Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform > The Troubled Teen Industry
Vice article on The Troubled Teen Industry
psy:
--- Quote from: "Whooter" ---Her book did get good reviews, I think we all agreed to that several years ago. But she never had the opportunity to witness and experience the day to day operations of a program which was unfortunate.
--- End quote ---
Like none-ya said. You don't have to drink poison to know it's bad for you. You don't have to have had cancer to know how to treat it. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to know that if you have 1000 kids saying they had a horrible experience in program and only 100 saying they were saved, there might very well be a problem. Maia does not go so far as to say that all programs across the board are bad. What she says is that because it's impossible to tell a good program from a bad one, effectively all programs are unsafe. Straight was once thought to be the cat's meow. CEDU as well. WWASP had it's day, and the lists goes on. The programs of today will no doubt fall into disrepute and the ones that come after will no doubt claim to be "better". To have "learned from the mistakes". And so it all repeats and nothing really changes but the names. CEDU becomes Aspen. "Propheets" become workshops of "LifeSteps". "Raps" become "group". "Bans" becomes "non-com". If the programs really worked, Whooter -- f they really have changed -- why is it that there has never been a single peer reviewed study -- not a single one -- that has shown that programs are effective in the long term and cause no lasing harm?
none-ya:
--- Quote from: "psy" ---
--- Quote from: "Whooter" ---Her book did get good reviews, I think we all agreed to that several years ago. But she never had the opportunity to witness and experience the day to day operations of a program which was unfortunate.
--- End quote ---
Like none-ya said. You don't have to drink poison to know it's bad for you. You don't have to have had cancer to know how to treat it. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to know that if you have 1000 kids saying they had a horrible experience in program and only 100 saying they were saved, there might very well be a problem. Maia does not go so far as to say that all programs across the board are bad. What she says is that because it's impossible to tell a good program from a bad one, effectively all programs are unsafe. Straight was once thought to be the cat's meow. CEDU as well. WWASP had it's day, and the lists goes on. The programs of today will no doubt fall into disrepute and the ones that come after will no doubt claim to be "better". To have "learned from the mistakes". And so it all repeats and nothing really changes but the names. CEDU becomes Aspen. "Propheets" become workshops of "LifeSteps". "Raps" become "group". "Bans" becomes "non-com". If the programs really worked, Whooter -- f they really have changed -- why is it that there has never been a single peer reviewed study -- not a single one -- that has shown that programs are effective in the long term and cause no lasing harm?
--- End quote ---
Psy, if you feel so strongly, I don't understand the need to give the opposition a voice. Unless of course you could recommend a good program.
psy:
--- Quote from: "none-ya" ---Psy, if you feel so strongly, I don't understand the need to give the opposition a voice.
--- End quote ---
Because I want to understand how industry representatives think and argue. I want others to see it too. It also provides a catalyst for discussion.
--- Quote ---Unless of course you could recommend a good program.
--- End quote ---
Even if thought I knew of a good program, I would not. I could never be sure. Moreover, why should parents trust me? Becuase of my experiences? What about parents like Sue Scheff or students like Kevin August or some others who I can think of who have had experiences and yet still refer (and not to good places either)? This is a discussion that has been had many times on Fornits. If there is one message i'd like parents to hear is that they should trust nobody.
none-ya:
Here we go again. Delete my posts?
What's the problem now?
Che Gookin:
Far be it for me to appear as if I were siding with none-ya, perish the thought, but I'm having a hard time seeing how comparing exotic fruit and other equally bizarre analogies has much of anything to do with the article.
I mean really.. aren't his comments about the whooter just as relevant in a topic thrown this far out of whack?
Unless of course you are trying to illustrate the absurd lengths programs go to make their already absurd case. If that's the case then sorry None-ya, I agree with Psy.
Personally though, I'm wondering if you've been taking a bit of your vino therapy too seriously or some such thing.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version