Author Topic: "Multi-Center Study of Youth Outcomes" (Behrens, 2006)  (Read 7219 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Whooter

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5513
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: "Multi-Center Study of Youth Outcomes" (Behrens, 2006)
« Reply #15 on: June 17, 2010, 12:16:27 PM »
Quote from: "Ursus"
But what is actually being measured is simply the kid's and his or her parents' perception of change between start of program and the conclusion of program. No further. And no deeper.

And while that analysis may be "clean," from a certain perspective, it is also quite shallow. We are not dealing with an analysis on the efficacy of certain vacuum cleaners here (well, perhaps metaphorically speaking, we are!). We're dealing with complex psychological changes that occur in human beings under the duress of a controlled environment. That is, a therapeutic milieu which utilizes thought coercion, and sometimes also physical coercion, to effect a modification of behavior.

That’s what “should” be measured because that is why the child entered the program.  There are outwardly apparent behaviors like refusing to go to school, acting out, fighting, running away, anxiety, depression etc.  which caused the child to be placed in a program.  At the conclusion of the program they measure the same parameters to see if there have been any improvements or not.

Lets say you go to the doctors and tell him that your back hurts after you go up or down the stairs.  He may give you some pain killers and he tells you to practice walking up the stairs without bending over (stay straight) and then to come see me again in 6 months.  In 6 months he would ask how he feels and if the pain is worse or less.  This would be the measurement he would go by to decide if his treatment was successful or if he needs to adjust his treatment.

Quote
But that is not the expectation of parents who enroll their children in these programs, is it? After all, we are dealing with "behavioral health" here, and the effects of "therapy" are not expected to miraculously cease the minute the kid is no longer in program, eh?

No, I meant that the program will not harm the child while the child is there.  I don’t see how the behavior modification could harm the child after they leave the program.

Quote
I beg to differ. *I* feel harmed. Long term. Testimonies of other posters here on fornits attest to same or similar assessments.

The ACE study also attests to long term damage brought about by traumatic childhood events (occurring up to and including age 18 in this study) which have very real, far in the future, long term ramifications on the simple measurable parameters of life-expectancy and frequency of illness or propensity for addiction or other self-destructive behaviors.
Many times the reason the kids are sent to a program is because they have experience stressful events, divorce, adoption issues, or may have a late onset of disruptive behavior disorders, so it would be difficult to isolate the cause and say their stay in the program caused them PTSD.  The programs are designed to alleviate these issues and turn them around not compound them.

If there were a way to easily study this or determine the cause of PTSD in children who emerged from a program I am sure the study would be undertaken.



...
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anne Bonney

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5006
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: "Multi-Center Study of Youth Outcomes" (Behrens, 2006)
« Reply #16 on: June 17, 2010, 12:19:36 PM »
Quote from: "Whooter"
No, I meant that the program will not harm the child while the child is there.  I don’t see how the behavior modification could harm the child after they leave the program.


Therein lies one of your problems.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
traight, St. Pete, early 80s
AA is a cult http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-cult.html

The more boring a child is, the more the parents, when showing off the child, receive adulation for being good parents-- because they have a tame child-creature in their house.  ~~  Frank Zappa

Offline Anne Bonney

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5006
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: "Multi-Center Study of Youth Outcomes" (Behrens, 2006)
« Reply #17 on: June 17, 2010, 12:37:39 PM »
Quote from: "Whooter"
Many times the reason the kids are sent to a program is because they have experience stressful events, divorce, adoption issues, or may have a late onset of disruptive behavior disorders, so it would be difficult to isolate the cause and say their stay in the program caused them PTSD.  The programs are designed to alleviate these issues and turn them around not compound them.


 :roflmao:  :roflmao:  :roflmao:  :roflmao:  :roflmao:  :roflmao:  :roflmao:  :roflmao:  :roflmao:  :roflmao:  :roflmao:  :roflmao:  :roflmao:  :roflmao:  :roflmao:  :roflmao:  :roflmao:  :roflmao:  :roflmao:  :roflmao:  :roflmao:  :roflmao:  :roflmao:  :roflmao:  :roflmao:  :roflmao:  :roflmao:  :roflmao:  :roflmao:  :roflmao:  :roflmao:  :roflmao:  :roflmao:  :roflmao:  :roflmao:  :roflmao:



Then their design is failing.   Miserably.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
traight, St. Pete, early 80s
AA is a cult http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-cult.html

The more boring a child is, the more the parents, when showing off the child, receive adulation for being good parents-- because they have a tame child-creature in their house.  ~~  Frank Zappa

Offline Awake

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 409
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: "Multi-Center Study of Youth Outcomes" (Behrens, 2006)
« Reply #18 on: June 17, 2010, 12:39:51 PM »
Quote from: "Anne Bonney"
Quote from: "Whooter"
No, I meant that the program will not harm the child while the child is there.  I don’t see how the behavior modification could harm the child after they leave the program.


Therein lies one of your problems.


Definitely potential for harm, inside, outside, both.  There is plenty of reason to connect the Troubled teen industry with psychological trauma.


viewtopic.php?f=9&t=30423&start=0  



.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anne Bonney

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5006
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: "Multi-Center Study of Youth Outcomes" (Behrens, 2006)
« Reply #19 on: June 17, 2010, 12:42:47 PM »
Quote from: "Awake"
Quote from: "Anne Bonney"
Quote from: "Whooter"
No, I meant that the program will not harm the child while the child is there.  I don’t see how the behavior modification could harm the child after they leave the program.


Therein lies one of your problems.


Definitely potential for harm, inside, outside, both.  There is plenty of reason to connect the Troubled teen industry with psychological trauma.


viewtopic.php?f=9&t=30423&start=0  



.


 :notworthy:  :notworthy:


No wonder Whooter won't go near that thread!!!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
traight, St. Pete, early 80s
AA is a cult http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-cult.html

The more boring a child is, the more the parents, when showing off the child, receive adulation for being good parents-- because they have a tame child-creature in their house.  ~~  Frank Zappa

Offline Whooter

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5513
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: "Multi-Center Study of Youth Outcomes" (Behrens, 2006)
« Reply #20 on: June 17, 2010, 02:05:00 PM »
Quote from: "Awake"
Quote from: "Anne Bonney"
Quote from: "Whooter"
No, I meant that the program will not harm the child while the child is there.  I don’t see how the behavior modification could harm the child after they leave the program.


Therein lies one of your problems.


Definitely potential for harm, inside, outside, both.  There is plenty of reason to connect the Troubled teen industry with psychological trauma.


viewtopic.php?f=9&t=30423&start=0  



.

Well, I partially agree with you.  I think there is potential for harm "anytime" a child is overseen by others outside the family.  This includes daycare, public/private schools and programs.  I think like Anne Bonney, your vantage point stems from experiences you had with programs 30 years ago or isolated cases.  The majority of the programs I am familiar with work directly to reverse any potential issues which would result in long term or short term damage not cause them.



...
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anne Bonney

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5006
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: "Multi-Center Study of Youth Outcomes" (Behrens, 2006)
« Reply #21 on: June 17, 2010, 02:12:05 PM »
Quote from: "Whooter"
Well, I partially agree with you.  I think there is potential for harm "anytime" a child is overseen by others outside the family.  This includes daycare, public/private schools and programs.  I think like Anne Bonney, your vantage point stems from experiences you had with programs 30 years ago or isolated cases.  The majority of the programs I am familiar with work directly to reverse any potential issues which would result in long term or short term damage not cause them.


Do these programs you speak of use LGAT type tactics on the kids?   Do you approve of using such tactics on children?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
traight, St. Pete, early 80s
AA is a cult http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-cult.html

The more boring a child is, the more the parents, when showing off the child, receive adulation for being good parents-- because they have a tame child-creature in their house.  ~~  Frank Zappa

Offline Whooter

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5513
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: New article/study for debate
« Reply #22 on: June 17, 2010, 02:34:14 PM »
Quote from: "Joel"
Does anyone want me to post another article for debate or keep debating this TTI study?

Thanks for checking in with us, Joel.  I think we are all set for now.



...
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline SUCK IT

  • Posts: 411
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: "Multi-Center Study of Youth Outcomes" (Behrens, 2006)
« Reply #23 on: June 17, 2010, 02:49:21 PM »
Quote from: "Anne Bonney"
Quote from: "Whooter"
Well, I partially agree with you.  I think there is potential for harm "anytime" a child is overseen by others outside the family.  This includes daycare, public/private schools and programs.  I think like Anne Bonney, your vantage point stems from experiences you had with programs 30 years ago or isolated cases.  The majority of the programs I am familiar with work directly to reverse any potential issues which would result in long term or short term damage not cause them.


Do these programs you speak of use LGAT type tactics on the kids?   Do you approve of using such tactics on children?

It's not like if someone answers yes it is some damning answer that only an evil person would subscribe to. LGAT have a proven track record and are used in corporations, government, military, religion, and yes treatment programs. If it didn't work people wouldn't use it. But it seems the term 'LGAT' is another fornits loaded term, that has it's own definition here. Like if asking someone if they support LGAT as a way of communicating in groups, they support nazism or something. Fornits is a strange world to live in I can imagine, at least from an outside perspective it seems this way.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
one day at a time

Offline Anne Bonney

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5006
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: "Multi-Center Study of Youth Outcomes" (Behrens, 2006)
« Reply #24 on: June 17, 2010, 02:59:26 PM »
Quote from: "SUCK IT"
Quote from: "Anne Bonney"
Quote from: "Whooter"
Well, I partially agree with you.  I think there is potential for harm "anytime" a child is overseen by others outside the family.  This includes daycare, public/private schools and programs.  I think like Anne Bonney, your vantage point stems from experiences you had with programs 30 years ago or isolated cases.  The majority of the programs I am familiar with work directly to reverse any potential issues which would result in long term or short term damage not cause them.


Do these programs you speak of use LGAT type tactics on the kids?   Do you approve of using such tactics on children?

It's not like if someone answers yes it is some damning answer that only an evil person would subscribe to. LGAT have a proven track record and are used in corporations, government, military, religion, and yes treatment programs.

Citation please.

Quote
If it didn't work people wouldn't use it.

 :rofl:  :rofl:  :rofl:


Quote
But it seems the term 'LGAT' is another fornits loaded term, that has it's own definition here. Like if asking someone if they support LGAT as a way of communicating in groups, they support nazism or something. Fornits is a strange world to live in I can imagine, at least from an outside perspective it seems this way.


LGATs are dangerous, especially if it's forced upon someone.  I would never voluntarily attend one, but if an adult thinks they can glean some special knowledge from it, fine.....go right ahead.  Forcing that kind of emotional intrusion onto a child, especially one that may be troubled to begin with, is deplorable.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
traight, St. Pete, early 80s
AA is a cult http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-cult.html

The more boring a child is, the more the parents, when showing off the child, receive adulation for being good parents-- because they have a tame child-creature in their house.  ~~  Frank Zappa

Offline Awake

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 409
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: "Multi-Center Study of Youth Outcomes" (Behrens, 2006)
« Reply #25 on: June 18, 2010, 01:18:03 PM »
Quote from: "Whooter"
Quote from: "Awake"
Quote from: "Anne Bonney"
Quote from: "Whooter"
No, I meant that the program will not harm the child while the child is there.  I don’t see how the behavior modification could harm the child after they leave the program.


Therein lies one of your problems.


Definitely potential for harm, inside, outside, both.  There is plenty of reason to connect the Troubled teen industry with psychological trauma.


viewtopic.php?f=9&t=30423&start=0  



.

Well, I partially agree with you.  I think there is potential for harm "anytime" a child is overseen by others outside the family.  This includes daycare, public/private schools and programs.  I think like Anne Bonney, your vantage point stems from experiences you had with programs 30 years ago or isolated cases.  The majority of the programs I am familiar with work directly to reverse any potential issues which would result in long term or short term damage not cause them.



...



So you are saying that troubled teen industry programs take action to protect the teen  from double bind situations, which is the context under which they operate?  I’d really like to hear how you believe they are doing that.  Neither you on the TTI can deny that double binds have the potential for psychological harm, or that the therapy provided, at it’s core, functions as a result of double binding.

It’s all here for your understanding,  but if you want to cast it off as inconsequential ….

Hey Whooter, I demand that you feel better about yourself.  Grow your self esteem, buddy!

DOUBLE BIND: Mind Control in the TTI  


.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline jaredsmom

  • Posts: 12
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Troubled Teen Industry Studies
« Reply #26 on: June 19, 2010, 04:34:23 PM »
There is no way to objectively follow these studies.  In order to provide accurate statistics, one would have to follow each teenager from the moment they entered the facility, their response to the program on an individual basis (and all must experience the same exact treatment), enter a controlled environment upon their release and made to experience the same situations for a few years.  Then, and only then, would we be able to get an accurate account of how well the industry works.
Here is something to consider:  a few years ago, I found my best friend from Roloff via the internet.  Unfortunately, I found her too late.  She had died two years prior and her mother had set up a memorial page.  I got in touch with her mother, who told me my friend's story.
After leaving Roloff, she was determined to live a "normal" life.  Prior to the homes, her parents had been drug dealers, and she had been a cocaine addict.  After leaving, she returned to high school (having to repeat the whole grade she had done at the homes due to a lack of accreditation) and got a job.  She lived with her mother, who had gotten out of prison and was also working.  Then her father got out, and the drug dealing began again.  Long story short, my friend lived her life in and out of prison, battling emotional problems throughout.  She was eventually a victim of domestic abuse.
I went to the homes after our pastor recommended it may be the best thing.  I was a troublemaker at our Christian school, finding myself at the principal's office at least once a week.  My crimes?  They ranged from insulting a kid on the bus to carrying a condom to school (although I wasn't sexually active at the time).  I did my time at Roloff, then came out to the same Christian environment.  Although I rejected Christianity as a result of the Roloff experience, I was still in a loving, supportive environment.  In time, the anger went away and I moved on in life without much of a struggle.  I am now the person you would see anywhere and not give them a second thought.  I'm neither angry or wallowing in sorrow, nor am I extremely successful or powerful.  Just your average citizen, I guess.
Am I success story for the homes?  I think not.  Is my friend a failure for the homes?  Again, no.  We are products of our environment, circumstances, and choices.  We just happened to find ourselves for one year at a teen behavior modification program.  Save your studies.  All they do is prove bias and give people a reason to argue.
If I had a choice to go back and do my life over, I may skip that one year, though.  I didn't enjoy it.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Whooter

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5513
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Troubled Teen Industry Studies
« Reply #27 on: June 19, 2010, 05:59:26 PM »
Quote from: "jaredsmom"
There is no way to objectively follow these studies.  In order to provide accurate statistics, one would have to follow each teenager from the moment they entered the facility, their response to the program on an individual basis (and all must experience the same exact treatment), enter a controlled environment upon their release and made to experience the same situations for a few years.  Then, and only then, would we be able to get an accurate account of how well the industry works.
Here is something to consider:  a few years ago, I found my best friend from Roloff via the internet.  Unfortunately, I found her too late.  She had died two years prior and her mother had set up a memorial page.  I got in touch with her mother, who told me my friend's story.
After leaving Roloff, she was determined to live a "normal" life.  Prior to the homes, her parents had been drug dealers, and she had been a cocaine addict.  After leaving, she returned to high school (having to repeat the whole grade she had done at the homes due to a lack of accreditation) and got a job.  She lived with her mother, who had gotten out of prison and was also working.  Then her father got out, and the drug dealing began again.  Long story short, my friend lived her life in and out of prison, battling emotional problems throughout.  She was eventually a victim of domestic abuse.
I went to the homes after our pastor recommended it may be the best thing.  I was a troublemaker at our Christian school, finding myself at the principal's office at least once a week.  My crimes?  They ranged from insulting a kid on the bus to carrying a condom to school (although I wasn't sexually active at the time).  I did my time at Roloff, then came out to the same Christian environment.  Although I rejected Christianity as a result of the Roloff experience, I was still in a loving, supportive environment.  In time, the anger went away and I moved on in life without much of a struggle.  I am now the person you would see anywhere and not give them a second thought.  I'm neither angry or wallowing in sorrow, nor am I extremely successful or powerful.  Just your average citizen, I guess.
Am I success story for the homes?  I think not.  Is my friend a failure for the homes?  Again, no.  We are products of our environment, circumstances, and choices.  We just happened to find ourselves for one year at a teen behavior modification program.  Save your studies.  All they do is prove bias and give people a reason to argue.
If I had a choice to go back and do my life over, I may skip that one year, though.  I didn't enjoy it.

Great insight, Jaredsmom, thank you for posting you perspective.



...
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline DannyB II

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3273
  • Karma: +5/-0
    • View Profile
Re: "Multi-Center Study of Youth Outcomes" (Behrens, 2006)
« Reply #28 on: June 19, 2010, 09:17:17 PM »
Quote
Whooter wrote:
No, I meant that the program will not harm the child while the child is there.  I don’t see how the behavior modification could harm the child after they leave the program.
 
Anne wrote:
Therein lies one of your problems.

Awake wrote:
Definitely potential for harm, inside, outside, both.  There is plenty of reason to connect the Troubled teen industry with psychological trauma.
 
Whooter wrote:
Well, I partially agree with you.  I think there is potential for harm "anytime" a child is overseen by others outside the family.  This includes daycare, public/private schools and programs.  I think like Anne Bonney, your vantage point stems from experiences you had with programs 30 years ago or isolated cases.  The majority of the programs I am familiar with work directly to reverse any potential issues which would result in long term or short term damage not cause them.

Awake wrote:
So you are saying that troubled teen industry programs take action to protect the teen  from double bind situations, which is the context under which they operate?  I’d really like to hear how you believe they are doing that.  Neither you on the TTI can deny that double binds have the potential for psychological harm, or that the therapy provided, at it’s core, functions as a result of double binding.
It’s all here for your understanding,  but if you want to cast it off as inconsequential ….

Hey Whooter, I demand that you feel better about yourself.  Grow your self esteem, buddy!  

DOUBLE BIND: Mind Control in the TTI  


Here we have 3 people, 2 of the people went to a treatment program and 1 had a child go to a treatment program. The 2 that went obviously did not have a good experience which was/is not unusual, also what I am seeing through out there posts is 1) that they can not accept that someone  else could have a good experience, 2) that they will find whatever evidence there is to substantiate their feelings, 3) that just because the programee did not like their stay at the TC does this always have to necessarily mean they did not receive a decent education, academically and/or therapeutically.
This broad brush painting is robbing fornits of valuable debate and leaving the tenants here ignorant. I know personally several folks who have come here to try and share their experience and read many posts, determined this site does not encourage open debate, so left. Not good folks.
Now I'm sure anyone reading this is probably thinking that I have no room to judge, your right in some respects. But I have never shut anyone down here from saying what they have had to say, I have actually always promoted different opinions, we need them.
Keep your mind open.....There are children dying that need help, their experiences may be different from ours before, during and after. We need to listen and go further then are experiences allow.
This is what makes me angry, I see folks here that appear so intelligent yet can be so ignorant when it comes to understanding separate living experiences. You call the TCI a "cookie cutter" experience, stamping out the same experience but your wrong, wrong because of the participants, their human beings.
You (fornits) are doing the exact same thing, trying to promote a universal experience (cookie cutter) by saying all the the programs in the TCI are destructive. Children are dying they need help.

Awake I know you have found the Double Bind Phenomenon and this is a great piece of info yet does it apply in all TC's without exception. I found at Elan it really depended on the Director and staff, this could change found house to house, at least while I was a employee.

danny
« Last Edit: June 20, 2010, 03:50:13 PM by DannyB II »
Stand and fight, till there is no more.

Offline Paul St. John

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 835
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
MY Opinion
« Reply #29 on: June 19, 2010, 09:37:34 PM »
I am totally open to considering that there might be some kinds of voluntary programs out there, that can be beneficial to teens.

Why not?  There are all sorts of things in the world.

But I say that a TC is a TC.  Some may be better then others, but they are flawed by their very design.

Paul
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »