was working and that is their small staff to student ratio, therapeutic component, transition back into the community support and a focus on family to name a few.
 
The same would apply if you were going to start a new charter school you would look at and research what works well in other schools public and private but would not consider what was not effective thereby making a stronger more effective school.

As far as length of stay I don’t see how a shortened stay can increase effectiveness.  It’s the quality of the stay that is important and the Missouri model doesn’t guarantee a short stay.  The stay is determined by how well the kids apply themselves.  TBS’s maintain profitability very well with shorter stays.  The key is to keep the beds filled and as one student graduates another is accepted into the program.  If you have a program with 150 beds then keeping them filled is the ultimate goal to profitability not how long they are there.



...

[Anonymous]

Missouri is a state run facility...no money (per say)....comes from the state allocating funds....paperwork.
Paralell w/ juvie institutions...this is why I think it is revolutionary....now humans have self-will we can
only hope that the ones holding the "keys to the castle" don't become self-centered or the next Gov.
thinks there are getting to much funding.

[wdtony]

When you write "I think we can all agree" repeatedly, that doesn't mean that we all agree and it doesn't make your opinion any more valid.

How is therapy better than general counseling sessions where the children don't have to rely on a reward/punishment system to advance? A visit home should not be a reward.

And no, it isn't rocket science....the human mind and factors contributing to behavior is much more complicated than rocket science.

Peer groups are an innappropriate venue to open up about PRIVATE traumas and family issues.

If you can't provide an example of a specific program that you consider to be successful, for whatever reason, I don't know how to discuss what models might be successful or detrimental. I don't have the knowledge base to discuss every positive and negative concerning program methods and their efficacy.

Blombrowski has listed a few programs that have serious issues, it would be productive to list a few that seem to be on the right track (in your opinion).

[Whooter]

When you write "I think we can all agree" repeatedly, that doesn't mean that we all agree and it doesn't make your opinion any more valid.

What I try to look at is your point of view and my own and see if there are any areas in which we have consensus.  If it bothers you that I point this out I will stop.

How is therapy better than general counseling sessions where the children don't have to rely on a reward/punishment system to advance? A visit home should not be a reward.

Our whole society is based on a reward/ punishment system.  The Missouri Model uses this also and has seen great results so far.

And no, it isn't rocket science....the human mind and factors contributing to behavior is much more complicated than rocket science.

I think what the director of youth service meant was that there are a few basic components of the Missouri Model which make it successful… Structure love and attention.  I don’t think he was trying to make a direct comparison.  He was Just saying that it is not that difficult.

Peer groups are an innappropriate venue to open up about PRIVATE traumas and family issues.

I disagree with you especially if they can place people in groups which have similar experiences.  The Missouri Model has seen success so far in this approach as have the Therapeutic Boarding Schools.

If you can't provide an example of a specific program that you consider to be successful, for whatever reason, I don't know how to discuss what models might be successful or detrimental. I don't have the knowledge base to discuss every positive and negative concerning program methods and their efficacy.

Blombrowski has listed a few programs that have serious issues, it would be productive to list a few that seem to be on the right track (in your opinion).

I would rather not list names of Programs here for obvious reasons.   But if you look at the shift from a large prison type system (like Missouri had) to a smaller more therapeutic setting modeled after TBS with its peer groups and group therapy with reward systems and then see the results that only 7% ended up back in prison after 3 years vs 75% in the old system its not hard to see that it has been a successful change.



...

[Anonymous]

When you write "I think we can all agree" repeatedly, that doesn't mean that we all agree and it doesn't make your opinion any more valid.

How is therapy better than general counseling sessions where the children don't have to rely on a reward/punishment system to advance? A visit home should not be a reward.

And no, it isn't rocket science....the human mind and factors contributing to behavior is much more complicated than rocket science.

Peer groups are an innappropriate venue to open up about PRIVATE traumas and family issues.

If you can't provide an example of a specific program that you consider to be successful, for whatever reason, I don't know how to discuss what models might be successful or detrimental. I don't have the knowledge base to discuss every positive and negative concerning program methods and their efficacy.

Blombrowski has listed a few programs that have serious issues, it would be productive to list a few that seem to be on the right track (in your opinion).

You are associated with HEAL. What ideas do HEAL  members think will change abusive  programs and other juvenile justice programs?  It is easy to say, "Shut abusive programs down".  However, these programs resurface elsewhere in the United States.

[Ursus]

It seems we agree that when designing a new model that it would be best to avoid those programs which failed to deliver what they promised (as you pointed out above) and that is what the Missouri Model did…

“ The state of Missouri changed its juvenile prison system into a new, more effective model that looks something like a series of therapeutic boarding schools…………They often do therapeutic work in peer groups, where they open up about their pasts, family traumas, and other problems. If they adhere to rules, they receive rewards in the form of visits home, field trips, and other freedoms.

In 2006, only 7% of Missouri teens who finished the therapeutic program were in adult prisons within three years. This compares to 75% in New York and California. No Missouri teens have committed suicide since the overhaul of the system. Nationally, more than 25 teens within juvenile systems kill themselves every year.

"This isn't rocket science," said Mark Steward, director of Missouri's Division of Youth Services. "It's about giving young people structure, love and attention, and not allowing them to hurt themselves or other people. Pretty basic stuff, really."

What Missouri did was take from their research into TBS’s and other privately run programs what was working and that is their small staff to student ratio, therapeutic component, transition back into the community support and a focus on family to name a few.
 
The same would apply if you were going to start a new charter school you would look at and research what works well in other schools public and private but would not consider what was not effective thereby making a stronger more effective school.

As far as length of stay I don’t see how a shortened stay can increase effectiveness.  It’s the quality of the stay that is important and the Missouri model doesn’t guarantee a short stay.  The stay is determined by how well the kids apply themselves.  TBS’s maintain profitability very well with shorter stays.  The key is to keep the beds filled and as one student graduates another is accepted into the program.  If you have a program with 150 beds then keeping them filled is the ultimate goal to profitability not how long they are there.



...

The numbers from the blue (quoted) section in Whooter's post didn't exactly compare with numbers I've read about thus far, so I googled them...

Moreover, the comparison of the Missouri model with therapeutic boarding schools struck me as odd.

None of the material coming out of Missouri or describing that system seems to use that particular descriptive or those "relapse rate" percentages.

·
·
·

Well... here's the actual source of Whooter's quote, one of a myriad of "teen help" spam sites:

http://www.teen-help-directory.com/miss ... hools.html

I noticed that the "article" appeared right alongside a "featured program" description of Academy at Swift River.  

[Ursus]

Network Solutions whois info for teen-help-directory.com:

Domain Services Provided By:
      000domains, http://www.000domains.com

Registrant:
   Aspen Education Group
   17777 Center Court Dr
   Suite 300
   Cerritos, CA  90703
   US

   Registrar: 000DOM
   Domain Name: TEEN-HELP-DIRECTORY.COM
      Created on: 01-NOV-02
      Expires on: 01-NOV-10
      Last Updated on: 15-OCT-07

   Administrative, Technical Contact:
      Hobbins, Mark  [email protected]
      Aspen Education Group
      17777 Center Court Dr
      Suite 300
      Cerritos, CA  90703
      US
      1.5624675526


   Domain servers in listed order:
      NS.RACKSPACE.COM
      NS2.RACKSPACE.COM

End of Whois Information

[Whooter]

The numbers from the blue (quoted) section in Whooter's post didn't exactly compare with numbers I've read about thus far, so I googled them...

Moreover, the comparison of the Missouri model with therapeutic boarding schools struck me as odd.

None of the material coming out of Missouri or describing that system seems to use that particular descriptive or those "relapse rate" percentages.


Well... here's the actual source of Whooter's quote, one of a myriad of "teen help" spam sites:

http://www.teen-help-directory.com/miss ... hools.html

I noticed that the "article" appeared right alongside a "featured program" description of Academy at Swift River.  

I think you consider it spam because it doesnt agree with you and that is okay.  But if the numbers or portions of the article seem off to you then post what you have.  Its always good to compare the figures from different sources, maybe the director of youth services and others are not getting their figures straight.  That would be good to know.  I noticed the ASR ad also and thought they had updated their logo on recent ads.  This one seemed a little dated to me, but it did pop out.

A drop from 75% down to 7% seems large to me also.  I know that the TBS industry has experienced these success rates but to see it drop so easily for kids who are coming out of a prison environment (like the Missouri model) is a huge success in my mind.  Dropping the heavy hand for a more therapeutic approach does seem to be the answer, though.



...

[Ursus]

A drop from 75% down to 7% seems large to me also. I know that the TBS industry has experienced these success rates but to see it drop so easily for kids who are coming out of a prison environment (like the Missouri model) is a huge success in my mind. Dropping the heavy hand for a more therapeutic approach does seem to be the answer, though.

Hey, ya might just try reading the previous page of this here very thread, although I know ya did post in it...

Here are the stats that I see cited, I haven't seen the figures you cite anywhere save that "teen help" snake oil ad:

NPR: Missouri Youth Prisons · Listen to this Real Player news clip that explains how Missouri's Juvenile Justice System differs from the juvenile systems in other states.

August 21, 2001 · Morning Edition
Matt Hackworth of member station KCUR has a report on the Missouri juvenile justice system -- while over 70 percent of kids housed in conventional jails nationwide end up back behind bars, in Missouri that figure is only 11 percent. State officials credit their juvenile justice system, which emphasizes counseling and rehabilitation.[/list][/list]

Moreover, how does one interpret "small dormitory-style facilities, free of bars and perimeter fences" as being equivalent to "therapeutic boarding schools?"

Seems the Aspen folk are getting kinda loose and slothful with their advertising standards here!

[Whooter]

Wow, your tough on people....Here, this is why the numbers are different.  
Your source:
In 2001, over 70 percent of kids housed in conventional jails nationwide end up back behind bars, in Missouri that figure is only 11 percent.

My source:
In 2006, only 7% of Missouri teens who finished the therapeutic program were in adult prisons within three years. This compares to 75% in New York and California. No Missouri teens have committed suicide since the overhaul of the system. Nationally, more than 25 teens within juvenile systems kill themselves every year.

It seems your figure was 5 years earlier and refers to a nationwide average of 70% and that Missouri is experiencing an 11% return rate at that time.
My figure speaks to New York and California with 75% and 7% in Missouri.  

So looking at both our numbers it seems the Missouri model has been improved over the 5 years from 11% return rate down to 7%.  I find looking at many sources valuable. With the addition of your source we can see that they are both in line with each other.  It would be interesting to see if they have been able to improve upon the 7% since 2006.

Moreover, how does one interpret "small dormitory-style facilities, free of bars and perimeter fences" as being equivalent to "therapeutic boarding schools?"

I think it goes beyond the physical set-up.  The Missouri model has incorporated a therapy component into their rehabilitation and focuses more on family and getting them involved.  The Staff to child ratio has been brought more in line with therapeutic boarding schools and they focus on an easier transition back into society.



...

[Ursus]

Moreover, how does one interpret "small dormitory-style facilities, free of bars and perimeter fences" as being equivalent to "therapeutic boarding schools?"

I think it goes beyond the physical set-up.  The Missouri model has incorporated a therapy component into their rehabilitation and focuses more on family and getting them involved.  The Staff to child ratio has been brought more in line with therapeutic boarding schools and they focus on an easier transition back into society.

I'm just going by what your "informative" source wrote, namely (emphasis added):

Missouri Reforms Its Reform Schools to a More Effective Therapeutic Model

The state of Missouri changed its juvenile prison system into a new, more effective model that looks something like a series of therapeutic boarding schools...[/list]

While we're on the subject of "more effective therapeutic models," do tell us what is so "therapeutic" about going through Aspen's Lifesteps, experiential exercises based in part on those used in the psychologically destructive LGAT Lifespring?

Given how coercive and damaging many adults found Lifespring's methodology to be, what makes you think it would be anything but more so for adolescents?

[Whooter]

You two can rumble for 15 more pages.  What is the solution to the problem in state facilities?

So far the discussion has lead us to following what the state of Missouri did which was to drop the heavy hand and cell doors for a more therapeutic approach which seems to be working.

@ Ursus : Oh boy, your asking the wrong guy on that one.  I don’t have a background in therapy.  I know first hand that sitting in a Russian style sauna in the winter time  and then jumping into the snow or icy pond is extremely therapeutic but I couldn’t explain the details of why it works.  It just does.



...

[psy]

@ Ursus : Oh boy, your asking the wrong guy on that one.  I don’t have a background in therapy.  I know first hand that sitting in a Russian style sauna in the winter time  and then jumping into the snow or icy pond is extremely therapeutic but I couldn’t explain the details of why it works.  It just does.

Aah but can you prove it works?  Just because something makes a person feel fantastic or changed or healthy does not make it so.  The amount of popular snake oil and quackery out there in the market proves that.  Something can only be said to objectively work or be therapeutic if it provide demonstratable, consistant, and repeatable results.  That has never been done with the programs you support so highly.  One would think given the amount of money in this industry that if these programs actually worked there would be some independent, peer reviewed studies out there, but there aren't.  Why is that?