If Parents Are Brainwashed, Where Do Whitmore Alumni Turn?

[Joyce Harris]

On 2005-02-28 21:34:00, Anonymous wrote:

"





Does anyone other than me not see the irony in the fact S.S. from Pure is suing Carey Bock for having accused her of sending kids to abusive schools. Now it appears that allegation MAY be true.



Won't Carey's wwaspie attorney have a field day with this one.



Won't S.S.'s attorney be so embarrassed.



If I was referring to a school who had been accused of such abuse allegations,I'd stop referring immediately until the allegations have been proven one way or another.It seems like safe common sense to me.



Or are we seeing an EGO bigger than it should be?





"

[Joyce Harris]

That has been my point all along:

That Sue Scheff should not be still referring to Whitmore Academy until the issue is resolved one way or the other.

[Cayo Hueso]

I'd like to know how anyone can, in good conscience, continue to refer to a program that is being investigated for abuse AND has had their license taken away.  http://www.isaccorp.org/whitmore/whitmorenews.pdf


Does PURE disclose to potential clients that Whitmore is currently under investigation for abuse?

Does PURE disclose to potential clients that Whitmore's license has been pulled?

How can PURE refer to a "school" that has no teachers?

How can PURE refer to a place that is supposed to provide therapy when there are NO THERAPISTS?

What are the criteria that PURE/Sue Scheff use to "approve" programs or schools?

Our youth can not understand why society chooses to criminalize a behavior with so little visible ill effect or adverse social impact... These young people have jumped the fence and found no cliff.

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/studies/nc/ncmenu.htm' target='_new'>Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse

[Antigen]

Honestly, I think they simply refuse to believe it. They're not just saying that all critics are bitter failures who can't deal. They actually believe it.

Sayeth the one: "All are queer but me and thee."
Rejoins the other: "Even thou art a little strange."

I think that was Poor Richard, but I'm not sure.

Eskimo: "If I did not know about God and sin, would I go to hell?"
Priest: "No, not if you did not know."
Eskimo: "Then why did you tell me?"
--Annie Dillard, "Pilgrim at Tinker Creek"

[Cayo Hueso]

That would explain the "how could they in good conscience" part, but I'd still like some answers to these questions.  There's no believing or not believing about these.

Does PURE disclose to potential clients that Whitmore is currently under investigation for abuse?



Does PURE disclose to potential clients that Whitmore's license has been pulled?



How can PURE refer to a "school" that has no teachers?



How can PURE refer to a place that is supposed to provide therapy when there are NO THERAPISTS?



What are the criteria that PURE/Sue Scheff use to "approve" programs or schools?

Look at PURE's "NEVER/ALWAYS" list...
http://www.helpyourteens.com/helpful_hints.html

specifically...

NEVER accept a program that is not accredited to educate your child,

ALWAYS ask for the staff?s education, training and experience. Credentials of those working with your child are vital. Ask if they have background checks on all employees.

Beware the leader who bangs the drums of war in order to whip the citizenry into a patriotic fervor, for patriotism is indeed a double-edged sword. It both emboldens the blood, just as it narrows the mind. And when the drums of war have reached a fever pitch and the blood boils with hate and the mind has closed, the leader will have no need in seizing the rights of the citizenry. Rather, the citizenry, infused with fear and blinded by patriotism, will offer up all of their rights unto the leader and gladly so. How do I know? For this is what I have done. And I am Caesar.
                                                                               
--Julius Caesar

[Antigen]

I'm tellin' ya', a couple people answered that. They trust Cheryl because Sue trusts Cheryl and they trust Sue because she's so nice.

Those thing only apply to people who they don't trust. Get it? Just like my brother getting all the cash and effective rights to the land because he's working his program. Same shit, very slightly different wrapper.

History does not record anywhere or at any time a religion that has any rational basis. Religion is a crutch for people not strong enough to stand up to the unkonwn without help. But, like dandruff, most people do have a religion and spend time and money on it and seem to derive considerable pleasure from fiddling with it.
--Robert A. Heinlen, American science-ficiton author

[Joyce Harris]

Antigen,

I'm sorry. But these PEOPLE, the Sudweeks, are running a business, and they make approximately  $4,000 per student a month,and THAT IS A WHOLE BUNCH OF MONEY.

And these PEOPLE MAY BE A LOT OF THINGS...but they are not stupid.

And Sue Scheff refers most, if not EVERY, student to Whitmore, and she MAKES A WHOLE BUNCH OF MONEY.

And all three of THEM...Mark and Cheryl Sudweeks, and Sue Scheff all know that they are doing EXACTLY what Cayo is asking about:

Sue Scheff is referring kids to Whitmore that advertises on the internet TODAY that it isa fully accredited School, and it IS NOT.

The Sudweeks list a staff of "teachers" and 3 of them are their daughters who are not certificed teachers, one is a son-in-law, one is Mark's mother, one is a non-certified karate teacher, and Mark and Cheryl Sudweeks even list themselves as teachers, and they most certainly are not certified teachers. Three others teach trade courses: carpentry, mechanics, wood shop.

If Sue Scheff is not aware of this sham of a list of "teachers," she well should be.

The Sudweeks do not have a license to have therapy--so I ask the same question: What services does Sue Scheff offer these parents that she is referring to Whitmore?

Does Ms. Sheff disclose to her "clients" that the Sudweeks are being investigated for child abuse and sexual abuse?  Does she disclose that the Sudweeks "surrendered their license to the State of Utah" amidst allegations and an investigation for child abuse? Does she disclose that the Whitmore Academy is NOT a fully accredited school? Does she disclose that the Sudweeks are operating the Whitmore Academy with only a license for a Bed and Breakfast, and that getting a license for a Private School is dependent on the Sudweeks securing full accreditation from the Utah Office of Education---which by the way is auditing the Whitmore Academy's "candidacy status of accredidation" at this time as directed by Dr. Patti Harrington,the Superintendent of the Utah Office of Education.

I think not.  If Ms. Scheff tried to refer any parent to Whitmore Academy, and then did the correct and professional thing---and disclosed all of the above: Any parent with a brain would take their child and getfar away from P.U.R.E. and Whitmore Academy as fast as they could.

[Joyce Harris]

The word "nice" and Sue Scheff  are just not two words that go together for me.

No, I would not use this word to describe Ms. Scheff.

[Antigen]

I was being facetious about the so nice part.

But the rest, I think, is also quite true. That doesn't mean that any of the things you say are untrue. It's just amazing what people can do w/o inconvenient ethical or legal considerations when they think they've got some kind of higher calling. This is the stuff wars are made of.

He that lives upon hope will die fasting
--Benjamin Franklin 1758

[Joyce Harris]

Guess I'm just one of those people that lives in a world where things are either black or white:

If you say you have a school:
  Then is should be accredited,
  And you should have Certified Teachers.

If you say you're running a Private School"
  Then you ought to have a license for a
  School, and not a Bed and Breakfast.

If you say you don't have a license to offer
  Therapy, then you should not advertise that
  you have a school that offers therapy.

If you say you don't accept students with a
  History of violence,
  Then: no gang kids are allowed.

If you say you don't us physical punishment,
  Then for sure not PHYSICAL ABUSE is
  EVER allowed.

Seems rather simple to me.
Wonder why Mark and Cheryl Sudweeks can't get it?

And if they can't follow simply rules, why would the "NICE" Sue Scheff refer any kids there?

[Anonymous]

If a person does the MATH there is big, big money to be had.

Apparently all morality and ethics fly out the window when the newed to be honest comes into play.

So disappointing.  I would think illegal too.

[Cayo Hueso]

On 2005-03-01 22:25:00, Joyce Harris wrote:

"Guess I'm just one of those people that lives in a world where things are either black or white:
..............

Think we're all going at two sides of the same coin here.  Joyce I dont' think anyone is arguing that what Sue and PURE are doing is wrong.  The motivations behind it may vary, but no one is arguing (at least the rational people) that Whitmore and PURE are not living up to their claims.  I think Antigen has a point though with Sue's and Sudweeks motivations though.  I'm sure they believe they're the saviors of these children.  

They trust Cheryl because Sue trusts Cheryl and they trust Sue because she's so nice.

This makes perfect sense to me knowing what I know about how people are sucked into personalities.  These parents want to believe they're doing the right thing for their kids.  They see some of the horror stories of WWASP, think they have the kinder, gentler answer and BAM!  Guru in the making. So, Sue comes up with her answer....PURE.  Sue apparently comes across to people as very caring and rational.  When you read the story of what she went through with WWASP and she's telling parents that she'd NEVER let that happen to another kid, they want to believe her.  Remember, these are parents who are already buying into all the fear mongering so they've become desperate to do SOMEthing but are afraid of the WWASP stories.  

The Sudweeks, IMO, are just small time power trippers that in some twisted way also see themselves as the kids saviors.  I think religion plays a bigger part in there situation obviously, but they're nowhere near what WWASP is in the sense of influence and power.  

Bottom line....IMO....both bad...period.

If there is a God, he is a malign thug.
--Samuel Clemens "Mark Twain", American author and humorist

[Joyce Harris]

Alright, I'm trying to "get it."

So IF Sue Scheff is on this crusade to save all these children from mean ole WWASP programs, and she was a "true believer" in the Sudweek's so-called Christian-based-love-and-save-all-children-program...

And let's just give Sue Sheff a GREAT BIG OLD BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT that she never, ever knew the Sudweeks wwould EVER abuse a kid in any way:

Then UP TO THE MOMENT the investigation for child abuse began against the Sudweeks in Nov 2002.....then Sue Scheff could have backed off, let the investigators do their job---and if she had stopped referring kids to Whitmore until things were settled ONE WAY OR THE OTHER,

,,,Then Sue Sheff could have retained her little angle wings and walked away with her reputation as "the saviour of all children" still pretty much intact, right?"

(NOW most people know, this is a "fairy tale," because parents are talking and talking---and parents were complaining about their placements at Whitmore by Sue Scheff BEFORE this incident in November 2004,)

BUT, I was just trying to see if I was "getting it" and following the motivational LOGIC of how people like Sue Scheff and the Sudweeks think.

[Joyce Harris]

correction: the investigation began in Nov 2004

[Cayo Hueso]

Joyce.....Yes, I think that's what this statement was about.  Not speaking for Antigen but it makes sense to me.

Posted: 2005-03-01 22:05:00   That doesn't mean that any of the things you say are untrue. It's just amazing what people can do w/o inconvenient ethical or legal considerations when they think they've got some kind of higher calling.

Neither in my private life nor in my writings, have I ever made a secret of being an out-and-out unbeliever.
--Sigmund Freud, Austrian-born psychologist