NATSAP members dropping out

[Dysfunction Junction]

All I am saying is that these DHS reports keep coming out of RCS about beatings, stolen cars, police chases and now rapes are making it to the public and when people look at the reports and see the man who started NATSAP is responsible for the problems in the reports it makes them want to avoid the "guilt by association" factor.  So they drop out of NATSAP because of this and also because of the awful problems at many NATSAP-approved facilities.  The ones who haven't yet been caught for abuse don't want to be associated with the ones who have, many of which carry the NATSAP seal of approval, so the connection is there.

[Whooter]

All I am saying is that these DHS reports keep coming out of RCS about beatings, stolen cars, police chases and now rapes are making it to the public and when people look at the reports and see the man who started NATSAP is responsible for the problems in the reports it makes them want to avoid the "guilt by association" factor.  So they drop out of NATSAP because of this and also because of the awful problems at many NATSAP-approved facilities.  The ones who haven't yet been caught for abuse don't want to be associated with the ones who have, many of which carry the NATSAP seal of approval, so the connection is there.

That is much better, DJ.  You expressed an opinion and the readers can accept that, myself included.  I dont agree with all of what you said but I respect your right to your opinion.
The problem I have is when people attack a program with lies and try to present them as facts.



...

[Dysfunction Junction]

This could possibly be because NATSAP was dreamed up, founded and funded by Len Buccellato of HLA/Ridge Creek "School" and he's getting a lot of bad publicity again for incidents at the private detention center RCS and that is transferring onto NATSAP.  Those programs may want to try to disassociate themselves from Len's problems and bad press.

Yeah, it's the same opinion I had right at the beginning of this thread before Whooter derailed it.  I guess your day-long tantrum was over nothing then.  A bit of a waste of your day, no?

[Whooter]

This could possibly be because NATSAP was dreamed up, founded and funded by Len Buccellato of HLA/Ridge Creek "School" and he's getting a lot of bad publicity again for incidents at the private detention center RCS and that is transferring onto NATSAP.  Those programs may want to try to disassociate themselves from Len's problems and bad press.

Yeah, it's the same opinion I had right at the beginning of this thread before Whooter derailed it.  I guess your day-long tantrum was over nothing then.  A bit of a waste of your day, no?

No the two posts are not the same.  The first one you tried to attack you ex-boss who fired you over lying on your employment application about not revealing your felony for selling drugs.  I think inserting your personal agenda into the conversations lowers your credibility to almost nil.  This is why I commented on your post initially.

You should try to separate out your need to get even with a man who was just doing his job.  You had a felony background of selling drugs and there is no place for you being around kids in a program.  You cant fault him for that.  Just stay with the facts within your argument and you will be okay.  Leave the personal stuff out of it.



...

[Dysfunction Junction]

No, they're the same.  You've conceded your hissy fit was just over nothing.  Next time you should try to exercise some self control and not spend all day running in circles only to agree with me in the end after you lose the argument.  It's hard to watch you repeat this pattern over and over.  You should try working on it and see what happens.  Bruce will be in soon to help you work on this personal development you need so badly.  Enjoy.

[Whooter]

only to agree with me in the end after you lose the argument.  

So this was my last post and you say you agree with me then:

You should try to separate out your need to get even with a man who was just doing his job. You had a felony background of selling drugs and there is no place for you being around kids in a program. You cant fault him for that. Just stay with the facts within your argument and you will be okay. Leave the personal stuff out of it.

Its good that we agree for a change.



...

[Dysfunction Junction]

Work with Bruce, dude.  You're working a double again tonight and I expect you back at 7am after that.  You know, your normal schedule?  I think you should try to squeeze in a coffee and a sandwich before Bruce gets in because your performance dropped off all day and finally ended up with you conceding anyway.  You have to do better on the overnight, bro, or you'll be let go.  Any questions, go to Bruce.  Any comments, go to Bruce.

[Whooter]

Fact One: This post shows Dysfunction Junction worked at Daytop at one time. It also shows that he had a felony conviction and prison sentance.

Fact Two: He no longer works in the TBS field. According to him he got disillusioned with the industry. I suspect he isn't allowed to be employed by them with a previous felony conviction as most TBS's do background checks for most of their employees usually.

I'll bust your fucking teeth down your throat, choke you until you nearly fall unconscious, then give you a wake-up kick to the temple and send you on your merry way.  Your pain, suffering and disfigurement wouldn't matter .......

Look, DJ, you dont need to threaten everyone that disagrees with you.  I think we all know that if it were not for your criminal past that you would still be working in the TT industry instead of posting here on fornits to establish a resume that doesnt exist in real life.  Maybe when you took this anger of yours out on the kids is why HLA decide to release you along with the fact you lied on your employment application.



...

[psy]

All I am saying is that these DHS reports keep coming out of RCS about beatings, stolen cars, police chases and now rapes are making it to the public and when people look at the reports and see the man who started NATSAP is responsible for the problems in the reports it makes them want to avoid the "guilt by association" factor.  So they drop out of NATSAP because of this and also because of the awful problems at many NATSAP-approved facilities.  The ones who haven't yet been caught for abuse don't want to be associated with the ones who have, many of which carry the NATSAP seal of approval, so the connection is there.

That is much better, DJ.  You expressed an opinion and the readers can accept that, myself included.  I dont agree with all of what you said but I respect your right to your opinion.
The problem I have is when people attack a program with lies and try to present them as facts.



...

If he wasn't telling the truth, why were the lawsuits successful?  You deny the past because the past is connected to the present.  Natsap still exists.  When it comes to Straight Inc, you'll try to win some over by expressing /some/ sympathy and saying things were done wrong but I don't think i've ever heard you criticize a current program.  This is the exact same pattern as your run of the mill educational consultant.  I have archived a Lon Woodbury review of Paradise Cove giving it glowing reviews.  Turns out it wasn't much of a paradise...  more of an inferno for those put there.  But at the time it was a wonderful program.  Cedu was open for quite some time too.

Parents should wonder about where their kids are at now, but the'll be conned.  The excesses you claim no longer exist somehow happened at an Aspen program in Oregon.  You insulted those who suffered at Aarc.  You defend the worst of the worst and act like there's nothing at all wrong with what those kids went through.  You pretend this doesn't happen anymore. You call them liars.  To you the past is irrelevant.  You claim they changed but where is the proof, other than your word which has historically had it's weaknesses to put it diplomatically.  You can't deny that all these kids are saying the exact same thing year after year, generation after generation of program.  They cannot all be lying because if they were their stories would not match.

And you always neglect to mention that NATSAP is merely a trade organization and many of these places have little or no real accreditation.

[Whooter]

If he wasn't telling the truth, why were the lawsuits successful?

There are always going to be lawsuits regardless of how well run an organization is.  Lawsuits are not a good measure of success or failure.  Many times people see an opportunity to sue someone and they go after it.

You deny the past because the past is connected to the present.  Natsap still exists.  When it comes to Straight Inc, you'll try to win some over by expressing /some/ sympathy and saying things were done wrong but I don't think i've ever heard you criticize a current program.  This is the exact same pattern as your run of the mill educational consultant.  I have archived a Lon Woodbury review of Paradise Cove giving it glowing reviews.  Turns out it wasn't much of a paradise...  more of an inferno for those put there.  But at the time it was a wonderful program.  Cedu was open for quite some time too.

Hitler was time magazine Man of the Year.  Hindsight is 20/20, psy.  I am not a fan of CEDU or paradise cove.  There are 100’s of programs out there and the argument always comes down to pointing the finger at one or two programs or a picture of the hobbit or a 300 pound staff member who sat on a kid.
The industry is growing stronger and getting better but there will always be a few that take their eyes off the children in place of higher profits.  They will get the spot light but they dont necessarily represent the others.

Parents should wonder about where their kids are at now, but the'll be conned.  The excesses you claim no longer exist somehow happened at an Aspen program in Oregon.  You insulted those who suffered at Aarc.  You defend the worst of the worst and act like there's nothing at all wrong with what those kids went through.  You pretend this doesn't happen anymore. You call them liars.  To you the past is irrelevant.  You claim they changed but where is the proof, other than your word which has historically had it's weaknesses to put it diplomatically.  You can't deny that all these kids are saying the exact same thing year after year, generation after generation of program.  They cannot all be lying because if they were their stories would not match.

I have stated several times that there are good and bad programs today.  Yet you criticize that.  How many posters on fornits come out and say there are good programs today?  Do you really believe that every program is bad and every child is abused?  Why criticize my position being in the middle when you are surrounded by expremists?

And you always neglect to mention that NATSAP is merely a trade organization and many of these places have little or no real accreditation.

I never stated I was a big supporter of NATSAP,psy.  Here are 2 responses in this thread from me.

I would support them as an association much more so if they had some stricter standards and enforced them, but they dont appear to do that. The requirements for membership are wide open and they dont seem to terminate memberships for falling below standards.

I think it would be good to give NATSAP some competition. This may cause these organizations to start stepping up end enforcing some standards for their members to meet, even if they are minimal to start with. Just to write a check to be a member is useless in my opinion.

Why does it bother people here so much that I can see both sides of the issue?  Why are you threatened so much because I stand alone and don’t join the group think that all programs are evil and perform brainwashing?
I accept your opinions for the most part.



...

[psy]

I have never said that every single program does these things, Whooter.  You know that.  That would be absurd.  What i'm saying is that it's near impossible to tell a good program from a bad program (bad programs of old stayed open a long time by hiding their actions much in the same way modern programs do) and because of that, and because of how common abuse is, there are no good programs for all intents and purposes.  The risk is simply too high.

[Whooter]

I have never said that every single program does these things, Whooter.  You know that.  That would be absurd.  What i'm saying is that it's near impossible to tell a good program from a bad program (bad programs of old stayed open a long time by hiding their actions much in the same way modern programs do) and because of that, and because of how common abuse is, there are no good programs for all intents and purposes.  The risk is simply too high.

I agree with that to a certain extent, psy, that is why I would like to see a better association (good housekeeping seal of approval) to be formed which limits members to certain minimal requirements, accredited, licensed etc. and a probationary period for infractions found by DHS and finally removal from the association if minimal standards are not met.  This would be an organization worth joining nd would help (versus further confuse or mislead) parents looking to find a good program.



...

[Dysfunction Junction]

I have never said that every single program does these things, Whooter.  You know that.  That would be absurd.  What i'm saying is that it's near impossible to tell a good program from a bad program (bad programs of old stayed open a long time by hiding their actions much in the same way modern programs do) and because of that, and because of how common abuse is, there are no good programs for all intents and purposes.  The risk is simply too high.

Where there's smoke, there's fire.  psy is right about this, parents.  You should find a way to get your kid real help from real professionals in your communities without exposing them to these reckless programs.  Too many children have been damaged and too many have been lost.

[Whooter]

I have never said that every single program does these things, Whooter.  You know that.  That would be absurd.  What i'm saying is that it's near impossible to tell a good program from a bad program (bad programs of old stayed open a long time by hiding their actions much in the same way modern programs do) and because of that, and because of how common abuse is, there are no good programs for all intents and purposes.  The risk is simply too high.

Where there's smoke, there's fire.  psy is right about this, parents.  You should find a way to get your kid real help from real professionals in your communities without exposing them to these reckless programs.  Too many children have been damaged and too many have been lost.

This is an area where many of us agree.  I would recommend that all parents seek out professionals locally to help your child prior to considering placement in a program.  I have always been a strong believer that programs should be viewed as a last resort when all other options have been exhausted.  There are those who feel children should never be placed in programs, but those like myself feel a parent should never give up and just hope for the best.  Parents should consider all avenues available to help their child.



...

[Whooter]

Does anyone know if there Is there a screening process for programs to be part of NATSAP?

I think there are minimal requirements to join.  Someone posted them here on fornits a year or so ago.  I would have to look back to see.



...