Kids in Program Credible?

[Awake]

The use of Behavior Modification is not abusive and can be used to increase a childs self esteem.  Allow them to grow and succeed and celebrate their milestones.  I think the stories of straight and the seed and places like CEDU have over-shadowed fornits to the point where they believe all programs are like those were.

So you believe that behavior modification is never, and never has been, abusive?  If you don’t believe that can be true, what about in the context of force? Can it be abusive then?

.

Not at all, Behavior Mod can be abusive like anything else.  But it doesnt have to be to be effective.



...

Well you would be right in thinking that bevavior mod doesn't have to be effective to benefit the program owners. We certainly can't discount that money does motivate those applications which best suit the investors. I'm more interested in what you would consider abusive in this sense.

[Whooter]

Well you would be right in thinking that bevavior mod doesn't have to be effective to benefit the program owners.

The program owners befit by the income from the business (they get paid).  If the business doesn't do well then they will benefit less.  So there is an incentive to make every child as successful as possible and do a little bit better than the next program.

We certainly can't discount that money does motivate those applications which best suit the investors.

We always need to keep in mind that people do what they do and are motivated by money.  A good test of that would be to stop paying hospital employees and doctors and then see how many people are still working in the hospital after a month.  There are many compassionate people in the world but we all need to profit from what we do to survive unless we want to be supported by the government.

I'm more interested in what you would consider abusive in this sense.

Any type of physical violence to try to change a kids behavior would be considered abusive in my opinion.  Say, hitting a child with a stick every-time they made a mistake.  This would not be considered positive feedback and would not further build a child's self esteem or self worth.



...

[Ursus]

I'm more interested in what you would consider abusive in this sense.

Any type of physical violence to try to change a kids behavior would be considered abusive in my opinion.  Say, hitting a child with a stick every-time they made a mistake.  This would not be considered positive feedback and would not further build a child's self esteem or self worth.

And... what about psychological violence?

[Shadyacres]

Any type of physical violence to try to change a kids behavior would be considered abusive in my opinion.  Say, hitting a child with a stick every-time they made a mistake.  This would not be considered positive feedback and would not further build a child's self esteem or self worth.

...

All that "positive peer pressure" jive and isolation from everything the child knows is tantamount to hitting their emotions, their psyche, with a stick, repeatedly, for months or years.  And emotions, self worth, self esteem all take much longer to heal than your average switch welts.  Many of us are still trying to heal after decades, even broken bones only take a couple of months.

[Awake]

I'm more interested in what you would consider abusive in this sense.

Any type of physical violence to try to change a kids behavior would be considered abusive in my opinion.  Say, hitting a child with a stick every-time they made a mistake.  This would not be considered positive feedback and would not further build a child's self esteem or self worth.

I hear that. So does that mean anytime behavior modification is used in a way does not give the child positive feedback and build their self esteem it is abusive? Or only in the case of physical violence?

[Whooter]

Any type of physical violence to try to change a kids behavior would be considered abusive in my opinion.  Say, hitting a child with a stick every-time they made a mistake.  This would not be considered positive feedback and would not further build a child's self esteem or self worth.

...

All that "positive peer pressure" jive and isolation from everything the child knows is tantamount to hitting their emotions, their psyche, with a stick, repeatedly, for months or years.

The children are not isolated at all, Shady.  They are engaged in many activities on and off the school property.  Some kids work on community projects others need to work on themselves and others work more on academics depending on the individual childs needs.  Our public schools can only provide a "One size fits all" solution which doesnt work for many children.

And emotions, self worth, self esteem all take much longer to heal than your average switch welts. Many of us are still trying to heal after decades, even broken bones only take a couple of months.

That is why many of these programs run for a year or more.  These kids come into the program with many issues and low self esteem is very common and as you stated it takes time to turn this around.  If it were just broken bones the child could be treated and sent home the same day.  I think the difference is many of the programs today have recognized the need to build family ties and self esteem whereas this was not the focus back in the earlier programs as you have witnessed yourself.



...

[Whooter]

I'm more interested in what you would consider abusive in this sense.

Any type of physical violence to try to change a kids behavior would be considered abusive in my opinion.  Say, hitting a child with a stick every-time they made a mistake.  This would not be considered positive feedback and would not further build a child's self esteem or self worth.

I hear that. So does that mean anytime behavior modification is used in a way does not give the child positive feedback and build their self esteem it is abusive? Or only in the case of physical violence?

If positive feedback or and increased self esteem is not attained then it is not abusive it would just be ineffective in my opinion.



...

[Awake]

I'm more interested in what you would consider abusive in this sense.

Any type of physical violence to try to change a kids behavior would be considered abusive in my opinion.  Say, hitting a child with a stick every-time they made a mistake.  This would not be considered positive feedback and would not further build a child's self esteem or self worth.

I hear that. So does that mean anytime behavior modification is used in a way does not give the child positive feedback and build their self esteem it is abusive? Or only in the case of physical violence?

If positive feedback or and increased self esteem is not attained then it is not abusive it would just be ineffective in my opinion.



...

Is giving negative feedback abusive?

[Whooter]

I'm more interested in what you would consider abusive in this sense.

Any type of physical violence to try to change a kids behavior would be considered abusive in my opinion.  Say, hitting a child with a stick every-time they made a mistake.  This would not be considered positive feedback and would not further build a child's self esteem or self worth.

I hear that. So does that mean anytime behavior modification is used in a way does not give the child positive feedback and build their self esteem it is abusive? Or only in the case of physical violence?

If positive feedback or and increased self esteem is not attained then it is not abusive it would just be ineffective in my opinion.



...

Is giving negative feedback abusive?

No I wouldnt consider it abusive and sometimes it can be effective with some kids.  Letting kids know they will not get pizza because of various reasons.  The kids that do well get rewarded with a night out, extra money to spend at the store etc.



...

[Awake]

Is giving negative feedback abusive?

No I wouldnt consider it abusive and sometimes it can be effective with some kids.  Letting kids know they will not get pizza because of various reasons.  The kids that do well get rewarded with a night out, extra money to spend at the store etc.

Giving negative feedback can never be considered abusive? I disagree Whooter. If you were a teen in a program  and a staff called you a lowlife piece of shit to get you to behave in the manner they want, I don’t think that would be ethical. I would consider that abuse. Wouldn't you?

[Whooter]

Is giving negative feedback abusive?

No I wouldnt consider it abusive and sometimes it can be effective with some kids.  Letting kids know they will not get pizza because of various reasons.  The kids that do well get rewarded with a night out, extra money to spend at the store etc.

Giving negative feedback can never be considered abusive? I disagree Whooter. If you were a teen in a program  and a staff called you a lowlife piece of shit to get you to behave in the manner they want, I don’t think that would be ethical. I would consider that abuse. Wouldn't you?

I didnt say negative feedback can never be considered abusive.  I said I dont consider negative feedback abusive.  In fact it can be effective with many kids.  I think anything can be abusive if you want it to be.  You can hold a gun to a kids head at night to force him to brush his teeth, which would be abusive, but that doesn't mean that brushing your teeth is abusive or telling the child he will miss afternoon snack the next day because he failed to brush his teeth.   If a staff used language as you described then they should be fired on the spot.



...

[Shadyacres]

Any type of physical violence to try to change a kids behavior would be considered abusive in my opinion.  Say, hitting a child with a stick every-time they made a mistake.  This would not be considered positive feedback and would not further build a child's self esteem or self worth.

...

All that "positive peer pressure" jive and isolation from everything the child knows is tantamount to hitting their emotions, their psyche, with a stick, repeatedly, for months or years.

The children are not isolated at all, Shady.  They are engaged in many activities on and off the school property.  Some kids work on community projects others need to work on themselves and others work more on academics depending on the individual childs needs.  Our public schools can only provide a "One size fits all" solution which doesnt work for many children.


Hah!  The program I was in, now that was a one size fits all approach.  And by sending me there, my Mom sent a message, to me and to the whole world;  MY SON IS NOT NORMAL.  When in reality the opposite was true, I was normal, SHE WASN'T.  And as I understand it, these places all still work on "phase" or "level" systems, in which first phase is completely isolated from family and community, and definitely friends.  The LIFE program told my mother, and me at intake, that phase one lasts 2 - 4 weeks.  THEY LIED.  I stayed on phase one for five months.

And emotions, self worth, self esteem all take much longer to heal than your average switch welts. Many of us are still trying to heal after decades, even broken bones only take a couple of months.

That is why many of these programs run for a year or more.  These kids come into the program with many issues and low self esteem is very common and as you stated it takes time to turn this around.  If it were just broken bones the child could be treated and sent home the same day.  I think the difference is many of the programs today have recognized the need to build family ties and self esteem whereas this was not the focus back in the earlier programs as you have witnessed yourself.

...

You know damn well I was referring to the "issues"  these places INFLICT.  If I had low self esteem going into that place, it was nothing compared to how low it was upon leaving.  That program also claimed to be "building family ties and self esteem".  "That's why we require the participation of the whole family"  Mrs. Pete used to say.  Again, they were LYING.  They knew exactly what they were doing to us, breaking our spirits.  And the best way to do that is to turn our own parents against us, they become a tool in our "breakdown".  These people did not know a damned thing about drug culture so, by definition, all the things they told our parents to scare them were LIES.  It seems to me that, at least in the case of LIFE, several "upstanding citizens" were scared shitless of youth culture and designed a way to keep their streets and shopping malls peaceful and quiet; by imprisoning and torturing all the "problem" young people without any kind of trial or due process.  The old and boring declared WAR on the young because the way we dressed and talked, and maybe the fact that we smoked pot, TERRIFIED THEM due to their own bigotry and personal prejudices.

[Awake]

Is giving negative feedback abusive?

No I wouldnt consider it abusive and sometimes it can be effective with some kids.  Letting kids know they will not get pizza because of various reasons.  The kids that do well get rewarded with a night out, extra money to spend at the store etc.

Giving negative feedback can never be considered abusive? I disagree Whooter. If you were a teen in a program  and a staff called you a lowlife piece of shit to get you to behave in the manner they want, I don’t think that would be ethical. I would consider that abuse. Wouldn't you?

I didnt say negative feedback can never be considered abusive.  I said I dont consider negative feedback abusive.  In fact it can be effective with many kids.  I think anything can be abusive if you want it to be.  You can hold a gun to a kids head at night to force him to brush his teeth, which would be abusive, but that doesn't mean that brushing your teeth is abusive or telling the child he will miss afternoon snack the next day because he failed to brush his teeth.   If a staff used language as you described then they should be fired on the spot.

I’m guessing what you meant to say then is that you believe negative feedback is abusive in certain respects. How do you determine when negative feedback is abusive in behavior modification and when it is not?

.

[Whooter]

You know damn well I was referring to the "issues"  these places INFLICT.  If I had low self esteem going into that place, it was nothing compared to how low it was upon leaving.  That program also claimed to be "building family ties and self esteem".  "That's why we require the participation of the whole family"  Mrs. Pete used to say.  Again, they were LYING.  They knew exactly what they were doing to us, breaking our spirits.  And the best way to do that is to turn our own parents against us, they become a tool in our "breakdown".  These people did not know a damned thing about drug culture so, by definition, all the things they told our parents to scare them were LIES.  It seems to me that, at least in the case of LIFE, several "upstanding citizens" were scared shitless of youth culture and designed a way to keep their streets and shopping malls peaceful and quiet; by imprisoning and torturing all the "problem" young people without any kind of trial or due process.  The old and boring declared WAR on the young because the way we dressed and talked, and maybe the fact that we smoked pot, TERRIFIED THEM due to their own bigotry and personal prejudices.

I agree,  the "establishment" as we called them just wanted us off the streets.  It wasnt just the drugs it was our long hair and lack of a tie.  We didnt respect their generation and for good reason with the way they were handling Vietnam and voting assholes into office.  They started a war on drugs when they didnt even understand what or who they were fighting.  I think that is why programs in the 1970 did so well in keeping their beds full.  I might have ended up in one myself if I had been caught dealing or doing drugs, but I was cool about it and keep up with my studies and managed to stay out of trouble.
I dont think programs back then gave a damn about self esteem or building a family bond, they just wanted the kids fixed, cleaned up to look presentable.  Now a days things are a little different, most parents tolerate their kids a little more and give them more space to grow into themselves.



...

[Whooter]

I’m guessing what you meant to say then is that you believe negative feedback is abusive in certain respects. How do you determine when negative feedback is abusive in behavior modification and when it is not?

.

Well you dont want to shame the child and you want to protect their self esteem and sense of themself.  Negative feedback can give the child a more pragmatic view of their actions without slamming them.  Many kids are in a bad cycle.. blaming others, manipulation, lying, hurting themselves... all of which contributes to low self esteem and lowered self worth which if left unchecked can take a child down a dangerous path.  Modifying their behavior is the only way to break this cycle and sometimes it involves negative feedback.
Every situation is different and I am not sure how we would determine when the negative feedback tips the scales into becoming abusive.



...