Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform > Aspen Education Group
Programs In Behrens Study Charged with Abuse
Whooter:
--- Quote from: "Gonzotherapy" ---I said nothing about it being fake. In fact I clearly said she did not flat out lie. The study is skewed, it does not address the long lasting effects of the abuse in the programs. It says on discharge kids have better behavior than admittance.
So if I take a kid who throws tantrums and lock him in a closet, and every time he makes a noise I pull him out and beat him with a stick. After a few weeks of this that kid never makes another noise again and never throws another tantrum again, than his treatment is ok and beneficial? I could do a study with a hundred kids and I gaurantee you with these methods their behavior would change. It doesn't make it right and it doesn't make it an ok way to treat someone.
And I restate my previous question, when has any company ever in the history of time paid for something that was detrimental to itself? The only study a company would pay for is one that profits that company.
If you can find one instance of a company that paid for a study that caused said company to go out of business, I will rethink my position.
Until then, stop being stupid. Or at least make an effort. :ftard:
--- End quote ---
Research firms get paid for what they do. Everyone pays unless you can get the government to pay for it. Even the pharmaceutical industry has to pony up their share for research studies and they get a ton of grant money from Uncle Sam.
We all know that if the study came out unfavorably then it would not have been released. They wont release a study that would put them out of business, like you said. The study wasnt skewed because they hired a review board to oversee the study. The study was presented at the annual APA convention in 2006 and no one came forward to challenge the findings. The study stands Gonzo. You can toss it aside but I think it is important to allow the readers to make up their own mind.
...
Dysfunction Junction:
--- Quote from: "Troll Control" ---We all know about Mount Bachelor Academy's recent closure due to child abuse and neglect and that Aspen Education has claimed in court that it provides no therapy.
MBA was one of the programs that was studied in Behrens' work. The fact that MBA was closed for abusing children and that Behrens concluded MBA was "effective" despite offering no therapy and abusing hundreds of children is terribly troubling to say the least.
Here's a list of the all of the programs she looked at:
Academy at Swift River, Aspen Ranch, Copper Canyon Academy, Mount Bachelor Academy, Stone Mountain School, Pine Ridge Academy, SunHawk Academy,Turnabout Ranch, and Youth Care, Inc.
Academy at Swift River has been cited by state authorities for child abuse.
How many of the others have been as well? Are there any untainted entities in this study?
--- End quote ---
:bump:
Dysfunction Junction:
Some other opinions on the Behrens study...
--- Quote from: "Gonzotherapy" ---This is so ridiculous. Right at the bottom of this "study" it says that Aspen Education paid for it. Why would Aspen pay to have anything other than a promotional study done?
And I find it very interesting that all results are based on behavior upon entrance and discharge of the program. Not one word about a year down the road or farther. Of course the majority of kids are going to change their behavior and are going to follow the rules in the program, the alternative is to be horribly abused. This Doctor may have her skewed research bought, but at least she isn't a flat out liar.
This study is a complete croc of shit, and this Dr. ought to be ashamed of herself.
Whooter, seriously. Is this the best you can come up with? A study that Aspen itself paid for?
Name one company that pays for research that is detrimental to that companies existence.
--- End quote ---
Dysfunction Junction:
This pretty much sums it up.
--- Quote from: "Troll Control" ---So, basically, the results were that it made no difference when the kid split - a week, a month,six months or the average stay of 8.6 months. The length of stay had nothing whatsoever to do with outcomes, suggesting that no stay would produce similar results. The researcher, unable to explain this phenomenon, speculated on a couple of reasons. Either of which, if they explain the results, mean that one, the program was no change agent or two, the study is simply too biased to draw any conclusions. Either way, the program did not help any kids and/or the data were bad based on bias. The researcher herself admits this.
Which brings me to a second point. With no control group, the fact that kids who stayed one day did just as well as those that completed the program cannot be explained other than the basic inference that the program itself did not induce any change and was not measured to have done so.
Which brings me to a third point. With no follow up done, there can be no suggestion that any change that was self-reported lasted even one day after discharge.
So what does this study tell us? Not much, really. Only that it is self-admittedly biased and that kids who stayed one day did as well as kids who completed the program. Both of which tell us the program doesn't actually do anything and that the study is deeply flawed based on the admitted bias.
These are the basic reasons why this study could never have passed peer review or withstood scrutiny to be published. And "phase two" was never released even though it was completed several years ago because the results weren't to Aspen's liking. They spun phase one into a marketing tool and phase two wouldn't aid sales so they punted it without ever even making the results public. Anyone with a modicum of intelligence can see this quite easily.
--- End quote ---
Anne Bonney:
--- Quote from: "Dysfunction Junction" ---Some other opinions on the Behrens study...
--- Quote from: "Gonzotherapy" ---This is so ridiculous. Right at the bottom of this "study" it says that Aspen Education paid for it. Why would Aspen pay to have anything other than a promotional study done?
And I find it very interesting that all results are based on behavior upon entrance and discharge of the program. Not one word about a year down the road or farther. Of course the majority of kids are going to change their behavior and are going to follow the rules in the program, the alternative is to be horribly abused. This Doctor may have her skewed research bought, but at least she isn't a flat out liar.
This study is a complete croc of shit, and this Dr. ought to be ashamed of herself.
Whooter, seriously. Is this the best you can come up with? A study that Aspen itself paid for?
Name one company that pays for research that is detrimental to that companies existence.
--- End quote ---
--- End quote ---
:bump:
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version