Many Many Programs Abuse Kids

[RobertBruce]

There are plenty of summer camps and outward bound programs where the child doesn't write a letter until the end of his/her first week and doesnt have phone contact for several. The procedure outlined above allows the child to begin writing in their first week, speak with their parents the first week and can accomplish a few letters in 3 weeks and then speak with their parents (non conference setting) after 3 weeks. If this is abusive to you then we clearly disagree and I dont think you will get many people to agree with you.

They already do John, that why conversations like this go on.

Provide for me a summer camp that prohibits open communication between parent and child, censors and screens outgoing and incoming letters, only allows 15 minutes per week for a child to call home, and monitors all phone calls and terminates them at will.

A summer camp John, not a theraputic or rehab program that disguises itself as one.

You already admitted that a child who is abused has no way of reporting the abuse in a program where communication is restricted.

You have yet to answer the question about how such a policy would be beneficial between a non abusive parent and a child.

[Whooter]

So it appears as if the child who is abused and is restricted in his communication really doesnt have any good option in order to report the abuse. Once again proving that this policy fosters an unsafe environment and is abusive.

This doesn't prove anything, Bruce.  A child in a program can speak to any of the staff members, write a letter home or talk to their parents on their weekly phone call, they could run away and talk to someone in town.  The process of communication that you posted here clearly shows the child is not totally restricted and has options to report.

If you build a scenario where the child is completely restricted then, sure, they cannot report abuse.  But from my experience and from reading here on fornits kids have plenty of options to report abuse.  I am sure there are exceptions like the time kids are placed into the hobbit etc.  but this is the exception from what I have read here and these places have been shut down.



...

[DannyB II]

...

[DannyB II]

..

[RobertBruce]

If the child is completely restricted then a child cannot report it.

That's a BINGO!!!! A child who is abused in his program and is further abused by restricted communication cannot report the abuse.

This would be a accurate assessment of, "no communication" if in fact RCS was doing this.

Say if for example the child was placed in isolation.

Happens quite frequently. I myself was thrown out in the woods for almost a month for beating up a staff member. Another favorite tactic is to simply lock the kid up in an isolation room indefinitly. In either situation the child has no means to report or communicate any abuse to their parents.

There is nothing in the annals of HLA history to confirm this incident took place, please identify the staff member you beat up, please. Where out back were you placed to live for a month.

But if the child has access to other staff then the child can speak with them and report it through their internal reporting process.

What internal reporting process? Do you have some information on this policy? Are children in the programs made aware of it upon arrival? I sure as hell was never told about one, and I've never heard another former inmate mention one. I don't think I've ever even seen a posting on here about one. What I have heard and seen repeatedly is abusive staff either not reprimanded at all, or let go temporarily only to be rehired a short time later.

You don't have to be told, when you are being abused as discreetly as the staff do it (your words) then it is instinctual the person/resident/student goes to another authority figure to report, very few (a infinitesimal amount)of kids just sit with it.  


Given that the normal response given to a child reporting abuse to another staff member is, "Stop manipulating." this would seem to be a fairly useless option.

This is a very dangerous and irresponsible comment to make. What Robert is assuming is all staff are abusive and we here know that is not true. Staff do not tolerate abusive measures from other staff, there is a individual moral compass in every person.

The child could write a letter or talk about it to their parents.

We're talking about a scenario in which a child is placed in a program where communication is restricted. Writing a letter isn't going to do any good since all letters are screened, and any letter detailing abuse is going to be trashed. If the child is allowed to call their parents for 15 minutes a week a counselor sits right next to the phone with their finger on the button. Any attemps by the child to communicate they are being abused and the call is terminated. So no luck there.

The calls are not terminated while the parent is on the phone as Robert is describing. Letters do get home because if they did not parents would be asking why. Many kids do not even write home anyway, they wait to call.

If the program is not too isolated the child could walk to a nearby business and telephone someone.

Assuming the program isnt too isolated, the child can attempt to run away. If they're seen making the attempt a "take down" is performed which involves tackling the child to the ground and placing them in some form of hold until the child can be returned. Upon returning to the program the child is immediately either placed in isolation, or sent away indefinitely.

Child is placed apart from the other students, yes. Please tell us where they are sent away indefinitely, Robert.

 If the child is able to successfully run away without being caught he has to first convince either a business owner to allow the use of his telephone, or make it to the police. At HLA we were actually warned about the first option. We were told by the headmaster that any attempts to get help from the locals would result in a gun being pointed at our face.

Please tell us who was the headmaster that told you, "a gun would be pointed in your face". Roberts knowledge of the locals surrounding HLA is nonsense and irresponsible.


Does that strike you as using fear tactics or being manipulative?


The second option involves convincing the police to believe you and not simply take you right back to the program where you will of course be isolated. If you are able to use the phone at the police department you still have to hope they wont return you to the program, and the only way that will happen is if your injuries are severe. Of course if your injuries are that severe chances are you weren't able to make to the police station to begin with.

Robert, once again you are being irresponsible and reckless with your words. They have a duty to call the parents of the child making the claims of abuse. The child is underage. Georgia police take this responsibility seriously.
Please tell us when the police ever have taken a child of HLA right back to the program without the child first talking with there parents. I would appreciate you showing documentation of this, to all of us here.


So it appears as if the child who is abused and is restricted in his communication really doesnt have any good option in order to report the abuse. Once again proving that this policy fosters an unsafe environment and is abusive.

Robert, you have not proven anything as far as what happens to the general population, in fact you can not even show with clarity what happened to you.
Abuses happened at HLA, no one doubts that but embellishing does not help your cause.
Stick with the facts.

Listen I am a ex-resident, so bs's will not work.

[RobertBruce]

RB, you say it is firmly established that RCS has the same policy, procedures and is allegedly abusive. Yet you cite nothing to confirm these accusations.

You mean the post from RC's website posted several days ago and reposted several time by both Whooter John and myself? You mean I should cite that policy Danny? It really would be best if you just held your questions for later.

When did we conclusively determine that was from RCS, is this something you determined on your own.

Is this the procedure, you were explaining to me in another post, that you used to allegedly shut down HLA.

Explain to me why someone would use HLA's communication policy to shut their program down.

Wow, why do you act like this. I can understand you did not like your alleged time in HLA, OK.
Robert what do you hope to accomplish with undocumented information and allegations you can not account for.

Which allegations son, be specific now.

The people in charge at RCS are not going to implode as Buchi did, so good luck. They are professionals.
Everyone wanted Buchi gone as they did Richard Darrington.

Buch is still very much around and involved RC. Richard Darrington does not work at RC nor did he work at HLA. I have no idea why you're bringing him up in this conversation. You only further highlight your ignorance on the subject.

Buchi, has squat to say about anything at RCS. If you do not know why I keep bringing up Richard Darrington, the you are more ignorant then I originally thought.

[RobertBruce]

Danny these are all great questions. I'm glad to see you finally attempting to participate in a grown ups conversation.

Here's what I'm going to do. Several of your questions pertain to my specific time in HLA, so I'm going to answer those in your thread on OFFA. The others that are about this specific disucssion I'll answer here. I feel that this is a good topic and I don't want to see it bogged down by the usual nonsense.

Now I've got some errands to run, but when I get back we'll get right to it. So you just sit tight, and maybe watch your favorite movie 'Triumph of the Will '. See you soon son.

[RobertBruce]

Any of your comments that are not addressed here you will find in the Are you Serious thread in the OFFA.

When did we conclusively determine that was from RCS, is this something you determined on your own.

You're more than welcome to travel over to the RC website and view the original source for yourself. It's under their FAQ section.

Buchi, has squat to say about anything at RCS. If you do not know why I keep bringing up Richard Darrington, the you are more ignorant then I originally thought.

Buchi is listed as both the founder and as one of the clinical therapist on staff. Again your claims of insider status at RC have yet to be supported, or even expanded upon. Richard Darrington still has nothing to do with RC. If you'd like to counter this claim, by all means.

Now you somehow missed my challenge to back up your accusation of my allegations you claim I cannot account for. Let me know when you get to that son. You also failed to address your claims about how the restrictive communication policy was somehow used in the closure of HLA.

[RobertBruce]

This would be a accurate assessment of, "no communication" if in fact RCS was doing this.

You are incorrect. No one has claimed no communication is permitted. What has been claimed is that communication is restricted, which is true. Learn the difference son.

There is nothing in the annals of HLA history to confirm this incident took place

The annals of HLA history?  :roflmao: I'm not sure which is more ridiculous, that you believe such a book even exists, or the fact even if it did exist that you of all people would have access to it.

Danny it did very much occur, but whatsmore, I am by no means the only inmate to have ever gotten into a fist fight with a staff member at HLA. There were many both before and after me who did the same. Again, you only highlight your ignornace with comments like these.

You don't have to be told, when you are being abused as discreetly as the staff do it (your words) then it is instinctual the person/resident/student goes to another authority figure to report, very few (a infinitesimal amount)of kids just sit with it.

Kids learn quickly, when the authority figures either don't care, or don't listen there isn't much point in talking to them about things like that. Especially when all that will happen is the kid in question will be retailiated against by the staff in question. It happened there all the time. Again Danny, I was there, you were not. My testimony carries more weight than yours.

[RobertBruce]

This is a very dangerous and irresponsible comment to make. What Robert is assuming is all staff are abusive and we here know that is not true. Staff do not tolerate abusive measures from other staff, there is a individual moral compass in every person.

I can tell you unequivocally that of all the staff there during my incarceration there were maybe 2 or 3 of the staff ('counselors' and above) that seemed to genuinely care about the wellbeing of the kids. Most of the ones who did actually care about the kids and tried to help us were either fired or quit.

The calls are not terminated while the parent is on the phone as Robert is describing.

Yes they are. Again, I was there you were not. I'm right you're wrong. Even if that weren't enough ( it is ) the policy posted from RC's website makes reference to the policy.

calls will last 15 minutes and will be supervised by one of the student's counselors to ensure the student is respectful and appropriate.

Guess what happens if the 'counselor' feels the inmate is being disrespectful or inappropriate?

Letters do get home because if they did not parents would be asking why.

Again, you aren't paying attention. No one has claimed letters don't go out. The fact that's been made clear is that letters are prescreened and censored and must be approved before being mailed out.

[Whooter]

Again, you aren't paying attention. No one has claimed letters don't go out. The fact that's been made clear is that letters are prescreened and censored and must be approved before being mailed out.

Actually they need the parents permission to screen the childs letters.  The parents need to sign a  waiver indicating that their letters will be screened (incoming and outgoing).

At this point there is no evidence that RC has parents sign this waiver.



...

[RobertBruce]

Many kids do not even write home anyway, they wait to call.

Read the policy again son. It's no different now then it was when I was locked up. Kids cannot make or receive calls non confrence calls until they've sent out at least two letters, and received one back.

Child is placed apart from the other students, yes. Please tell us where they are sent away indefinitely, Robert.

Devil's Kitchen mostly. Although there are some locations along the trail they were sent to.

Please tell us who was the headmaster that told you, "a gun would be pointed in your face".

Greg Lindsay.

Roberts knowledge of the locals surrounding HLA is nonsense and irresponsible.

Still a bunch of inbred incestous hillbilly's? Sounds like not much has changed.

Robert, once again you are being irresponsible and reckless with your words. They have a duty to call the parents of the child making the claims of abuse. The child is underage. Georgia police take this responsibility seriously.
Please tell us when the police ever have taken a child of HLA right back to the program without the child first talking with there parents. I would appreciate you showing documentation of this, to all of us here.

Why would I, or anyone else for that matter have access to internal police documents pertaining to another child runningaway and claiming abuse? That makes absolute zero sense. Think your questions out before you ask them son. As it stands in my year long incarceration I wittnessed probably a dozen different runaway attempts. They were all caught by the police and then magically brought back to HLA. Again, I was there, you were not.

[RobertBruce]

Again, you aren't paying attention. No one has claimed letters don't go out. The fact that's been made clear is that letters are prescreened and censored and must be approved before being mailed out.

Actually they need the parents permission to screen the childs letters.  The parents need to sign a  waiver indicating that their letters will be screened (incoming and outgoing).

At this point there is no evidence that RC has parents sign this waiver.



...

I don't know if my parents ever signed a waiver, but I do know that all letters incoming and outgoing were screened at HLA. As it stands however there actually is evidence to suggest this still occurs at RC.

You may email your child or send letters/cards through conventional mail. Your child's Primary and Element therapists will distribute this mail to ensure this mail is truly from parents. However, the therapist does not read the mail so privacy is ensured

Maybe you can explain how it is they are supposed to verify the mail is from the parents without screening it first. This is a thinly veiled notification that translates to "We read your kids mail."

[RobertBruce]

Robert, you have not proven anything as far as what happens to the general population, in fact you can not even show with clarity what happened to you.
Abuses happened at HLA, no one doubts that but embellishing does not help your cause.
Stick with the facts.

Listen I am a ex-resident, so bs's will not work.

Given the fact that the policy I described from 14 years ago is identical to the current policy, and given that other people have made the exact same claims, I would say proof has been established, even if you aren't bright enough to catch it.

You have yet to show a single instance of what you believe I have exaggerated. I'm still waiting son.

You were a resident at Elan, not HLA. You really have no frame of refernce in which to comment on the program.

[Whooter]

Again, you aren't paying attention. No one has claimed letters don't go out. The fact that's been made clear is that letters are prescreened and censored and must be approved before being mailed out.

Actually they need the parents permission to screen the childs letters.  The parents need to sign a  waiver indicating that their letters will be screened (incoming and outgoing).

At this point there is no evidence that RC has parents sign this waiver.



...

I don't know if my parents ever signed a waiver, but I do know that all letters incoming and outgoing were screened at HLA. As it stands however there actually is evidence to suggest this still occurs at RC.

We havent seen this evidence on the forum yet.  I have seen the procedure for communication at RC which isnt restrictive or abusive in my opinion.  I have not seen evidence that they screen any of the communication between parent and child.  RC is open to telling us that they have a staff member listen in on the students calls for the first 3 weeks only.  So it is laid out fairly clearly.



...