DAYTOP

[Paul St. John]

On 2003-10-26 20:24:00, kaydeejaded wrote:

"shit I could take the xanax I am prescribed for the panic attacks from the PTSD from my beloved Straight inc



hmmmm but what if I am just not angry enough anymore??

Government can do something for the people only in proportion as it can do something to the people
http://laissezfairebooks.com/product.cfm?op=view&pid=FF7485&aid=10247' target='_new'> Thomas Jefferson.

"

As soon as you start thinking in terms of high or not high, they will already win, unless you can pierce through the paradigm in the moment.


Paul St. John

[kaydeejaded]

Dude!!!

come lecture us!
Oh my God my teacher probably would lover to know what my problem is and why I won't stop jumping all over this poor recovered lady in my class

what my big beef with TC's is
and what my massive freak out is in general

I would love to have you lecture !!!!!!!!!!!

my teacher is actually cool. I could say I know someone who knows the total ins and outs of and is completely familar with the "program" who would like to come lecture the class?

upstate NY? You down?

Is uniformity [of opinion] attainable? Millions of innocent men, women, and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half the world fools, and the other half hypocrites.
http://laissezfairebooks.com/product.cfm?op=view&pid=FF7485&aid=10247' target='_new'>Thomas Jefferson

[Anonymous]

City Limits MONTHLY
Date: February 2003
THE BIG IDEA: SICK TREATMENT
When drug counselors attack. > By Maia Szalavitz
      
Gloria Holmes didn't need any more hassles. A working, 36-year-old mother of three, she had been in and out of drug treatment for years. Following a 2001 suicide attempt serious enough to land her in Columbia-Presbyterian Hospital for a week, doctors had given her a prescription for the antidepressant Paxil. Arrested for drug possession not long after that, she was facing prison time.

Holmes asked to be sent to a women-only treatment program. Instead, in the fall of 2001, the city Office of Special Narcotics' Drug Treatment Alternatives to Prison Program sent her to a co-ed rehab residence run by the Veritas Therapeutic Community in Barryville, New York. There, according to Holmes, she was forced to stop taking Paxil. (Veritas says its general policy is to permit antidepressants.)

Adding to her misery, her treatment often consisted of being bullied and humiliated by her counselors. "They insult you all the time," says Holmes. Once, she says, a staff member told her, "If I was your husband, I would put you in chains and tie you up and throw you out the window."

The final straw came as she was sitting outside at a picnic table, enjoying the countryside. A counselor snuck up behind her and dumped a five-gallon bucket--which had been used as an ashtray and was full of cigarette butts--over her head, and banged it three or four times. "He said he did it as a joke," she says. "He was laughing. But I was crying."

Jurrant Middleton, the program director at Veritas in Barryville, says what happened to Holmes was no big deal. "I am familiar with this incident, and think that it was blown out of proportion," he told City Limits. "It was inappropriate, it was dealt with and the counselor was disciplined."

But Holmes says the incident made her feel worthless. "She felt that she was physically abused, violated tremendously and made a mockery of," says her husband, John Holmes, a former cocaine and heroin addict now training to be an addictions counselor. "It certainly didn't do anything for her self-esteem. She felt she could no longer take it, and she left." Holmes dropped out of the program, violating the conditions of her sentence, and started smoking crack again. Now she is upstate, serving three to six, as a result of her failure in rehab.


_______

Imagine if physicians could justify being abusive, arrogant and condescending by arguing that it improves patient health. Imagine that these professionals could decide not to use chemotherapy for cancer, for example, because they "don't believe in it," despite overwhelming research data. That's what addiction care has been like for the last half-century. To this day, there's a huge gap between clinical psychiatric knowledge and the way drug treatment actually goes down.

Clinical research shows that, like anyone else, addicts--particularly women and the mentally ill--respond better to empathetic treatment than to attacks or humiliation. The University of New Mexico's William Miller, for example, has demonstrated that patients are less likely to drop out and relapse if they have counselors who are compassionate, and not confrontational.

Yet for years, the sort of "care" Gloria Holmes received has been par for the course in addiction treatment. Many providers believe that addicts needed to be "broken down" and then re-socialized, and that insults, humiliation and degrading treatment aid this process. And while the National Institute on Drug Abuse has shown that medications like antidepressants aid recovery, a large proportion of rehab programs still routinely deny addicts standard psychiatric medications on the premise that they could lead back to addiction.

Recently, a number of federal, state and local government initiatives have begun trying to reform drug treatment, through both regulations and research. But they'll have to overcome a deeply entrenched legacy of anti-science and even anti-addict ideology.

Until very recently, abusive treatment was almost universally praised. A 1993 book by the founder of the Daytop treatment network, Monsignor William O'Brien, calls addicts "babies" and "stupid," and says that addiction treatment "has to be harsh," and that "being too gentle...doesn't do anybody any good."

John Holmes, who works at an agency that provides housing for former addicts, doesn't think his wife's experience was unique. "I've heard about people who were made to wear dunce hats or sit in a corner for hours, about men dressed as women, or made to wear diapers," says Holmes.


_______

These ideas about how addicts should be treated pervade almost every type of addiction care. But they have their roots in one specific type of treatment: therapeutic communities, often called "TCs," like the one that Gloria Holmes attended.

Therapeutic communities began in the late 1950s, after physicians and psychiatrists essentially decided that addiction was untreatable. While some doctors continued to try, the treatment of addicts and alcoholics became a backwater of the medical profession, populated largely by profiteers and quacks with little concern about and no financial interest in determining whether their treatment actually worked.

Alcoholics Anonymous, developed by two alcoholics in the 1930's, offered some hope to excessive drinkers. Based on the idea that one alcoholic could help another, it showed the public that alcoholism--and later other addictions via copycat 12-step programs like Narcotics Anonymous--weren't always hopeless conditions. As "the program" grew, doctors and psychologists began to offer residential treatment to help initiate people into self-help. The first of these, Pioneer House, opened in Minnesota in 1958 and became the model for modern programs like Hazelden and Betty Ford.

That same year, AA member Chuck Dederich opened a small storefront in Santa Monica and began treating heroin addicts. He found that living in a dedicated community, where addicts forced each other to look at their problems, could help some stay away from drugs. Synanon--named after the way one resident mispronounced "seminar"--became the first American therapeutic community, spawning countless imitators. Two of them, Phoenix House and Daytop (both based in New York), are now the country's largest providers of addiction treatment.

Unfortunately, Synanon's program became increasingly bizarre over time, eventually devolving into a violent cult. After putting a rattlesnake in the mailbox of an attorney who was suing Synanon, Dederich and several other members were ultimately convicted of conspiracy to commit murder.

Synanon is gone now, but its methods live on. Before Synanon imploded, mainstream programs picked up many of its methods, including "marathon" therapy sessions lasting days without breaks for sleep or food, brutal emotional confrontation, humiliating punishments--such as being dressed as a bum and wearing a sign saying "I am an asshole"--and other techniques aimed at dehumanizing and degrading participants.

Like fraternity initiations, this "tough love" tradition is highly resistant to change, often because many TC staffers are graduates themselves. A large proportion of graduates believe that what was done to them was necessary to their recovery. They come into the field with an evangelical urge to spread the word--and some, unfortunately, relish the chance to do unto others as others had done unto them.

As a result, they often not only disregard science as being irrelevant to what they do, but also tend to view medications and more humane treatments as inimical to recovery. "Remember that Synanon and TCs started as an anti-psychiatry, anti-medication movement, because those things weren't doing anybody any good," says Jim Dahl, director of program planning for Phoenix House. "To have the same people embrace research, it's a total culture clash."


_______

In the last few years, state and federal governments have tried to bring research into practice. The National Institute on Drug Abuse's Clinical Trials Network, which has outposts at NYU and Columbia, runs trials of research-based treatments in community programs, in the hope that such collaboration will encourage providers to adopt effective new methods.

Similar work is also being done by the federal Center for Substance Abuse Treatment. New York State's Office of Alcohol and Substance Abuse Services uses a federally funded network to bring together local providers and researchers for meetings and networking.

Kevin Wadalavage, vice president of the Outreach Project, which runs a variety of treatment programs as well as New York State's largest training program for addiction counselors, thinks that ideological barriers are starting to fall. "The new generation is more open," he says. "I think as we start to understand the disease of addiction as a brain-based phenomenon, we are getting there. Sometimes people will have a 'drug-free' philosophy, but I don't think it's as pervasive as people think."

Nonetheless, even Wadalavage recognizes numerous obstacles to change. The research projects and collaborations can only exhort providers to improve care, not force change. As courts sentence more and more people to rehab as an alternative to prison, patients have little choice about which program they enter--but they are blamed for it and incarcerated if they "fail" treatment. And since drug courts provide a steady stream of patients--at least 50 percent of clients, in some residential drug programs--providers have few incentives to improve their practices.

There are also practical problems. Addiction counseling pays little and has high turnover, and many programs don't require much training beyond having graduated from a therapeutic community or being a member of a 12-step program. "The problem is that therapeutic communities are the only modality which really grooms its recovering people to work in the field," says Ira Marion, executive director of the Division of Substance Abuse at Albert Einstein College of Medicine, which runs a methadone program for 4,400 patients. "TCs now integrate Narcotics Anonymous, which is totally against medication. Even if you train such people up the wazoo--and one big issue in the field still is training--they still have their experience and the NA credo in their gut and in their soul."

Despite the obstacles, there is definitely a shift underway. "We try to create an environment where if someone says, 'AA was the only way for me,' someone else can say, 'Well, that didn't work for me,'" explains Wadalavage. "Or if someone says, 'I'm opposed to methadone' [someone else can reply], 'Well, methadone saved my life.'"

Dahl, too, is adamant about abandoning infantilizing techniques. "That reduces self-esteem, and the self-esteem of most of our clients is already quite low," he says. "We have a manual for operating a TC, and we try to hold [staff] accountable if they do things like making someone wear bum clothes, put on a dunce hat, etc."

He acknowledges that the change is not yet complete, however. "Here and there you still do find that old tradition rearing its ugly head," Dahl admits. "A lot of people still carry those toxic methods with them. It's very hard to change. But we're trying desperately."


Maia Szalavitz is a co-author of Recovery Options: The Complete Guide: How You and Your Loved Ones Can Understand and Treat Alcohol and Other Drug Problems (Wiley 2000).

   
Defying research, some counselors still "treat" addicts with bullying, humiliation and dunce caps.

[Paul St. John]

KayDee, I think that I will probably be down for this.. yes..

Talk to the teacher.. see whta he says..

Umm.. Some time loate in November would probably be best for me..


Where are you upstate?

I am on the island..


Paul St. JOhn

[Paul St. John]

Anonymous..



Thanks for posting this..


Paul St. John

[kaydeejaded]

the college is in Stone Ridge I think you would get off exit 18 New Paltz

I am going to talk to my teacher tomorrow
class at 10:10am

Men had better be without education than be educated by their rulers.

--Thomas Hodgskin

[Anonymous]

If I were in the class, or was the teacher, and you came across as just trying to make the guest lecturers lose their composure or score points off of them, and I knew nothing about the programs, you'd come across to me as a jerk.

Now, knowing something about the programs, I know why you're upset and I know you're not a jerk, but you want to keep in mind that you're not going to convince the program people, and probably not going to convince the teacher, but you MAY convince the undecideds.

The undecided folks in class are your "intended audience" here, and so you need to come across as calm, reasonable, well-informed and sincere.

If Paul could be there, that could be good.  If he can't be there, a statement of what he experienced himself that you could have copied as handouts for your class members who want them would be a good technique---then you don't overwhelm them with information and come across as overbearing--you're just a reasonable person giving them info if they want it.

The other thing is you should research connections between Daytop and Synanon---like founders or early or ongoing staff with Synanon connections, Synanon methods in Daytop's program, things like that.

I'd start off ASKING them nicely about connections  with Synanon.  Then ask them if they knew that---and mention a connection you've documented.  Again, you want a handout fact sheet that you only give to class members who ask for it, "If any of you want it, I have some information I've put together documenting the links"---reference sources, where you can.  Don't try to read off the whole sheet, just use a couple of the stronger links in "did you know that" questions to the lecturers.  Have them memorized.  They'll probably say something like, "Well, I don't know where you're getting your information, but..." implying that you're talking out of your butt.  Then you say, "Well, of course I can't ask anyone to take my unsupported word for it, so I've documented the links and listed the sources of that information, and I've got copies for anyone who'd like to be able to confirm the facts for themselves."

The trick is not to let people know you have prepared cites to primary sources and copies until *after* they've implied you're an ignorant paranoid idiot---give 'em enough rope.  Then, you present the handouts like it's the most natural thing in the world---you're a reasonable person just trying to get to the truth, they've asked you to back up what you're saying, and OF COURSE you, as a reasonable person, are more than ready to do so.

Okay, I know I sound manipulative, here, but you really do have to prepare for this kind of thing by putting yourself in your audience's shoes and thinking about what backup information they're going to want---but that they're NOT going to want to be overloaded with information up front---they're going to want to be able to follow it up at their leisure--or, if they choose not to follow it up, they're going to want to at least know they've got the sources in their hands and they CAN follow up if they want.

You also have to keep in mind that your audience does not want to be placed in the middle of a technicolor argument between you and the lecturers.  They want to take notes and pass the test.  SOME of them actually want to learn about the subject--but not many.  IF there is a technicolor argument, it's not to your advantage, and you DON'T want to be seen to provoke it.

It's better for your point if there isn't a fuss.  If there is one, it's vital for your point that you were just engaging in a reasonable and well-informed and carefully prepared discussion of the issues, and THEY went off and got unreasonable without good cause.

If you look like you're baiting them, the BEST you can hope for from the audience is "a plague on both your houses."  What's more likely is that you'll be seen as a jerk disrupting their class.

The other thing you may be accused of is being against all residential treatment, so you want to be clear in your own head and able to debate intelligently when residential treatment is appropriate, what kinds are effective, and what qualifications the staff should have---and that just because someone is listed "on staff" doesn't mean they're actually there.  If this comes up, you might be prepped with anecdotes where programs have either claimed false credentials for staff members, or claimed people as staff members who were very rarely there.  You want to emphasize that oversight is needed so the parents and patients can be sure that any residential treatment program is ACTUALLY being run by qualified staff.

You might also be prepared to discuss what elements (like isolation interfering with mail) are inappropriate in a residential treatment, and what safeguards minors need before commitment to a residential program.

You might also be prepared with a handout (a printout of one of the very good internet articles would probably be enough) on Stockholm Syndrome in case someone is unfamiliar with it or needs refresher information.

Basically, you have to be as prepared as if YOU were the guest lecturer, or as if you were going to be in a formal debate with these guys.

But you ALSO have to be prepared for the teacher to tell you you have to shut up so the guest lecturers can lecture.  That's why you want everything you want to say in handouts for the other class members who want them.

If you're belligerent and she shuts you up, they'll be glad and won't want to read your stuff.  If you're eminently reasonable and she shuts you up, they're more likely to wonder what she's afraid of about your information and ask for and read your handouts---which will then have the luster of "forbidden fruit."

A good technique is for each handout on each subject to have a brief summary or talking points as the first page, a more in-depth supportive discussion as the next page(s), with footnoted cites to primary sources as the last page(s).

That way people can get the information right up front and have the deeper information and sources as a security blanket so they know why they should believe you---the casually interested will likely believe the summaries, the real skeptics will dig all the way down to the sources.  It's probably better to give names and contact information for survivors or organizations---email and such--rather than just web pages---otherwise you're open to the charge that you just downloaded some conspiracy bullshit off the internet.  You can and sometimes should give web pages, too, but you want a non-"on the internet" cite for every source (email to a real person in this case counts as non-"on the intenet").

You may still be challenged with "how do you know these people really were in the programs they claim and aren't just making something up on the internet"--if you're provided actual contact information, you can respond, "Their contact info is there, you're welcome to ask anyone you doubt to confirm their bonafides."  "Well, why didn't YOU do that?"  "I have no way of knowing what you would find convincing.  Again, if you have questions, you're welcome to contact them and ask for whatever proof or confirmation would convince you that they are who they say they are."

Yeah, I know this is a hell of a lot of work, and you may have to pick and choose what you have time to do, but the better prepared you are, the more convincing you will be.

[Deborah]

Copyright 2004 MediaNews Group, Inc. and ANG Newspapers
San Mateo County Times (San Mateo, CA)
January 30, 2004 Friday

HEADLINE: Parents of teen suicide sue County Mother said 16-year-old had troubles with alcohol
BYLINE: By Tim Hay, STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: REDWOOD CITY

The parents of a teen who hanged himself while being treated at the Day Top Village drug rehabilitation center are suing San Mateo County, two counselors and a doctor, saying their son was misdiagnosed for depression and that gross
negligence contributed to his suicide.

Alan and Vicki Henry say their son Will, who was 16 when he died, should have been kept in a locked mental health facility, and are seeking unspecified damages.

The case was recently thrown out of federal court when a judge found no federal violations, County Counsel Tom Casey said Thursday.

"It's a complete tragedy, but I don't think anybody did anything wrong," he said. "That's what came out of the federal court."

Will Henry was arrested in April 2000, the suit said. His mother told The Times in 2001 he had problems with alcohol.

According to the suit:
Henry told police and probation officials at the time of his arrest that he was considering committing suicide. He was sent to the psychiatric unit at St. Mary's Hospital in San Francisco, where a doctor prescribed 10 milligrams of Prozac a day.

When Henry became restless and uncomfortable, his dosage was doubled.

After a short stay at St. Mary's, Henry was moved to Hillcrest Juvenile Hall, where he continued to take Prozac but got no other treatment for depression.

On May 22, after less than a month in juvenile hall, Henry was released to Day Top Village, a residential drug treatment program.

At the rehab, Dr. Don Mordecai doubled Henry's Prozac dosage to 40 milligrams a day, though the suit claims the teen was suffering from "Akathisia," a side-effect of antipsychotic medications and antidepressants characterized by
extreme restlessness and increased depression.

The suit doesn't indicate whether Henry was ever diagnosed with Akathisia, which, according to the Scottish Medical Journal, can lead to "increased risk of suicide and violence."

According to the lawsuit, "Will's condition went from one of a passive, depressive nature into an actively anxious, severely suicidal condition, which put him at even higher risk of self-injury and death."

The suit also claims Henry made repeated threats about killing himself while at Day Top, and that he cut himself with razor blades and paper clips.

Anticipating a visit from his mother on June 13, Will told several counselors he planned to steal money from her, then walk out of the facility and kill himself, according to the suit.

Though he didn't steal from his mother, five days after the visit he left the center in the evening -- stuffing clothing inside his blankets to make it look like he was sleeping, his mother said -- and hanged himself, according to the suit.

The Henrys, who could not be reached for comment Thursday, are suing the County, Day Top, Dr. Mordecai and two counselors.

Claims made in a lawsuit give only one side of a story. A spokesman said Day Top makes it a policy not to speak about its current or former clients.

Staff writer Tim Hay covers County government. He can be reached at 306-2428 or by e-mail at [email protected] .

[Deborah]

http://www.nynewsday.com/news/nyc-hstee ... -breaking2

Study: 1 in 5 Teens tried painkillers
BY JAMIE TALAN
STAFF WRITER
April 21, 2005, 9:54 PM EDT

Your kids may be doing your drugs.

Substance abuse experts say they are surprised by results of a new survey showing that one in five teenagers has misused the prescription painkiller
Vicodin -- and an alarmingly high number of  others have tapped the family medicine cabinet for access to other prescription medicines designed to treat pain, attention deficits, sleeping problems and anxiety.

Tom Hedrick, co-founder of the nonprofit Partnership for a Drug-Free America, which conducted the survey, said the growing abuse of legal drugs as opposed to street drugs seemed to arrive overnight.

"As adults, we are always a little behind what  the kids are doing, but this happened at the speed of light," he said.

The national survey found that a growing number of teenagers are swallowing Vicodin, OxyContin, Ritalin, Adderall and just about any sedative or
painkiller found in the home.

Teenagers are also abusing over-the-counter cough suppressants containing a powerful ingredient called dextromethorphan. High doses create an
opiate-like high.

"It's easy to get into parents' medicine cabinets, either in your own home or the homes of your friends," Hedrick said. In the survey, more than 7,300 teenagers in grades 7 through 12 from across the country were asked anonymously about their drug habits.

Based on the findings, scientists say that 4.3 million teenagers have taken Vicodin, 2.3 million OxyContin, 2.3 million Ritalin/Adderall and 2.2 million over-the-counter cough and cold medicines.

Steve Pasierb, president and chief executive of the nonprofit organization, added that this "represents one of the most significant developments in substance abuse trends in recent memory."

The organization, founded in 1986, launched the national anti-drug campaign indelible in the memories of baby boomers: "This is your brain on drugs."

Since then, it has created hundreds of public service anti-drug ads. But never has it felt the need to add prescription drugs to a campaign. The
survey results, released yesterday, were a wake-up call. "Those ads are now in the works," Hedrick said.

The survey also revealed why this trend is taking place. "A lot of teenagers told us that they didn't think that these drugs are dangerous, simply because they are prescriptions," Hedrick said. "And they said the prescription drugs are easier to get than street drugs."

In the wrong hands, prescription drugs can be addicting and potentially deadly, said Dr. Herbert Kleber, a professor of psychiatry at Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons in Manhattan. Kleber is also director of the division of substance abuse there.

The teens who used prescription drugs were also more likely to abuse marijuana and Ecstasy, although both drugs are on the decline, according to the survey. In 2004, 37 percent of teens said they experimented with marijuana, compared with 42 percent in 1998. Ecstasy use has gone from 12
percent in 2001 to 9 percent in this survey.

Yesterday, Val Maroulis, an 18-year-old senior from Montville, N.J., accepted the role of poster child for anti-drug use as the partnership
released the latest statistics.

He's now into his seventh month in a residential treatment program at Daytop, a drug and alcohol treatment center in Mendham, N.J. "I was in my
own little world," said the lanky teen. His drug habit started at 14, with marijuana. It moved on to more serious drugs, including Xanax, Klonopin,
Adderall and OxyContin. "I would take  prescription drugs with alcohol. Sometimes I'd black out," he said. His mother, Kathy, said that she tried one-week hospital programs several times.

He finally got picked up for possession of marijuana and ended up in court. The judge gave him a choice: rehab at Daytop or jail.

He chose treatment. "He's doing good, now," his mother said. "He's a whole different person."

The teenager offers advice for parents: "Be aware of what you keep in your medicine cabinet."

"I know if I do drugs I am taking a step backwards," he said. "Talk to your kids, educate them, drug test them."

Columbia's Kleber said the baby boom generation is reticent about talking to their children about drugs because they fear being asked about their own past usage.

If parents do have a drug history, Kleber advises that parents admit that they did experiment, but now realize that bad things could easily have
happened. He also pointed out that marijuana is four to five times more powerful than it was in the 1970s.
Copyright © 2005, Newsday, Inc.