Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => Straight, Inc. and Derivatives => Topic started by: Nonconformistlaw on March 11, 2010, 01:40:48 PM
-
Why is it most former group staff will not post on these boards? Yeah I know, I've seen them attacked. I myself have probably done so on occasion over the years. I have noticed survivor's views toward staff generally fall into one of 2 categories - automatic anger and hatred just because they were on staff or the view that staff were brainwashed too, staff was like another phase of the program (although it was voluntary as opposed to coerced).
Unfortunately, I think many former group staff have remained silent since they see the anger and rage directed toward staff either via direct attacks or posts in general. Of course former staff should take the time to understand where that anger and rage is coming from for it is completely justified. On the other hand, shouldn't survivors do the same, take the time to try to understand where former staff is coming from? If former staff would start posting, we might learn something from them. If we refrain from attacking them, maybe they would be able to see where we are coming from.
(I do not include known abusive staff in this category for extremely abusive staff members fall into a completely different category - I have no desire to "understand" where these people are coming from.)
Granted I say this knowing full well if certain former staff members who were involved in my kidnapping ever surface - it will take every once of restraint I can muster to refrain from attacking them and I might fail miserably, my own emotions might take over - so I do know why survivors tend to lash out at them....again survivor anger is justified.
Seeing what Rich Mullinax has done, the way he came forward, and the interactions that have taken place since - we have been given the opportunity to learn something - from an executive staff member - personally I have become more interested in the ENTIRE Straight "story" coming out for the world to know - for that to happen, former staff members stories would have to be part of the big picture. Right now I see that their perspective is almost completely absent - there are a few exceptions like Don, but most wont post like he does. I have talked to enough former staff off the boards to know that some are just as anti straight as the rest of us are. I would like to see them start posting without getting attacked - I wonder if this is even possible?
-
Excellent post, all great points.
I actually ran into an Exec staff a few years ago at Target right around Christmas. He was one who made my life particularly miserable while I was there. Before I went in I had a Latin class with him when he was on 5th phase (I'm guessing). He had told Newton that he knew for a fact that I had done cocaine (I'd never even seen it before I went in) and a host of other complete lies about things I did before I went in. I mean, Christ....the guy wasn't allowed to associate with me, knew next to nothing about me but rattled off this list of drugs that I had supposedly done (never did anything more than a lil pot and drinking before).
Anyway, I was in Target and saw him walking around shopping. I froze for a few minutes and sort of followed him around the store. Then I worked up enough nerve to walk up and asked if he remembered me. He did. I asked him how he felt, now, about those years and his participation. He ignored me and walked away. I followed and kept asking questions. Did he remember doing XX to so-and-so, how could he sleep at night etc. etc....all in a calm tone and never raised my voice. Finally, he turned and told me that he'd call the police if I didn't stop. You're gonna call the police on me because I'm asking you questions, I asked? He kept walking. I kept up for a bit, then gave up and went about my shopping. We ended up at the checkout at the same time, so I started with the questions again. He finally gave and agreed to speak with me outside. His wife was with him (who had not been in Straight) and I again began with my questions, especially regarding the lies he told about me that made things so difficult. When I began to cry while telling the things he did to me and others, he tried to interrupt me but his wife shushed him and told him to listen to what I had to say, then she reached out and hugged me. She kept looking over at him like 'how could you do such things!'. I know I got to him, I could see it in his face. He did throw up the same reasons/excuses we've all heard but it was nowhere NEAR the sincere apology that Rich gave. He did give me his email address and told me to contact him if I wanted to discuss it further. I never did, not sure why. It was about 5 or so years ago and I was still pretty intimidated...gut reaction.
I didn't really get any concrete answers to the questions I had, but it did give me a huge confidence boost that I was able to speak to him in a clear, intelligent manner without devolving into a frightened little girl again. (wow...almost teared up writing that sentence, not sure why). I felt like I had faced one of my main demons and faced him down.
His name was/is William "Rusty" Rollins for anyone who was in there at the same time period. And no, the wife was not Alice Bowen. Guess they divorced a few years after Straight shut down. The wife that I encountered did seem very sweet and genuinely interested in what I was saying. I would LOVE to have heard the conversation on the way home!!
-
I was on my phases with that little kool aid drinkin stroke.I remember him as being a real polly-anna type.Didnt seem like he had much backbone either.
But then again my dad used to say".......put the twats in uniform,an they all become bloody Hitler." :guesswho:
-
Is it possible…for former staff to begin posting, without being attacked?
I think, it is indeed possible. Yet there are variables that determine whether they are attacked, or welcomed with open arms (“open” is relative). And I think it wise to consider there is a grey area involved as well. I think there was a time, in my life, when a person said they were on “staff”, there was most definitely a “knee jerk reaction” on my part. Even for established, well known members of our community that were on “staff” there is/was a level of distrust…a feeling of stand off’ish-ness on my part. Then to the far distant extreme, I readily embraced folks, well…folk, because it has only been Rich Mullinax.
Yet, even with Rich, he caught a barrage of shit from me, repetitively. Even after his open LOA, there was a degree of distrust. If I recall, it was shortly after our “gathering” held in 3 states for those walking wounded who no longer walk with us, you, Nonconformistlaw, drew up the Request for Apology and then Rich, made his apology. At first, I did not openly accept his apology. The apology at the time seemed as if it were a form letter of sorts. As if, he placed his name on your Request for Apology and passed it on as a heart felt apology. His words almost directly mirrored your “Request”. It took some time, reading his words, watching his interactions with other members of our community to finally accept his LOA as genuine. And, having since watched him and taken the time to get to know him more, I have fully accepted his apology and consider him as friend.
I wanted to accept his apology. I wanted deeply, to have a “faith in mankind” restored. In time, that “faith in mankind” was, restored. With Rich, it was relatively easy. I once told Rich I could never “forgive” him, because I had never condemned him. He was never in my life, as a “staff member” and never had an effect on me.
Yet, even though he had no direct impact on me as a child, there was still a contemptuous, antagonistic emotion held against him, simply because the word “staff” was in the same sentence as his name. What is interesting to me here is that he, although he was not on staff at the time of my incarceration, I still had such a strong visceral reaction towards him. I questioned myself at length about this state I found myself in. Sadly, I haven’t any answers as of this date. And I am not convinced there is an answer, only time given for observation. Observation to see if his following actions matched with his/your words. And in Rich’s case, they have. His actions have matched his LOA.
In general, I have an admiration for any staff member that has the testicular fortitude to write on this or any message board. Yet the mistake they make, as I see it, is that they expect to be accepted without consequence. There is a failure to recognize that we, our community, are deeply scared. And for the most part, we have been scared by people with the word “staff” attached to their name.
One of the variables I see as hampering a former staff’s effort at being a member of our community is, arrogance.
Arrogance, regardless of it’s etiology is inappropriate. Arrogance will understandably be met with bristling antagonism. Over the years, many staff members have made their way into these rooms and were immediately attacked. They failed to realize that by coming to these message boards they were walking on thin ice right off the bat. They failed to see that we were no longer their minions and falsely expected us to behave as such. When we did not respond in accordance with their delusional expectations (mixed with arrogance), their feelings would get hurt. Some simply left, some raised a ruckus briefly, then left.
Another behavior exhibited by former staff members is an active dismissal of our experience. More so than arrogance, dismissal of our experience insults and infuriates. Unfortunately, arrogance and dismissal often accompany each other, thus adding insult to injury. Now, I am of the opinion that these behaviors are indeed protective mechanisms, bolstered in the minds of former staff members. The question in my mind then becomes…what are they protecting? I fail to believe they are protecting the truth. We know better than that, and see right thru that. It appears to me that they are protecting something between their own ears. Guilt? Remorse? Denial? Failure to accept the heinous exploitation and incarceration of children they themselves actively participated in? I don’t pretend to know, as such, I can only guess what these behaviors are attempting to hide.
I share your interest in seeing “the ENTIRE Straight story” coming out. And I also agree that having former staff members input would be invaluable in revealing the “ENTIRE story”. This doesn’t discredit our experience. Most, if not all of us know very well, painfully well, one side of the coin. The other side of the coin is still very much a mystery. As such, the story is lopsided. I have written about this before, and received a lil heat. But I still maintain, how can I know everything about what happened to me, if I adamantly refuse to listen, hear, read the other side of the story? How can I pretend to know what was going thru a staff members mind set at the time, if I don’t know?
What’s the value of knowing former staff members insights into Straight Inc.? Understanding. Pure and simple. Not implying acceptance. Not changing my viewpoint. Not “switching sides”. Nothing of the sort. Just simply to have a better understanding of what I experienced. Why I experienced what I did. What the motivation was behind so many bizarre situations and ritualistic abuses. I just want to know. I just want to be able to be at peace, in regard to the Straight Inc experience.
If I only hear my side of the story, along with others stories that are very similar to my experience, the only understanding I have is one side of the coin. (and I know it well) Would former staffs input be of great significance? I dunno, it’s a difficult question to answer, if I don’t hear/read/listen to the other side of the story.
Closure? No, I doubt it. I do not imagine “closure” every actually occurring. On the other hand, with this information would come (eventually) understanding. “Understanding” opens up a whole new set of possibilities. One of which I believe to be “healing”. The challenge then becomes, am I capable of the emotional restraint in order to hear/read/listen to the “other side of the story”? I can not answer this question either. Even tho I know there is a desire to know, a desire to understand, a desire to heal…I don’t know that I have the emotional restraint I see as a requirement to actually hear the other side of the story. I would like to think I have that restraint, but I am inclined to think not. Now, am I willing to try? Absolutely! And I have done so in the recent past (the entire month of December 09) But that effort failed, the former staff member I made every effort to understand, never got off the ground. There was no mutual desire to understand equal to the desire to be understood. I tried to link up Rich with this individual…Rich graciously agreed to talk with this individual. However, that former staff member flat out refused to speak with Rich for reasons I still don’t understand.
For my own sanity, I backed off. Even though I backed off, the topic, the issue has never been far from my thoughts, but I found the process to be exhausting and unfulfilling. Yet the was my first earnest effort at such a thing. I am willing to make an attempt again…but not just yet. It was very much a parasitic experience for me. A unwilling former staff, a less than understanding support system, and being left to my own resources…I was exhausted. Now some 3 months latter, sure, the interest is there, but a degree of reality remains fresh in my mind. The reality?…simply put…it aint easy.
NCL, I am glad to see you in the mix again, I have always found you to be inspirational and thought provoking. I admire that in a person. I don’t have answers to all the questions and situations. But I am fascinated with the idea of finding out. It will take a lil more time for me to regain my emotional strength after the last effort at understanding. Yet, I know myself well enuff to know that I will be back up to speed in short order. And I will be asking questions, probing and digging deeper. I appreciate your post, and the motivation behind it.
Much Peace
Continued Healing
woof
On a side note, regarding William “Rusty” Rollins. Like Seamus, I was on my phases with William Rollins. I hear people, like Anne Bonney and others talk about what a menace he was and how he terrorized folks. It is not that I disbelieve what is being said…I believe it, I sincerely believe it…I just can’t picture it. This lil effeminate toothpick, sheepish, impish and generally non-threatening individual:
A) Made it on staff
B) Generated the amount of fear he did.
It’s astounding what power, unquestionable power will have on individuals and now they cower in the dark recesses, afraid to face us, ashamed to face us, and unwilling to face us. Cowards behaving cowardly. Like I said, it takes testicular fortitude for them to have an exchange with us. Thus far, only one has had that testicular fortitude, Richard Mullinax. Being the first, Rich set the standard. Rich took heat for his LOA, but he did what a man does when he realizes he is wrong. He says he is wrong, explains how he was wrong and makes himself available to make things right.
-
I wholeheartedly agree with woof, BUT,on the other hand I wouldnt hold my breath waiting for Ross,Peterman,cassler,hemminger,The sadistic "amazon" Amy Wright,or any of the other members of that ship of fools to ever admit to any wrongdoing. There were staff members who didnt lay the shit on thick too,and I never had any real animosity towards them,but hell,like we're gonna hear from them either. I mean shit as agroup,we cant seem to "agree to disagree" on what color shit is. Look at all the AA horseshit goin on.WE ( myself included ) are somewhat of an intolerant lot. This doesnt make the shit we suffered any less wrong,damaging or painfull somehow by any means,Its just a thought.
-
I know I got to him, I could see it in his face. He did throw up the same reasons/excuses we've all heard but it was nowhere NEAR the sincere apology that Rich gave. He did give me his email address and told me to contact him if I wanted to discuss it further. I never did, not sure why. It was about 5 or so years ago and I was still pretty intimidated...gut reaction.
I didn't really get any concrete answers to the questions I had, but it did give me a huge confidence boost that I was able to speak to him in a clear, intelligent manner without devolving into a frightened little girl again. (wow...almost teared up writing that sentence, not sure why). I felt like I had faced one of my main demons and faced him down.
I never had the experience of running into someone like you did - I dont know how I would handle such an encounter - if I run into people involved in my kidnapping it will be unlikely I will be able to listen to their side, I doubt I would be "reasonable", I would probably fly off the handle and make that encounter a very unpleasant experience for them. - Thats the demon I have yet to face and dont know if I ever will. Its amazing how you maintained your composure under such emotional circumstances.
One thing I dont want to see is former staff coming along making excuses - that would piss me off real fast. Rich has never once made excuses - he'll tell it like it was, but never excuses it. I find it extremely ironic that "taking responsibility" was shoved down our throats every minute of the day, we suffered dire consequences if we didn't "take responsibility" for some real or imagined or invented wrong doing (brutal confrontation, set backs, start overs, etc.) AND were part of those damn steps - 4 & 5 I think. But yet the people that preached it dont have the first clue what "making a searching and fearless moral inventory of themselves" AND what taking responsibility means or they just refuse to do it for whatever reason.
I hope former staff, group and or executive level, to start posting and explaining why things were the way they were, their experience, etc, without excuses. I want concrete answers beyond what we already know - North Korean brainwashing was used as "therapy" - we've established that much - but even that answer doesnt provide all the concrete answers that are needed for the entire story of Straight to be known. if anything, that answer just provokes more questions.
-
I never had the experience of running into someone like you did - I dont know how I would handle such an encounter - if I run into people involved in my kidnapping it will be unlikely I will be able to listen to their side, I doubt I would be "reasonable", I would probably fly off the handle and make that encounter a very unpleasant experience for them. - Thats the demon I have yet to face and dont know if I ever will. Its amazing how you maintained your composure under such emotional circumstances.
If this had happened when I was first starting to deal with all this I probably would have gone off on him. But I knew that if I did, he'd just write me off as a 'disgruntled, failed phaser' and there was no way in hell I was gonna give him any chance to do that. I also truly wanted answers, specifically from him because he really did a shitload of damage to me personally. As I said, never did get those answers but at least he knew how I felt. And I have no doubt that he's read here about himself too.
One thing I dont want to see is former staff coming along making excuses - that would piss me off real fast. Rich has never once made excuses - he'll tell it like it was, but never excuses it.
Yep...totally agree.
I find it extremely ironic that "taking responsibility" was shoved down our throats every minute of the day, we suffered dire consequences if we didn't "take responsibility" for some real or imagined or invented wrong doing (brutal confrontation, set backs, start overs, etc.) AND were part of those damn steps - 4 & 5 I think. But yet the people that preached it dont have the first clue what "making a searching and fearless moral inventory of themselves" AND what taking responsibility means or they just refuse to do it for whatever reason.
Yep and it's still going on here too.
I hope former staff, group and or executive level, to start posting and explaining why things were the way they were, their experience, etc, without excuses. I want concrete answers beyond what we already know - North Korean brainwashing was used as "therapy" - we've established that much - but even that answer doesnt provide all the concrete answers that are needed for the entire story of Straight to be known. if anything, that answer just provokes more questions.
Yep.
-
Is it possible…for former staff to begin posting, without being attacked?
I think, it is indeed possible. Yet there are variables that determine whether they are attacked, or welcomed with open arms (“open” is relative). And I think it wise to consider there is a grey area involved as well. I think there was a time, in my life, when a person said they were on “staff”, there was most definitely a “knee jerk reaction” on my part. Even for established, well known members of our community that were on “staff” there is/was a level of distrust…a feeling of stand off’ish-ness on my part. Then to the far distant extreme, I readily embraced folks, well…folk, because it has only been Rich Mullinax.
Yet, even with Rich, he caught a barrage of shit from me, repetitively. Even after his open LOA, there was a degree of distrust. If I recall, it was shortly after our “gathering” held in 3 states for those walking wounded who no longer walk with us, you, Nonconformistlaw, drew up the Request for Apology and then Rich, made his apology. At first, I did not openly accept his apology. The apology at the time seemed as if it were a form letter of sorts. As if, he placed his name on your Request for Apology and passed it on as a heart felt apology. His words almost directly mirrored your “Request”. It took some time, reading his words, watching his interactions with other members of our community to finally accept his LOA as genuine. And, having since watched him and taken the time to get to know him more, I have fully accepted his apology and consider him as friend.
You're right, whether or not former staff will be attacked depends on alot of things but - to avoid an immediate hostile situation 1) it would help if former staff that post do not make excuses and 2) it would help if former clients avoid, no matter how understandable it is, the knee jerk reaction "just because they were on staff" reactive attack. We'll never get answers we all need if these two things keep happening. I know I would have to withhold any knee jerk reactions as well, long enough to let a former staff do some explaining and that wont be easy.
As far as why Rich formatted his apology the way he did, although I cannot speak for him I remember that at the time he first wrote it, he explained to me his reasons, his sincerity was never a question in my mind, but I also was able to talk to him on the phone about it - but I can also understand your reaction. In fact, I think no matter how written, regardless of the format or word choice, any apology would be greeted with skepticism by some survivors. I also think that is understandable.
Yet, even though he had no direct impact on me as a child, there was still a contemptuous, antagonistic emotion held against him, simply because the word “staff” was in the same sentence as his name. What is interesting to me here is that he, although he was not on staff at the time of my incarceration, I still had such a strong visceral reaction towards him. I questioned myself at length about this state I found myself in. Sadly, I haven’t any answers as of this date. And I am not convinced there is an answer, only time given for observation. Observation to see if his following actions matched with his/your words. And in Rich’s case, they have. His actions have matched his LOA.
Maybe its because victims in general need to hold someone accountable for what was done to them - in the case of Straight, for many of us there is no single person that can be held accountable, many of our "injuries" are the product of a very screwed up system, the result of the collective actions of many people including ourselves (forced to be perpetrators to progress). In other words, aside from the Semblers and the executive staff level at each Straight branch, who do we as survivors direct our anger towards? I think its a natural reaction to be angry with and hold people we had contact with accountable - group staff was much more a part of our daily life in Straight than the executive or highest levels. Just a theory.
-
In general, I have an admiration for any staff member that has the testicular fortitude to write on this or any message board. Yet the mistake they make, as I see it, is that they expect to be accepted without consequence. There is a failure to recognize that we, our community, are deeply scared. And for the most part, we have been scared by people with the word “staff” attached to their name.
One of the variables I see as hampering a former staff’s effort at being a member of our community is, arrogance.
Arrogance, regardless of it’s etiology is inappropriate. Arrogance will understandably be met with bristling antagonism. Over the years, many staff members have made their way into these rooms and were immediately attacked. They failed to realize that by coming to these message boards they were walking on thin ice right off the bat. They failed to see that we were no longer their minions and falsely expected us to behave as such. When we did not respond in accordance with their delusional expectations (mixed with arrogance), their feelings would get hurt. Some simply left, some raised a ruckus briefly, then left.
Me too. I would respect the hell out of any former staff who willingly posts, without making excuses, and is willing to deal with the anger from us. My experience with former staff has been relatively easy so far, but then again I haven't directly encountered those who personally caused me harm. That said, I think your observations are correct - I've seen some of that myself over the years on these boards.
Another behavior exhibited by former staff members is an active dismissal of our experience. More so than arrogance, dismissal of our experience insults and infuriates. Unfortunately, arrogance and dismissal often accompany each other, thus adding insult to injury. Now, I am of the opinion that these behaviors are indeed protective mechanisms, bolstered in the minds of former staff members. The question in my mind then becomes…what are they protecting? I fail to believe they are protecting the truth. We know better than that, and see right thru that. It appears to me that they are protecting something between their own ears. Guilt? Remorse? Denial? Failure to accept the heinous exploitation and incarceration of children they themselves actively participated in? I don’t pretend to know, as such, I can only guess what these behaviors are attempting to hide.
Yep Ive seen the "get over it that was a long time ago" mentality. What are they protecting? Maybe themselves, from the truth (again just a theory) - the second one acknowledges the truth about Straight, that it was brainwashing, it was abusive, etc, is the second that all the justifications fall apart. Thats the moment the idea that Straight was a "good place" becomes a real question is ones mind. That is the moment one begins to see the dark horrible truth that was Straight inc and that is a bitter pill, even for us, the people that have no trouble accepting that Straight was a horrible place. Me I had no trouble accepting that Straight used N Korean brainwashing but for some reason it took me awhile to accept that it was also a cult. Who the hell wants to acknowledge something like that?
I share your interest in seeing “the ENTIRE Straight story” coming out. And I also agree that having former staff members input would be invaluable in revealing the “ENTIRE story”. This doesn’t discredit our experience. Most, if not all of us know very well, painfully well, one side of the coin. The other side of the coin is still very much a mystery. As such, the story is lopsided. I have written about this before, and received a lil heat. But I still maintain, how can I know everything about what happened to me, if I adamantly refuse to listen, hear, read the other side of the story? How can I pretend to know what was going thru a staff members mind set at the time, if I don’t know?
What’s the value of knowing former staff members insights into Straight Inc.? Understanding. Pure and simple. Not implying acceptance. Not changing my viewpoint. Not “switching sides”. Nothing of the sort. Just simply to have a better understanding of what I experienced. Why I experienced what I did. What the motivation was behind so many bizarre situations and ritualistic abuses. I just want to know. I just want to be able to be at peace, in regard to the Straight Inc experience.
If I only hear my side of the story, along with others stories that are very similar to my experience, the only understanding I have is one side of the coin. (and I know it well) Would former staffs input be of great significance? I dunno, it’s a difficult question to answer, if I don’t hear/read/listen to the other side of the story.
No it wouldn't discredit our side at all, if anything, it could do alot to explain why Straight was such a bad place. We will only learn more by listening. And I'm not changing my position either - it is just who I am - I need to understand why certain things happened to me at Straight and its for the same reason you said, because I am trying to make peace with this. The other reason I want staff's side to come out is because this shit is still going on in other places - usage of untrained program graduates is still out there damaging more children even as I write this post. For the sake of today's children, it has to be told so some people might learn how destructive certain practices were then and still are destructive now.
-
Another behavior exhibited by former staff members is an active dismissal of our experience. More so than arrogance, dismissal of our experience insults and infuriates. Unfortunately, arrogance and dismissal often accompany each other, thus adding insult to injury. Now, I am of the opinion that these behaviors are indeed protective mechanisms, bolstered in the minds of former staff members. The question in my mind then becomes…what are they protecting? I fail to believe they are protecting the truth. We know better than that, and see right thru that. It appears to me that they are protecting something between their own ears. Guilt? Remorse? Denial? Failure to accept the heinous exploitation and incarceration of children they themselves actively participated in? I don’t pretend to know, as such, I can only guess what these behaviors are attempting to hide.
Yep Ive seen the "get over it that was a long time ago" mentality. What are they protecting? Maybe themselves, from the truth (again just a theory) - the second one acknowledges the truth about Straight, that it was brainwashing, it was abusive, etc, is the second that all the justifications fall apart. Thats the moment the idea that Straight was a "good place" becomes a real question is ones mind. That is the moment one begins to see the dark horrible truth that was Straight inc and that is a bitter pill, even for us, the people that have no trouble accepting that Straight was a horrible place. Me I had no trouble accepting that Straight used N Korean brainwashing but for some reason it took me awhile to accept that it was also a cult. Who the hell wants to acknowledge something like that?
I think that's it exactly. Maybe a combination of the two and a little ego...their entire POV is threatened and the guilt that would come from actually acknowledging it. I really believe that's why my father doesn't want to discuss it to this day. He's comfortable believing that he "did what he thought was best" and was "only trying to help" and doesn't want anything to interfere with that delusion because it would hurt too much. If he were to acknowledge the true nature of Straight and what it did to our entire family, his whole belief system would be called into question and the guilt would just be overwhelming. As a parent myself, I can't even imagine having to carry kind of guilt around. As it is now, he can sit up there and feel secure in his belief that he did what was right, facts be damned.
Same thing with Rollins. He was a true believer (still is apparently) and he was a PRICK about it. I can't imagine carrying that guilt around either. I mean, there's staff and then there's STAFF.
-
I'm tired of being tormented to hell, that's what I'm tired of.
-
Woof, Rich is pretty cool but he's not the only staffer to hang around w/ all us splits, pull-offs n fuckups. Deprogrammed was on staff for a couple of years, I think. Don Smith too. And he initially came out as a dedicated program defender.
But more commonly, it goes like this:
John Underwood comes along to share his "insights"
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=11132&hilit=john+underwood (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=11132&hilit=john+underwood)
(or a light come down on group LOL)
Marnie Sykes posted briefly. She still insisted that the Seed had saved her brother's life, at least till he od on heroin, and then bowed out rather gracefully. Far as I know she's still working for a local print shop somewhere on the Gulf Coast.
Those are just a couple I know of from the Seed/Straight line. I'm sure there are others. Then there's Dysfunction Junction and Che from other programs. Never mind the Elan people! LOL They're too hard to figure out sometimes.
-
Edited: Wednesday, October 06, 2010
-
Woof, Rich is pretty cool but he's not the only staffer to hang around w/ all us splits, pull-offs n fuckups. Deprogrammed was on staff for a couple of years, I think. Don Smith too. And he initially came out as a dedicated program defender.
But more commonly, it goes like this:
John Underwood comes along to share his "insights"
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=11132&hilit=john+underwood (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=11132&hilit=john+underwood)
(or a light come down on group LOL)
Marnie Sykes posted briefly. She still insisted that the Seed had saved her brother's life, at least till he od on heroin, and then bowed out rather gracefully. Far as I know she's still working for a local print shop somewhere on the Gulf Coast.
Those are just a couple I know of from the Seed/Straight line. I'm sure there are others. Then there's Dysfunction Junction and Che from other programs. Never mind the Elan people! LOL They're too hard to figure out sometimes.
:shamrock: :shamrock:
Jeesh Ginger if you called Woof as much as you called some Elan people he would also know your a bit skewed....lol. You just leave some of us Elan folks alone, trust me Woof a Doof knows some of us well enough.
Now concerning a conversation with survivors and ex-staff with the conversation being entirely focused on the interactions between them. I have not specifically encountered that with a survivor I staffed. My experience has been with survivors I have met on line here and out in public over the years. Most cases have been ok at first awkward then after some conversation good. In person the encounters have been better then the encounters on line. Which I think makes sense for obvious reasons.
Danny :shamrock:
-
1. I found and contacted a former executive staff from KHK. He was a staff I remember from when I was in KHK back in '87. I did not attack this man, I just wanted to talk to him. He didn't remember me but after a few minutes, he was sure that I remembered him. I am glad that I was calm and took a friendly approach. The reason why I am glad is because I learned some important facts. He stated that he had a degree in Psychology and this is what landed him the job at KHK. I also learned that he was not only executive staff but that he was also a program parent. His daughter had served time at KidsCope (a KHK spinoff). KHK had hoped to use him as a "professionally credentialled employee" but that dream never reached fruition. He disagreed with the program director about the treatment he witnessed "in group" and was immediately fired.
I never mentioned my views on KHK. I wasn't concealing it, I was only interested in obtaining information from this man. I asked him what he thought of KHK and he replied that it was an outdated model that he thought had been eliminated years ago due to its inefficacy. Basically he felt that it was a useless model which offered no benefit to anyone.
I have often wondered why I hung up the phone without ever telling him my perspective, why I didn't go more into detail or try to get more information. I guess the biggest reason was that I sensed that he, as a former program parent, seemed to have learned that these programs were a mistake and he exhibited remorse. I can only imagine what his daughter went through, post-program. I may contact him again one day, just to see if he would be willing to go "on the record" so that the world might have a better understanding of what really happened in there.
2. I was a peer staff after I 7-stepped. I was 16 years old at graduation. At some point of my 6-month follow up I decided to "be all I could be" and join staff. I was a "trainee". I don't think I lasted 4 months (although my memories are quite vague from that time). I do remember why I was ostracized, fired from staff and threatened with a "refresher". It was because I had started to think for myself again and was questioning executive staff, more specifically, "why there needed to be so much confrontation and negative self attacking in the group". I just couldn't understand it. I refused to hold negative Raps. Somehow I still had the strength to do something right, which was to ease the suffering of the kids in group while I was in charge of the raps. This disregard for the staff rules of holding negative-type raps went largely unnoticed for quite some time. I was considered to be one of the more "washed" kids, I suppose, as I was a vehement supporter of the program who would always speak well of the program and perform speaking engagements attesting to the lives saved due to KHK. But it eventually caught up with me and I was basically "dismissed" from KHK. That is the short story and I am unsure if I could remember the long story.
3. The people who are willing to discuss the truth and talk about what really happened deserve to not be attacked. Save the attacking for those who really deserve it, those who still believe in hurting others to help them, those who continue to deceive, those who will lie to us anyway. But for those who have differing opinions or just don't remember it like we do, I say they deserve respect and I think we have a lot to gain by being civil and having a reasonable discourse. Instead of asking, "why did you hurt me?" or "how could you think that was right?", maybe better questions to ask are, "what do you think was wrong with the program?" or "are you aware of the history of Straight Inc. and the roots of its methods?" It occurred to me that learning about what the program really was, makes a big difference on how we view what we went through. This education seems very important in overcoming all of the personal complexities and confounded experiences of these programs which seems to keep this issue so very ambiguous and difficult to convey and discuss.
I don't think these discussion boards are the best place to "start" these communications. It probably would be better started as phone calls, e-mails or on FaceBook. One on one discussion without an attack would be a good place to begin.
-
The program was all about making changes with oneself and phaser staffers became products of their environment. For the most part, these changes were a consequence of indoctrination into the cult. I can see how aspirations to become staffers could "grow" on certain mindsets of that age range and I give SOME former staffers SOME leeway in that regard all these years later. I determine that on a case by case basis. In the case of Rich Mullinax, it is good to see his efforts at self-accountability, however, he should make a greater effort to obtain apologies from the other execs. If he has already tried, I haven't heard about it.
One thing I hate to hear now is when people who were SO gung ho back then to be staff whine about how fucked up they were while doing it, you know, like how WDTONY talks like he was SO horribly tortured when standing there in group watching the kids crying, bleeding, etc... *insert drama queen emoticon*
One thing's for sure- accountability is a bitch!
As far as the discussion idea goes, I think there'd be a lot of :beat: :beat: :beat: goin on
:cheers:
-
.
3. The people who are willing to discuss the truth and talk about what really happened deserve to not be attacked. Save the attacking for those who really deserve it, those who still believe in hurting others to help them, those who continue to deceive, those who will lie to us anyway. But for those who have differing opinions or just don't remember it like we do, I say they deserve respect and I think we have a lot to gain by being civil and having a reasonable discourse. Instead of asking, "why did you hurt me?" or "how could you think that was right?", maybe better questions to ask are, "what do you think was wrong with the program?" or "are you aware of the history of Straight Inc. and the roots of its methods?" It occurred to me that learning about what the program really was, makes a big difference on how we view what we went through. This education seems very important in overcoming all of the personal complexities and confounded experiences of these programs which seems to keep this issue so very ambiguous and difficult to convey and discuss.
I don't think these discussion boards are the best place to "start" these communications. It probably would be better started as phone calls, e-mails or on FaceBook. One on one discussion without an attack would be a good place to begin.
I think this is a key point, and I would be willing to go along with it. My .02.......
-
Edited: Wednesday, October 06, 2010
-
As you all know i am an outsider to all this. So i say this in the hope that it does not offend anyone hurt by this industry and the players within, but i am not sure whether or not people who worked at places like straight or even wwasp who had been promoted from within did so without coercion exactly. While it is not coercion in the sense that kids on low phases are coerced into lying about their drug habits, there also may not appear to be a lot of choices. I try to think what I would do if I had been convinced that 2 years of abuse had actually saved me from myself. Without the education to do anything different or even the social skills to rebuild a life on "the outside" with normal well adjusted people and it becomes a whole lot less of a choice. Add to all this the fact that you are in most cases still a kid without any other experience of the world. Then on top of this after years of being told you are shit and nothing, you are a leader. You get paid a salary even if it is shitty, parents and adults who used to see you as a menace suddenly are fawning all over you and thanking you for saving their kids. In addition you have internalized the idea that you might not be able to make it out in the world. From where i sit that looks and feels pretty coerced.
I accept that this does not make abusing anyone OK but apparently few among us have the level of moral integrity to take the noble road in this instance. I read the lucifer effect and what shocked me was not the behavior of the guards but the fact that the guy who designed the experiment got caught up in it. As the "superintendent" of the prison he allowed the abuse to occur and only stopped it when an outsider to the whole thing expressed her disgust. If this is what can happen to a smart, highly educated, middle aged adult who beleives strongly in freedom and questioning authority, it seems a kid doesnt stand much of a chance. So while I fully appreciate that i might feel entirely diferent if I had been treated badly by a malicious staff member, i feel for them because they have the pain of the program and the guilt of being a purpertrator. that cant be easy
-
One thing I hate to hear now is when people who were SO gung ho back then to be staff whine about how fucked up they were while doing it, you know, like how WDTONY talks like he was SO horribly tortured when standing there in group watching the kids crying, bleeding, etc... *insert drama queen emoticon*
Now why is this a problem? Is it really so hard to believe that someone on staff could start "snapping out of it" just enough to start to see things wrong with what was going on in Straight? Is it possible someone started out being "gung ho" about being on staff, then later started questioning Straight? I think this is entirely possible. I have heard other former staff say similar things. Its possible that if a former staff member started to feel this way, it could have been the beginning of the end of their time on staff and could have been the first signs that the brainwashing was starting to wear off. If anything this makes perfect sense.
If someone still was gung ho TODAY and "talks like he was SO horribly tortured when standing there in group watching the kids crying, bleeding, etc" as you said, then yes I would have a huge problem with that.
-
As you all know i am an outsider to all this. So i say this in the hope that it does not offend anyone hurt by this industry and the players within, but i am not sure whether or not people who worked at places like straight or even wwasp who had been promoted from within did so without coercion exactly. While it is not coercion in the sense that kids on low phases are coerced into lying about their drug habits, there also may not appear to be a lot of choices. I try to think what I would do if I had been convinced that 2 years of abuse had actually saved me from myself. Without the education to do anything different or even the social skills to rebuild a life on "the outside" with normal well adjusted people and it becomes a whole lot less of a choice. Add to all this the fact that you are in most cases still a kid without any other experience of the world. Then on top of this after years of being told you are shit and nothing, you are a leader. You get paid a salary even if it is shitty, parents and adults who used to see you as a menace suddenly are fawning all over you and thanking you for saving their kids. In addition you have internalized the idea that you might not be able to make it out in the world. From where i sit that looks and feels pretty coerced.
I have seen it be debated before whether staff truly made a voluntary choice to go on staff - to me it seems voluntary on the surface. Maybe it was that simple, maybe it wasnt. Someone once pointed out that if staff ever approached any phaser about the possibility of going on staff, would that person really be able to say no? If they did say no, its entirely possible the person would have been questioned about "where they were at with themselves", whether they were applying their program, ie. the 7th step, blah, blah, blah. I can see fear of set back being a motivating factor in agreeing to do it. Obviously only former staff could answer that question - I would be very interested to see former staff comment on voluntary vs involuntary.
-
One thing I hate to hear now is when people who were SO gung ho back then to be staff whine about how fucked up they were while doing it, you know, like how WDTONY talks like he was SO horribly tortured when standing there in group watching the kids crying, bleeding, etc... *insert drama queen emoticon*
Now why is this a problem? Is it really so hard to believe that someone on staff could start "snapping out of it" just enough to start to see things wrong with what was going on in Straight? Is it possible someone started out being "gung ho" about being on staff, then later started questioning Straight? I think this is entirely possible. I have heard other former staff say similar things. Its possible that if a former staff member started to feel this way, it could have been the beginning of the end of their time on staff and could have been the first signs that the brainwashing was starting to wear off. If anything this makes perfect sense.
If someone still was gung ho TODAY and "talks like he was SO horribly tortured when standing there in group watching the kids crying, bleeding, etc" as you said, then yes I would have a huge problem with that.
Well, it doesn't matter if they are "gung ho" or not today. My point is that it is really MUCH easier all these years later for the former staffers to say how so terribly brainwashed and tortured they felt. When they were in group they NEVER acted like they were brainwashed and tortured. In fact, they got off on the power trips and were feared by most phasers. Keep in mind that I could understand their current statements much more easily if they had gotten off the rap stool and just walked out of group one day, ranting and raving about how the program was so full of shit. If that happened, then what they say now would make more sense. That never happened when I was in the program. Hell, even phasers are guilty of abusing too, not just staff. Overall, it's a damn if you do damn if you don't situation and it will never be 100% resolved regardless of who says what when etc. At some point folks should come to terms with history and how it relates to their lives, but constantly dragging through it is futile. I think we have to say when sooner than later. It's ok to "never forget".
One other note: I don't necessarily discount former staffer suffering at the hands of the drug free zealots. After all, they were newcomers at some point and all that jazz. I have noticed that some former staffers have a lot of guilt issues these days and some seem a lot more sincere than others, so that plays a big part in my perspective on this issue.
:cheers:
-
I don't think these discussion boards are the best place to "start" these communications. It probably would be better started as phone calls, e-mails or on FaceBook. One on one discussion without an attack would be a good place to begin.
Why would former staff provide his or her contact information? This is a terrible idea considering some survivors will do whatever it takes to expose abuse at the expense of other family members.
There was a program survivor who called me in the middle of the night. "Janice" rambled on about Provo Canyon School. She thought I was a former staff member from PCS and sounded high as a kite. There are only three people on fornits who knew my telephone number. She obviously got it from a fornits member. This is one example why former staff (I worked at EYA) should never release their contact information.
E-mails are a bad idea because some wise guy would post them on fornits. I am guilty of that. The same is applicable towards communications on facebook.
People may ask former staff, "What have you got to hide?" My response would be, "I have done this before, other family members were affected, so no thanks. You can thank Angela Smith from HEAL for that." This is something I tried to move on from and it still is difficult.
If people are still persistent about this idea, then send your questions to Antigen. She could post them on fornits for former staff to answer. I think it would better if she moderated this discussion.
:shamrock: :shamrock:
This is the most rational idea I have heard so far. This would work if we could pick a particular night that this discussion could happen for a set period of time. Just some beginning thoughts.
Thanks Joel...
Danny...
-
Someone once pointed out that if staff ever approached any phaser about the possibility of going on staff, would that person really be able to say no? If they did say no, its entirely possible the person would have been questioned about "where they were at with themselves", whether they were applying their program, ie. the 7th step, blah, blah, blah. I can see fear of set back being a motivating factor in agreeing to do it. Obviously only former staff could answer that question - I would be very interested to see former staff comment on voluntary vs involuntary.
I never was technically on staff but I can tell you that the above is just about exactly my thinking when they "offered" me and half a dozen other kids pre-training. They stood us up in group to tell us so we were all on the spot. I remember trying to act like I was thrilled about it and being terrified of getting busted. I had planned on getting into college in Woods Hole Mas. to study marine biology as a way out but wound up splitting for the last time right in the middle of a huge state investigation into the program. All 4 of the girls I went to school with split on the same day. Two of them went together, so they obviously trusted each other with those plans. But they had no idea about the other two of us and I had no idea about any of them.
If I hadn't done that I probably would have gone on staff long enough to get my first pay check and a bus ticket to nowhere.
-
E-mails are a bad idea because some wise guy would post them on fornits. I am guilty of that. The same is applicable towards communications on facebook.
People may ask former staff, "What have you got to hide?" My response would be, "I have done this before, other family members were affected, so no thanks. You can thank Angela Smith from HEAL for that." This is something I tried to move on from and it still is difficult.
If people are still persistent about this idea, then send your questions to Antigen. She could post them on fornits for former staff to answer. I think it would better if she moderated this discussion.
:shamrock: :shamrock:
This is the most rational idea I have heard so far. This would work if we could pick a particular night that this discussion could happen for a set period of time. Just some beginning thoughts.
Thanks Joel...
Danny...
:timeout: Hold up, am I being drafted?
I publish my contact info liberally, but that's because I'm in the business of hosting websites. I decided a long time ago that it was worth the (sometimes considerable) risks. But I wouldn't recommend anyone else making that decision lightly, especially if you were on staff and/or a particularly hard assed oldcomer/expediter/etc. Shit, even if you weren't. I was never much of a hard ass. Rarely got called on to do a restraint. I think I actually participated in one once and just tacitly refused to actually hurt the girl. I didn't think I had made a lot of enemies but I've run into people in recent years who were really scared of me. But no one has really tried to interfere with my life except for ed-cons and program operators who have sued me or threatened to sue me.
No, I'd suggest ya'll just do what DJ and Che have done (though I think Che would agree that it wouldn't hurt to leave out the donkey fucking references) Just talk about whatever strikes you as worth discussing and try and leave the personal attacks alone.
-
Edited: Wednesday, October 06, 2010
-
For me, I wouldn't say I was coerced or pressured to work as staff. After being brainwashed it just seemed like the best idea in the world to be on staff. I mean... I believed in the program after the forced nervous breakdown on first phase (age 14), we were saving kid's lives and the world, "in my mind". After 7-stepping, as a 16 year old kid who was thoroughly washed, it was an honor to be accepted to go on staff. In the "closed system world" of the program being a trainee on staff was like moving to another phase which offered more power and freedom. For me, it was an easy decision because I was very afraid of leaving the program and going back out into the real world where it seemed that (without the program) I would be destined to end up dead, insane or in jail according to the mantra.
But after a few months of re-integrating back into the outside world a bit and starting to think for myself again, I believed that there was a better way to "help kids get off drugs" and at that point I started to see that the confrontational therapy and self-hate that was piled on the kids daily in raps just wasn't necessary. I started to change my thinking about my devotion to the program and about program ways. I have heard from other former staff that they also went through this conversion and were also subsequently banished from the program for it.
One thing I don't understand is that for years after I was ostracized from KHK, I still believed in most of what they had drilled into my head. Even though it should have been blatantly obvious that what they had done was very wrong. I often wonder why I almost entirely eliminated my thoughts about the first phase of the program until many years later.
I do feel guilty for the things that I did as an oldcomer and I wish I could take everything back, but I don't blame myself. The truth is I really had very little control after the wash.
I don't think we are going to get a response from the executive staff who are responsible for the existence of these programs. They profited from the programs and I assume from their silence that they are (and were) aware of their crimes.
-
E-mails are a bad idea because some wise guy would post them on fornits. I am guilty of that. The same is applicable towards communications on facebook.
People may ask former staff, "What have you got to hide?" My response would be, "I have done this before, other family members were affected, so no thanks. You can thank Angela Smith from HEAL for that." This is something I tried to move on from and it still is difficult.
If people are still persistent about this idea, then send your questions to Antigen. She could post them on fornits for former staff to answer. I think it would better if she moderated this discussion.
:shamrock: :shamrock:
This is the most rational idea I have heard so far. This would work if we could pick a particular night that this discussion could happen for a set period of time. Just some beginning thoughts.
Thanks Joel...
Danny...
:timeout: Hold up, am I being drafted?
I publish my contact info liberally, but that's because I'm in the business of hosting websites. I decided a long time ago that it was worth the (sometimes considerable) risks. But I wouldn't recommend anyone else making that decision lightly, especially if you were on staff and/or a particularly hard assed oldcomer/expediter/etc. Shit, even if you weren't. I was never much of a hard ass. Rarely got called on to do a restraint. I think I actually participated in one once and just tacitly refused to actually hurt the girl. I didn't think I had made a lot of enemies but I've run into people in recent years who were really scared of me. But no one has really tried to interfere with my life except for ed-cons and program operators who have sued me or threatened to sue me.
No, I'd suggest ya'll just do what DJ and Che have done (though I think Che would agree that it wouldn't hurt to leave out the donkey fucking references) Just talk about whatever strikes you as worth discussing and try and leave the personal attacks alone.
:shamrock: :shamrock:
Well of course your being drafted why not....lol...it's a free for all. Seriously I don't know what to say on this topic. I am doing "so so" with Elan folks. I have met many (Elan residents) in AA so the situation has been conducive to working things out, some had been in AA longer then I. I don't take for granted that folks (survivors) will accept me whether there in AA or not. I just try to make it as easy as possible for a understanding to happen.
I made a suggestion concerning staff conversing with the population but to be honest I am good going about it as I have been.
Danny
-
Why not just use Che's Programs Q&A forum?
-
You don't really need to converse all that much. Here's one former Sr. staffer who just did his thing then exited stage left. search.php?keywords=&terms=all&author=enough&sc=1&sf=all&sr=posts&sk=t&sd=d&st=0&ch=300&t=0&submit=Search (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/search.php?keywords=&terms=all&author=enough&sc=1&sf=all&sr=posts&sk=t&sd=d&st=0&ch=300&t=0&submit=Search)
I remember this guy. He showed up to speak at the Trebach conference in 2000. He was so scared that it was a set up by former clients that he never even gave his real name till he was at the podium.
-
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=30038&start=15 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=30038&start=15)
I can only speak for myself.
I have no problem understanding how people became staff.
From where I was sitting (The Corner) it just looked like the next level up on the dichotomy.
I honestly believe that most of the staff really think they are helping these kids, just like they were helped.
There is a girl who was in the program with me, really kind girl.
She is a Director now, has been for years.
She even sent HER KIDS to Elan.
I would love to pick her brain for sure.
I don't think I would be hostile to her, because she and I were nice to each other.(rare in my lowly position)
However if one of the people who made my life hell while I was there suddenly popped up, I would be quite confrontational to say the least. Still, I can't deny that I watched this whole brainwashing thing happen to many.
I am sure there are people out there who are upset about the way I treated them while they guarded and restrained me.
We all did what we had to do to survive that hellhole.
Many did not.
The real problem that I have is that some people just will not stop playing games and it really makes them look like they are still on the payroll, punchdrunk, or both.
The Q & A is a good idea
:shamrock: :shamrock:
Nice points....guilty of a few.
Danny
-
Joel. Your post just disappeared. I don’t think you will get many people arguing with you and taking the position that restraints are never needed. The danger of utilizing restraints is the lack of training not the restraints themselves.
...
-
:shamrock: :shamrock:
Nice points....guilty of a few.
Danny
Hey Bennison was honesty one of the Philosophies at Élan?
Joe Ricci hated AA, I mean hated, you could not even mentioned the name. Nothing about Elan or the Daytop I was in even resembled AA. Ask anyone about that in the time frame I was there. I didn't even know AA existed until 1988.
viewtopic.php?f=22&t=30014 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=30014)
-
Joel. Your post just disappeared. I don’t think you will get many people arguing with you and taking the position that restraints are never needed. The danger of utilizing restraints is the lack of training not the restraints themselves.
...
Whooty you have been slinking around Fornits looking for a bitch slap.
I'll restrain your ass and see how you like it.
I have lots of experience :jawdrop:
My point to Joel was that I don’t think anyone would argue that restraints are unnecessary in all cases. They are designed and utilized for a reason. If you had a chance to read the results of the GAO investigation you will see that they are looking to provide more training to the public school system so that they come more in line with the Hospitals with the use of restraints. No one (including the GAO) is arguing they are unnecessary. We wouldn’t want to put these kids at risk by pulling the plug on a system designed to protect them. I understand, Eliscu2, that many here don’t understand the reason restraints were designed and why they are used and see them only has a tool to harm people, but that is just misinformation. Here are the results of the investigation:
GOA Investigation Results (http://http://edlabor.house.gov/newsroom/2010/03/houses-approves-bill-to-protec.shtml)
The problem with restraints are the people who are using them. If we can get them the proper training then we can eliminate the odds of kids getting hurt, which we can all agree is the ultimate goal.
The key is education not misinformation.
Your response was very telling in that your knee jerk reaction was to suggest utilizing restraints on someone (myself) who you disagree with. The GAO’s suggestions are designed to target people like yourself who don’t understand the reason restraints are used. They should not be used out of anger like you feel they should be.
...
-
:shamrock: :shamrock:
Nice points....guilty of a few.
Danny
Hey Bennison was honesty one of the Philosophies at Élan?
Joe Ricci hated AA, I mean hated, you could not even mentioned the name. Nothing about Elan or the Daytop I was in even resembled AA. Ask anyone about that in the time frame I was there. I didn't even know AA existed until 1988.
viewtopic.php?f=22&t=30014 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=30014)[/quote
Duh....Kimmy I got nothing sorry. Yeah sounds crazy uh....Duh...still got nothing.
Danny
-
Whooty, you make some pretty big assumptions there.
I have read the entire G.A.O. report
Don't try to PSYCHOanylize me.
Whenever I hear anyone arguing for slavery, I feel a strong impulse to see it tried on him personally. -Abraham Lincoln
That's all, :beat: I thought you might like to get some real life experience on the subject matter.
If you understood the reason restraints were designed you would know that it is not a tool that should be used out of anger as you seem to think. There are probably very few, if any, on the GAO panel who personally experienced being restrained, but that doesn’t diminish their conclusion on the subject.
Think of it as a way to protect a person from themselves or others not as a device to be used to demonstrate a power position. Lincoln wanted to educate people and open their eyes to the backward use of slavery as a means to expand their family businesses and abolish it. There isn’t anyone or any federal agency , that I am aware of, who wants to eliminate the use of restraints. They are designed to help people. If I were trying to harm myself or my family I would hope that someone would have the sense to restrain me and I am sure you would wish the same if you were hurting yourself. I dont think experiencing it ahead of time,like you suggest, would change anyones opinion including your own.
...
...
-
Edited: Wednesday, October 06, 2010
-
:shamrock: :shamrock:
Nice points....guilty of a few.
Danny
Hey Bennison was honesty one of the Philosophies at Élan?
Joe Ricci hated AA, I mean hated, you could not even mentioned the name. Nothing about Elan or the Daytop I was in even resembled AA. Ask anyone about that in the time frame I was there. I didn't even know AA existed until 1988.
viewtopic.php?f=22&t=30014 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=30014)
I think You meant this post right here: http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=30014#p357958
I am confused here....He knew Joe Ricci hated AA in the early 70's, but never heard of it until 1988? hmmmmmmmmm
:shamrock: :shamrock:
Jeesh, you two are at it again Kimmy and Felice, let me see. I did not even know what he meant concerning AA just knew it was something out there. I was to busy drinking my ass off.
It was Disco Time....drinking, coking and dancing, if you could dance. So AA was the furthest from my mind and even if I knew about it I would have rejected it also. Did not fit into my plans then.
Man you two busted me again, gosh I am such a liar. I think I'll go smoke a ....no can't do that.
I'm tired I'll just go to bed. nite nite.
:shamrock:
Danny
-
I worked at Eckerd for three years. There are abusive acts committed by staff and children. Anyone who says otherwise is misleading you. We can all agree staff commit more abusive acts than children. I witnessed a 6'1, 16 year old, 300 lb. boy, hit another child in the face with a broom. The victim was no more than 150 lbs. His face began to bleed. Was this a justifiable reason for a restraint? Yes, it was. I did not restrain the aggressor because I would have done something I regretted. The aggressor was the same child who popped open a camping knife blade during another restraint. I made a split second decision to bend his wrist and remove it. He did not enjoy it neither did I. There were no injured parties. I will not lie if you ask me, "Did you perform restraints that were not justified?" There are very few restraints, form my experience, done correctly in a wilderness setting. People don't take into account the child's size, strength, speed and athletic ability. There was a case where I restrained a child for throwing a black kerosene kettle. This guy was one hell of a wrestler and he ended up face down in the dirt. There was another case where I planted a child on his rear and everyone heard a loud thud. To make a long story short he bit me in the restraint, I bled and had to stop the restraint. I would have done the same thing if I were him. There were young kids at Eckerd. We had to use a basket hold restraint with them. I actually had to kneel down on my knees due to my strength and size. They would bang their head 20 times against my chest and they got a good laugh out of it. They cried which was depressing to say the least. I would also like to discuss the management issues in another segment.
Joel I know this took a lot. Thanks for your courage.
-
... gosh I am such a liar. I think I'll go smoke a ....no can't do that.
I'm tired I'll just go to bed. nite nite.
:shamrock:
Danny
Thank you for conceding that. They (http://http://www.dailystrength.org/groups/liars-anonymous/joinreg) say the first step is admitting it.
I appreciate this thread as it an opportunity for honest discussion about program staff and their experiences.
I won’t bother to ask who the hell “Kimmy” is, as I’m not as interested in more of your disjointed inconsistent ramblings as I am the substantive contributions.
-
I worked at Eckerd for three years. There are abusive acts committed by staff and children. Anyone who says otherwise is misleading you. We can all agree staff commit more abusive acts than children. I witnessed a 6'1, 16 year old, 300 lb. boy, hit another child in the face with a broom. The victim was no more than 150 lbs. His face began to bleed. Was this a justifiable reason for a restraint? Yes, it was. I did not restrain the aggressor because I would have done something I regretted. The aggressor was the same child who popped open a camping knife blade during another restraint. I made a split second decision to bend his wrist and remove it. He did not enjoy it neither did I. There were no injured parties. I will not lie if you ask me, "Did you perform restraints that were not justified?" There are very few restraints, form my experience, done correctly in a wilderness setting. People don't take into account the child's size, strength, speed and athletic ability. There was a case where I restrained a child for throwing a black kerosene kettle. This guy was one hell of a wrestler and he ended up face down in the dirt. There was another case where I planted a child on his rear and everyone heard a loud thud. To make a long story short he bit me in the restraint, I bled and had to stop the restraint. I would have done the same thing if I were him. There were young kids at Eckerd. We had to use a basket hold restraint with them. I actually had to kneel down on my knees due to my strength and size. They would bang their head 20 times against my chest and they got a good laugh out of it. They cried which was depressing to say the least. I would also like to discuss the management issues in another segment.
If you don't mind me asking, were you restrained at the program you were sent to as a youth? And do you think there was an element of brainwashing in that program? ...Just curious.
-
Edited: Wednesday, October 06, 2010
-
If you don't mind me asking, were you restrained at the program you were sent to as a youth?
CEDU RMA did not do restraints when I was there.
And do you think there was an element of brainwashing in that program? Just curious.
I will get back to you later on because this question will take time to answer.
Ok, thanks. I was curious because at KHK restraint was so commonplace that it became a second-nature and over time we became desensitized to it. I didn't know RMA was a CEDU program.
And anything concerning brainwashing is complicated so I get that. I asked because some people say their program didn't brainwash "per se'" while others say there was definitely brainwashing happening.
-
Edited: Wednesday, October 06, 2010
-
The only encounters I had with ex staff were ugly I ran into amazon amy wright once in venice while she was on staff at L.I.F.E. I threatened her with great bodily harm . Where I used to cop dilaudid was on the same street she lived on,so I made sure folks knew what was what. I ran into flamey ol dave searcy,in sarasota and told him he was a fuckin joke and kept rollin. see i figured that they were fucked in the head,and as I was doin a laundry list of bad shit myself at the time It wasnt really worth the effort.Besides ,what control ,what power did they have outside the walls of the monkey farm anyhow? None,they were in my world now,and in those days I pretty much went heels every where I went. so fuck em,what were they gonna do? start me over? put me in the green room? put
me on away from home? what? they had nothin.
The fucks that I hated there were: Ross,Peterman(what a pompous ol biatch) doug hemminger,liz cassady,That goddamn amy wright. Dave searcy was a joke,I never could take him seriously,good ol vergie boy,pseudo father cassian miller newton. and I really disliked the toadly wanda minton.
Dave Crock never did me no wrong,John Legg was ok by me,so was marnie sykes. Criss Cassler was a retard. I saw him at an Al Di Meola concert once, musta blew his mind cause I was with this drop dead gorgeous red head,and sober too.Had life by the ass.
-
Ok Joel I am here, I was Staff from 3/77 - 1/78 then I became a Ass. Director 1/78 - 11/78. Resigned/Fired all at the same time.
Did I participate in abuse of course I did first as a resident examples I fought for the house, I screamed at other residents, I restrained other residents with other residents and without, laughed at people shot down, talked shit about other residents with other residents. My biggest sin I feel guilty about as a resident is I ran away from everyone (through driving for the house) did not share the horror or try to help folks who were really being outrageously victimized. I remember M.D. (I will not share her real name) coming to me to talk about her humiliating experience in a group where she was made fun of because of her sexual issues. Now I was in a Mental Diagnostic Center with her and she was very annoying with her sexual issues. I will not go into that. But my point is she tried to talk with me and I blew her off. I did that a lot. M.D. is no longer with us she committed suicide and I know at least some of it stemmed from her incarceration at Elan.
As staff and Ass. Director the abuse continued with screaming at people, using screaming as a intimidation, making people scrubs floors for hours on end, putting folks into the corner for days on end. I could not put people into the ring or allow residents to spank people but I witnessed other Directors do it and I was there supporting it.
I remember one time I was Ass. Director at E-7 and Marty called and said ," Get ready were going to E-6 because the house is going "TIGHT" and get ready to get physical. Now my first impulse was I got all fired up. I drove with Joe and the finance manager (don't ask me why he was going) well we got there and shit everybody was there. Marty Kruglick, Peter McCann, Rick Rosenhaus, Larry Smaller, Alan Frey, Joe Ricci, Vincent Smith, George Washington and myself. Just before we went in Joe and Marty got us together and said were going into this house to kick ass be ready. If anyone gives you any shit knock'em out. This is the gods honest truth and if anybody has witnessed a "COWBOY ASSWHIPING" at Elan you know what I mean. We weren't in there 2 seconds and this one dude saw us coming and he threw a plate at Vincent Smith, now if anybody knew Vincent why in the hell you would want to throw it at him I don't know. Well Vincent literally knocked him out. Well that got everyones attention because the guy was laying there unconscious. Within 3 seconds are little horse and pony show was over and this guy was being brought around with smelling salts. Joe the chicken shit left shortly after. Anyway this is what I involved myself in. I personally never restrained anyone as Staff/Director I had residents do it on more then a dozen or so times. Actually Joe in most regards was against staff putting their hands on residents for obvious reasons to protect his ass.
I was a active drunk and in the end maybe last 2 months drug user while I was working there. Not very responsible leader.
As my memory comes back I will post more.
Danny
-
Edited, what I posted here had nothing to do with the topic here and I found it annoying.
-
Your Kimmy, just like I'm Bennison your "Kimmy".....were a team. "Your disjointed inconsistent rambling", (sounds like lyrics to a country song) well I will just have to give you more "substantive contributions". How was my post Kimmy did you read it.
Danny
:eek: :ftard:
What?? What the hell are you trying to say? Seriously, it is really, really difficult to read your posts.
-
Edited, same as above.
-
:shamrock: :shamrock: :shamrock: :shamrock: :shamrock: :shamrock: :shamrock: :shamrock: :shamrock: :shamrock: :shamrock:
:shamrock: :shamrock: :shamrock: :shamrock: :shamrock: :shamrock: :shamrock: :shamrock: :shamrock: :shamrock:
:shamrock: :shamrock: :shamrock: Time to fumigate.
:shamrock: :shamrock: :shamrock: :shamrock: :shamrock: :shamrock: :shamrock: :shamrock: :shamrock: :shamrock:
-
Joel. Your post just disappeared. I don’t think you will get many people arguing with you and taking the position that restraints are never needed. The danger of utilizing restraints is the lack of training not the restraints themselves.
...
Well, that may be part of it. Other factors include pretending that the client is mentally ill when really, in most cases, they're normal kids who have idiots for parents. Then there's the issue of systematically provoking violent reactions from these kids and then pretending that their perfectly normal responses are grounds for physical restraint.
-
Edited: Wednesday, October 06, 2010
-
Well, that may be part of it. Other factors include pretending that the client is mentally ill when really, in most cases, they're normal kids who have idiots for parents. Then there's the issue of systematically provoking violent reactions from these kids and then pretending that their perfectly normal responses are grounds for physical restraint.
I saw cases where wilderness staff kept confronting a child over a small problem. They did not take into account the child was getting angrier. The child was usually restrained over a petty problem. This is common with new wilderness staff including wilderness staff who are exhausted, mentally and physically, from lack of support. I think, in some cases, this can be prevented by additional support/training from supervisors.
Of course my first thought is what happened at KHK to us and not the bigger picture of restraint as Joel has mentioned. I tend to focus on the misuse of restraint rather than the proper use of it such as when someone is a real danger to themselves or others. I am sure there are times when a restraint is necessary in places where kids are placed and this should be done properly by qualified, trained employees and only when absolutely necessary.
I have talked to a friend recently who places children in state homes when they have been abused by family members and she informed me that restraint is extremely rare because the kids aren't subjected to provocation and the staff are careful not to do so. These kids have already been abused and are easily pushed over the edge. Another important bit of information is that these kids are never taken out of public school and are given ample opportunity to communicate with family and the outside world at all times.
In KHK restraint was used for any number of reasons. But it was mainly a means to scare the hell out of us and keep us from leaving the program. The entire environment was abusive (especially on first phase) so it was only a natural response to try and escape or to freak out and get very upset. We were basically restrained at KHK after being provoked (psychologically antagonized and physically depleted) as Antigen has mentioned.
I had spent a short time in the juvenile system in KY and I also spent some time in adult jails in KY when I was younger. I never saw anyone restrained in Juvenile detention or in jail. The guards were assholes but they didn't provoke us and had no reason to restrain us. If there was a fight, the cell was opened and inmates obeyed the jailers but there was no restraint. In KHK people were restrained daily. These were my observations.
-
At Springfield straightinc in 1983-4, usually 1 or maybe 3 of the same people were getting physically restrained one or two days out of a week. Sometimes the restrained phasers would go a few days or even a couple weeks before being restrained again. Very few were restrained for longer periods as cult staffer Mel Riddile preferred that they be taken out of group where the rest of the phasers couldn't witness their fate. Again, this was not happening every damn day. Throughout my 19 month stint, I never became desensitized to the restraint process. Physical restraint, however, was infrequent compared to how much spit was flingin all over the place, EVERYONE's knees were tearing, backs were cracking, skin was paling, blood becoming anemic, um... the list goes on and on...
I think folks should spend some time talking about the aspects of psychological restraint and the constant low-level physical torture being endured on a daily basis.
-
Edited: Wednesday, October 06, 2010
-
I think folks should spend some time talking about the aspects of psychological restraint and the constant low-level physical torture being endured on a daily basis.
I have not witnessed a psychological restraint while working at Eckerd and could not imagine how people feel about them. There are staff in wilderness camps, from my work experience, who do not exhaust every option before restraining a child. This affects the whole group. They loose faith in their primary staff member creating more problems. There are ways to prevent restraints which is something I hope we can discuss civilly. I am not discounting how people feel about restraints but I think restraint prevention is important to discuss.
The very first thought in my mind after reading this would be to suggest eliminating an environment where the kids are prisoners and are antagonized. This would probably curb the need for restraint. If anything is going to help kids it must start with not being forced into treatment. Taking anyone away from their own life entirely can be traumatic, especially for kids who might be in the process of forming their identity.
I honestly think there is no good reason for restraint in any program and that if the situation escalates to that level, the police should be called and the kid should be taken out of that environment by the police. My brother was a teacher and he never had to restrain anyone and I am pretty sure he never had training in proper/improper restraint techniques.
Why have restraint as an option at all.... couldn't program staff just call the police? It seems like most of these programs generate the notion that restraint is an acceptable practice as long as it is carried out properly. If KHK was still in operation, a proper restraint would be just as tragic as an improperly performed restraint because the end result would be to keep the kid in a torturous, psychologically tormenting environment, which would eventually lead to more friction and probably more restraint.
-
Edited: Wednesday, October 06, 2010
-
I honestly think there is no good reason for restraint in any program and that if the situation escalates to that level, the police should be called and the kid should be taken out of that environment by the police. My brother was a teacher and he never had to restrain anyone and I am pretty sure he never had training in proper/improper restraint techniques.
Personally, I wish I did not have to restrain any child while employed at Eckerd. There will always be cases where restraints are necessary. This depends on the program among other factors. I was in the middle of a riot escalated by children throwing gang signs. There were 4 children from an Eckerd RI group whose intent was to physically harm children from an Eckerd TN camp. The riot was so bad that we had to move almost every child into the camp dining hall. Children from the Eckerd TN camp were throwing big rocks at the dining hall with the intent to cause serious bodily harm. I restrained 4 children during the riot and every restraint was justified. During this riot I witnessed another child pulling a female staff's hair. This is another example where a restraint would have been justified.
Backing up and looking at the bigger picture, you were already in an environment that had been constructed where you apparently couldn't get away from restraining in some situations. From what you have mentioned, I can understand having to use restraint and I am sure I would have done the best I could in the situation, probably using some form of restraint. Let me be clear that I am not faulting you for using restraint in such an environment. And I appreciate your talking about it.
How would you envision a better program for kids? I know this is a very general question so any thoughts are welcome.
My point earlier was that those who facilitate these environments, such as program owners/directors don't seem to know or care what they are creating and can develop into a situation as you have described where a riot breaks out. You had mentioned poor management being a problem earlier and I completely agree. We had situations in KHK where it seemed like half the kids in group was restraining the other half of the group, but that was what we had to do in that environment. It wasn't the kids fault (myself included) that this was the way we had to conduct ourselves.
I have heard of minor restraints being used in children's homes (in KY) where the kids are becoming violent against other kids due to personal annoyances (e.g. fighting over a hair brush, bullying etc.). In these cases, the restraints, by staff only, were short in duration and the situation was resolved rather quickly. Then (and this is in KY) there was a slew of paperwork as well as a meeting about the restraint the next day. Also there was documentation describing the incident and the social worker and parents were contacted immediately. Keep in mind that in these homes, the kids were allowed to leave the premises and attend public school 5 days a week. I feel far more comfortable with this type of environment than a more isolated one. And communiation was allowed at most times such as phone calls or scheduled personal visits where privacy was permitted. To me these are good signs of transparency.
I guess when you are in an environment where restraint is an option or even a necessity, the choices are limited: leave the environment or use best judgement on when and how restraint is to be used. And as you have stated earlier, and perhaps more importantly, ways to prevent or diminish restraint altogether.
-
Edited: Wednesday, October 06, 2010
-
Looking at it from a broader perspective restraints will always be necessary to keep social order. The vast majority of us are able to utilized "self restraint". But in those cases where people have not been taught or refuse to utilize "self restraint" then other types need to be used like chemical or physical. We are all restrained every day of our lives.
The use of restraints should not be viewed as a form of punishment. I am sure it feels like it to the person being restrained , though. If someone flips you off on the way to work you can speed up and cut the guy off into a ditch or use self restraint. Self restraint doesn’t make you feel any better and it may feel like it is not fair because this guy is able to flip you off and just get away with it, but that is life in society. If you cannot restrain yourself then someone else will have to.
If someone were wailing on another person with a stick should we sit back and watch or try to restrain the aggressor? Would you view this restraint as punishment or as helpful?
If restraints prove to be ineffective I could see calling the police, but typically overpowering the child with weapons and handcuffs and putting him in jail isn’t the greatest experience for a child and should be avoided and used as a final option.
...
-
Edited: Wednesday, October 06, 2010
-
I think a good inspector can see past most of the quick changes put into place. But you need to give the program director advanced notice of any formal audit so that he can have the people available to escort them and clear his own schedule.
...
-
Edited: Wednesday, October 06, 2010
-
How would you envision a better program for kids? I know this is a very general question so any thoughts are welcome.
I don't know if programs would get better per se. One thing I would encourage outsiders to look at is the investigation process. There was only one time a state employee came to Eckerd RI. He came for the sole purpose to do an audit. There are things investigators don't look into because it is too much work, from their point of view.
1. Restraint paperwork
2. Interviewing children & staff
3. Inspecting living conditions
4. Inspecting buildings to make sure they're up to par with state/local building codes
5. Background checks
6. Nutrition
7. Billing practices
8. Audits
9. Staff credentials (This includes staff that should be trained in restraint procedures because many staff do them without formal training.)
10. Therapy practices
11. Education requirements
Bear in mind program directors are notified prior to inspections. They ought to do inspections without notifying programs. The regional director for Eckerd RI would notify my boss prior to visiting the camp. Things changed in a hurry. The process would require a couple of people. I don't see this happening anytime soon.
Well, that's a great point of view. I don't remember anyone ever inspecting or investigating KHK. If anyone did, it was for the building and no "person" was questioned that I know of. I don't know how much it would cost to hire Federal Inspectors to monitor, investigate and regulate these programs but I agree with you with what you have wrote and I believe that this must be done, especially # 2. Interviewing children and staff. These regulators would have to be able to collect evidence and have enough power to legally halt program operations as well as open up a broader investigation if necessary. I once hoped H.R. 911 would offer this solution but I am uncertain if it would at this point.
And there is no point in an inspection if the program director knows it is coming. So I agree with you on this point. After working in restaurants for several years, I understand how much can be "covered up" in a hurry as you mentioned.
This is a good list of specific things that should be looked at by investigators. And anyone who is running a clean program should have no problem with being transparent to regulators. This might not happen soon but it is a good idea that should be revisited often until it is put into place.
-
Getting back to the original point of the topic that Noncomformistlaw posted, I'll throw a few points into the ring based on my own experiences. Posting here as staff requires an extremely thick skin. A think skin that took me years to develop and a bit of common sense. Common sense I still fully haven't gotten around to assimilating. I fully understand why survivors lash out at ex-staff. As staff members we had the duty to report incidents of abuse and the majority of us didn't. This makes us just as responsible for the acts we directly participated and equally responsible for the acts we chose not to report.
Just about every single state has some sort of mandatory reporting law. Just about every single state has some sort of privacy protection for mandatory reporters. Not sure of the exact numbers, but I do know that there isn't any excuse for not reporting abuse.
You survivors should be angry and you should take your shots at them. However, do try to keep in mind that ex-staffers who are cooperative can be good sources of information. Milk them for all the goodies and then blow their doors off if you feel the urge to get some forum therapy done. You'd all be well advised to direct them to the PQ&A forum for direct inquistioning/questioning as Ginger suggests. Not my forum anymore so I can't say just how moderated it is, but it seems pretty good.
Also, Ginger:
Donkey fucking is a friendly noncompetitive sport played in Burma involving two men and a donkey with one jar of vaseline. You shouldn't be a hater, and thank god I've never been to Burma.
Tony:
KHK of Nick Gaglia fame?
-
Also, Ginger:
Donkey fucking is a friendly noncompetitive sport played in Burma involving two men and a donkey with one jar of vaseline. You shouldn't be a hater, and thank god I've never been to Burma.
What could be more sporting than barnyard animals and petroleum jelly? The Burmese think it is competitive, they're trying to get it entered as a sport in the next Summer Olympics.
-
Oh those wild and crazy Burmese!
-
I'm just curious to know how many senior and executive staff are still true believers in Straight.I'm sure there are a few who
have not seen the error of their ways.But it is undeniable that Straight was basically closed down,some of their locations,
because authorities caught on to the abuse and the vilolations/non-compliance with State health regulations.That is just a
plain fact of history. I, being a victem of the Springfield branch (Nov.86-late 88, I think), I think the State of Virginia holds some responsibility and blame for not taking action until the early 90's.I mean the Fred Collins trial was in 83 or 84, so
Virginia knew something was seriously wrong.Ofcourse, Virginia has a bad history in general, slavery and the Confederacy,
which was an act of treason.But thats veering off the point.I guess what I mean to say is the state regulators are to blame
almost as much as staff.It was especially unprofessional and uncalled for that Straight delved into our sex lives.They were
not qualified to be drug counselors, let alone sex therapists.Alot of people are genetically predisposed to their sexual
orientation.That is a matter of science.Straight would say our impulses were "part of our drug problem" and our quest
for "good feelings." That is such a disgrace for them to have uttered such nosey nonsence.A apology is in order, but I
guess most staff is not sorry. The point is this kind of "rehabilitation" should never happen again. All that being said,
I see no point in being bitter, angry or feeling sorry for myself.Life is verry hard and weird, history is unkind and
reality can be overwhelming.I have made terrible mistakes in my life, as we all have. The point is to love one another
and contribute something positive to society. There are so many avenues to reach out and make a difference. As for me
I intend to keep dreaming,reaching out and believing in the Spirit of Life and Love.
Love, Evan J Rodgers
-
A few more thoughts I'd like to add: If there are staff out there who still believe in Straight and feel that what they did was
right<they should not be expected to apologize,for they cant apologize if they are unrepentent.There are probably alot
of staff that know now that they were wrong but just dont care, and I dont expect a response from them. I thInk
Nixon could have been alot more direct and apologetic about Watergate, but that man was disturbed.
In the end History will be the judge. I think the lesson learned is to be as kind and respectful to everyone we meet,
everyday! We never know what someone is going through or what difference a kind word or smile can make.
Love, Evan J Rodgers
-
Looking at it from a broader perspective restraints will always be necessary to keep social order. The vast majority of us are able to utilized "self restraint". But in those cases where people have not been taught or refuse to utilize "self restraint" then other types need to be used like chemical or physical. We are all restrained every day of our lives.
The use of restraints should not be viewed as a form of punishment. I am sure it feels like it to the person being restrained , though. If someone flips you off on the way to work you can speed up and cut the guy off into a ditch or use self restraint. Self restraint doesn’t make you feel any better and it may feel like it is not fair because this guy is able to flip you off and just get away with it, but that is life in society. If you cannot restrain yourself then someone else will have to.
If someone were wailing on another person with a stick should we sit back and watch or try to restrain the aggressor? Would you view this restraint as punishment or as helpful?
If restraints prove to be ineffective I could see calling the police, but typically overpowering the child with weapons and handcuffs and putting him in jail isn’t the greatest experience for a child and should be avoided and used as a final option.
...
I can appreciate the altruistic point of view here....however I think this is where the casual participant falls short of a real understanding of what a slippery slope restraints can become given the proper pressures and manipulation.
In Straight, the refusal to sit a certain way in ones chair could often constitute a full four point restraint that could likely result in injury. Now, it could be argued that the person being restrained was doing harm to themselves by not participating fully in their own recovery by rebeling against the minor rule of maintaining proper posture. In fact, this was precisely how this sort of behavior was viewed by the group...it was "hazardous" to ones sobriety. We were all modeled to believe that one day theyd be slouching in their chair, and the next day be sticking a needle in their arm.
The very idea may seem ludicrous to the casual observer, but this program model has effected tens of thousands of children over the span of several decades, and is still now in use in programs that have adopted parts of the modality. You must go further back and understand the circumstances of a treatment or program core teaching in order to see how what seems to make sense to the rest of the free world, can become horribly twisted and remade into just sheer violence for the sake of control. THAT is the reality, and no shoulda coulda attitude is going to make that different.
The sicker part of the whole thing, was that as participants of the group, we were conditioned to approve and commend the abuse...even participate when given the chance. There was no one there to call foul on the technique.....and under duress of it happening to us too, you bet your bottom dollar our stories were all the same come time for investigations or inspections. This was part of why I think it took so damn long to get them shut down. Only a brave few came forward with their pain. My girlfriend ran away and turned herself in to the police....they photographed her body from head to toe, because she was so bruised and cut from restraints for such things as not raising her hand in group or not sitting properly in her chair (I personally witnessed many of these involving her), took her statement...and then you know what? They SENT HER BACK. There was only one detective who attempted to follow up with her afterwards, and the program staff refused him entry or contact.....she was there for several more months until her parents pulled her out for having sexual contact with a senior staffer. The program itself continued to run for close to another year.
-
Looking at it from a broader perspective restraints will always be necessary to keep social order. The vast majority of us are able to utilized "self restraint". But in those cases where people have not been taught or refuse to utilize "self restraint" then other types need to be used like chemical or physical. We are all restrained every day of our lives.
The use of restraints should not be viewed as a form of punishment. I am sure it feels like it to the person being restrained , though. If someone flips you off on the way to work you can speed up and cut the guy off into a ditch or use self restraint. Self restraint doesn’t make you feel any better and it may feel like it is not fair because this guy is able to flip you off and just get away with it, but that is life in society. If you cannot restrain yourself then someone else will have to.
If someone were wailing on another person with a stick should we sit back and watch or try to restrain the aggressor? Would you view this restraint as punishment or as helpful?
If restraints prove to be ineffective I could see calling the police, but typically overpowering the child with weapons and handcuffs and putting him in jail isn’t the greatest experience for a child and should be avoided and used as a final option.
...
I can appreciate the altruistic point of view here....however I think this is where the casual participant falls short of a real understanding of what a slippery slope restraints can become given the proper pressures and manipulation.
In Straight, the refusal to sit a certain way in ones chair could often constitute a full four point restraint that could likely result in injury. Now, it could be argued that the person being restrained was doing harm to themselves by not participating fully in their own recovery by rebeling against the minor rule of maintaining proper posture. In fact, this was precisely how this sort of behavior was viewed by the group...it was "hazardous" to ones sobriety. We were all modeled to believe that one day theyd be slouching in their chair, and the next day be sticking a needle in their arm.
The very idea may seem ludicrous to the casual observer, but this program model has effected tens of thousands of children over the span of several decades, and is still now in use in programs that have adopted parts of the modality. You must go further back and understand the circumstances of a treatment or program core teaching in order to see how what seems to make sense to the rest of the free world, can become horribly twisted and remade into just sheer violence for the sake of control. THAT is the reality, and no shoulda coulda attitude is going to make that different.
The sicker part of the whole thing, was that as participants of the group, we were conditioned to approve and commend the abuse...even participate when given the chance. There was no one there to call foul on the technique.....and under duress of it happening to us too, you bet your bottom dollar our stories were all the same come time for investigations or inspections. This was part of why I think it took so damn long to get them shut down. Only a brave few came forward with their pain. My girlfriend ran away and turned herself in to the police....they photographed her body from head to toe, because she was so bruised and cut from restraints for such things as not raising her hand in group or not sitting properly in her chair (I personally witnessed many of these involving her), took her statement...and then you know what? They SENT HER BACK. There was only one detective who attempted to follow up with her afterwards, and the program staff refused him entry or contact.....she was there for several more months until her parents pulled her out for having sexual contact with a senior staffer. The program itself continued to run for close to another year.
:notworthy: :notworthy: :notworthy:
-
Woof, Rich is pretty cool but he's not the only staffer to hang around w/ all us splits, pull-offs n fuckups. Deprogrammed was on staff for a couple of years, I think. Don Smith too. And he initially came out as a dedicated program defender.
But more commonly, it goes like this:
John Underwood comes along to share his "insights"
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=11132&hilit=john+underwood (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=11132&hilit=john+underwood)
(or a light come down on group LOL)
Marnie Sykes posted briefly. She still insisted that the Seed had saved her brother's life, at least till he od on heroin, and then bowed out rather gracefully. Far as I know she's still working for a local print shop somewhere on the Gulf Coast.
Those are just a couple I know of from the Seed/Straight line. I'm sure there are others. Then there's Dysfunction Junction and Che from other programs. Never mind the Elan people! LOL They're too hard to figure out sometimes.
Antigen,
I wasn't on staff for a couple of years, thank goodness...it was almost a year.......Also ye forgot to mention what I became....ye mentioned what Don did...but not me...
I love ye anyway !
-DP :rocker: :rasta:
-
One memory I have is the first protest I ever attended on November 30th 2007 in front of KHK/PFC Milford. DP was there protesting alone from early morning until late at night. When the rest of us arrived late afternoon-ish, DP had been there all day in the freezing cold holding signs and was a defiant popsicle! If I am not mistaken, I think DP may have gotten a degree of frostbite by the end of the night. That really shook up the KHK peeps and rattled them so bad that they didn't know what to do.
Some memories are good.
-
She did, on her toes.