We have described a confrontation as a key aspect of a non-medically oriented residential therapeutic community. In our view, confrontation in the context of residential treatment is a potent psychotherapeutic tool that produces not only the acquisition of prosocial values but also behavioral improvement. Since these changes are internalized, long-term prognosis is quite good. Although we have no long-term systematic follow-up, anecdotal data confirm a less-than-ten-percent recidivism rate, which, to the best of our knowledge, is unmatched at any other residential treatment program. Bratter et al. (2006) contend "critics claim that confrontation psychotherapy is painful and simplistic. But they cannot explain how and why adolescents, who were extreme casualties, improve in a confrontational treatment milieu with escalating expectations for intellectual excellence and moral integrity [that] can be achieved without compromising one for the other" (p. 14). Confrontation as a psychotherapeutic technique has a long history in self-help therapeutic communities. In our experience, it can also be very effective in promoting change in adolescents who are resistant to other treatment approaches. Clearly, confrontation warrants further study.
QuoteWe have described a confrontation as a key aspect of a non-medically oriented residential therapeutic community. In our view, confrontation in the context of residential treatment is a potent psychotherapeutic tool that produces not only the acquisition of prosocial values but also behavioral improvement. Since these changes are internalized, long-term prognosis is quite good. Although we have no long-term systematic follow-up, anecdotal data confirm a less-than-ten-percent recidivism rate, which, to the best of our knowledge, is unmatched at any other residential treatment program. Bratter et al. (2006) contend "critics claim that confrontation psychotherapy is painful and simplistic. But they cannot explain how and why adolescents, who were extreme casualties, improve in a confrontational treatment milieu with escalating expectations for intellectual excellence and moral integrity [that] can be achieved without compromising one for the other" (p. 14). Confrontation as a psychotherapeutic technique has a long history in self-help therapeutic communities. In our experience, it can also be very effective in promoting change in adolescents who are resistant to other treatment approaches. Clearly, confrontation warrants further study.
Great, we normally don’t see many positive (pro kid/program) articles posted here. Thanks Zen……..Although “Attack therapy” has been proven effective the report indicates that this type of therapy needs to be matched with the right child and if it is not then there could be more harm done then good. This report also provides further evidence that these schools are effective, disbands the notion that these schools work within a world of secrecy and they are also getting the nod from the psychological community which are all a step forward.
It would be nice to see all schools have their models critiqued by the mental health community.
...
Isn't it strange how the who sees hell as heaven?
Isn't it strange how the who sees hell as heaven?
"Although we have no long-term systematic follow-up". You didn't highlight that part. It's a crucial bit, don't you think? I'm surprised you missed that. Dr. Bratter might as well claim 100% success if he's only relying on anecdotal evidence. See how Dr. Bratter quotes himself a lot? He's the source of his own "anecdotal evidence".
Do you know Dr. Bratter, who? You share personality traits with him.
But we have to rely on whatever information we can gather until that time comes. We all read accounts of these schools thru the eyes and ears of those who attended them every day here on fornits. They can choose to tell the truth, they can claim they were abused or treated well. How do we know which ones to believe?
As we get more and more professionals looking at the outcome and results of these schools we can become more confident of the results.
...
Um...who is this "we", dude? I don't think there is a "we", since your point of view isn't shared by anyone here. It's "you", not "we". Ask your Dr. to increase your dosage.
Quote from: "JUNKY"
Um...who is this "we", dude? I don't think there is a "we", since your point of view isn't shared by anyone here. It's "you", not "we". Ask your Dr. to increase your dosage.
By adding three and five, we obtain eight.
"We" in this sense often refers to "the reader and the author", since the author often assumes that the reader knows certain principles or previous theorems for the sake of brevity (or, if not, the reader is prompted to look them up),
I thought the who was never coming back, "scout's honor"? So why is "we"-who posting?
....... When who says "we", he is speaking for those who share his views......
Quote from: "Flunky"
....... When who says "we", he is speaking for those who share his views......
If you knew the answer, why did you ask?
@ psy -- He that studieth revenge keepeth his own wounds green, which otherwise would heal and do well. -- John Milton
Dont make fun of my Avatar.
...
Why all the negativity on Anecdotal data? I agree that there are better forms of data collection and presentation, but in the absence of long term controlled studies, anecdotal evidence is acceptable, revealing and educational.
...
Quote from: "TheWho"Why all the negativity on Anecdotal data? I agree that there are better forms of data collection and presentation, but in the absence of long term controlled studies, anecdotal evidence is acceptable, revealing and educational.
...
Why so positive about anecdotal evidence? It's the absence of long term controlled studies that makes the industry look like the shabby puppy mill it is. How come there hasn't been a long term study in over twenty years?
Quote from: "HUNAN"Quote from: "TheWho"Why all the negativity on Anecdotal data? I agree that there are better forms of data collection and presentation, but in the absence of long term controlled studies, anecdotal evidence is acceptable, revealing and educational.
...
Why so positive about anecdotal evidence? It's the absence of long term controlled studies that makes the industry look like the shabby puppy mill it is. How come there hasn't been a long term study in over twenty years?
Well, I don’t take a real positive stand on anecdotal data, but in the absence of any other it can be very informative and better than nothing at all. It can help steer the ship and give one a sense for what is working and what is not. It can also pose a challenge to run statistical reports on some of the results.
Not sure why there hasn’t been any studies done… my guess is that it usually comes down to money. Longer term studies are expensive and if the schools cannot see a way to recoup their investment (short term) then most would not be willing to shell out the cash.
...
Money? There doesn't seem to be a shortage of money for programs owned by Aspen, or UHS. I, and I alone, not "we", think you're rationalizing.
The Attack Therapy is probably THE most damaging part of TBSs and RTCs. It would be amusing watching them try to justify it if it wasn't so sad.
Opponents of "attack therapy" do not under-stand is that confrontation has proven effective to eradicate malignant, dangerous, vicious attitudes and acts. While some critics condemn confrontation to be "cruel," they need to remember that Dewey students have engaged in dangerous, often death-defying behavior which demands heroic intervention. Unless the therapist can persuade the youth to avoid a collision course with disaster, there can be profoundly serious consequences.
Quote from: "dfsght"The Attack Therapy is probably THE most damaging part of TBSs and RTCs. It would be amusing watching them try to justify it if it wasn't so sad.
Opponents of "attack therapy" do not under-stand is that confrontation has proven effective to eradicate malignant, dangerous, vicious attitudes and acts. While some critics condemn confrontation to be "cruel," they need to remember that Dewey students have engaged in dangerous, often death-defying behavior which demands heroic intervention. Unless the therapist can persuade the youth to avoid a collision course with disaster, there can be profoundly serious consequences.
Dewey students have engaged in dangerous, often death-defying behavior which demands heroic intervention.
He's quoting Bratter to back Bratter's claims, which doesn't cut it.
Here's Bratter's "attack therapy" outcome study. How ironic Bratter was sentenced in Litchfield.
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-8337096.html (http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-8337096.html)
Man sentenced in assault case
LITCHFIELD, Conn. -- The president of a private school in western Massachusetts was sentenced today to three years probation and ordered to make $50,000 charitable donation in the case involving a teen-age student who said he sexually assaulted her in 1993 at his Connecticut home. Thomas Bratter, the 55-year-old founder of the John Dewey Academy in Great Barrington, was sentenced in Litchfield Superior Court and also ordered to serve 500 hours of community service. Bratter, of Salisbury, Conn. had pleaded no contest to second-degree unlawful restraint. The John Dewey Academy is a school for at-risk adolescents.
That was 15 years ago!! Things change over time.
just look at the articles on Straight and Synanon from the 1960's compared to how they fell about the now.
Cite your sources please....and that doesn't mean this article. Please show me where clinical studies have been done to show that this is beneficial.
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." C.S. Lewis
Quote from: "Anne Bonney"
Cite your sources please....and that doesn't mean this article. Please show me where clinical studies have been done to show that this is beneficial.
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." C.S. Lewis
Show us where it was stated clinical studies were conducted, then we can track down the source. I went back and reread the posts and I think you were mistaken. Most of us have been referencing the OP article.
I'm still waiting for those sources. I have a feeling I shouldn't hold my breath.
Cite your sources please....and that doesn't mean this article. Please show me where clinical studies have been done to show that this is beneficial.
Quote from: "HUNAN"Here's Bratter's "attack therapy" outcome study. How ironic Bratter was sentenced in Litchfield.
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-8337096.html (http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-8337096.html)
Man sentenced in assault case
LITCHFIELD, Conn. -- The president of a private school in western Massachusetts was sentenced today to three years probation and ordered to make $50,000 charitable donation in the case involving a teen-age student who said he sexually assaulted her in 1993 at his Connecticut home. Thomas Bratter, the 55-year-old founder of the John Dewey Academy in Great Barrington, was sentenced in Litchfield Superior Court and also ordered to serve 500 hours of community service. Bratter, of Salisbury, Conn. had pleaded no contest to second-degree unlawful restraint. The John Dewey Academy is a school for at-risk adolescents.
That was 15 years ago!! Things change over time.
just look at the articles on Straight and Synanon from the 1960's compared to how they fell about the now.
Quote from: "Anne Bonney"
Cite your sources please....and that doesn't mean this article. Please show me where clinical studies have been done to show that this is beneficial.
Show us where it was stated clinical studies were conducted, then we can track down the source. I went back and reread the posts and I think you were mistaken. Most of us have been referencing the OP article.
(http://http://planetsmilies.net/happy-smiley-575.gif)
Quote from: "Anne Bonney"(http://http://planetsmilies.net/happy-smiley-575.gif)
Anne Bonny, or Who ever you are you are a piece of shit as are the rest of you. Sexual assault is not funny just because he got community service doesn’t mean he was innocent.
You ask for proof and long term studies for everything
sometimes just someones story or have to believe what someone is saying is good enough. Why is this anecdotal evidence not good enough for you people. That’s what they told us in court they wanted proof, not anecdotal evidence so the son of a bitch that hurt my kid went free. Sometimes a persons account of what happened is true and should be listened to.
Why all the negativity on Anecdotal data? I agree that there are better forms of data collection and presentation, but in the absence of long term controlled studies, anecdotal evidence is acceptable, revealing and educational.
...
ZenAgent is an industry spy who elicits information out of the real advocates and survivors who post here.
Fuck off, Who.
Quote from: "Beware!"ZenAgent is an industry spy who elicits information out of the real advocates and survivors who post here.
I shot Kennedy, too.
So I guess we should hire a judge to swear everyone in before posting here for credibility? (http://http://www.fornits.com/wwf2/images/smiles/icon_rolleyes.gif)
Sometimes I can't believe the amount of circling 'round the ol' mulberry bush that goes on here...boggles the mind.
Quote from: "Froderik"So I guess we should hire a judge to swear everyone in before posting here for credibility? (http://http://www.fornits.com/wwf2/images/smiles/icon_rolleyes.gif)
Sometimes I can't believe the amount of circling 'round the ol' mulberry bush that goes on here...boggles the mind.
The swearing in would not change the data type. Fornits is based on peoples stories. These stories are not scientific, not controlled or managed in anyway and the people are not tracked over a long period of time so the data is highly anecdotal. Fornits posters speak of other peoples experiences as well as their own. They tell us how their parents are feeling, why they were sent to the program which is categorized as hearsay.
I think the reason we keep going in circles is because many people don’t understand what they are against. Many here are quick to ridicule information that different programs collect (organize and report) without realizing that they themselves are generating the same type of database. If we expect people to respect/believe what is written here on fornits we need to do the same with other data collection sites.
...
Thomas Bratters success is highly anecdotal. His conviction as a sex offender is public record. The Dewey staff who engaged in sexual misconduct, that's on record, too.
Parents are told to research programs before placing their kids. Why would they choose Dewey based on this information?
Everyones history should be taken into account when weighing their story. If a poster here poster had a history of drug abuse, acting out in school, not being truthful etc. this should be considered when judging the credibility of their story.
Dewey students have engaged in dangerous, often death-defying behavior which demands heroic intervention.
Do they have a criminal record for any of the above offenses? Bratter and a staffer have criminal records as sex offenders. How can you question the credibility of every survivor who's abused drugs, acted out in school, or hasn't always been truthful? You're using the behaviors that landed them in programs to discredit their accounts. Not only that, but the average high school kid lacks credibility, if drug abuse, lying and getting in trouble makes them questionable.
It sounds like the Dewey kids have their share of demons, but Bratter claims a less than 10% recidivism rate. That estimate is based on "anecdotal data" from patients who've left Dewey after being sent there for "dangerous, often death-defying behavior".
You'll accept anecdotal data as valid if it supports a program, and questionable if it is critical.
There is a difference in status between Bratter as a mental health care professional and his patients at Dewey. Not only did he break the law, he violated the ethics of his profession and the trust of those in his care. Abusive caregivers and those they abuse can't be held to the "same standard".
I am not using anything, just holding everyone to the same standard.
So lets look at the studies these programs report on. We all know that no company is going to go public with information that will hurt their business and parents know this also. But a lot can be learned by examining what areas were left out of the report which would reveal where they are failing or unsuccessful.
There is a difference in status between Bratter as a mental health care professional and his patients at Dewey. Not only did he break the law, he violated the ethics of his profession and the trust of those in his care. Abusive caregivers and those they abuse can't be held to the "same standard".You take a kid who was comfortable in his world (Drugs, self destructive, crime etc.) force him out of that environment and into a program (an environment he doesn’t like or chose for himself). This particular kid doesn’t do well in a program, goes back to his old life style and then comes on here to fornits to talk about his experience. Do you expect a balanced account of his time in the program? Don’t you think it would be a little biased? I know the answer, I have read more than my share. Status isn’t really the issue, it is motivation. This is why I feel the parents are probably in a better position to view behavior changes and report back successes and failures better then the students or program owners.
Let's look at the studies then. I'll defer to you to provide them. In regard to these companies not reporting information that could damage their profitability, you've shown the need for independent evaluations to present fact-based studies of programs for parents to consider, since you've made it clear mental health professionals will violate their ethics and lie as damage control.
You're getting closer to the problem of transparency in the industry. There is none at the moment, and no incentive for the industry to resolve this problem.
You take a kid who was comfortable in his world (Drugs, self destructive, crime etc.) force him out of that environment and into a program (an environment he doesn’t like or chose for himself). This particular kid doesn’t do well in a program, goes back to his old life style and then comes on here to fornits to talk about his experience. Do you expect a balanced account of his time in the program? Don’t you think it would be a little biased? I know the answer, I have read more than my share. Status isn’t really the issue, it is motivation. This is why I feel the parents are probably in a better position to view behavior changes and report back successes and failures better then the students or program owners.
"You take a kid who was comfortable in his world (Drugs, self destructive, crime etc.) force him out of that environment and into a program (an environment he doesn’t like or chose for himself)". This particular kid realizes people around him are getting their asses kicked regularly and decides to pretend he/she is completely "on-board" or "aligned" with the program. He/she completely hoodwinks the unethical "professionals" desperate for a "success" and they fawn all over the kid. The kid gets out quickly, tows the line at home for three months and the program declares success. Then the patient relapses or finds a forum to give an account of the abuse he/she witnessed. Ask DYS about fooling trained "experts" in a program.
Where are the parents going to report the failures? You've already said any company will suppress information from that could hurt profitability. The programs will quash the negative outcomes. Also, the parents with "failures" may not be inclined to report anything back to the unsuccessful program unless it's through an attorney. Most of them try to "put it behind them and move on", which keeps the industry going, unchecked and unaccountable.
Anyone familiar with John Rosen, the self-proclaimed psychoanalyst who wrote Direct Psychoanalysis? He was one of the first to use brutal "attack therapy", resulting in the death of a patient and Rosen losing his license over sexual assault and over sixty counts of malpractice. Bratter and Rosen have a lot in common, both get carried away with the "godlike" power they have over their patients and both were sexually abusive to those in their care.
Quote from: "Dewey Care?"
"You take a kid who was comfortable in his world (Drugs, self destructive, crime etc.) force him out of that environment and into a program (an environment he doesn’t like or chose for himself)". This particular kid realizes people around him are getting their asses kicked regularly and decides to pretend he/she is completely "on-board" or "aligned" with the program. He/she completely hoodwinks the unethical "professionals" desperate for a "success" and they fawn all over the kid. The kid gets out quickly, tows the line at home for three months and the program declares success. Then the patient relapses or finds a forum to give an account of the abuse he/she witnessed. Ask DYS about fooling trained "experts" in a program.
Where are the parents going to report the failures? You've already said any company will suppress information from that could hurt profitability. The programs will quash the negative outcomes. Also, the parents with "failures" may not be inclined to report anything back to the unsuccessful program unless it's through an attorney. Most of them try to "put it behind them and move on", which keeps the industry going, unchecked and unaccountable.
Anyone familiar with John Rosen, the self-proclaimed psychoanalyst who wrote Direct Psychoanalysis? He was one of the first to use brutal "attack therapy", resulting in the death of a patient and Rosen losing his license over sexual assault and over sixty counts of malpractice. Bratter and Rosen have a lot in common, both get carried away with the "godlike" power they have over their patients and both were sexually abusive to those in their care.
You point out an interesting problem. How about a kid who comes home, relapses the first day, comes onto fornits and writes how horrible the place is, the parents call back to the school to report the failure. But within a couple of weeks the child bounces back and decides to use the new tools he/she receives and continues on a healthy path. Will this child come back onto fornits and edit their post saying they were mistaken and only blowing off steam, probably not. Will the school get a phone call providing this new feedback changing their questionnaire results or will the family just move on?
How about the child that relapses in 3 years? Would this be a success or failure? Program related? Or home related?
If the same child was doing fine in 10 years would this be a success for the program or just natural maturity?
If the kids become experts in fooling the professionals and trained experts then controlled studies would not be any more reliable. This is more reason to go with the parents for feedback on success and failure.
I've seen programs call relapses "natural consequences". It's the program's way of washing their hands of the matter, saying they did their job and shifting blame to the parents or the kid, claiming they didn't maintain "due diligence".
Quote from: "ZenAgent"I've seen programs call relapses "natural consequences". It's the program's way of washing their hands of the matter, saying they did their job and shifting blame to the parents or the kid, claiming they didn't maintain "due diligence".
Personally I think before we can determine success and failure we need to define it. If an alcoholic goes thru a program and after graduation stays sober for a day (then relapses) or a month (then relapses) or a year (then relapses) or 2 years (then relapses) or 10 years (then relapses). Where would you draw the line between success and failure?
I would think if the person could last at least a year then that would be an indication that the program had a great influence and turned this person around. Someone else might say 2 years another 1 month. So maybe success is individually defined and can only be approached in relative terms or compared to initial expectations.
Just like colleges cannot guarantee a successful future, they provide you with the education and tools to succeed and the rest of it is up to you. One graduate may be happy to get a job as an accountant whereas another may feel like a failure if they dont attain a presidentcy position.
Here's to alcohol!!!! (http://http://www.fornits.com/wwf2/images/smiles/cheers.gif)
How about a kid who comes home, relapses the first day, comes onto fornits and writes how horrible the place is, the parents call back to the school to report the failure. But within a couple of weeks the child bounces back and decides to use the new tools he/she receives and continues on a healthy path.
QuoteHow about a kid who comes home, relapses the first day, comes onto fornits and writes how horrible the place is, the parents call back to the school to report the failure. But within a couple of weeks the child bounces back and decides to use the new tools he/she receives and continues on a healthy path.
Don't you love these Who-style wallbangers? The fact that this thing could even type that is so mindbendingly retarded and so full of hopeless wishful thinking that you think it must be some sort of subhuman stupidity record.
Nah. It gets dumber than that. But if you've made it to page 5, you've figured that out by now.
Programmies apparently believe in the Control Fairy.
Quote from: "Froderik"Here's to alcohol!!!! (http://http://www.fornits.com/wwf2/images/smiles/cheers.gif)
Frod, That is funny!!!
(http://http://www.clipartof.com/images/emoticons/xsmall2/1969_drinking_beer_together.gif)
Quote from: "Licensd"Quote from: "Froderik"Here's to alcohol!!!! (http://http://www.fornits.com/wwf2/images/smiles/cheers.gif)
Frod, That is funny!!!
(http://http://www.clipartof.com/images/emoticons/xsmall2/1969_drinking_beer_together.gif)
Thanks, I'll be here all week..
Later....got some drinking to do! :D
Bratter still loves quoting Bratter.
Confrontation-A potent psychotherapeutic approach with difficult adolescents
Adolescent Psychiatry, 1/1/2008 by Bratter, Thomas Edward, Sinsheimer, Lisa
Abstract
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_q ... 1322/pg_12 (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3882/is_200801/ai_n27901322/pg_12)
This chapter describes the use of confrontation at the John Dewey Academy, a college-preparatory therapeutic boarding school. The treatment utilizes caring confrontation and positive peer pressure within a therapeutic community setting. The authors discuss the conceptual basis for the use of confrontation, drawing upon the literature about therapeutic communities. They offer a rationale for the efficacy of this psychotherapeutic approach in a population of bright adolescents who are resistant to traditional treatment. They illustrate the use of confrontation with an extended excerpt from a therapeutic group. Countertransference issues related to the use of confrontation are also discussed.
Toward a definition of clinical confrontation
Nunberg (1955) provides a reasonable definition of confrontation when he proposes the psychoanalyst "[call] the patient's attention to his inner conflicts, the sources of which are not known to either of them, and asks him to be helpful in discovering the unknown, the repressed. Thus, from the very beginning, the aims of the analyst are opposed to those of the patient, to the wishes of his repressing ego" (p. 123). Nunberg disagrees with Devereux (1951), who explicitly states that confrontation "yields no insight, and merely focuses the attention of the patient on something which he perceived but failed to register-or refuses to acknowledge openly" (p. 69).
Carkhuff and Berenson's (1967) definition has stood the test of time. They report that confrontation helps the person understand:
himself, his strengths and resources, as well as his self-destructive behavior....It is a challenge to... become integrated....It is directed at discrepancies... between what the client says and does...and between illusion and reality....It implies a constructive attack upon an unhealthy confederation of miscellaneous illusions, fantasies, and life avoidance techniques in order to create a réintégration at a higher level of health (p. 171).
Confrontation in self-help therapeutic communities
During World War II at Henderson Hospital in the Belmont Social Rehabilitation Unit in England, Rapoport (1960), a sociologist, was the first to describe group psychotherapy to be "reality confrontation." Shankman (1978) provides a description of the self-help therapeutic community (TC), as illustrated by Casriel (1963); Bratter (1978); Bratter, Collabolletta, Fossbender, Pennacchia, and Rubel (1985); Glaser (1974); Sugarman (1974, 1986); and Yablonsky (1965), in which recovered persons act as catalysts and responsible role models:
The TC might best be described as a school which educates people who have never learned how to live or feel worthy without hurting themselves and others. The therapeutic community helps people who have tried again and again to get what they wanted from life and have continually defeated themselves. The principle combines the basic and universal human values of knowledge, love, honesty, and work, with the dynamic instrument of intense group pressure, in order to recognize and help correct personality defects which prevent people from living by these values. The results lie in rehabilitation so that the individual may reenter his or her community as an independent and productive person (p. 156).
When describing self-help peer psychotherapy, Van Stone and Gilbert (1972) candidly describe the brutality of confrontation in residential therapeutic communities that are run by recovering addicts. Confrontations needed to be harsher in these adult communities than they would be with teenagers, and justifiably so:
[Confrontation is] a kind of group therapy in which each member is...presented with candid, personal facts regarding every observable behavior or attitude recognized by the group as being self-defeating or dishonest. If the member.. .attempts to explain or deny any observation, he is ridiculed.. .and insulted as his fellow members hammer away at the distorted ideas that he offers in support of his damaging behavior patterns. Intellectual insight or genetic self-interpretations are derided as an escape from responsibility for current behavior. Honesty, trust in the group, realistic self-assessment, appropriate emotional release, and changed behavior, in particular, are rewarded by sympathetic counsel and encouragement from fellow members (p. 585).
The professional community initially characterized confrontation as cruel. Maslow (1967), the progenitor of humanistic psychology, recognized the effectiveness of confrontation after attending groups at Synanon, the first exaddict-administered therapeutic community. He wrote, "people are ...tough.... They can take a.. .lot... .I've suggested that a name for this might be 'no crap therapy.' It.. .cleanfs] out defenses [and] rationalizations." (p. 28). Ruitenbeek (1970) agrees with Maslow, describing the essence of this technique as an "insistence upon total honesty....No rationalizations...are allowed" (p. 166). The clinical challenge of confrontation is to help the youth commit to accept responsibility by converting noxious emotions into constructive acts via the internalization of positive values. Self-respect and success become positive addictions.
Confrontation is painful because it penetrates protective barriers. Using a psychoanalytic orientation, Adler (1985) defines confrontation as an attempt to "gain a patient's attention to inner experiences or perceptions of outer reality of which he is conscious or is about to be made conscious" (p. 122). Sifneos (1991) cautions that the therapist who uses confrontation needs to:
"be convinced that the patient is able to withstand [much] stress... .[Effective] confrontation must be based on the therapist's observation about a series of paradoxical behavioral patterns, contradictory statements....It must motivate him to look at himself from a different point of view" (pp. 374, 382). Cohen (1982), who reconciles confrontation and psychoanalysis, provides a comprehensive synthesis when he contends that "confrontation analysis is a method of investigating, analyzing, and evaluating human behavior in the context of interpersonal interaction. It.. .contains a theoretical framework within which to understand the evolution, maintenance, and modifications of personality dimensions" (p. xv).
Countertransference issues
Collabolletta, Gordon, and Kaufman (1998) stress that the therapist's intent determines whether the confrontation is therapeutic or an abuse of power: "When the psychotherapist's intent is to promote change, this kind of confrontation becomes caring and constructive." When the intent is to prevent a student from engaging in destructive, dangerous, and deceitful acts, compassionate confrontation becomes the most potent expression of responsible concern. A skillful confrontation provides prima facie proof of the therapist's care and emotional investment.
The therapist needs to be mindful of potential countertransferential contamination when using this technique. Only the confronter knows personal motivations; thus, one must understand the psychodynamics before confronting. Unresolved countertransferential issues can provoke cruel confrontations. Giovacchini (1985) notes that adolescents can arouse disruptive countertransference reactions because of the intensity of their neediness and defiance, and warns that countertransference may destroy the treatment relationship, or it may lead to therapeutically beneficial insights. The therapist can feel jealous that these adolescents have emancipated themselves from middle-class restraints. Or, more likely, be disgusted by cruel and feel a need to punish the offender. Consultation with colleagues or a supervisor can minimize the likelihood of acting out a destructive countertransference reaction.
Sequence and principles of confrontation
Bratter (2003) asserts that "there are two sequential phases to confrontation: first, the unlearning of dysfunctional attitudes and acts and, second, learning healthy responses. Confrontation can penetrate the permissive and indulgent attitudes of families that [created] the psychopathology of alienation, deceit, irresponsibility, and self-absorbed behaviors" (p. 140).
Bratter (1977, p. 170) lists seven principles of confrontation psychotherapy:
1. Attack the malignant and dysfunctional aspects of behavior.
2. Penetrate the facade of justification of behavior.
3. Force individuals to accept responsibility for behavior.
4. Help persons evaluate their behavior.
5. Assist individuals to be aware and to anticipate the consequences and payoffs of their behavior.
6. Challenge persons to mobilize their resources.
7. Define a direction so that persons can continue their growth and development.
How confrontation facilitates change in adolescents
Confrontation is a potent psychotherapeutic process designed to help the adolescent not only to recognize (and change) the self-destructive aspects of behavior but also to acquire skills that help actualize potential. In a group setting, peers offer insight and suggestions, thus providing the catalytic conditions necessary for selfexploration and improvement. Confrontation pierces the formidable protective armor of denial, deceit, and distortion. Meeks and Bernet (1990) note "accurate confrontation is much easier in the inpatient setting than it is in the treatment of outpatient adolescents" (p. 578). Johnson (1985) views confrontation as supplying an "observing ego" (p. 255). Brook (1996) believes that confrontation helps adolescent "group members...to confront denial and accept responsibility for their actions" (p. 258).
Bratter (1972) describes the therapeutic thrust of a confrontation-group orientation:
Using a confrontation-teaching-interpretative-reasoning approach, the group demonstrates to the [member] the irresponsible and self-defeating aspects of...behavior [and]...begins to understand the consequences of his acts and attempts to become more responsible to himself, others, and society. Emphasis is placed on the eigenweit (the relation to one's self)-i.e., the immediate experience. The individual must acknowledge his perceptions of the conflict, the problem, his irresponsibility, etc....
The individual, gaining the candid opinions and admonishments of his peers regarding the more destructive elements of his behavior, considers a new orientation and behavior (p. 309).
Confrontation can:
- * Expedite a behavioral change-i.e., stop dangerous and dysfunctional behavior.
* "Force" the adolescent to be accountable for attitudes and acts.
* Help students understand future consequences and payoffs for current behavior.
* Mobilize personal talents to actualize potential.
Confrontation utilizes provocative questions to stimulate self evaluation. Do your attitudes and acts help you to achieve your intermediate and long-term goals? How do others view you? Do you have self-respect? In addition, the therapist must elicit reactions from the confronted and group members about their reactions to the confrontation. Garner (1970) urges the therapist to ask frequently, "What do you think or feel about what I told you?" (p. 231).
Helping each other while helping the self
To minimize the impact of negative countertransference reactions, since a significant age differential exists between adolescents and the group leader, peers are encouraged to do most of the confronting. Volkman and Cressey (1963), among the first to recognize the importance of self-help confrontational psychotherapy groups, write:
The most effective mechanism for exerting group pressure on members will be found in groups so organized that criminals are induced to join with noncriminals for the purpose of changing other criminals. A group in which criminal "A" joins with some non-criminals to change criminal "B" is probably more effective in changing criminal "A" (p. 139).
Brager (1965) notes increased self esteem in group members when they confront peers to better themselves. Reisman (1965) labels this treatment dynamic as "the helper principle," and notes that the helper often gains more from the helping process than the person being helped. Positive peer pressure traces its antecedents to self-help psychotherapy. Hurvitz (1970) reports that when peers are active,
they focus on the presenting problem, and assume that by following principles and methods of their movement, they will help each member solve his specific problem....They may ridicule and attack each other with great hostility and they may provoke aggressive and hostile feelings; however, peers regard such attacks and provocations as other's expressions of concern and concern (p. 44).
Use of confrontation at the John Dewey Academy
Bratter, Sinsheimer, and Kaufman, in chapter 7 of this volume, have described the population and treatment philosophy at the John Dewey Academy (JDA). As they have said, JDA youth are "immune to traditional therapeutic and teaching techniques. They have erected formidable barriers and defenses which need to be cracked before they will think rationally... .Peers confront each other by demanding that each member accept accountability for immature, irresponsible, illicit, and self-destructive acts" (p. 73).
Compassionate confrontation: Rebutting the critics
When entering the John Dewey Academy, most students possess toxic attitudes that reduce others to objects to satisfy voracious narcissistic needs, self-entitlement, and self- aggrandizement. Both traditional therapeutic approaches and the administration of psychotropic medicine have proven ineffective. No chemical imbalance exists. Many Dewey youth have a virulent attitude that renders psychotherapy ineffective which explains why recidivism rates are high.
Critics contend that confrontation is controversial, counter therapeutic, and cruel punishment which often brutalizes persons-in-treatment. Confrontation attempts to modify irresponsible, impulsive, immature, stupid and self-destructive behavior. Confrontation penetrates denial, distortion, and dysfunctional attitudes. Critics protest, furthermore, that the use of confrontation is prompted by a negative countertransference reaction. Confrontation has been labeled "attack therapy" for pejorative reasons. Opponents of "attack therapy" do not understand is that confrontation has proven effective to eradicate malignant, dangerous, vicious attitudes and acts. While some critics condemn confrontation to be "cruel," they need to remember that Dewey students have engaged in dangerous, often death-defying behavior which demands heroic intervention. Unless the therapist can persuade the youth to avoid a collision course with disaster, there can be profoundly serious consequences. The primary goal of psychotherapy is to preserve life, so desperate and heroic treatment interventions are required for this difficult-to-treat population. When viewed from this humanistic perspective, confrontation connotes caring by the therapist who attempts to convince the adolescent to become more responsible, responsive, and respectful.
Similar to other medical procedures, there are abuses of confrontation psychotherapy which the authors acknowledge and condemn. The authors, therefore, do not minimize the noxious impact of confrontation when done for the wrong reasons.
There are similarities between the psychotherapist who confronts, the radiologist who medicates, the surgeon who operates, and the psychiatrist who prescribes psychotropic medication. Stated simply, these procedures are subject to abuse. In addition, each procedure attempts to attack malignancies. If the truth be known, confrontation is more benign than other medical approaches. The surgeon, radiologist, and psychiatrist do more physical and permanent damage under the guise of medical treatment than does the therapist who confronts. Interesting, these professions escape criticism because the end is thought to justify the means. There are more malpractice suits against medical professionals than psychotherapists who confront.
Confrontation psychotherapy: A Case study
As an illustration, we present an excerpt of our group process. Prior to attending JDA, Jason had been diagnosed as having schizoaffective disorder and had been prescribed a cocktail of psychotropic medications, including amphetamines, antidepressants, and anxiolytics. Jason's father died when he was twelve, and his mother was in remission from a brain tumor. He witnessed several people jumping to their deaths from the World Trade Center towers during the 9/11 terror attacks. Two years ago, Jason learned he had the same hereditary cardiac condition that caused his father's premature death, and he underwent the implantation of a pacemaker-defibrillator.
Considering his history, post-traumatic stress disorder might have been a more appropriate diagnosis. Regardless of diagnosis, however, this boy had clear explanations for his choice to suppress his feelings and for his decision not to trust others. He struggled with a continuing sense of abandonment and betrayal, stemming from his father's sudden death. During the 18 months that he was at JDA, he remained closed off from other students and staff. The following is a fragment of a group session in which first the group leader and then the other members of the group confronted Jason on his behavior and their reactions to it. Before convening this group and implementing this confrontation, the group leader discussed the treatment impasse extensively with colleagues. The intent of this confrontation was to precipitate a crisis, forcing Jason to change or to leave.
Leader: Jason, recently adults have asked if I think you are organically damaged since you refuse to heed repeated warnings not only to change but also to become a contributing member of the community. I admit that for the first time I mentioned that perhaps they are right and I am wrong. Maybe you are damaged goods and are incapable of changing. You might be the first student in our twenty-year history who needs medication to function. I intend to recommend to your mother that you be evaluated by a psychiatrist who specializes in pharmacology.
Jason: I am not. You know damn well I'm not crazy and don't need that crap.
Leader: I no longer know what to think. What I do know is that you have been here for eighteen months, but haven't changed much. You still isolate. You still refuse to relate. You still don't trust anyone. You still are stubborn. But to your credit, you finally have started to do well academically. I think you hide in your academics by claiming you need to study six or seven hours a day.
Jason: Yes, but...
Leader: Yes period. Your classmates complain that you're a drag and a drain. They don't want to waste their time and energy reaching out to you and having you reject them. Ask them.
Jason: I've been talking to people. (He lists five students.)
Mary: Big deal. They are new students. None have been here longer than three months. What about us? We know you much better than they do. They don't know how to confront you. So you continue to play stupid games.
Laurie: I have no idea who you are. When you feel uncomfortable and threatened, you shut down. When my father died abruptly from a heart attack, just like your father, you never even said you were sorry. This is why I stopped pursuing you.
Jason: I don't want to talk to you because you don't want to talk to me.
Leader: That's a very mature response. You're right, but do you know why?
Jason: No.
Leader: You lie. You know damn well. Everyone is frustrated and weary. They have extended themselves by sharing experiences and confronting you. What have they gotten from you? Only silence and sarcasm. So they finally said to themselves, 'Fuck him. He's simply not worth it.' You quit. No, that's wrong. You never tried.
Allie: Tom's right. I quit six months ago. I gave you the benefit of the doubt that, underneath your defenses, you were caring. I don't believe that any more. You talk in a monotone. I cannot remember when I felt you cared. You are the most frightened and self-absorbed person I've ever met. I know why. When I came I was too scared to care. I had a damn good excuse. I had several abusive relationships with guys. I felt sorry for myself and saw myself as the victim. I was confronted that it was my choice. I chose to remain with these abusive jerks when I should have rejected them! It was scary to trust because I feared the worst. Yeah, I got hurt once or twice. I was knocked down. But I got up and tried again. And you know what? Today, I have the best friends I ever had.
Laurie: I don't blame Allie for not giving a damn. No one trusts you. You are nineteen. You continue to treat your mother like she's the enemy! You abuse your younger sister. None of us care whether you leave or stay. I pity you. You are too scared to be human. You are a poor excuse for a person.
Eddie: Jason, it's really that easy. You lack the guts to venture forth. You're a coward. I'd lie if I said I care because I don't. Blame yourself. But what frightens me is that I know if you don't do it at JDA, you never will. You will never be in an environment which is so caring and safe.
Paul: Eddie's understating your problem. Several of us believe you have major guilt, but lack the integrity to take accountability. Fuck your fears. Take accountability. Things can't get much worse.
Shirley: Do you know what I think the problem is?
Leader: No. Tell us.
Shirley: Jason does not believe you will expel him. You've threatened so many times to expel him that he thinks he's immune.
Eddie: Shirley's right. Jason knows you like bright students, so he's gambling since he has not done anything expellable, you'll let him graduate.
Leader: Jason, if this is what you think, your reality testing is flawed. Complete the next two weeks and then go home for the holidays. Think about what you will want to do with your life. And then write a ten-page essay why I should readmit you. Include in this document your guilt and what you will change.
Allie: Why wait? He thinks you are bluffing. He's not going to change. For the next two weeks, he will do nothing.
Leader: You're right, Allie. Jason, leave in three days. I will give you seventytwo hours to make arrangements because I doubt your mother will permit you to return home. My guess is that all the New York City homeless shelters are filled because it's cold, but I suggest you call them.
Paul: We're wasting our time. We have confronted you many times but you ignored us. You have made commitments to change, but you never have. You continue to joke and act nonchalant. You've done this for six months, so I agree with what Tom said at the beginning of the group. Maybe you just don't get it! I believe you lack the guts to come out from behind all the barriers you have erected. You will be a lonely guy who becomes bitter because no one will be knocking at the door asking you to let us in. Maybe you should watch Dickens' "Christmas Carol." You could become Scrooge.
Susan: I've kept quiet because I tried many times to reach out to you, but you always gave me shit. You continue to be obnoxious and confront others about dumb shit which tells everyone to stay away. I know when I confront kids rather than connecting with them, they get the message to stay away.
Leader: Sadly, I doubt if this group will have much impact. You have heard all this shit many, many times. This may be the last group you attend at John Dewey. I won't shed any tears if you do not return, other than we failed to help you in your time of desperate need. But Scrooge changed when he was much older than you are. Unfortunately, Scrooge is a fictional character. Maybe you ought to read Dickens when you go home. Unless you change by letting the sun shine in, you very well could become Scrooge. It would be tragic if you were to live a wasted life because you have been blessed with awesome intelligence. You could have been great. You could have improved the quality of life. But you won't unless you get the guts to show you care. It's late, but there still is time. The next month will be the most important in your life, because the decisions you make will influence you until you die. I hope for your sake, and that of society, you finally make the right decisions because this may be your last chance. Enough. I don't want to waste any more time. I end abruptly because I do not want to have closure. I hope you are scared because I am scared for you! You can win, but time is a precious commodity, which you lack.
Case follow-up
Following this group, Jason enrolled in a four-week wilderness program in an attempt to earn readmission to Dewey. During his stay at the wilderness program, Jason received notification of early-decision admission to a prestigious college of engineering, as well as word that he had been awarded a substantial scholarship.
While in the wilderness program, Jason was admitted early decision to a prestigious engineering college. We thought this would provide the incentive for him not only to return to John Dewey but also to confront his fears. However, when he returned from the wilderness program, Jason remained intransigent. He engaged in provocative behavior, which forced his expulsion for safety reasons. He "played" with the fire alarm. He "played" with the stove, turning it on and off. He asked the dean of students if he could set fires by using his bow and drill, a skill he had learned in the wilderness. His intent seemed obvious-rather than leaving school voluntarily, Jason wanted to be expelled. It seemed certain that the behavior would escalate if he were allowed to remain. The decision to expel Jason was in keeping with the treatment principle that there are consequences for behavior. Students, parents, and staff were notified before any action was taken, and no one disagreed with the decision to expel him.
The president was faced with the dilemma of whether, and how, to report Jason's behavior to the engineering college. One option would have been to hide behind the shield of confidentiality, but it was felt that unsafe behavior does not warrant confidentiality. Additionally, notification was justified because Jason dropped four courses, which, if not explained, would have resulted in his acceptance being rescinded. Finally, there was the importance of maintaining a relationship with this college so others could attend.
At the same time, the president was aware of his reactions to Jason, which included disappointment, betrayal, anger at not being appreciated for convincing the college to grant a generous scholarship, and rage at being placed in a most uncomfortable position. He knew no one would criticize him if he urged the college to rescind admission, but knew this consequence was extreme since the family could not afford to pay tuition. It is dubious if Jason would have attended college. After careful consideration, the president wrote a letter to the dean of admissions at the college, explaining the reasons for the expulsion, reviewing the factors in Jason's background that have made it difficult for him to succeed academically and socially, and recommending that he reapply to JDA and complete a postgraduate year before attempting college. Included in the letter were the following statements.
Please be advised.. .if I thought Jason were "too dangerous" or "too sick," not only would I notify _____college, but also would refuse to give him the option to return to Dewey....Jason's refusal to comply is motivated by fear to trust others and to be emotionally vulnerable, not defiance. The only time Jason cried was when he was confronted about his reluctance to trust.. .because he feared friends would abandon and betray him... .If permitted to attend college, I suggest Jason be required to continue psychotherapy. He needs to resolve his fear of intimacy, not because he is a threat to safety. Jason and his mother will receive a copy of this letter, so hopefully both will communicate with you. I warned Jason that [college] may rescind his acceptance....
I would be willing to accompany Jason for a conference, with anyone you think makes sense, to discuss options. Undeniably, Jason is a disappointment, but I hasten to mention that several have graduated in Jason's position needing to do more work therapeutically. In college, they excelled. His prognosis remains guarded....! conclude...by stating that he has learned much.
The president would have been wrong to suggest rejection essentially because the decision is that of the college, not the preparatory school. To recommend rejection would have been an abuse of psychotherapeutic power. Post hoc, the president knew that had he become retaliatory, his motivation would have been revenge for Jason's disrespect and lack of appreciation regarding his advocacy, which had resulted in Jason's being awarded a $160,000 four-year scholarship. Had he urged that Jason be rejected, which was warranted, Jason's future would have been ruined, because without a scholarship, it would have been impossible for him to attend college. The president retained his therapeutic integrity by reporting what happened, but refraining from recommending any action. The college decided to continue to extend its offer of admission and a scholarship, and Jason plans to completed the required work and attended. Subsequently, he attained a 3.8 average which puts him on the dean's list. The president assumed an aggressive advocate stance, advocating that he become a resident assistant in the dorms. Jason has visited the John Dewey Academy six times during the year because he wants to "give back" to the school which helped him mature. He has forgiven the president and now recognizes the confrontations were expressions of concern.
Discussion
It is premature to know whether Jason will be a "success" or a "failure." Undeniably, Jason was helped by confrontation because he excelled and was admitted by a college of quality. How much has this adolescent grown, and what the quality of his interpersonal relationships will be, has not been determined. Judicious handling of this complicated situation has avoided the preclusion of future educational, professional, and social successes.
This kind of confrontation is justified when the adolescent remains intransigent or engages in extremely dangerous behavior. Alexander (1950) describes a patient who was irritating and engaged in regressive behavior. When the patient complained that no one liked him, rather than commiserating, Alexander opines that no one liked him because he was unpleasant. Subsequently the patient established a positive treatment alliance. Hearing the truth from a caring professional enabled the patient to trust and to move forward. Corwin (1991) labels this kind of intervention heroic: "When such statement is made, it is an emergency situation....The analyst knows it, the patient is...aware....But both know the moment it is uttered that it may have a prophetic significance for the patient....It implies that a psychic reaction must lead toward the establishment of a working alliance" (p. 83). We have utilized this sort of radical intervention for six seniors in past years, all of whom eventually returned to graduate. We believe Jason will not be an exception.
Critics contend that confrontation is controversial, counter therapeutic, and cruel punishment which often brutalizes persons-in-treatment. Confrontation attempts to modify irresponsible, impulsive, immature, stupid and self-destructive behavior. Confrontation penetrates denial, distortion, and dysfunctional attitudes. Critics protest, furthermore, that the use of confrontation is prompted by a negative countertransference reaction. Confrontation has been labeled "attack therapy" for pejorative reasons. Opponents of "attack therapy" do not under-stand is that confrontation has proven effective to eradicate malignant, dangerous, vicious attitudes and acts. While some critics condemn confrontation to be "cruel," they need to remember that Dewey students have engaged in dangerous, often death-defying behavior which demands heroic intervention. Unless the therapist can persuade the youth to avoid a collision course with disaster, there can be profoundly serious consequences. The primary goal of psychotherapy is to preserve life, so desperate and heroic treatment interventions are required for this difficult-to-treat population. When viewed from this humanistic perspective, confrontation connotes caring by the therapist who attempts to convince the adolescent to become more responsible, responsive, and respectful.
Conclusion
We have described a confrontation as a key aspect of a non-medically oriented residential therapeutic community. In our view, confrontation in the context of residential treatment is a potent psychotherapeutic tool that produces not only the acquisition of prosocial values but also behavioral improvement. Since these changes are internalized, long-term prognosis is quite good. Although we have no long-term systematic follow-up, anecdotal data confirm a less-than-ten-percent recidivism rate, which, to the best of our knowledge, is unmatched at any other residential treatment program. Bratter et al. (2006) contend "critics claim that confrontation psychotherapy is painful and simplistic. But they cannot explain how and why adolescents, who were extreme casualties, improve in a confrontational treatment milieu with escalating expectations for intellectual excellence and moral integrity [that] can be achieved without compromising one for the other" (p. 14). Confrontation as a psychotherapeutic technique has a long history in self-help therapeutic communities. In our experience, it can also be very effective in promoting change in adolescents who are resistant to other treatment approaches. Clearly, confrontation warrants further study.
References
Adler, G. (1985), Borderline Psychopathology and Its Treatment. New York: Jason Aronson.
Alexander, F. & French, T. (1946), Psychoanalytic Therapy. New York: Ronald Press.
Brager, G., (1965), The indigenous worker: A new approach to the social work technician. Social Work, 10: 33-40.
Bratter, T. E. (1972), Confrontation group psychotherapy with affluent, alienated drug abusing adolescents. Psychother.: Theory, Res. & Pract., 9: 308-313.
Bratter, T. E. (1977), Confrontation groups: The therapeutic community's gift to psychotherapy. In Proceedings of the First World Conference on Therapeutic Communities, ed. P. Vamos & J. J. Devlin. Montreal, Canada: Portage Press, pp. 164-174.
Bratter, T. E. (1978), The four 'Rs' of the American self-help therapeutic community: Rebirth, responsibility, reality and respect. In Proceedings of the Third World Conference on Therapeutic Communities, ed. J. Corelli, I. Bonfiglio, T. Pediconi, & M. Collumb. Rome: International Council of Alcoholism and Addictions Press, pp. 434-448.
Bratter, T. E., Collabolletta, E., Fossbender, A. J., Pennacchia, M. C, & Rubel, J. R. (1985), The American self-help residential therapeutic community: A pragmatic treatment approach for addicted character-disordered individuals. In Alcoholism and Substance Abuse: Strategies for Clinical Intervention, ed. T. E. Bratter & G. G. Forrest. New York: Free Press, pp. 461-507.
Bratter, T. E. (2003), Group psychotherapy with gifted, self-destructive, drug-dependent, unconvinced adolescents. Group, 27: 131-146.
Bratter, T. E., Bratter, C. J., Coiner, N. L., & Steiner, K. M. (2006), Motivating gifted, defiant, and unconvinced students to succeed at the John Dewey Academy. Ethical Human Psychology and Psychiatry, 8: 7-16.
Brook, W. (1996), Adolescents who abuse substances. In Group Therapy with Adolescents, ed. P. Kymissis & D. A. Halpern. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association, pp. 243-264.
Carkhuff, R. R. & Berenson, R. G. (1967), Beyond Counseling and Therapy. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Casriel, D. (1963), So Fair a House: The Story of Synanon. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Cohen, A. I., (1982), Confrontation Analysis: Theory and Practice. New York: Grune & Stratton.
Corwin, H. A. (1991), Therapeutic confrontation from routine to heroic. In Confrontation in Psychotherapy, eds. G. Adler & P. G. Myerson. Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson. pp. 69-94.
Devereux, G. (1951), Some criteria for the timing of confrontations and interpretations. Intl. J. Psychoanal., 32:19-24.
Gans, J. S. & Weber, R. L. (2000), The detection of shame in group psychotherapy: Uncovering the hidden emotion. Intl. J. Group Psychother., 50:381-396.
Garner, H. H. (1970), Psychotherapy: Confrontation Problem-Solving Technique. St Louis: Warren H. Green.
Glaser, F. B. (1974), Some historical and theoretical background of a self-help addiction treatment program. Amer. J. Drug & Alcohol Abuse, 1:37-52.
Giovacchini, P. (1985), Countertransference and the severely disturbed adolescent. Adolescent Psychiatry, 12:449-467.
Hurvitz, N. (1970), Peer self-help groups and their implications for psychotherapy. Psychother. Theory, Prac. Res., 7:41-47.
Johnson, S. M. (1985), Characterological Transformation: The Hard Work Miracle. New York: Norton.
Kaufman, G. (1989), The Psychology of Shame: Theory and Treatment of Shame-Based Syndromes. New York: Springer.
Maslow, A. H. (1967), Synanon and eupsychia. J. Humanistic Psychol., VII:21-32.
Meeks, J. E. & Bernet, W. (1990), The Fragile Alliance: An Orientation to the Psychiatric Treatment of the Adolescent. Malabar, FL: Krieger Publishing.
Nunberg, H. (1955), Principles of Psychoanalysis. New York: International Universities.
Reisman, F. (1965), The "helper" therapy principle. Social Work, 10:27-32.
Ruitenbeek, H. (1970), The New Group Therapies. New York: Avon Books.
Shankman, S. (1978), Criteria and factors affecting admission into and completion of the therapeutic community program. In Proceedings of the Third World Conference on Therapeutic Communities, ed. J. Corelli, T. Bonfiglio, T. Pediconi, & M. Collumb. Rome: Centro Italiano di Solidarieta, pp. 156-160.
Sugarman, B. (1974), Daytop Village: A Therapeutic Community. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
Sugarman, B. (1986), Structure, variations, and context: A sociological view of the therapeutic community. In Therapeutic Communities for Addictions: Readings in Theory, Research and Practice, ed. G. De Leon & J. T. Ziegenfuss. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas, pp. 65-82.
Van Stone, W. W. & Gilbert, R. (1972), Peer confrontation groups: What, why, and whether. Amer. J. Psychiat., 129:581-591.
Volkman, R. & Cressey, D. R., (1963), Differential association and the rehabilitation of drug addicts. Amer. J. Soc., 69:131-141.
Yablonsky, L. (1965), The Tunnel Back: Synanon. New York: Macmillan.
Thomas Edward Bratter is President and Founder of The John Dewey Academy in Great Barrington, Massachusetts.
Lisa Sinsheimer, M.D. is a psychiatric consultant and Admissions Coordinator at The John Dewey Academy in Great Barrington, Massachusetts.
Copyright Analytic Press 2008
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved
Bratter still loves quoting Bratter.
Confrontation in self-help therapeutic communities
During World War II at Henderson Hospital in the Belmont Social Rehabilitation Unit in England, Rapoport (1960), a sociologist, was the first to describe group psychotherapy to be "reality confrontation." Shankman (1978) provides a description of the self-help therapeutic community (TC), as illustrated by Casriel (1963); Bratter (1978); Bratter, Collabolletta, Fossbender, Pennacchia, and Rubel (1985); Glaser (1974); Sugarman (1974, 1986); and Yablonsky (1965), in which recovered persons act as catalysts and responsible role models:The TC might best be described as a school which educates people who have never learned how to live or feel worthy without hurting themselves and others. The therapeutic community helps people who have tried again and again to get what they wanted from life and have continually defeated themselves. The principle combines the basic and universal human values of knowledge, love, honesty, and work, with the dynamic instrument of intense group pressure, in order to recognize and help correct personality defects which prevent people from living by these values. The results lie in rehabilitation so that the individual may reenter his or her community as an independent and productive person (p. 156).
[/color]
One of the most important achievements of social psychiatry during the Second World War was the discovery of the therapeutic community. The idea of using all the relationships and activities of a residential psychiatric centre to aid the therapeutic task was first put forward by Wilfred Bion in 1940 in what became known as the Wharncliffe Memorandum, a paper to his former analyst, John Rickman, then at the Wharncliffe neurosis centre of the wartime Emergency Medical Service (EMS)...
The opportunity to test the efficacy of the therapeutic community idea arose in the autumn of 1942 at Northfield Military Hospital in Birmingham, when psychiatrists were invited to try out new forms of treatment that would enable as many neurotic casualties as possible to be returned to military duties rather than be discharged to civilian life...
While Bion and his colleagues at the WOSBs (Bion, 1946) were coming forward with new ideas about groups, some serious problems were affecting military psychiatric hospitals dealing with breakdowns in battle and in units. The withdrawal of psychiatric casualties back to base and then to hospital seemed to be associated with a growing proportion of patients being returned to civilian life. It was as if "getting one's ticket," as it was called, had replaced the objective of hospital treatment--to enable rehabilitated officers, NCOs and men to return to the army...
wait im confused. Do images post here are not? There are images all over this threadThey used to, but no longer do. What's there alreaDY is still there, but ya can't do it no more. WhaTEVER you do, don't ask ME why. :D
Since you missed this the first time around, this is from four years ago. A more recent vintage? Same shit.
http://www.isaccorp.org/documents/dewey ... 26.04.html (http://www.isaccorp.org/documents/dewey-academy.08.26.04.html)
Dewey Academy is sued over teacher-student affair
By Derek Gentile
Berkshire Eagle Staff
August 26, 2004
GREAT BARRINGTON -- A former student at the John Dewey Academy is suing the private therapeutic boarding school and some of its officials, including headmaster Thomas Bratter, for allegedly failing to properly oversee a female teacher who enticed the student into a sexual relationship.
The civil suit was filed last week in U.S. District Court in Boston by the Boston law firm of Brody, Hardoon, Perkins & Kesten.
The defendants are listed as John Dewey Academy, Bratter, dean of students Kenneth Steiner and Gwendolyn Hampton, a former teacher.
The suit was filed by former student [name withheld by ISAC].
The [family is] seeking to be compensated for personal injury, emotional distress, breach of contract, reasonable attorney's fees and punitive fees. No specific figure was requested in the suit, but the [student's parents] contend they spent $110,000 on the education of their son at Dewey Academy.
Contacted yesterday, Bratter denied the claims in the suit. As soon as he and Steiner were made aware of the relationship, he said, the school fired Hampton.
"We take very seriously our position as role models for our students," said Bratter. "Had we had any suspicion that this was happening, we would have terminated that employee immediately."
Hampton could not be reached for comment yesterday.
The suit contends that Bratter and Steiner failed to properly supervise Hampton, a Spanish teacher who was also assigned as [the student's] clinician.
[The student] was admitted to Dewey Academy in 1999 after being expelled from high school in Illinois for drug and alcohol abuse.
In the spring of 2000, [the student] and Hampton began a sexual relationship when [the student] was 18 and Hampton was 28. Hampton had been hired by Dewey Academy in the mid- 1990s, according to the suit.
According to the suit, Hampton was entrusted with counseling the young man. Instead, she regularly gave [the student] alcohol, encouraged his use of drugs and had sexual relations with him at her home in Great Barrington and in the school car.
After [the student] graduated in 2001, the relationship continued. In June 2002, with [the student] in college, the couple had a child, which was later placed for adoption, according to the suit.
[The student] was of legal age, and Massachusetts law does not prohibit teachers from having sexual relationships with their students if the students are 16 or older. No charges were ever filed against Hampton.
However, the lawsuit contends that students and staff were aware of the relationship between [the student] and Hampton, and that the school did nothing to investigate or stop it, a charge Bratter angrily denies.
Lawrence E. Hardoon, who filed the lawsuit on behalf of the [family], is a former state prosecutor who has handled sexual abuse cases.
He said he believes that state law should be expanded to make it illegal for teachers to have sex with their students, even if those students are 16 or older.
"Actually, I don't disagree with that," said Bratter yesterday. "The law should be changed."
This is the second time a Dewey Academy official has been charged with having an inappropriate relationship with a student.
In 1995, Bratter pleaded no contest in Connecticut to a charge of second-degree unlawful restraint, which involved an alleged relationship with a 17-year-old girl. However, the charges lodged by the girl in the same case in Massachusetts were dropped.
The Dewey Academy, a coeducational, college preparatory therapeutic boarding school, was founded by Bratter in 1985. The annual tuition at the school, which houses its students year-round, is $65,000.
NOTE: The name of the family has been withheld by the International Survivors Action Committee.
While Helfand and Hampton agreed to give their first daughter up for adoption in June 2002, Hampton said she never told him that she gave birth to a second daughter by him on Sept. 17, 2003, because he had broken off their relationship six months earlier. She said she's raising that child on her own, along with her older children, who are 12 and 14.
Hampton's lawyer, Joseph Elder of Hartford, said he plans to seek child support from the Helfands for the baby born last year.
Hampton said she is teaching at another private high school, which she would not identify, but the Department of Education has refused to issue her certification because of the pending civil suit...
Oakdale FoundationAdjunct Faculty/Staff
[/li][/list]
- Provided English classes and daily activities for mentally deficient adults from Venezuela
During a conference with teachers at the first Waldorf school, Steiner analyzed the case of a little girl who had learning disabilities. He explained that the teachers probably couldn't do much for the child because she wasn't really a human being. The Earth's population includes many such pseudo-humans, he said:
"Dr. Steiner: 'That little girl L.K. in the first grade must have something really very wrong inside. There is not much we can do. Such cases are increasing in which children are born with a human form, but are not really human beings in relation to their highest I; instead, they are filled with beings that do not belong to the human class. Quite a number of people have been born since the nineties [1890s] without an I, that is, they are not reincarnated, but are human forms filled with a sort of natural demon. There a quite a large number of older people going around who are actually not human beings, but are only natural; they are human beings only in regard to their form. We cannot, however, create a school for demons.'
"A teacher: 'How is that possible?'
"Dr. Steiner: 'Cosmic error is certainly not impossible. The relationships of individuals coming into earthly existence have long beendetermined. There are also generations in which individuals have no desire to come into earthly existence and be connected with physicality, or immediately leave at the very beginning. In such cases, other beings that are not quite suited step in. This is something that is now quite common, that human beings go around without an I; they are actually not human beings, but have only a human form. They are also quite different from human beings in regard to everything spiritual. They can, for example, never remember such things as sentences; they have a memory only for words, not for sentences.
"'The riddle of life is not so simple. When such a being dies, it returns to nature from which it came. The corpse decays, but there is no real dissolution of the etheric body, and the natural being returns to nature.
"'It is also possible for something like an automaton could occur. The entire human organism exists, and it might be possible to automate the brain and develop a kind of pseudomorality.
"'I do not like to talk about such things since we have often been attacked even without them. Imagine what people would say if they heard that we say there are people who are not human beings. Nevertheless, these are facts. Our culture would not be in such a decline if people felt more strongly that a number of people are going around who, because they are completely ruthless, have become something that is not human, but instead are demons in human form.
"'Nevertheless, we do not want to shout that to the world. Our opposition is already large enough. Such things are really shocking to people. I caused enough shock when I needed to say that a very famous university professor, after a very short period between death and rebirth, was reincarnated as a black scientist. We do not want to shout such things out into the world.'"
Color-highlighted portion from: FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER, Rudolph Steiner; Anthroposophic Press, 1998; pp. 649-650
http://homepage.mac.com/nonlevitating/one.html (http://homepage.mac.com/nonlevitating/one.html)
IS THOMAS BRATTER THEWHO? THERE IS CONJECTURE THAT JOHN DEWEY'S RESIDENT PERV IS THEWHO.No. My take on Tom Bratter is that he is someone who never quite grew up, who found some kind of solace or sense of structure or belonging with the therapeutic community model, and who projects his identity and his needs onto the kids who attend John Dewey Academy. Hence these kids all get subjected to the tricks of the trade that Bratter believes to have provided some answers for his own earlier days. In fact, this whole John Dewey Academy "experiment" is one big, drawn out rationalization for Bratter's own take on "life."
...Step 1 -- Recognize there is a problem and Define the problem (really boil it down to one sentence, write it down. i.e. Kids being sent to TBS ) This will take a lot of discussion and maybe weeks.
Step 2 Determine root cause (What is causing this to happen? Make sure you are staying focused on the proplem as it is written, it is very easy to wander off track. Uninformed parents, kids taking drugs, schools systems suck etc.) This could take time to determine. Its nice to have only one cause but sometimes there are many.
Step 3 Make a list of solutions (all of them). Educate parents, educate kids, shut down the schools, let the air out of the vehicles that take the kids away etc. Rate the hundreds of solutions and pick the top ones.
Step 4 Impliment Solutions (Impliment the top solutions)
Step 5 Measure your Success or failure (Very difficult sometimes)
Step 6 Adjust and go back to Step 3.
If these steps are followed practically any problem could be solved eventually.
I have applied these steps in industry and the results are amazing. The key to success, for me, was to
define the problem very carefully and focus on getting to root cause at all times and constantly refer back to the problem statement (step 1) to insure all our energy is focused tightly on the problem defined.
Gwendolyn G. Hampton VanSant (http://http://docs.google.com/View?docid=dgqxpx46_0f5fk9b)
387 Main Road
PO Box 334
Monterey, MA 01245
413-528-8589/413-854-1176
[email protected]
Objective
To continue my career in education and community service as an educator, interpreter, translator, tutor, and advocate.
Professional Experience
Board of Directors, Berkshire Co-Op Market. October 2007-Present
Board of Directors, Free Legal Clinic. March 2008-Present
BRIDGE, Inc. Berkshire Resources to Integration of Diverse Groups and Education, 2007.Executive Director, & Co-Founder September 2007-present
[/li][/list]
- Multicultural Dinners
[li]Immigrant Advocacy for Access to Interpreting, Translating, and other Services- Professional Training on using Interpreters as Cultural Brokers
- Spanish for the Workplace Course Development for Police, Emergency and Public Services. Grant Berkshire Taconic Community Foundation
- Free Community Spanish Conversational Class in collaboration with Jewish Federation of the Berkshires. January 2008-May 2008.
- Multicultural Education and Cultural Brokering
- Community Organizing and Outreach
- Grassroots Organizing of non-profit organization BRIDGE, Inc.
Mariposa Services, 2007-present.Owner, Tutor, Translator, Interpreter, Curriculum Consultant
[/li][/list]
- Personal Tutor. Writing Skills, Geometry, 11th grade, SAT prep, Spanish, AP Spanish prep and Algebra. Sept.2006-present
[li]Translator. CHP (Community Health Programs) Website, evaluations and reports. Rotary Exchange Student documents. March 2007-present- Translator. Lee Middle and High School Special Education Department.March 2007-June 2007
- Interpreter. Volunteers in Medicine. March 2007-June 2007
- Interpreter. CHP, Early Intervention and Nutrition Services. June-present
- Interpreter. Pediatric Development Center. September 2007-Present
- Kitchen Coordinator. CHP Nutrition Services September 2007-March 2008
- Spanish Classes. Beginning, Intermediate, and Advanced. March 2007-present
- Spanish Club Development. Valleyhead. June 2008-August 2008.
- Adjunct faculty for Spanish for the Workplace. BCC. February 2008-present
Eagleton School, 2003-2007.Spanish Teacher
Resource Room Teacher
- Taught Spanish school-wide to each student of varying levels of fluency ages 9-21 (TPR based)
Research and Technology Teacher/Integrating Technology
- Taught Math using Upper Grades TouchMath system for remediated math skills
- Taught Reading using SRA Laboratory and Wilson Reading System for remediating reading skills
- Taught Study Skills school-wide for researching and outlining and drafting research papers using graphic organizers
- Assessed/Monitored Reading levels using DIBELS
- Taught Enrichment Classes in Cooking, Heritage Clubs
- Supervised, edited and distributed student-generated school newspaper using Computer Lab
- Organized school-wide Holiday assemblies
- MCAS administration, proctoring, and assisting students with modifications specified in their IEPs
- Prepared, assisted teachers, and submitted MCAS-Alts (DOE training)
On-Site Interpreter for Clinical Department
- Supervised Education Building Computer Network and Reporting to System Administrator from all classrooms and computer lab
- Taught Computer Skills and held computer labs for all students focusing on Microsoft Office (PowerPoint, Word, Access, Excel) and internet-based research
[/li][/list]
- Interpreted Spanish in family therapy sessions on an as need basis as requested by the Clinical Department
Unitarian Universalist Meeting of Southern BerkshireUnitarian Universalist Religious Education Teacher 1999-present
[/li][/list]
- Teaching middle and high school religious education classes introducing young students to the seven principles of Unitarian Universalism and to all schools of faith
[li]Developing curriculum and calendar- Planning trips and events
- Interim RE director for one year
John Dewey AcademyAssociate Dean of Student Services 2002-2003
Spanish and Sociology Teacher 1992-2003
- Organized student and family activities in the school
[li]Developed, organized, led a group for parents of incoming students- Organized student involvement in local community through community service at town celebrations, projects with the Hispanic community, nursing homes, food shelters, and homeless shelters
- Organized observance of religious holidays within the school and arranged for student teaching assistants in UUMSB religious education class
- Collaborated with Dean of Students on activities for the students
- Collaborated with Dean of Students in running student administration meeting
- Organized Family Weekends every six weeks for administration, clinical, faculty families and students
- Co-led Women’s Group for the female students with the Dean of Students
- Co-led Mother’s Group with the Dean of Students
- Led Parent and Family Groups every 6 weeks
- Co-led Group Therapy three times a week with the other clinical staff
- Primary Counselor for caseload of 6-10 Students quarterly
Acting Dean of Students December 1997-January 1998, November 1999-January 2000 October 2000-November 2002
- Taught the following college preparatory courses related to Latin American Studies in Spanish: All levels of Spanish ranging from basic vocabulary and grammar to literature and politics of Latin America, Latin American Studies in English ranging from Art History to Literature to Politics
- Taught the following college preparatory courses related to Sociology: Urban Issues, Urban Sociology (focusing on our educational system, race and class, poverty, our welfare system, history of social work), Survey of Community Service and Community Organizing (involving actual work within our community)
- Taught courses in Women’s Studies: History of Women in the US, Women around the World, Latin American Women, History of West African Women; Perspectives in Women’s Studies
- Organized, conducted, and chaperoned two two-week foreign language study programs for the students in Costa Rica and Mexico
Kitchen Director
- Primary Counselor
- Led Women’s Group
- Led Heads Meeting( Student Administration)
- Maintained Student Medical Records with the Business Office
- Trained residential staff, train incoming Deans of Students
- Led Parent Groups
Residential Staff
- Planned menus; ordered all food for two meals daily feeding between 25 to 40 people; maintained kitchen supply for boarder breakfasts and snacks for the students
- Instructed a kitchen staff on how to prepare, serve and store the food
- Organized at least one meal for 100 people every six weeks
- Maintained physical kitchen and its hardware and appliances
- Locally licensed as Food Service Provider after taking nationally recognized ServSafe course
[/li][/list]
- Responsible for students and building after school, overnight, and weekends for fire drills, runaways, parent phone calls, staff phone calls, student crises, etc.
- Organized extra-curricular and recreational activities on weekends and vacations
Oakdale FoundationAdjunct Faculty/Staff
[/li][/list]
- Provided English classes and daily activities for mentally deficient adults from Venezuela
Education
Reading Institute/Endicott College 2005
- Computers in Specialized Reading
Westfield State College 2005
- Foundations of Reading
University of Connecticut School of Social Work 1998-2001Simon’s Rock College of Bard Great Barrington, MA 01230
- Included the following courses: Introductory to Social Work, Ethics in Social Work, Casework, Group Work, Computers in Social Work, The Black Experience, History of Social Work and Women Children and Families.
Bachelor of Arts in Art History and Latin America History 1987-1992
Honors, Certifications, and Accomplishments
- Certificates of Completion in Medical (15 hr. course) and Mental Health Interpreting 2007. Passed MIT exam for the 54 hr. course.
- Nominated/Awarded the National Who's Who Among High School Teachers Recognition 2005
- Trained in MCAS-Alt by Massachusetts Department of Education 2004-2005
- Certified ServSafe Professional. 2000
- Honorary Women’s Studies Major Simon's Rock College Class of 1992
- Department of Language and Literature Prize Simon's Rock College Class of 1992
- Research Abroad and Senior Thesis on Images of Women in Central American Photography based on personal interviews of Mexican and Latin American photographers, Graciela Iturbide and Luis Gonzalez Palma in Mexico City
- Interned in District Attorney Office in Pittsfield, MA in the Victim-Witness unit
- Trained as a peer counselor and Rape Crisis counselor on college campus and in Pittsfield, MA
- Developed the Slide Library for the Arts Department in the Albert Schweitzer Center at Simon’s Rock by photographing pictures from Art History books and galleries and museums, organizing, filing, labeling all slides in the Art History Department
Related Skills and Professional experience
- Bilingual.
- Proficient in Microsoft Office. Oversaw Education Building Computer Network and reported to System Administrator of the school. 2004-2006.
- Taught Computer Skills. 2003-2006
- Conducted series of professional trainings in Adolescent Self-Destructive Behavior to all Staff. Valleyhead School, Lenox, MA. 2002
- Spanish for the Workplace Course Development for Police, Emergency and Public Services. Grant Berkshire Taconic Community Foundation. 2008
- Adjunct Faculty for BCC and approved accredited site for BCC. 2007-present.
- Taught Spanish in the Workplace for Fairview Hospital and Children's Health Program for all staff. 1994 and 1996.
- Personal Tutor for students and adults of varying levels in several subjects: Mathematics, Reading, Writing, Spanish, Algebra, and MCAS prep.
- Special Education Tutoring for Searles Middle School and Monument Mountain High School students coordinating with foster parents and DSS. 1992 - Present
- After School Spanish Program. Bryant School.
- Spanish for Tots. Bear Care Center.
God damn! Don't people even bother to hide practicing therapy without a license anymore?!??!
...And nope, I couldn't find any evidence of "certification," nor of a degree relevant towards being someone's primary counselor at a place like John Dewey Academy. Although it does note that she attended the University of Connecticut School of Social Work 1998-2001, no mention is made of a completed degree, just some (?) of the courses taken...
I found this entry quite telling:QuoteOakdale FoundationAdjunct Faculty/Staff
[/li][/list]
- Provided English classes and daily activities for mentally deficient adults from Venezuela
Quote from: "TheWhat?"IS THOMAS BRATTER THEWHO? THERE IS CONJECTURE THAT JOHN DEWEY'S RESIDENT PERV IS THEWHO.No. My take on Tom Bratter is that he is someone who never quite grew up, who found some kind of solace or sense of structure or belonging with the therapeutic community model, and who projects his identity and his needs onto the kids who attend John Dewey Academy. Hence these kids all get subjected to the tricks of the trade that Bratter believes to have provided some answers for his own earlier days. In fact, this whole John Dewey Academy "experiment" is one big, drawn out rationalization for Bratter's own take on "life."
TheWho, on the other hand, really is a parent. By profession, he is a marketer and start-up specialist, a rather successful one. During the course of his kids' adolescence, they got involved with drugs. TheWho attempted to address this using a business model, posting the following back on September 9th, 2005 (originally as Anon):
http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic. ... 31#p130431 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=11614&p=130431#p130431)Quote...Step 1 -- Recognize there is a problem and Define the problem (really boil it down to one sentence, write it down. i.e. Kids being sent to TBS ) This will take a lot of discussion and maybe weeks.
Step 2 Determine root cause (What is causing this to happen? Make sure you are staying focused on the proplem as it is written, it is very easy to wander off track. Uninformed parents, kids taking drugs, schools systems suck etc.) This could take time to determine. Its nice to have only one cause but sometimes there are many.
Step 3 Make a list of solutions (all of them). Educate parents, educate kids, shut down the schools, let the air out of the vehicles that take the kids away etc. Rate the hundreds of solutions and pick the top ones.
Step 4 Impliment Solutions (Impliment the top solutions)
Step 5 Measure your Success or failure (Very difficult sometimes)
Step 6 Adjust and go back to Step 3.
If these steps are followed practically any problem could be solved eventually.QuoteI have applied these steps in industry and the results are amazing. The key to success, for me, was to
define the problem very carefully and focus on getting to root cause at all times and constantly refer back to the problem statement (step 1) to insure all our energy is focused tightly on the problem defined.
HOW DO you know all of this about the who? how do u know he posted that anon?
Quote from: "guest"HOW DO you know all of this about the who? how do u know he posted that anon?
Real simple: click on the provided link, and you will see that one or more posters quoted TheWho's post in their reply (in the conversation at the time), and that the identity of TheWho's post (in the quoted portion) is "Anonymous."
Eagleton School, 2003-2007.Spanish Teacher
Resource Room Teacher
- Taught Spanish school-wide to each student of varying levels of fluency ages 9-21 (TPR based)
Research and Technology Teacher/Integrating Technology
- Taught Math using Upper Grades TouchMath system for remediated math skills
- Taught Reading using SRA Laboratory and Wilson Reading System for remediating reading skills
- Taught Study Skills school-wide for researching and outlining and drafting research papers using graphic organizers
- Assessed/Monitored Reading levels using DIBELS
- Taught Enrichment Classes in Cooking, Heritage Clubs
- Supervised, edited and distributed student-generated school newspaper using Computer Lab
- Organized school-wide Holiday assemblies
- MCAS administration, proctoring, and assisting students with modifications specified in their IEPs
- Prepared, assisted teachers, and submitted MCAS-Alts (DOE training)
On-Site Interpreter for Clinical Department
- Supervised Education Building Computer Network and Reporting to System Administrator from all classrooms and computer lab
- Taught Computer Skills and held computer labs for all students focusing on Microsoft Office (PowerPoint, Word, Access, Excel) and internet-based research
[/li][/list]
- Interpreted Spanish in family therapy sessions on an as need basis as requested by the Clinical Department
I went to JDA and it was the worst experience in my entire life. I ran away half a year ago. I was virtually homeless for four months because my parents were advised by the JDA staff not to let me come home.
The therapy session quoted in this article was mild compared to JDA standards. Therapy was usually much, much worse. It wasn't uncommon to be called "a fucking worthless piece of shit" "a manipulative, dishonest bastard" etc. It was verbal abuse.
After I left I received a letter from Bratter telling me, among other things, that I was friendless, that I'd never had any real friends in my entire life and I never would learn how to make friends. He wrote that the only way I would survive outside of John Dewey was if I resorted to prostitution and the only way I could become a "worthwhile" person was if I came back and completed the program. He wrote that he feared all I would ever become, at best, was "the assistant to the assistant to the assistant manager at a fast food restaurant."
When I first came to the program I was a senior. I'd already applied to several highly selective colleges. Tom Bratter asked me where I wanted to go and I told him my first choice and he told me if I stayed, he would get me in because another student who was graduating that year had applied early and been deferred, but with his insider info and leverage he was confident he could threaten the school into accepting the student. While I was at JDA this particular student was accepted into the school and is now attending it thanks to Bratter.
In his letter he also mentioned acceptance to the school, that if I came back I still had a chance of going there but if I left I'd never get in. I refused to go back, determined to never, ever return to a place where I'd felt so horribly worthless, which was quite a feat for someone who has been severely depressed for almost half her life.
I wasn't like most of the kids sent to JDA. I had never done any drugs, even pot, in my life, I never drank, I'd never engaged in promiscuous behavior, I'd been a straight-A student. I'd never cheated, stolen, or hurt other people. I was just severely depressed, and had attempted suicide several times even after years of therapy. My parents were fed up and didn't want to deal with me anymore, and John Dewey provided a great solution.
It was the worst thing they could have done.
The first time I tried to leave, I announced that I was because of their "open-door" policy. Bratter told me I was welcome to leave, but a student told me he'd call the cops the minute I set foot outside the door.
One day a while after that incident, I just walked out the door and across the street to the general store that sold bus tickets while most students were in classes. I hid in the bushes of the station until the bus arrive and boarded. I had all of $8.34 when I arrived in New York City, where I'd lived, and no phone numbers or means of contacting anyone because when I'd arrived at John Dewey they had taken all of that personal information away.
At John Dewey I suffered verbal abuse and isolation. I had to scrub the toilets my second week there because I'd asked a "Younger Member" a question without a Middle or Older Member listening. I worked through Closed House, which was a school-wide "consequence" where, among other things, we weren't allowed to eat cooked food, or sit down at all during the day, except for designated therapy time. The only place we were allowed to sit during the day was the floor, and only if it was hardwood or marble, no carpet. If we leaned back on our hands we were punished. We were never allowed more than six hours of sleep. All our "privileges" were taken away. We weren't allowed to go outside at all. We couldn't groom ourselves. During the day we had to "Super-GI" the entire castle, which included scrubbing the group in between the tiles on our hands and knees with q-tips. We could have no cooked food, prepared meals, or sweet foods. We could only drink water.
Closed House lasted almost an entire month.
I still have nightmares of John Dewey and it's affected me more than my parents care to understand. They still think they were right in sending me there, but I can't disagree more.
These places are not the answer.
Quote from: "JANKY"
Isn't it strange how the who sees hell as heaven?
"Although we have no long-term systematic follow-up". You didn't highlight that part. It's a crucial bit, don't you think? I'm surprised you missed that. Dr. Bratter might as well claim 100% success if he's only relying on anecdotal evidence. See how Dr. Bratter quotes himself a lot? He's the source of his own "anecdotal evidence".
Do you know Dr. Bratter, who? You share personality traits with him.
I did include the line you referenced and believe the entire conclusion is critical not just those 9 words. As far as people making claims, none of us are ever sure until complete studies are done by independent sources. They can be interpreted at will. But we have to rely on whatever information we can gather until that time comes. We all read accounts of these schools thru the eyes and ears of those who attended them every day here on fornits. They can choose to tell the truth, they can claim they were abused or treated well. How do we know which ones to believe?
As we get more and more professionals looking at the outcome and results of these schools we can become more confident of the results.
...
BTW, since I've been hearing it come up a lot, I don't think the Who is Tom Bratter. Actually i'm only 70% sure he's not. I went over his shit, and he just doesn't have the same shtick. Bratter talks redundantly and repeats the same phrases and themes over and over again, this guy is slightly more argumentative and intellectual...however, I've only seen Bratter in God/Therapist mode at JDA, so he could be different when he doesn't have any false prop power position to lean on.The Who is NOT Tom Bratter.
the way he defends that argument up there sure is something T Bratter would do though.
Quote from: "Avalon"I went to JDA and it was the worst experience in my entire life. I ran away half a year ago. I was virtually homeless for four months because my parents were advised by the JDA staff not to let me come home.
The therapy session quoted in this article was mild compared to JDA standards. Therapy was usually much, much worse. It wasn't uncommon to be called "a fucking worthless piece of shit" "a manipulative, dishonest bastard" etc. It was verbal abuse.
After I left I received a letter from Bratter telling me, among other things, that I was friendless, that I'd never had any real friends in my entire life and I never would learn how to make friends. He wrote that the only way I would survive outside of John Dewey was if I resorted to prostitution and the only way I could become a "worthwhile" person was if I came back and completed the program. He wrote that he feared all I would ever become, at best, was "the assistant to the assistant to the assistant manager at a fast food restaurant."
When I first came to the program I was a senior. I'd already applied to several highly selective colleges. Tom Bratter asked me where I wanted to go and I told him my first choice and he told me if I stayed, he would get me in because another student who was graduating that year had applied early and been deferred, but with his insider info and leverage he was confident he could threaten the school into accepting the student. While I was at JDA this particular student was accepted into the school and is now attending it thanks to Bratter.
In his letter he also mentioned acceptance to the school, that if I came back I still had a chance of going there but if I left I'd never get in. I refused to go back, determined to never, ever return to a place where I'd felt so horribly worthless, which was quite a feat for someone who has been severely depressed for almost half her life.
I wasn't like most of the kids sent to JDA. I had never done any drugs, even pot, in my life, I never drank, I'd never engaged in promiscuous behavior, I'd been a straight-A student. I'd never cheated, stolen, or hurt other people. I was just severely depressed, and had attempted suicide several times even after years of therapy. My parents were fed up and didn't want to deal with me anymore, and John Dewey provided a great solution.
It was the worst thing they could have done.
The first time I tried to leave, I announced that I was because of their "open-door" policy. Bratter told me I was welcome to leave, but a student told me he'd call the cops the minute I set foot outside the door.
One day a while after that incident, I just walked out the door and across the street to the general store that sold bus tickets while most students were in classes. I hid in the bushes of the station until the bus arrive and boarded. I had all of $8.34 when I arrived in New York City, where I'd lived, and no phone numbers or means of contacting anyone because when I'd arrived at John Dewey they had taken all of that personal information away.
At John Dewey I suffered verbal abuse and isolation. I had to scrub the toilets my second week there because I'd asked a "Younger Member" a question without a Middle or Older Member listening. I worked through Closed House, which was a school-wide "consequence" where, among other things, we weren't allowed to eat cooked food, or sit down at all during the day, except for designated therapy time. The only place we were allowed to sit during the day was the floor, and only if it was hardwood or marble, no carpet. If we leaned back on our hands we were punished. We were never allowed more than six hours of sleep. All our "privileges" were taken away. We weren't allowed to go outside at all. We couldn't groom ourselves. During the day we had to "Super-GI" the entire castle, which included scrubbing the group in between the tiles on our hands and knees with q-tips. We could have no cooked food, prepared meals, or sweet foods. We could only drink water.
Closed House lasted almost an entire month.
I still have nightmares of John Dewey and it's affected me more than my parents care to understand. They still think they were right in sending me there, but I can't disagree more.
These places are not the answer.
Well, first off I can confirm that all of that is true, nothing exaggerated. I was a Dewey "graduate" as they call them and got into a top 15 liberal arts college and all that jazz.
I'd like to provide a little bit of a different take on JDA, though I assure you it will be ABSOLUTELY OBJECTIVE.
I also didn't quite fit the mold at JDA. I seldom did drugs, never got arrested, and my biggest problems were social issues. I also endured the closed house experience and also had to sit on a floor for 3 weeks and write and only get six hours of sleep a night...but I actually think it was one of the best things that happened to me, but i'll explain why later, because I don't want to come off as a total Dewey advocate.
The flaws of the place I list as follows: 1: Tom Bratter runs the school. Tom Bratter is a now fully senile egomaniac who thinks he is the best therapist since Freud but in reality is completely incompetent, at least at his current age. He makes blanket generalizations about all students, most of whom he hardly knows, and yells at them and screams profanities at them until they agree with him. Often times he never knows what students psychological problems are and won't let you explain them so he can go on a tirade about self-respect, hard work, the importance of going to a good college, and values. As many of you know Dewey focuses heavilly on group therapy, but group therapy is almost useless because of his constant domination of the groups without understanding what's going on.
2: Most individuals have little to no power of their lives unless they get in the staff and peers good graces. Though the school claims to be about accountability and decision making, the reality is one has very little self-governance until given a stamp of approval, usually manifested by status in a membership system. Until you get to a certain status (usually takin up to 8 monts), every single action you do is scrutinized; you have little to no credibility and you are attacked if you try to defend yourself in anyway. You MUST listen to them and at least try to hear them at (no matter how absurd) or you will be put in the shitter.
3: Stubborness: They have their beliefs and you can't criticize them. Over-relianc on attack therapy is one. My biggest qualm was time. The place just doesn't need to be 2-3 years. However, they blindly believe that students not doing well just need more time, so they have developed a trend of making students stay for inexorbitatnly long times. For most, the last 2 years of one's stay (should it be that long) are spent killing time, agonizing about leaving, and repeating a mindless lifestyle of cleaning, HW, responsibilites, and confronting newer people via attack style therapy. So Time is probably the next biggest problem. Another huge believe is that they are almost 100% that kids will not be OK unless they graduate John Dewey according to their timetable, which terrifies parents and kids and strains their relationship and objective treatment.
4: they manipulate parents into doing really stupid shit. They take away all credibility from the kid and other sources using scare tactics that lead parents to make REALLy stupid decisions like cutting off their kids or having them live on the streets.
So that's a breif list of my biggeest qualms, now it's strengths.
1: It changed my life. Before JDA, I had little to know drive or self-determination. I had no values, no work-ethic, and no material successes to show for my life. I had no friends and terrible grades. John Dewey's primary ideological focus of values, hard-work, and honesty made me feel good about myself and taught me to acheive. They did this to me by confronting my behavior (attacking if you will) that was driving me into the dust and forcing me to change it. And yes, it was the barbarity like the sitting on the floor and the threats of disownment and w.e. that did it. But it worked for me, and works for....rough modern estimate let's say 50% of the kids who go (it used to have a 25% graduation rate, but now they don't throw kids out as much).
2: The rest of the staff asides from Tom Bratter is amazing. The dean of students Ken Steinner I believe is the best therapist you may ever meet. He's an attack style therapist too, but he is infinietly more methodical and logical than Tom. His ability to assess the individual needs of a student while having high standards for them changes lives of dozens. BTW, he really does run the school, Bratter is more of a figurehead everyone wants out. Equate him with Bobby Bowden at FSU.
3: College: I would not have been able to go to college without JDA. the one thing Bratter does well is use his connections to give you a fresh academic start. He'll get the cute ditzy cheerleader into a top 10 liberal arts college just through a few phone calls and letters. (This is also accomplished because JDA has many teachers who frequently hand out As to students automatically, which I suspect are hired and maintained for that purpose).
My overall experience of JDA.
It had may flaws. I had basically gotten everything I needed to get out of their within my first year and a half and was forced to stay for another year and a half against my will. This was a consequence of their stubborness in their beliefs that I wasn't ready according to them and their manipulation of my parents. Tom Bratter is the most revolting person youll ever meet. In a lot of ways the place is corrupt and bullshit with teacher's who hand out As, clear social hierachies that are enforced by the staff, and scandal. Tom Bratter has had 3 or 4 rape accusations, I believe some of them are real. A student and a teacher had an affair, that's true. A teacher with a tract record of sexual misconducjust resigned after an allegation by a male student (I alwasy believed the guy was a pedophile, so i think its true. If I had said anything there, however, I would have gotten in much trouble, for criticisms of the staff of any kind is basically taboo. Criticizing the program in general is taboo and there are ramifications for doing so, though Bratter falsely claims to promote it. And because of an absolute honesty policy, if you tell one person they have to tell staff and the rest of the community, and these things are always reported).
But, honestly, despite its flaws, I'm glad I went there. I got what I needed to get out. It has a lot of flaws and it does bear a resemblance to Conrad's Heart of Darkness. However, if the kid is right, I think it's a great place. I think if Bratter croaks and the school survives under Steinner's leadership, it will be the greatest therapeutic institution of all time. Don't rule it out, there are programs that are far more severely flawed and won't even get kids into college. Look at the place and give it a chance, and if you're a parent, don't buy into their shit if it stinks. Maintain your own judgment and don't drink their poison punch. It's worth a look I swear.
Bratter still loves quoting Bratter.
Confrontation-A potent psychotherapeutic approach with difficult adolescents
Adolescent Psychiatry, 1/1/2008 by Bratter, Thomas Edward, Sinsheimer, Lisa
Abstract
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_q ... 1322/pg_12 (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3882/is_200801/ai_n27901322/pg_12)
This chapter describes the use of confrontation at the John Dewey Academy, a college-preparatory therapeutic boarding school. The treatment utilizes caring confrontation and positive peer pressure within a therapeutic community setting. The authors discuss the conceptual basis for the use of confrontation, drawing upon the literature about therapeutic communities. They offer a rationale for the efficacy of this psychotherapeutic approach in a population of bright adolescents who are resistant to traditional treatment. They illustrate the use of confrontation with an extended excerpt from a therapeutic group. Countertransference issues related to the use of confrontation are also discussed.
Toward a definition of clinical confrontation
Nunberg (1955) provides a reasonable definition of confrontation when he proposes the psychoanalyst "[call] the patient's attention to his inner conflicts, the sources of which are not known to either of them, and asks him to be helpful in discovering the unknown, the repressed. Thus, from the very beginning, the aims of the analyst are opposed to those of the patient, to the wishes of his repressing ego" (p. 123). Nunberg disagrees with Devereux (1951), who explicitly states that confrontation "yields no insight, and merely focuses the attention of the patient on something which he perceived but failed to register-or refuses to acknowledge openly" (p. 69).
Carkhuff and Berenson's (1967) definition has stood the test of time. They report that confrontation helps the person understand:
himself, his strengths and resources, as well as his self-destructive behavior....It is a challenge to... become integrated....It is directed at discrepancies... between what the client says and does...and between illusion and reality....It implies a constructive attack upon an unhealthy confederation of miscellaneous illusions, fantasies, and life avoidance techniques in order to create a réintégration at a higher level of health (p. 171).
Confrontation in self-help therapeutic communities
During World War II at Henderson Hospital in the Belmont Social Rehabilitation Unit in England, Rapoport (1960), a sociologist, was the first to describe group psychotherapy to be "reality confrontation." Shankman (1978) provides a description of the self-help therapeutic community (TC), as illustrated by Casriel (1963); Bratter (1978); Bratter, Collabolletta, Fossbender, Pennacchia, and Rubel (1985); Glaser (1974); Sugarman (1974, 1986); and Yablonsky (1965), in which recovered persons act as catalysts and responsible role models:
The TC might best be described as a school which educates people who have never learned how to live or feel worthy without hurting themselves and others. The therapeutic community helps people who have tried again and again to get what they wanted from life and have continually defeated themselves. The principle combines the basic and universal human values of knowledge, love, honesty, and work, with the dynamic instrument of intense group pressure, in order to recognize and help correct personality defects which prevent people from living by these values. The results lie in rehabilitation so that the individual may reenter his or her community as an independent and productive person (p. 156).
When describing self-help peer psychotherapy, Van Stone and Gilbert (1972) candidly describe the brutality of confrontation in residential therapeutic communities that are run by recovering addicts. Confrontations needed to be harsher in these adult communities than they would be with teenagers, and justifiably so:
[Confrontation is] a kind of group therapy in which each member is...presented with candid, personal facts regarding every observable behavior or attitude recognized by the group as being self-defeating or dishonest. If the member.. .attempts to explain or deny any observation, he is ridiculed.. .and insulted as his fellow members hammer away at the distorted ideas that he offers in support of his damaging behavior patterns. Intellectual insight or genetic self-interpretations are derided as an escape from responsibility for current behavior. Honesty, trust in the group, realistic self-assessment, appropriate emotional release, and changed behavior, in particular, are rewarded by sympathetic counsel and encouragement from fellow members (p. 585).
The professional community initially characterized confrontation as cruel. Maslow (1967), the progenitor of humanistic psychology, recognized the effectiveness of confrontation after attending groups at Synanon, the first exaddict-administered therapeutic community. He wrote, "people are ...tough.... They can take a.. .lot... .I've suggested that a name for this might be 'no crap therapy.' It.. .cleanfs] out defenses [and] rationalizations." (p. 28). Ruitenbeek (1970) agrees with Maslow, describing the essence of this technique as an "insistence upon total honesty....No rationalizations...are allowed" (p. 166). The clinical challenge of confrontation is to help the youth commit to accept responsibility by converting noxious emotions into constructive acts via the internalization of positive values. Self-respect and success become positive addictions.
Confrontation is painful because it penetrates protective barriers. Using a psychoanalytic orientation, Adler (1985) defines confrontation as an attempt to "gain a patient's attention to inner experiences or perceptions of outer reality of which he is conscious or is about to be made conscious" (p. 122). Sifneos (1991) cautions that the therapist who uses confrontation needs to:
"be convinced that the patient is able to withstand [much] stress... .[Effective] confrontation must be based on the therapist's observation about a series of paradoxical behavioral patterns, contradictory statements....It must motivate him to look at himself from a different point of view" (pp. 374, 382). Cohen (1982), who reconciles confrontation and psychoanalysis, provides a comprehensive synthesis when he contends that "confrontation analysis is a method of investigating, analyzing, and evaluating human behavior in the context of interpersonal interaction. It.. .contains a theoretical framework within which to understand the evolution, maintenance, and modifications of personality dimensions" (p. xv).
Countertransference issues
Collabolletta, Gordon, and Kaufman (1998) stress that the therapist's intent determines whether the confrontation is therapeutic or an abuse of power: "When the psychotherapist's intent is to promote change, this kind of confrontation becomes caring and constructive." When the intent is to prevent a student from engaging in destructive, dangerous, and deceitful acts, compassionate confrontation becomes the most potent expression of responsible concern. A skillful confrontation provides prima facie proof of the therapist's care and emotional investment.
The therapist needs to be mindful of potential countertransferential contamination when using this technique. Only the confronter knows personal motivations; thus, one must understand the psychodynamics before confronting. Unresolved countertransferential issues can provoke cruel confrontations. Giovacchini (1985) notes that adolescents can arouse disruptive countertransference reactions because of the intensity of their neediness and defiance, and warns that countertransference may destroy the treatment relationship, or it may lead to therapeutically beneficial insights. The therapist can feel jealous that these adolescents have emancipated themselves from middle-class restraints. Or, more likely, be disgusted by cruel and feel a need to punish the offender. Consultation with colleagues or a supervisor can minimize the likelihood of acting out a destructive countertransference reaction.
Sequence and principles of confrontation
Bratter (2003) asserts that "there are two sequential phases to confrontation: first, the unlearning of dysfunctional attitudes and acts and, second, learning healthy responses. Confrontation can penetrate the permissive and indulgent attitudes of families that [created] the psychopathology of alienation, deceit, irresponsibility, and self-absorbed behaviors" (p. 140).
Bratter (1977, p. 170) lists seven principles of confrontation psychotherapy:
1. Attack the malignant and dysfunctional aspects of behavior.
2. Penetrate the facade of justification of behavior.
3. Force individuals to accept responsibility for behavior.
4. Help persons evaluate their behavior.
5. Assist individuals to be aware and to anticipate the consequences and payoffs of their behavior.
6. Challenge persons to mobilize their resources.
7. Define a direction so that persons can continue their growth and development.
How confrontation facilitates change in adolescents
Confrontation is a potent psychotherapeutic process designed to help the adolescent not only to recognize (and change) the self-destructive aspects of behavior but also to acquire skills that help actualize potential. In a group setting, peers offer insight and suggestions, thus providing the catalytic conditions necessary for selfexploration and improvement. Confrontation pierces the formidable protective armor of denial, deceit, and distortion. Meeks and Bernet (1990) note "accurate confrontation is much easier in the inpatient setting than it is in the treatment of outpatient adolescents" (p. 578). Johnson (1985) views confrontation as supplying an "observing ego" (p. 255). Brook (1996) believes that confrontation helps adolescent "group members...to confront denial and accept responsibility for their actions" (p. 258).
Bratter (1972) describes the therapeutic thrust of a confrontation-group orientation:
Using a confrontation-teaching-interpretative-reasoning approach, the group demonstrates to the [member] the irresponsible and self-defeating aspects of...behavior [and]...begins to understand the consequences of his acts and attempts to become more responsible to himself, others, and society. Emphasis is placed on the eigenweit (the relation to one's self)-i.e., the immediate experience. The individual must acknowledge his perceptions of the conflict, the problem, his irresponsibility, etc....
The individual, gaining the candid opinions and admonishments of his peers regarding the more destructive elements of his behavior, considers a new orientation and behavior (p. 309).
Confrontation can:
- * Expedite a behavioral change-i.e., stop dangerous and dysfunctional behavior.
* "Force" the adolescent to be accountable for attitudes and acts.
* Help students understand future consequences and payoffs for current behavior.
* Mobilize personal talents to actualize potential.
Confrontation utilizes provocative questions to stimulate self evaluation. Do your attitudes and acts help you to achieve your intermediate and long-term goals? How do others view you? Do you have self-respect? In addition, the therapist must elicit reactions from the confronted and group members about their reactions to the confrontation. Garner (1970) urges the therapist to ask frequently, "What do you think or feel about what I told you?" (p. 231).
Helping each other while helping the self
To minimize the impact of negative countertransference reactions, since a significant age differential exists between adolescents and the group leader, peers are encouraged to do most of the confronting. Volkman and Cressey (1963), among the first to recognize the importance of self-help confrontational psychotherapy groups, write:
The most effective mechanism for exerting group pressure on members will be found in groups so organized that criminals are induced to join with noncriminals for the purpose of changing other criminals. A group in which criminal "A" joins with some non-criminals to change criminal "B" is probably more effective in changing criminal "A" (p. 139).
Brager (1965) notes increased self esteem in group members when they confront peers to better themselves. Reisman (1965) labels this treatment dynamic as "the helper principle," and notes that the helper often gains more from the helping process than the person being helped. Positive peer pressure traces its antecedents to self-help psychotherapy. Hurvitz (1970) reports that when peers are active,
they focus on the presenting problem, and assume that by following principles and methods of their movement, they will help each member solve his specific problem....They may ridicule and attack each other with great hostility and they may provoke aggressive and hostile feelings; however, peers regard such attacks and provocations as other's expressions of concern and concern (p. 44).
Use of confrontation at the John Dewey Academy
Bratter, Sinsheimer, and Kaufman, in chapter 7 of this volume, have described the population and treatment philosophy at the John Dewey Academy (JDA). As they have said, JDA youth are "immune to traditional therapeutic and teaching techniques. They have erected formidable barriers and defenses which need to be cracked before they will think rationally... .Peers confront each other by demanding that each member accept accountability for immature, irresponsible, illicit, and self-destructive acts" (p. 73).
Compassionate confrontation: Rebutting the critics
When entering the John Dewey Academy, most students possess toxic attitudes that reduce others to objects to satisfy voracious narcissistic needs, self-entitlement, and self- aggrandizement. Both traditional therapeutic approaches and the administration of psychotropic medicine have proven ineffective. No chemical imbalance exists. Many Dewey youth have a virulent attitude that renders psychotherapy ineffective which explains why recidivism rates are high.
Critics contend that confrontation is controversial, counter therapeutic, and cruel punishment which often brutalizes persons-in-treatment. Confrontation attempts to modify irresponsible, impulsive, immature, stupid and self-destructive behavior. Confrontation penetrates denial, distortion, and dysfunctional attitudes. Critics protest, furthermore, that the use of confrontation is prompted by a negative countertransference reaction. Confrontation has been labeled "attack therapy" for pejorative reasons. Opponents of "attack therapy" do not understand is that confrontation has proven effective to eradicate malignant, dangerous, vicious attitudes and acts. While some critics condemn confrontation to be "cruel," they need to remember that Dewey students have engaged in dangerous, often death-defying behavior which demands heroic intervention. Unless the therapist can persuade the youth to avoid a collision course with disaster, there can be profoundly serious consequences. The primary goal of psychotherapy is to preserve life, so desperate and heroic treatment interventions are required for this difficult-to-treat population. When viewed from this humanistic perspective, confrontation connotes caring by the therapist who attempts to convince the adolescent to become more responsible, responsive, and respectful.
Similar to other medical procedures, there are abuses of confrontation psychotherapy which the authors acknowledge and condemn. The authors, therefore, do not minimize the noxious impact of confrontation when done for the wrong reasons.
There are similarities between the psychotherapist who confronts, the radiologist who medicates, the surgeon who operates, and the psychiatrist who prescribes psychotropic medication. Stated simply, these procedures are subject to abuse. In addition, each procedure attempts to attack malignancies. If the truth be known, confrontation is more benign than other medical approaches. The surgeon, radiologist, and psychiatrist do more physical and permanent damage under the guise of medical treatment than does the therapist who confronts. Interesting, these professions escape criticism because the end is thought to justify the means. There are more malpractice suits against medical professionals than psychotherapists who confront.
Confrontation psychotherapy: A Case study
As an illustration, we present an excerpt of our group process. Prior to attending JDA, Jason had been diagnosed as having schizoaffective disorder and had been prescribed a cocktail of psychotropic medications, including amphetamines, antidepressants, and anxiolytics. Jason's father died when he was twelve, and his mother was in remission from a brain tumor. He witnessed several people jumping to their deaths from the World Trade Center towers during the 9/11 terror attacks. Two years ago, Jason learned he had the same hereditary cardiac condition that caused his father's premature death, and he underwent the implantation of a pacemaker-defibrillator.
Considering his history, post-traumatic stress disorder might have been a more appropriate diagnosis. Regardless of diagnosis, however, this boy had clear explanations for his choice to suppress his feelings and for his decision not to trust others. He struggled with a continuing sense of abandonment and betrayal, stemming from his father's sudden death. During the 18 months that he was at JDA, he remained closed off from other students and staff. The following is a fragment of a group session in which first the group leader and then the other members of the group confronted Jason on his behavior and their reactions to it. Before convening this group and implementing this confrontation, the group leader discussed the treatment impasse extensively with colleagues. The intent of this confrontation was to precipitate a crisis, forcing Jason to change or to leave.
Leader: Jason, recently adults have asked if I think you are organically damaged since you refuse to heed repeated warnings not only to change but also to become a contributing member of the community. I admit that for the first time I mentioned that perhaps they are right and I am wrong. Maybe you are damaged goods and are incapable of changing. You might be the first student in our twenty-year history who needs medication to function. I intend to recommend to your mother that you be evaluated by a psychiatrist who specializes in pharmacology.
Jason: I am not. You know damn well I'm not crazy and don't need that crap.
Leader: I no longer know what to think. What I do know is that you have been here for eighteen months, but haven't changed much. You still isolate. You still refuse to relate. You still don't trust anyone. You still are stubborn. But to your credit, you finally have started to do well academically. I think you hide in your academics by claiming you need to study six or seven hours a day.
Jason: Yes, but...
Leader: Yes period. Your classmates complain that you're a drag and a drain. They don't want to waste their time and energy reaching out to you and having you reject them. Ask them.
Jason: I've been talking to people. (He lists five students.)
Mary: Big deal. They are new students. None have been here longer than three months. What about us? We know you much better than they do. They don't know how to confront you. So you continue to play stupid games.
Laurie: I have no idea who you are. When you feel uncomfortable and threatened, you shut down. When my father died abruptly from a heart attack, just like your father, you never even said you were sorry. This is why I stopped pursuing you.
Jason: I don't want to talk to you because you don't want to talk to me.
Leader: That's a very mature response. You're right, but do you know why?
Jason: No.
Leader: You lie. You know damn well. Everyone is frustrated and weary. They have extended themselves by sharing experiences and confronting you. What have they gotten from you? Only silence and sarcasm. So they finally said to themselves, 'Fuck him. He's simply not worth it.' You quit. No, that's wrong. You never tried.
Allie: Tom's right. I quit six months ago. I gave you the benefit of the doubt that, underneath your defenses, you were caring. I don't believe that any more. You talk in a monotone. I cannot remember when I felt you cared. You are the most frightened and self-absorbed person I've ever met. I know why. When I came I was too scared to care. I had a damn good excuse. I had several abusive relationships with guys. I felt sorry for myself and saw myself as the victim. I was confronted that it was my choice. I chose to remain with these abusive jerks when I should have rejected them! It was scary to trust because I feared the worst. Yeah, I got hurt once or twice. I was knocked down. But I got up and tried again. And you know what? Today, I have the best friends I ever had.
Laurie: I don't blame Allie for not giving a damn. No one trusts you. You are nineteen. You continue to treat your mother like she's the enemy! You abuse your younger sister. None of us care whether you leave or stay. I pity you. You are too scared to be human. You are a poor excuse for a person.
Eddie: Jason, it's really that easy. You lack the guts to venture forth. You're a coward. I'd lie if I said I care because I don't. Blame yourself. But what frightens me is that I know if you don't do it at JDA, you never will. You will never be in an environment which is so caring and safe.
Paul: Eddie's understating your problem. Several of us believe you have major guilt, but lack the integrity to take accountability. Fuck your fears. Take accountability. Things can't get much worse.
Shirley: Do you know what I think the problem is?
Leader: No. Tell us.
Shirley: Jason does not believe you will expel him. You've threatened so many times to expel him that he thinks he's immune.
Eddie: Shirley's right. Jason knows you like bright students, so he's gambling since he has not done anything expellable, you'll let him graduate.
Leader: Jason, if this is what you think, your reality testing is flawed. Complete the next two weeks and then go home for the holidays. Think about what you will want to do with your life. And then write a ten-page essay why I should readmit you. Include in this document your guilt and what you will change.
Allie: Why wait? He thinks you are bluffing. He's not going to change. For the next two weeks, he will do nothing.
Leader: You're right, Allie. Jason, leave in three days. I will give you seventytwo hours to make arrangements because I doubt your mother will permit you to return home. My guess is that all the New York City homeless shelters are filled because it's cold, but I suggest you call them.
Paul: We're wasting our time. We have confronted you many times but you ignored us. You have made commitments to change, but you never have. You continue to joke and act nonchalant. You've done this for six months, so I agree with what Tom said at the beginning of the group. Maybe you just don't get it! I believe you lack the guts to come out from behind all the barriers you have erected. You will be a lonely guy who becomes bitter because no one will be knocking at the door asking you to let us in. Maybe you should watch Dickens' "Christmas Carol." You could become Scrooge.
Susan: I've kept quiet because I tried many times to reach out to you, but you always gave me shit. You continue to be obnoxious and confront others about dumb shit which tells everyone to stay away. I know when I confront kids rather than connecting with them, they get the message to stay away.
Leader: Sadly, I doubt if this group will have much impact. You have heard all this shit many, many times. This may be the last group you attend at John Dewey. I won't shed any tears if you do not return, other than we failed to help you in your time of desperate need. But Scrooge changed when he was much older than you are. Unfortunately, Scrooge is a fictional character. Maybe you ought to read Dickens when you go home. Unless you change by letting the sun shine in, you very well could become Scrooge. It would be tragic if you were to live a wasted life because you have been blessed with awesome intelligence. You could have been great. You could have improved the quality of life. But you won't unless you get the guts to show you care. It's late, but there still is time. The next month will be the most important in your life, because the decisions you make will influence you until you die. I hope for your sake, and that of society, you finally make the right decisions because this may be your last chance. Enough. I don't want to waste any more time. I end abruptly because I do not want to have closure. I hope you are scared because I am scared for you! You can win, but time is a precious commodity, which you lack.
Case follow-up
Following this group, Jason enrolled in a four-week wilderness program in an attempt to earn readmission to Dewey. During his stay at the wilderness program, Jason received notification of early-decision admission to a prestigious college of engineering, as well as word that he had been awarded a substantial scholarship.
While in the wilderness program, Jason was admitted early decision to a prestigious engineering college. We thought this would provide the incentive for him not only to return to John Dewey but also to confront his fears. However, when he returned from the wilderness program, Jason remained intransigent. He engaged in provocative behavior, which forced his expulsion for safety reasons. He "played" with the fire alarm. He "played" with the stove, turning it on and off. He asked the dean of students if he could set fires by using his bow and drill, a skill he had learned in the wilderness. His intent seemed obvious-rather than leaving school voluntarily, Jason wanted to be expelled. It seemed certain that the behavior would escalate if he were allowed to remain. The decision to expel Jason was in keeping with the treatment principle that there are consequences for behavior. Students, parents, and staff were notified before any action was taken, and no one disagreed with the decision to expel him.
The president was faced with the dilemma of whether, and how, to report Jason's behavior to the engineering college. One option would have been to hide behind the shield of confidentiality, but it was felt that unsafe behavior does not warrant confidentiality. Additionally, notification was justified because Jason dropped four courses, which, if not explained, would have resulted in his acceptance being rescinded. Finally, there was the importance of maintaining a relationship with this college so others could attend.
At the same time, the president was aware of his reactions to Jason, which included disappointment, betrayal, anger at not being appreciated for convincing the college to grant a generous scholarship, and rage at being placed in a most uncomfortable position. He knew no one would criticize him if he urged the college to rescind admission, but knew this consequence was extreme since the family could not afford to pay tuition. It is dubious if Jason would have attended college. After careful consideration, the president wrote a letter to the dean of admissions at the college, explaining the reasons for the expulsion, reviewing the factors in Jason's background that have made it difficult for him to succeed academically and socially, and recommending that he reapply to JDA and complete a postgraduate year before attempting college. Included in the letter were the following statements.
Please be advised.. .if I thought Jason were "too dangerous" or "too sick," not only would I notify _____college, but also would refuse to give him the option to return to Dewey....Jason's refusal to comply is motivated by fear to trust others and to be emotionally vulnerable, not defiance. The only time Jason cried was when he was confronted about his reluctance to trust.. .because he feared friends would abandon and betray him... .If permitted to attend college, I suggest Jason be required to continue psychotherapy. He needs to resolve his fear of intimacy, not because he is a threat to safety. Jason and his mother will receive a copy of this letter, so hopefully both will communicate with you. I warned Jason that [college] may rescind his acceptance....
I would be willing to accompany Jason for a conference, with anyone you think makes sense, to discuss options. Undeniably, Jason is a disappointment, but I hasten to mention that several have graduated in Jason's position needing to do more work therapeutically. In college, they excelled. His prognosis remains guarded....! conclude...by stating that he has learned much.
The president would have been wrong to suggest rejection essentially because the decision is that of the college, not the preparatory school. To recommend rejection would have been an abuse of psychotherapeutic power. Post hoc, the president knew that had he become retaliatory, his motivation would have been revenge for Jason's disrespect and lack of appreciation regarding his advocacy, which had resulted in Jason's being awarded a $160,000 four-year scholarship. Had he urged that Jason be rejected, which was warranted, Jason's future would have been ruined, because without a scholarship, it would have been impossible for him to attend college. The president retained his therapeutic integrity by reporting what happened, but refraining from recommending any action. The college decided to continue to extend its offer of admission and a scholarship, and Jason plans to completed the required work and attended. Subsequently, he attained a 3.8 average which puts him on the dean's list. The president assumed an aggressive advocate stance, advocating that he become a resident assistant in the dorms. Jason has visited the John Dewey Academy six times during the year because he wants to "give back" to the school which helped him mature. He has forgiven the president and now recognizes the confrontations were expressions of concern.
Discussion
It is premature to know whether Jason will be a "success" or a "failure." Undeniably, Jason was helped by confrontation because he excelled and was admitted by a college of quality. How much has this adolescent grown, and what the quality of his interpersonal relationships will be, has not been determined. Judicious handling of this complicated situation has avoided the preclusion of future educational, professional, and social successes.
This kind of confrontation is justified when the adolescent remains intransigent or engages in extremely dangerous behavior. Alexander (1950) describes a patient who was irritating and engaged in regressive behavior. When the patient complained that no one liked him, rather than commiserating, Alexander opines that no one liked him because he was unpleasant. Subsequently the patient established a positive treatment alliance. Hearing the truth from a caring professional enabled the patient to trust and to move forward. Corwin (1991) labels this kind of intervention heroic: "When such statement is made, it is an emergency situation....The analyst knows it, the patient is...aware....But both know the moment it is uttered that it may have a prophetic significance for the patient....It implies that a psychic reaction must lead toward the establishment of a working alliance" (p. 83). We have utilized this sort of radical intervention for six seniors in past years, all of whom eventually returned to graduate. We believe Jason will not be an exception.
Critics contend that confrontation is controversial, counter therapeutic, and cruel punishment which often brutalizes persons-in-treatment. Confrontation attempts to modify irresponsible, impulsive, immature, stupid and self-destructive behavior. Confrontation penetrates denial, distortion, and dysfunctional attitudes. Critics protest, furthermore, that the use of confrontation is prompted by a negative countertransference reaction. Confrontation has been labeled "attack therapy" for pejorative reasons. Opponents of "attack therapy" do not under-stand is that confrontation has proven effective to eradicate malignant, dangerous, vicious attitudes and acts. While some critics condemn confrontation to be "cruel," they need to remember that Dewey students have engaged in dangerous, often death-defying behavior which demands heroic intervention. Unless the therapist can persuade the youth to avoid a collision course with disaster, there can be profoundly serious consequences. The primary goal of psychotherapy is to preserve life, so desperate and heroic treatment interventions are required for this difficult-to-treat population. When viewed from this humanistic perspective, confrontation connotes caring by the therapist who attempts to convince the adolescent to become more responsible, responsive, and respectful.
Conclusion
We have described a confrontation as a key aspect of a non-medically oriented residential therapeutic community. In our view, confrontation in the context of residential treatment is a potent psychotherapeutic tool that produces not only the acquisition of prosocial values but also behavioral improvement. Since these changes are internalized, long-term prognosis is quite good. Although we have no long-term systematic follow-up, anecdotal data confirm a less-than-ten-percent recidivism rate, which, to the best of our knowledge, is unmatched at any other residential treatment program. Bratter et al. (2006) contend "critics claim that confrontation psychotherapy is painful and simplistic. But they cannot explain how and why adolescents, who were extreme casualties, improve in a confrontational treatment milieu with escalating expectations for intellectual excellence and moral integrity [that] can be achieved without compromising one for the other" (p. 14). Confrontation as a psychotherapeutic technique has a long history in self-help therapeutic communities. In our experience, it can also be very effective in promoting change in adolescents who are resistant to other treatment approaches. Clearly, confrontation warrants further study.
References
Adler, G. (1985), Borderline Psychopathology and Its Treatment. New York: Jason Aronson.
Alexander, F. & French, T. (1946), Psychoanalytic Therapy. New York: Ronald Press.
Brager, G., (1965), The indigenous worker: A new approach to the social work technician. Social Work, 10: 33-40.
Bratter, T. E. (1972), Confrontation group psychotherapy with affluent, alienated drug abusing adolescents. Psychother.: Theory, Res. & Pract., 9: 308-313.
Bratter, T. E. (1977), Confrontation groups: The therapeutic community's gift to psychotherapy. In Proceedings of the First World Conference on Therapeutic Communities, ed. P. Vamos & J. J. Devlin. Montreal, Canada: Portage Press, pp. 164-174.
Bratter, T. E. (1978), The four 'Rs' of the American self-help therapeutic community: Rebirth, responsibility, reality and respect. In Proceedings of the Third World Conference on Therapeutic Communities, ed. J. Corelli, I. Bonfiglio, T. Pediconi, & M. Collumb. Rome: International Council of Alcoholism and Addictions Press, pp. 434-448.
Bratter, T. E., Collabolletta, E., Fossbender, A. J., Pennacchia, M. C, & Rubel, J. R. (1985), The American self-help residential therapeutic community: A pragmatic treatment approach for addicted character-disordered individuals. In Alcoholism and Substance Abuse: Strategies for Clinical Intervention, ed. T. E. Bratter & G. G. Forrest. New York: Free Press, pp. 461-507.
Bratter, T. E. (2003), Group psychotherapy with gifted, self-destructive, drug-dependent, unconvinced adolescents. Group, 27: 131-146.
Bratter, T. E., Bratter, C. J., Coiner, N. L., & Steiner, K. M. (2006), Motivating gifted, defiant, and unconvinced students to succeed at the John Dewey Academy. Ethical Human Psychology and Psychiatry, 8: 7-16.
Brook, W. (1996), Adolescents who abuse substances. In Group Therapy with Adolescents, ed. P. Kymissis & D. A. Halpern. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association, pp. 243-264.
Carkhuff, R. R. & Berenson, R. G. (1967), Beyond Counseling and Therapy. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Casriel, D. (1963), So Fair a House: The Story of Synanon. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Cohen, A. I., (1982), Confrontation Analysis: Theory and Practice. New York: Grune & Stratton.
Corwin, H. A. (1991), Therapeutic confrontation from routine to heroic. In Confrontation in Psychotherapy, eds. G. Adler & P. G. Myerson. Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson. pp. 69-94.
Devereux, G. (1951), Some criteria for the timing of confrontations and interpretations. Intl. J. Psychoanal., 32:19-24.
Gans, J. S. & Weber, R. L. (2000), The detection of shame in group psychotherapy: Uncovering the hidden emotion. Intl. J. Group Psychother., 50:381-396.
Garner, H. H. (1970), Psychotherapy: Confrontation Problem-Solving Technique. St Louis: Warren H. Green.
Glaser, F. B. (1974), Some historical and theoretical background of a self-help addiction treatment program. Amer. J. Drug & Alcohol Abuse, 1:37-52.
Giovacchini, P. (1985), Countertransference and the severely disturbed adolescent. Adolescent Psychiatry, 12:449-467.
Hurvitz, N. (1970), Peer self-help groups and their implications for psychotherapy. Psychother. Theory, Prac. Res., 7:41-47.
Johnson, S. M. (1985), Characterological Transformation: The Hard Work Miracle. New York: Norton.
Kaufman, G. (1989), The Psychology of Shame: Theory and Treatment of Shame-Based Syndromes. New York: Springer.
Maslow, A. H. (1967), Synanon and eupsychia. J. Humanistic Psychol., VII:21-32.
Meeks, J. E. & Bernet, W. (1990), The Fragile Alliance: An Orientation to the Psychiatric Treatment of the Adolescent. Malabar, FL: Krieger Publishing.
Nunberg, H. (1955), Principles of Psychoanalysis. New York: International Universities.
Reisman, F. (1965), The "helper" therapy principle. Social Work, 10:27-32.
Ruitenbeek, H. (1970), The New Group Therapies. New York: Avon Books.
Shankman, S. (1978), Criteria and factors affecting admission into and completion of the therapeutic community program. In Proceedings of the Third World Conference on Therapeutic Communities, ed. J. Corelli, T. Bonfiglio, T. Pediconi, & M. Collumb. Rome: Centro Italiano di Solidarieta, pp. 156-160.
Sugarman, B. (1974), Daytop Village: A Therapeutic Community. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
Sugarman, B. (1986), Structure, variations, and context: A sociological view of the therapeutic community. In Therapeutic Communities for Addictions: Readings in Theory, Research and Practice, ed. G. De Leon & J. T. Ziegenfuss. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas, pp. 65-82.
Van Stone, W. W. & Gilbert, R. (1972), Peer confrontation groups: What, why, and whether. Amer. J. Psychiat., 129:581-591.
Volkman, R. & Cressey, D. R., (1963), Differential association and the rehabilitation of drug addicts. Amer. J. Soc., 69:131-141.
Yablonsky, L. (1965), The Tunnel Back: Synanon. New York: Macmillan.
Thomas Edward Bratter is President and Founder of The John Dewey Academy in Great Barrington, Massachusetts.
Lisa Sinsheimer, M.D. is a psychiatric consultant and Admissions Coordinator at The John Dewey Academy in Great Barrington, Massachusetts.
Copyright Analytic Press 2008
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved
Quote from: "ZenAgent"Bratter still loves quoting Bratter.
Bratter may enjoy quoting Bratter, but Bratter et al may not do their homework very well...Quote from: "Bratter, Edward, and Sinsheimer"Confrontation in self-help therapeutic communities
During World War II at Henderson Hospital in the Belmont Social Rehabilitation Unit in England, Rapoport (1960), a sociologist, was the first to describe group psychotherapy to be "reality confrontation." Shankman (1978) provides a description of the self-help therapeutic community (TC), as illustrated by Casriel (1963); Bratter (1978); Bratter, Collabolletta, Fossbender, Pennacchia, and Rubel (1985); Glaser (1974); Sugarman (1974, 1986); and Yablonsky (1965), in which recovered persons act as catalysts and responsible role models:The TC might best be described as a school which educates people who have never learned how to live or feel worthy without hurting themselves and others. The therapeutic community helps people who have tried again and again to get what they wanted from life and have continually defeated themselves. The principle combines the basic and universal human values of knowledge, love, honesty, and work, with the dynamic instrument of intense group pressure, in order to recognize and help correct personality defects which prevent people from living by these values. The results lie in rehabilitation so that the individual may reenter his or her community as an independent and productive person (p. 156).
[/color]
The earliest therapeutic communities that I have seen described would be the Northfield Experiments in the UK (Tavistock) in 1939 and 1942, whose primary objective was to get soldiers off the military psych ward and back onto the battlefield (instead of being released to go home, as many assumed they would). Therapists on this ward saw their primary responsibility to be the rehabilitation of the soldiers as a group back into functional fighting men, not the men as individual patients needing to be healed.QuoteOne of the most important achievements of social psychiatry during the Second World War was the discovery of the therapeutic community. The idea of using all the relationships and activities of a residential psychiatric centre to aid the therapeutic task was first put forward by Wilfred Bion in 1940 in what became known as the Wharncliffe Memorandum, a paper to his former analyst, John Rickman, then at the Wharncliffe neurosis centre of the wartime Emergency Medical Service (EMS)...
The opportunity to test the efficacy of the therapeutic community idea arose in the autumn of 1942 at Northfield Military Hospital in Birmingham, when psychiatrists were invited to try out new forms of treatment that would enable as many neurotic casualties as possible to be returned to military duties rather than be discharged to civilian life...
While Bion and his colleagues at the WOSBs (Bion, 1946) were coming forward with new ideas about groups, some serious problems were affecting military psychiatric hospitals dealing with breakdowns in battle and in units. The withdrawal of psychiatric casualties back to base and then to hospital seemed to be associated with a growing proportion of patients being returned to civilian life. It was as if "getting one's ticket," as it was called, had replaced the objective of hospital treatment--to enable rehabilitated officers, NCOs and men to return to the army...
From "The discovery of the therapeutic community: The Northfield Experiments" (Chapter One), by Harold Bridger, in The Transitional Approach in Action, edited by Gilles Amado and Leopold Vansena; Karnac Books, 2005 (Tavistock)
I attended JDA with "Jayson". He was my friend at JDA. It disturbed me to read that article. He had a huge heart and was a very kind and loving person. He also had an amazing sense of humor. When we went to lay in our beds for curfew, I remember he would keep me awake for hours laughing about anything and everything. He also would open up to me about how his problems of "emoting". He tried to act how everyone wanted him, but the tears just couldn't come out. He didn't ever cry and everyone in groups would ride him for it, especially about his fathers death. People would push him to get emotional about it, but he had trouble. I have many friends like Jayson that simply don't cry or get upset as easily as most people do. He had a stone face, but I kinda liked that about him. Maybe Tom was pissed that he couldn't break that stone face.. some people may have seen that as a weakness or a problem, but I saw it as a strength. Jayson always made me laugh, and I always felt safe and comfortable around him. Like if someone were to attack me, I know I could count on him to get by back and fight for me. He was a good friend. So that ridiculous group session I read got me upset. I defended him in groups, yet it didn't matter what I said. It was all politics. The older members were always right, and Tom was the boss. Jayson was an amazing kid and he is missed, its unfortunate that Tom gave him such a hard time, wish he could still be here with us today, because he really was a wonderful person to be around.Thanks for posting that heartfelt defense of Jason. After reading your post, I went back and reread the OP article again, and felt even more disgusted by Tom Bratter and John Dewey Academy methodologies than I had the first time I read it.
TOM: Well we already know about the sexual assault charges he was found guilty of, multiple times. I myself have seen it first hand while attending the school. (this one was not documented but considering all of the investments he has as well as stocks i'm sure he was able to afford to keep a few of them under wraps.) Tom is in no state to be around any girl under the age of 18. Just observe the way he constantly looks down their shirts and caresses them, its disgusting. It would be one thing if they were girls, but these are troubled teenage girls. I noticed he has a method of turning girls against their fathers too for some reason. He always tries to find a way to make the girl hate her father, and then he swoops in and fills the void he created. He also falls asleep in groups ALL THE TIME. He never remembered anything I told him, I could tell him the same story 10 times. At first I thought there was a method to his madness, but there is not. He just didn't care about me, which was fine.... only he was getting a check, because it is his job, so fuck caring about me, but do your job at the least. Even when I left, after the money they gave me, they never helped me with going to another school, or asked me or my family how things were, not once, they just took my family check and abandoned us when could have used there advice or help. "put him on the street" I'm lucky to have a dad that didn't buy into Tom's bullshit, and took me home, (my mom on the otherhand was completely brainwashed.... kinda like one kids mom... it took a long time to get her back in touch with reality and out of the JDA cult.)
and PARENTS beware, he is extremely manipulative. I mean he convinced multiple parents to leave there children homeless for months and sometimes years.
He also uses sleep deprivation in order to change the students into better human beings.... and if it works then maybe its worth it. But they don't put that on the website.
I would seriously look into his investments and accounts because for the amount of money that school costs, i wouldn't be surprised if he is storing that cash somewhere for himself or his children. Not for profit my ass, did you see how expensive tuition is!!
Oh yeah, and I left that place after about two years, I told them to go fuck themselves after they wrongfully accused me of something I didn't do, I got tired of trying to explain my innocents and I left.
I got into a GREAT school without them.
I started my own business and I currently have 3 locations.
I am happy, and I do whatever I want.
But if you look at all the people who actually graduated from that school only a small amount actually "succeed".
I could go on for hours, but i'm saving for a book (hopefully). I hope Tom leaves that place because I think if Ken called the shots, the school actually stands a chance in helping kids. So far majority of people I know that when there, are just as fucked up if not more fucked up then they were before they got to JDA.
Amen....
oh and Tom.... STOP SEXUALLY ASSAULTING AND HARASSING troubled teenage girls who are vulnerable , you sicko. and don't even try to deny it, I saw it with my own eyes.
Parents, If Tom is still working there, don't waste the money, there are better alternatives
I got into a GREAT school without them.
I started my own business and I currently have 3 locations.
I am happy, and I do whatever I want.
'Tom is in no state to be around any girl under the age of 18'...'He also falls asleep in groups ALL THE TIME. He never remembered anything I told him, I could tell him the same story 10 times".