Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => The Troubled Teen Industry => Topic started by: psy on November 20, 2010, 12:31:35 AM
-
The reason there are more graduates on anti-program sites is that they saw more. Most graduates faked their way through the program because they realized they had no other way out. When you've been lying to your parents for years, who are they going to believe? You or the "responsible adults" holding you captive? And when the captors have a $5000/month incentive to keep you, to what lengths will they go to keep you?
Especially when they already know you wont be believed. You become the perfect victim, and your parents the perfect marks.
-
If a particular child has a history of lying and manipulation then it will be difficult for the parents to believe the child over the program staff. So when those rare instances occur when a child really does get abused then the parents or other staff members may not believe them.
This is why the child needs to re-establish themselves as “credible” as quickly as they can. If they continue to lie and manipulate throughout the program they make themselves a bigger target to be taken advantage of in this area.
...
-
Even if the child in question does, these programmies have much longer records of not only lying and manipulating (both kids and parents) but abusing kids in order to get their way. Are they anymore credible because they lie and abuse kids for money?
-
Even if the child in question does, these programmies have much longer records of not only lying and manipulating (both kids and parents) but abusing kids in order to get their way. Are they anymore credible because they lie and abuse kids for money?
If a program has a widely known history of lying to the parents and their son has a history of never lying then the parents would naturally believe their own child over the program. I think we can all agree here.
If the child had a history of lying prior to entering the program and the parents had no reason to suspect that the program staff was lying or had any motivation to lie to them then the parents would believe the staff person every-time. This is the position the child placed him/herself in when they engaged in this activity prior to being sent to a program.
The child needs to quickly turn around their behavior and gain credibility again in the programs' and parents' eyes. Its not an easy situation to be in I agree.
...
-
If a program has a widely known history of lying to the parents and their son has a history of never lying then the parents would naturally believe their own child over the program. I think we can all agree here.
If the child had a history of lying prior to entering the program and the parents had no reason to suspect that the program staff was lying or had any motivation to lie to them then the parents would believe the staff person every-time. This is the position the child placed him/herself in when they engaged in this activity prior to being sent to a program.
The child needs to quickly turn around their behavior and gain credibility again in the programs' and parents' eyes. Its not an easy situation to be in I agree.
Are you saying that a child who has a history of lying deserves to be physically tortured and abused? Why wouldnt the parents in question do their homework before sending their child to an abusive program? How or why should a child care about gaining credibility with an abusive program? I know I didn't.
-
If a program has a widely known history of lying to the parents and their son has a history of never lying then the parents would naturally believe their own child over the program. I think we can all agree here.
If the child had a history of lying prior to entering the program and the parents had no reason to suspect that the program staff was lying or had any motivation to lie to them then the parents would believe the staff person every-time. This is the position the child placed him/herself in when they engaged in this activity prior to being sent to a program.
The child needs to quickly turn around their behavior and gain credibility again in the programs' and parents' eyes. Its not an easy situation to be in I agree.
Are you saying that a child who has a history of lying deserves to be physically tortured and abused? Why wouldnt the parents in question do their homework before sending their child to an abusive program? How or why should a child care about gaining credibility with an abusive program? I know I didn't.
No one deserves to be abused. Most parents do what they feel is appropriate research or hire an ed consultant prior to placing their child. If the child ends up in an abusive program then they are pretty much screwed, but for the vast majority of them if they turn around their behavior then they will start seeing their credibility increase and get back on a healthy path.
...
-
No one deserves to be abused. Most parents do what they feel is appropriate research or hire an ed consultant prior to placing their child. If the child ends up in an abusive program then they are pretty much screwed, but for the vast majority of them if they turn around their behavior then they will start seeing their credibility increase and get back on a healthy path.
Most parents? Vast majority? Where are you getting this information Whooter? What are you basing it on?
-
If a particular child has a history of lying and manipulation then it will be difficult for the parents to believe the child over the program staff. So when those rare instances occur when a child really does get abused then the parents or other staff members may not believe them.
This is why the child needs to re-establish themselves as “credible” as quickly as they can. If they continue to lie and manipulate throughout the program they make themselves a bigger target to be taken advantage of in this area.
...
So when those rare instances occur when a child really does get abused then the parents or other staff members may not believe them.
Rare incidents? My ass...look around the internet at all of the complaints againt many programs including this one from the original poster. Give me a break Whooter......Your "spin" has no validity here. Grow up! While ye are at it...GET REAL!
Hey Whooter...have ye ever been a kid in a program? If not have a seat!
-
No one deserves to be abused. Most parents do what they feel is appropriate research or hire an ed consultant prior to placing their child. If the child ends up in an abusive program then they are pretty much screwed, but for the vast majority of them if they turn around their behavior then they will start seeing their credibility increase and get back on a healthy path.
Most parents? Vast majority? Where are you getting this information Whooter? What are you basing it on?
There is very little existing data on the TTI so we need to go with our experiences. I base my post on what I have read here on fornits, outside of fornits and the people that I have met that have had children placed in programs and the children themselves. Very few kids do not do well and the overwhelming majority of the kids benefit greatly from their stay at a program.
Fornits does not represent your average cross section of kids who were sent to programs. This is an entirely different culture here which has its own language and definitions and is not representative of the majority of survivors. You would know this if you ever speak to a child who went to a program whether they did good or poorly they speak about the pros as well as the cons (they dont use the terms gulags, incarceration, kidnapping, isolation etc.). Here on fornits a reader rarely reads a post which speaks of nothing but the negative aspects of a program.
Do you see what I mean?
...
-
the overwhelming majority of the kids benefit greatly from their stay at a program.
How can you with your admittedly limited experience make such a claim? What data have you seen that would suggest this is true?
-
the overwhelming majority of the kids benefit greatly from their stay at a program.
How can you with your admittedly limited experience make such a claim? What data have you seen that would suggest this is true?
Robert, you need to get outside of fornits and read some of the alumni sites, speak to some of the parents and kids who have attended these programs to understand what I am talking about. I have a balanced view of the industry because I have seen kids who do well and those who have not done so well. I dont think you have ever had the opportunity to speak with parents and kids who did well in a program and benefited from their stay. Your experience is limited to only those kids who did poorly like those here on fornits. So naturally you would view the industry has mostly (or altogether) negative and I think we can all understand that.
If your father beat you and you had friends whose fathers beat them and then you joined a group of people brought together because they had this parental beatings in common than you would have a fairly dim view of fathers in general. If someone like myself came along and started speaking about fathers who took their kids fishing on weekends and spent time with them and never hit them they would be treated the same way I am being treated. Even though this person brought a fresh perspective on fatherhood and a more balanced view of family life you would be skeptical about his point of view. I think this would be understandable also.
So I don’t expect you to embrace my outside information or anyone elses, but it doesn’t make it any less factual.
...
-
So you haven't seen and cannot provide any actual data then?
-
So you haven't seen and cannot provide any actual data then?
Other than the few studies which have been released there is no data that I am aware of that covers the entire industry. In the absence of data what one needs to do is speak to those who have attended the programs. Speak to parents who have been through it and their children. You dont want to form an opinion based on one alumni site or a site that is primarily negative. You want to gather as much information as you can from all sides of the issue before formulating an opinion.
...
-
There is very little existing data on the TTI so we need to go with our experiences. I base my post on what I have read here on fornits, outside of fornits and the people that I have met that have had children placed in programs and the children themselves. Very few kids do not do well and the overwhelming majority of the kids benefit greatly from their stay at a program.
Fornits does not represent your average cross section of kids who were sent to programs. This is an entirely different culture here which has its own language and definitions and is not representative of the majority of survivors. You would know this if you ever speak to a child who went to a program whether they did good or poorly they speak about the pros as well as the cons (they dont use the terms gulags, incarceration, kidnapping, isolation etc.). Here on fornits a reader rarely reads a post which speaks of nothing but the negative aspects of a program.
Do you see what I mean?
...
Welcome back Whooter, good to see you are as nonsensical as usual. You are contradicting yourself, first you say ; "I base my post on what I have read here on fornits", then you say; "Very few kids do not do well and the overwhelming majority of the kids benefit greatly from their stay at a program", which is a perspective only occupied by you, here. I believe that I, personally, have enough data to state that the overwhelming majority of the kids are greatly diminished by their stay at a program. I have read the recent accounts of survivors and they are NEARLY IDENTICAL to my memories of the Straight spinoff I was in in '85. And the reason a fornits reader rarely reads a post which speaks of anything positive in a program is there isn't anything positive about these programs, they are a nightmare come true, for the kids as well as the parents. Parents might gain the compliance of their kid, but at the expense of the longterm health of their relationship with them. Do YOU see what I mean?
-
There is very little existing data on the TTI so we need to go with our experiences. I base my post on what I have read here on fornits, outside of fornits and the people that I have met that have had children placed in programs and the children themselves. Very few kids do not do well and the overwhelming majority of the kids benefit greatly from their stay at a program.
Fornits does not represent your average cross section of kids who were sent to programs. This is an entirely different culture here which has its own language and definitions and is not representative of the majority of survivors. You would know this if you ever speak to a child who went to a program whether they did good or poorly they speak about the pros as well as the cons (they dont use the terms gulags, incarceration, kidnapping, isolation etc.). Here on fornits a reader rarely reads a post which speaks of nothing but the negative aspects of a program.
Do you see what I mean?
...
Welcome back Whooter, good to see you are as nonsensical as usual. You are contradicting yourself, first you say ; "I base my post on what I have read here on fornits", then you say; "Very few kids do not do well and the overwhelming majority of the kids benefit greatly from their stay at a program", which is a perspective only occupied by you, here. I believe that I, personally, have enough data to state that the overwhelming majority of the kids are greatly diminished by their stay at a program. I have read the recent accounts of survivors and they are NEARLY IDENTICAL to my memories of the Straight spinoff I was in in '85. And the reason a fornits reader rarely reads a post which speaks of anything positive in a program is there isn't anything positive about these programs, they are a nightmare come true, for the kids as well as the parents. Parents might gain the compliance of their kid, but at the expense of the longterm health of their relationship with them. Do YOU see what I mean?
I have spoken to many kids and families and they differ greatly from the accounts here on fornits. Most kids (even the ones who did poorly) speak about the good and bad aspects of the program. If they feel they were abused by a staff member they still recall staff members who were good to them and other parts of the programs which were positive. On the flip side there are kids who did great and turned around their lives and can speak to the areas of the program which they did not like as well as those areas which they feel were positive.
Compare this to fornits stories which are striped of anything positive. Any first time reader will quickly realize there is an agenda to paint the industry as negative. You dont realize it because you have been here so long ans have learned to accept the negativity.
...
-
. Any first time reader will quickly realize there is an agenda to paint the industry as negative. You dont realize it because you have been here so long ans have learned to accept the negativity.
...
No paint involved, we want to strip away the "paint" and allow the negativity so abundant in this industry a chance to be seen by all. You don't realize it because you have absolutely no direct experience with these programs. Just a program parent pleased as punch with what you have done to your "daughter", right?
-
Other than the few studies which have been released there is no data that I am aware of that covers the entire industry. In the absence of data what one needs to do is speak to those who have attended the programs. Speak to parents who have been through it and their children. You dont want to form an opinion based on one alumni site or a site that is primarily negative. You want to gather as much information as you can from all sides of the issue before formulating an opinion.
What studies? You're guessing Whooter. You're allowing the fact that you have a fiduciary interest to this industry to cloud your judgement. Keep in mind you are talking to people who experienced this industry and the abuse it employs first hand. You did not. If these people who you claim benefitted from their experiences are the vast majority then tell us; Where are they? Why isn't there actual data to back up your claim? Why are so many of these places being forced to close their doors?
-
What studies? You're guessing Whooter.
There were a few studies done. One in particular questioned 1,000 graduates and their parents from 6 or 10 different programs and found them to be 85% (approx. I dont remember the exact figure) successful. The kids got back on a healthy path. We have covered this study in depth a few times here on fornits.
You're allowing the fact that you have a fiduciary interest to this industry to cloud your judgement.
No, I wish I were getting a piece of the action. The programs seem to be very profitable when the economy is doing well.
Keep in mind you are talking to people who experienced this industry and the abuse it employs first hand. You did not.
I was clear about that, Robert, as I stated earlier. I spoke to people who graduated from programs and their parents. I have also read alumni group comments on different programs
If these people who you claim benefitted from their experiences are the vast majority then tell us; Where are they?
They all dont hang out together if that is what you mean. They have all moved on to college, got married etc.
Why isn't there actual data to back up your claim? Why are so many of these places being forced to close their doors?
There have been a few studies that have been done. My thought is that they are expensive to do and there is little incentive to have them done. Unless they can see a return on their investment I dont see how they could justify a large expense to their stockholders. If the studies are successful then they can use this as part of their marketing strategy and try to offset the cost of the studies.
...
-
There were a few studies done. One in particular questioned 1,000 graduates and their parents from 6 or 10 different programs and found them to be 85% (approx. I dont remember the exact figure) successful. The kids got back on a healthy path. We have covered this study in depth a few times here on fornits.
Are you referring to your exit surveys? That is by no means an independent or scientific study.
No, I wish I were getting a piece of the action. The programs seem to be very profitable when the economy is doing well.
How would you know what their profit margins are like? The ones that are closing down due to abuse, are those considered successful?
I was clear about that, Robert, as I stated earlier. I spoke to people who graduated from programs and their parents. I have also read alumni group comments on different programs
Talk to whomever you like, just keep in mind that we experienced this industy first hand you did not, and we talk to more survivors than you. Our testimony bears more weight than yours.
They all dont hang out together if that is what you mean. They have all moved on to college, got married etc.
Many people who state that they were abused by this industry, myself included, have gotten married and moved onto college. What does that have to do why they arent supporting this industry?
There have been a few studies that have been done.
Please link to them.
-
Are you referring to your exit surveys? That is by no means an independent or scientific study.
No there was a study performed by an independent agency on 1,000 kids and their families. The finding were presented at the annual APA Conference.
How would you know what their profit margins are like? The ones that are closing down due to abuse, are those considered successful?
If a place is closing down or closed down then I think we can both agree that it was not successful. If children were abused then this would not be success either.
Talk to whomever you like, just keep in mind that we experienced this industy first hand you did not, and we talk to more survivors than you. Our testimony bears more weight than yours.
Technically, I spent more time inside programs than you have. You clocked 3 weeks, which you admitted to and then went back to change your post. This was also confirmed by an outside source would posted here on fornits. Your experience is also limited to one side of the industry, I have seen many facets
Many people who state that they were abused by this industry, myself included, have gotten married and moved onto college. What does that have to do why they arent supporting this industry?
I dont follow you. People who were hurt by an industry typically band together not those who were helped by it. If you ever had an opportunity to man a customer service line you would be hard pressed to find someone who called to express their delight on how their new television was working or witness workers marching out front of a business because they were happy with their "cost of living" raise.
As far as the studies go, you were involved in the conversations and participated in all the discussion. You will find them in the TTI forum which should refresh your memory.
...
-
No there was a study performed by an independent agency on 1,000 kids and their families. The finding were presented at the annual APA Conference.
Please link to the study. I'd be interested in seeing it.
If a place is closing down or closed down then I think we can both agree that it was not successful. If children were abused then this would not be success either.
Can you name any programs that have not been shown to be abusive and successful?
Technically, I spent more time inside programs than you have. You clocked 3 weeks, which you admitted to and then went back to change your post. This was also confirmed by an outside source would posted here on fornits. Your experience is also limited to one side of the industry, I have seen many facets
We're all still waiting for you provide some sort of evidence for your lie :seg: but so far you keep coming back empty. No suprises there. That aside any kid who spent even a day locked up in a program still has one up on you. You've never been locked up against your will in one of these places, we have. Making your program experiences limited and one sided.
I dont follow you. People who were hurt by an industry typically band together not those who were helped by it. If you ever had an opportunity to man a customer service line you would be hard pressed to find someone who called to express their delight on how their new television was working or witness workers marching out front of a business because they were happy with their "cost of living" raise.
People who support a movement or a program will come out to offer said support when they feel that institution is under attack. Especially one that claims to save so many lives. So far all these programmies here is a lot of crickets. Where is the support?
As far as the studies go, you were involved in the conversations and participated in all the discussion. You will find them in the TTI forum which should refresh your memory.
A conversation on fornits is not a study. You would do best to learn the difference.
-
Please link to the study. I'd be interested in seeing it.
We have all read the study over and over. yourself included. Find it yourself if you want a refresher.
Can you name any programs that have not been shown to be abusive and successful?
Of course! We all know that. Many of the Aspen programs, ASR Aspen Ranch. I provided a list of 5 or 6 a few months ago also.
We're all still waiting for you provide some sort of evidence for your lie :seg: but so far you keep coming back empty. No suprises there. That aside any kid who spent even a day locked up in a program still has one up on you. You've never been locked up against your will in one of these places, we have. Making your program experiences limited and one sided.
Sorry, Bruce, I am not going to bite. If you want to maintain that you spent longer than 3 weeks in a program knock yourself out. Any first day reader can see that you have limited experience based on your biased one-sided point of view.
Provide a few examples of programs which are beneficial to the kids that attend them and help the majority of the kids who attend them? Show the readers that you have experienced more than one side of the industry.
Do you see what I mean?
People who support a movement or a program will come out to offer said support when they feel that institution is under attack. Especially one that claims to save so many lives. So far all these programmies here is a lot of crickets. Where is the support?
Exactly, read in some of the alumni facebook pages or alumni sites. They defend themselves very quickly indeed.
A conversation on fornits is not a study. You would do best to learn the difference.
Again, dont be insulting, Bruce. I never stated that a conversation was a study. The study resides here on fornits in the TTI section. If you continue to be insulting we will postpone the conversation until later.
Remember you are going to try to shoot for 30 days without insulting or attacking people. If you misunderstand a post then ask for clarification dont assume something and attack them for it. If you continue I will just stop responding to your posts.
...
-
We have all read the study over and over. yourself included. Find it yourself if you want a refresher.
All I'm seeing is you not providing a link.
Of course! We all know that. Many of the Aspen programs, ASR Aspen Ranch. I provided a list of 5 or 6 a few months ago also.
Unlicensed progams that have had numerous charges of abuse brought against them, lie to the state about their purpose to avoid oversite, and hand out make believe diplomas probably aren't considered non abusive or a success. Please try again.
Sorry, Bruce, I am not going to bite. If you want to maintain that you spent longer than 3 weeks in a program knock yourself out
The evidence backs me up. You don't actually have any and along with everyone else know you're lying. :seg:
Any first day reader can see that you have limited experience based on your biased one-sided point of view.
As is yours. My experience is first hand. I spent almost a year under this abusive system. Myself, and every other survivor of this abusive industry will forever have one up on you. Meanwhile your experience not only remains one sided and biased based on your fiduciary interest.
Provide a few examples of programs which are beneficial to the kids that attend them and help the majority of the kids who attend them? Show the readers that you have experienced more than one side of the industry.
While I have always been open and hopeful of the possibility that at least one of these places runs above above board, and isn't abusive, so far none have been shown to exist.
In that same vein, would you be willing to name one program currently running in the United States that isn't running above board, and is abusive? I doubt it. I don't think your contract would allow you to do so.
Do you see what I mean?
Exactly, read in some of the alumni facebook pages or alumni sites. They defend themselves very quickly indeed.
Are you referring to the alumni groups that dont allow disenting opinions? Those sites? Come on Whooter try harder. You claimed that the vast majority of the kids who are locked up in these places benefit from their experience being locked up. Where is this "vast majority" when these places are being shut down one by one?
Again, dont be insulting, Bruce. I never stated that a conversation was a study. The study resides here on fornits in the TTI section. If you continue to be insulting we will postpone the conversation until later.
Then please link to it.
Remember you are going to try to shoot for 30 days without insulting or attacking people.
I don't recall ever agreeing to anything along those lines. I'm actually still waiting on you to clarify what you consider to be "attacking". Once done, I'll consider it. It's all on you buddy. In the meantime the challenge you've been unable to meet is still waiting for you on OFFA. See you there buddy.
-
Unlicensed progams that have had numerous charges of abuse brought against them, lie to the state about their purpose to avoid oversite, and hand out make believe diplomas probably aren't considered non abusive or a success. Please try again.
All I'm seeing is you not providing a link.
...
-
If a particular child has a history of lying and manipulation then it will be difficult for the parents to believe the child over the program staff. So when those rare instances occur when a child really does get abused then the parents or other staff members may not believe them.
This is why the child needs to re-establish themselves as “credible” as quickly as they can. If they continue to lie and manipulate throughout the program they make themselves a bigger target to be taken advantage of in this area.
How in the hell is a parent to know whether what the kid says is a manipulation/lie or not? There is an easy way to tell. Parents need to educate themselves and research what has happened at other similar schools (or even the same one) and see if what their kids are saying coincides with what has already been said on the interent by former "students". If the kids are lying, the stories won't match. In my experience, however, most of the time they do. It's the parents who for some reason just never bother to do the research. They trust the program too much. The trust the "professionals".
-
Most parents do what they feel is appropriate research or hire an ed consultant prior to placing their child. If the child ends up in an abusive program then they are pretty much screwed, but for the vast majority of them if they turn around their behavior then they will start seeing their credibility increase and get back on a healthy path.
May I point out that in the vast majority of abusive programs parents see "turn arounds" in their childrens' behaviors. Just because a program provides temporary "results" doesn't mean they obtain those results ethically or without abusive techniques. A change in behavior towards a more "healthy path" is not an indication of a good program, in fact it may be an indication of a bad program -- even more so if the change is extreme.
-
Compare this to fornits stories which are striped of anything positive. Any first time reader will quickly realize there is an agenda to paint the industry as negative. You dont realize it because you have been here so long ans have learned to accept the negativity.
Sometimes "negativity" as you paint it, is simply the unvarnished truth. When an organization exists that mistreats kids for profit (or misplaced ideology) there is often very little that's positive. Hey. At the program I was in I had one or two positive experiences (mostly with learning to build furniture -- which the program sold at a profit -- for some bizarre reason I liked it), but the rest of it was pretty much universally negative. One good thing does not outweigh all the bad and when you're giving an overall evaluation of a program it's very easy to forget to mention it. It's simply not relevant.
-
Unlicensed progams that have had numerous charges of abuse brought against them, lie to the state about their purpose to avoid oversite, and hand out make believe diplomas probably aren't considered non abusive or a success. Please try again.
All I'm seeing is you not providing a link.
...
Can't respond to the other comments? I'm not surprised. Here's something from MASS DOE showing that ASR is not approved as a special education school.
http://http://profiles.doe.mass.edu/profiles/general.aspx?topNavId=8001&orgcode=00690805&orgtypecode=2&leftNavId=8101&
Finding charges of abuse shouldn't be too tough. I'll let you know.
-
Unlicensed progams that have had numerous charges of abuse brought against them, lie to the state about their purpose to avoid oversite, and hand out make believe diplomas probably aren't considered non abusive or a success. Please try again.
All I'm seeing is you not providing a link.
...
Can't respond to the other comments? I'm not surprised. Here's something from MASS DOE showing that ASR is not approved as a special education school.
http://http://profiles.doe.mass.edu/profiles/general.aspx?topNavId=8001&orgcode=00690805&orgtypecode=2&leftNavId=8101&
Finding charges of abuse shouldn't be too tough. I'll let you know.
Please put those in the appropriate forum (aspen), with an appropriate thread title and directions to the moderator (suggestion: just allegaions of abuse, commenting in another thread.).
-
Most parents do what they feel is appropriate research or hire an ed consultant prior to placing their child. If the child ends up in an abusive program then they are pretty much screwed, but for the vast majority of them if they turn around their behavior then they will start seeing their credibility increase and get back on a healthy path.
May I point out that in the vast majority of abusive programs parents see "turn arounds" in their childrens' behaviors. Just because a program provides temporary "results" doesn't mean they obtain those results ethically or without abusive techniques. A change in behavior towards a more "healthy path" is not an indication of a good program, in fact it may be an indication of a bad program -- even more so if the change is extreme.
Besides getting the word out or having parents talk to other families who have gone through the process I dont see any solid way to prevent kids from being placed in the abusive programs. Some Ed Cons are unethical and others just dont do enough follow up to see that the child was abused.
...
-
Compare this to fornits stories which are striped of anything positive. Any first time reader will quickly realize there is an agenda to paint the industry as negative. You dont realize it because you have been here so long ans have learned to accept the negativity.
Sometimes "negativity" as you paint it, is simply the unvarnished truth. When an organization exists that mistreats kids for profit (or misplaced ideology) there is often very little that's positive. Hey. At the program I was in I had one or two positive experiences (mostly with learning to build furniture -- which the program sold at a profit -- for some bizarre reason I liked it), but the rest of it was pretty much universally negative. One good thing does not outweigh all the bad and when you're giving an overall evaluation of a program it's very easy to forget to mention it. It's simply not relevant.
Psy, this is one of those topics that just raises a red flag for me (and I am sure many other readers who dont post), just like the kidnapping topic. I am sure I will come across as insensitive in trying to express my thoughts on this topic. I have read stories from regulars here that are stripped bare of anything positive from that time period. If you read stories from Shaggy and a few others they will tell you honestly that the place was abusive but maybe the food was okay or they had a couple of good staff members or met a really good friend or learned how to paint etc. These things happen naturally in life. Even Holocaust survivors who suffered one of the greatest losses retell their stories with recounts of friendships made, guards who were kind to the children etc.
Reading stories that paint the entire experience negative from the color of the walls to every staff member just losses all credibility in my opinion and shows that there is an obvious agenda present, so we, as readers, are left not knowing what to believe within that account except the kid is angry and probably abused, but the details are not credible.
I have pointed out posts which show a high level of credibility which outlined the abuse that occurred along with the positive aspects of the program. Why are people afraid to say they met a good friend or enjoyed pizza when it was served or a helpful staff member? Why try to lay the negative paint on so thick that their story losses credibility? Do survivors just not see this in each others stories?
...
...
-
Compare this to fornits stories which are striped of anything positive. Any first time reader will quickly realize there is an agenda to paint the industry as negative. You dont realize it because you have been here so long ans have learned to accept the negativity.
Sometimes "negativity" as you paint it, is simply the unvarnished truth. When an organization exists that mistreats kids for profit (or misplaced ideology) there is often very little that's positive. Hey. At the program I was in I had one or two positive experiences (mostly with learning to build furniture -- which the program sold at a profit -- for some bizarre reason I liked it), but the rest of it was pretty much universally negative. One good thing does not outweigh all the bad and when you're giving an overall evaluation of a program it's very easy to forget to mention it. It's simply not relevant.
Psy, this is one of those topics that just raises a red flag for me (and I am sure many other readers who dont post), just like the kidnapping topic. I am sure I will come across as insensitive in trying to express my thoughts on this topic. I have read stories from regulars here that are stripped bare of anything positive from that time period. If you read stories from Shaggy and a few others they will tell you honestly that the place was abusive but maybe the food was okay or they had a couple of good staff members or met a really good friend or learned how to paint etc. These things happen naturally in life. Even Holocaust survivors who suffered one of the greatest losses retell their stories with recounts of friendships made, guards who were kind to the children etc.
Reading stories that paint the entire experience negative from the color of the walls to every staff member just losses all credibility in my opinion and shows that there is an obvious agenda present, so we, as readers, are left not knowing what to believe within that account except the kid is angry and probably abused, but the details are not credible.
I have pointed out posts which show a high level of credibility which outlined the abuse that occurred along with the positive aspects of the program. Why are people afraid to say they met a good friend or enjoyed pizza when it was served or a helpful staff member? Why try to lay the negative paint on so thick that their story losses credibility? Do survivors just not see this in each others stories?
...
...
Even Holocaust survivors who suffered one of the greatest losses retell their stories with recounts of friendships made, guards who were kind to the children etc.
Are you serious? :flame:
-
Even Holocaust survivors who suffered one of the greatest losses retell their stories with recounts of friendships made, guards who were kind to the children etc.
Are you serious? :flame:
If you ever get a chance to visit Washington DC take some time out to visit the Holocaust Museum. Just walk thru the museum and read and listen, really listen. Listen to the words of the survivors and the tails of their experiences the loved ones the lose and the hardship they endured. You will not find one of them ever saying that all Germans are evil etc. They speak about the occurrences naturally. Life still occurs even under the most horrible circumstances.
If you read the survivors stories here on fornits many lack the natural details of life (they have been stripped from the readers view). Even someone who has never heard of programs before would never believe that every staff person is evil and abusive, yet that is how the stories are formulated here. Many try to lead the readers to believe that they never met a good friend, enjoyed a certain meal, learned to enjoy writing during their time their, connected with a staff member, enjoyed snow for the first time etc. Many of the stories lack credibility because of this.
If I was raped by my teacher at school and beaten I would be justified as saying I did not have a very good experience in highschool. But if I went onto a web site and started writing my story explaining how every teacher is a rapist and I never met one friend in highschool, the food was horrible, everychild was raped, I never learned to read or write, I learned science but I dont credit the teachers for that, I eventually went to college but I dont credit the highschool for that, I did it in spite of them. My story didnt include one positive aspect of my time in highschool then the whole story sinks and loses credibility. I think many here on fornits spend so much energy trying to paint the industry as evil as possible that they forget to tell the whole story.
...
-
Reading stories that paint the entire experience negative from the color of the walls to every staff member just losses all credibility in my opinion and shows that there is an obvious agenda present, so we, as readers, are left not knowing what to believe within that account except the kid is angry and probably abused, but the details are not credible.
I have pointed out posts which show a high level of credibility which outlined the abuse that occurred along with the positive aspects of the program. Why are people afraid to say they met a good friend or enjoyed pizza when it was served or a helpful staff member? Why try to lay the negative paint on so thick that their story losses credibility? Do survivors just not see this in each others stories?
...
Your problem, Whooter, is that you simply will not believe how abusive these places were, and still are. I have no good memories at all, it was non-stop misery from the moment I opened my eyes in the morning to the moment I closed them to try to sleep at night. I was being held captive by insane fascist zealots bent on destroying my very personality. So they could install a "better" one. The pizza would have to be the best ever made to stand out in the middle of THAT. All my memories of that place really are bad. No good ones. Just bad. And you know where you can stick your "credibility".
-
Reading stories that paint the entire experience negative from the color of the walls to every staff member just losses all credibility in my opinion and shows that there is an obvious agenda present, so we, as readers, are left not knowing what to believe within that account except the kid is angry and probably abused, but the details are not credible.
I have pointed out posts which show a high level of credibility which outlined the abuse that occurred along with the positive aspects of the program. Why are people afraid to say they met a good friend or enjoyed pizza when it was served or a helpful staff member? Why try to lay the negative paint on so thick that their story losses credibility? Do survivors just not see this in each others stories?
...
Your problem, Whooter, is that you simply will not believe how abusive these places were, and still are. I have no good memories at all, it was non-stop misery from the moment I opened my eyes in the morning to the moment I closed them to try to sleep at night. I was being held captive by insane fascist zealots bent on destroying my very personality. So they could install a "better" one. The pizza would have to be the best ever made to stand out in the middle of THAT. All my memories of that place really are bad. No good ones. Just bad. And you know where you can stick your "credibility".
all I am saying is that is my point of view. Other readers my find the stories here very credible. I just seem to think there is something missing in many of the stories which raises a flag for me.
...
-
Reading stories that paint the entire experience negative from the color of the walls to every staff member just losses all credibility in my opinion and shows that there is an obvious agenda present, so we, as readers, are left not knowing what to believe within that account except the kid is angry and probably abused, but the details are not credible.
I have pointed out posts which show a high level of credibility which outlined the abuse that occurred along with the positive aspects of the program. Why are people afraid to say they met a good friend or enjoyed pizza when it was served or a helpful staff member? Why try to lay the negative paint on so thick that their story losses credibility? Do survivors just not see this in each others stories?
...
Your problem, Whooter, is that you simply will not believe how abusive these places were, and still are. I have no good memories at all, it was non-stop misery from the moment I opened my eyes in the morning to the moment I closed them to try to sleep at night. I was being held captive by insane fascist zealots bent on destroying my very personality. So they could install a "better" one. The pizza would have to be the best ever made to stand out in the middle of THAT. All my memories of that place really are bad. No good ones. Just bad. And you know where you can stick your "credibility".
all I am saying is that is my point of view. Other readers my find the stories here very credible. I just seem to think there is something missing in many of the stories which raises a flag for me.
...
Like the red flag that comes up for me every time you post, it says "program toady" on it.
-
Like the red flag that comes up for me every time you post, it says "program toady" on it.
:rofl: Some things never change.. :spam:
-
Like the red flag that comes up for me every time you post, it says "program toady" on it.
I have no idea what that means, Shady. I am guessing that you see me as jumping around from one thread to another posting about programs? I enjoy discussing different facets of the industry. There are many posters who like to just stick to the "HLA" forum or "Straight" forum but I have a more diverse interest so it may seem that I hop around more but it doesnt mean my posts are any less sincere.
...
-
Fornits does not represent your average cross section of kids who were sent to programs. This is an entirely different culture here which has its own language and definitions and is not representative of the majority of survivors. You would know this if you ever speak to a child who went to a program whether they did good or poorly they speak about the pros as well as the cons (they dont use the terms gulags, incarceration, kidnapping, isolation etc.). Here on fornits a reader rarely reads a post which speaks of nothing but the negative aspects of a program.
Do you see what I mean?
I do believe in fairies. I do! I do!
Whooter, aside from paid and/or coerced industry promo material, where do you find any significant number of program graduates who view the experience as helpful and non-abusive? Really. Where?
-
Like the red flag that comes up for me every time you post, it says "program toady" on it.
I have no idea what that means, Shady. I am guessing that you see me as jumping around from one thread to another posting about programs? I enjoy discussing different facets of the industry. There are many posters who like to just stick to the "HLA" forum or "Straight" forum but I have a more diverse interest so it may seem that I hop around more but it doesnt mean my posts are any less sincere.
...
toady |?t?d?|
noun ( pl. toadies)
a person who behaves obsequiously to someone important.
verb ( toadies, toadied) [ intrans. ]
act in an obsequious way : she imagined him toadying to his rich clients.
DERIVATIVES
toadyish adjective
toadyism |-?iz?m| noun
ORIGIN early 19th cent.: said to be a contraction of toad-eater, a charlatan's assistant who ate toads; toads were regarded as poisonous, and the assistant's survival was thought to be due to the efficacy of the charlatan's remedy.
-
Fornits does not represent your average cross section of kids who were sent to programs. This is an entirely different culture here which has its own language and definitions and is not representative of the majority of survivors. You would know this if you ever speak to a child who went to a program whether they did good or poorly they speak about the pros as well as the cons (they dont use the terms gulags, incarceration, kidnapping, isolation etc.). Here on fornits a reader rarely reads a post which speaks of nothing but the negative aspects of a program.
Do you see what I mean?
I do believe in fairies. I do! I do!
Whooter, aside from paid and/or coerced industry promo material, where do you find any significant number of program graduates who view the experience as helpful and non-abusive? Really. Where?
Just because information is paid for doesn't mean it is inaccurate. If you are a business and you want a study done on the outcome of your product or to measure your success/failure you will most likely have to pay for this yourself. There are not may people willing to step forward and pay for the study for you. If you have a study done and it turns out to be good then you would naturally want to use this material as part of your marketing strategy for your business to help offset the cost of the study and get the word out to potential customers.
The instances of abuse in these places is extremely rare, but they are highlighted here on fornits. I think we could agree that people with positive experiences dont hang around here very long. I have visited many alumni sites which allowed people to sit in and read and their stories are vastly different from those here on fornits. They are also more up to date and reflect the current views of recent graduates for these programs. I have read parents and kids testimonials on various program sites. (I do understand that they only post the most positive ones.)
So there is a lot of information on program graduates if you look around hard enough and keep in mind the source and motivation for posting the information as you read it. You can get a general sense on how the industry is doing and if people are benefiting from it or not.
...
-
The instances of abuse in these places is extremely rare, but they are highlighted here on fornits. I think we could agree that people with positive experiences dont hang around here very long. I have visited many alumni sites which allowed people to sit in and read and their stories are vastly different from those here on fornits. They are also more up to date and reflect the current views of recent graduates for these programs. I have read parents and kids testimonials on various program sites. (I do understand that they only post the most positive ones.)
So there is a lot of information on program graduates if you look around hard enough and keep in mind the source and motivation for posting the information as you read it. You can get a general sense on how the industry is doing and if people are benefiting from it or not.
...
One of the most notorious abusive programs, Straight Inc., never had any shortage of glowing reviews from parents and their brainwashed kids; http://survivingstraightinc.com/StPeter ... sement.pdf (http://survivingstraightinc.com/StPetersburgFLnewspaperArticles/5-15-1983-Parent-Paid-Straight-Advertisement.pdf) . I think, in light of this, positive program testimonials should be read with suspicion.
-
Fornits does not represent your average cross section of kids who were sent to programs. This is an entirely different culture here which has its own language and definitions and is not representative of the majority of survivors. You would know this if you ever speak to a child who went to a program whether they did good or poorly they speak about the pros as well as the cons (they dont use the terms gulags, incarceration, kidnapping, isolation etc.). Here on fornits a reader rarely reads a post which speaks of nothing but the negative aspects of a program.
Do you see what I mean?
I do believe in fairies. I do! I do!
Whooter, aside from paid and/or coerced industry promo material, where do you find any significant number of program graduates who view the experience as helpful and non-abusive? Really. Where?
Yes there are pros as well as the cons,but if one kid is harmed thats one too many.
And unfortunately allot have been harmed.You can't forget tho, exposure to negative and dangerous behaviors can spur thoughts and aggressions in some people, that were very suppressed and not brought out till triggered in a negative way.Some of those triggers don't react till years later,life itself causes confusion,and to have suppressed thoughts that were placed in you as a youth as ok thoughts and behaviors, due to very heavy peer pressure, could always surface later in life, and manifest into who know what. Why do perfectly normal folk just snap one day,??? and when asked, it goes 90% to their childhood.???
I think programs work for some but not all, a person has to be strong minded and willed to make it in a program, and unfortunately many are not, and it's just over looked. Every one doesn't make it threw Boot Camp in the Military and thats ok,but at least the Gov throws them out right away for the most part.. But programs being Money motivated don't care and find pleasure I think in trampling the weaker folks of the world, and really causing them damage and problems for life.
Some people in life let everything roll off their back, and some hold onto it forever. It is no more complicated than that.Even the weak find strength,and they should be heard,thats how they can become strong and overcome their fears and haunts in life from the programs an find some understanding.There is a message in everyones words,Thats why there are open forums to talk and discuss,
No ones right or wrong ,they are all just feeling and opinions. :cheers: :cheers: :rocker: :rocker: :rocker: :peace: :peace: :peace:
-
I think programs work for some but not all, a person has to be strong minded and willed to make it in a program, and unfortunately many are not, and it's just over looked. Every one doesn't make it threw Boot Camp in the Military and thats ok,but at least the Gov throws them out right away for the most part.. But programs being Money motivated don't care and find pleasure I think in trampling the weaker folks of the world, and really causing them damage and problems for life.
Some people in life let everything roll off their back, and some hold onto it forever. It is no more complicated than that.Even the weak find strength,and they should be heard,thats how they can become strong and overcome their fears and haunts in life from the programs an find some understanding.There is a message in everyones words,Thats why there are open forums to talk and discuss,
I don't see it that way at all. Believing that the person you are has value, and not wanting zealots to crush that person out of you, does not make you weak. On the contrary, I was strong willed and strong minded enough to split as soon as they moved me to phase 2. You think that you just "let it roll off your back" and I am just "holding onto it". From where I'm standing, you just roll over and accept your role as victim, while I am still trying to tell anyone who will listen what kind of people run these places and what their real methods are so hopefully they will not do this to their children. And "weak", in the group setting, just means that you are different from the automatons that make up the group.
-
One of the most notorious abusive programs, Straight Inc., never had any shortage of glowing reviews from parents and their brainwashed kids; http://survivingstraightinc.com/StPeter ... sement.pdf (http://survivingstraightinc.com/StPetersburgFLnewspaperArticles/5-15-1983-Parent-Paid-Straight-Advertisement.pdf) . I think, in light of this, positive program testimonials should be read with suspicion.
But businesses should not discontinue asking people for testimonials because of one place. Some places will reflect accurately what the business out put is while others will not. We need to all understand that the businesses are putting their best foot forward and they will never post the negative responses. But we can always look at fornits for the negative feedback. Looking at all the data gives us all a balanced view of the industry.
...
-
One of the most notorious abusive programs, Straight Inc., never had any shortage of glowing reviews from parents and their brainwashed kids; http://survivingstraightinc.com/StPeter ... sement.pdf (http://survivingstraightinc.com/StPetersburgFLnewspaperArticles/5-15-1983-Parent-Paid-Straight-Advertisement.pdf) . I think, in light of this, positive program testimonials should be read with suspicion.
But businesses should not discontinue asking people for testimonials because of one place. Some places will reflect accurately what the business out put is while others will not. We need to all understand that the businesses are putting their best foot forward and they will never post the negative responses. But we can always look at fornits for the negative feedback. Looking at all the data gives us all a balanced view of the industry.
...
Not really, we have no monetary motive, unlike the programs. We really have nothing to gain by posting our opinions here, except for the hope that we may prevent this from happening to one more kid. The programs, on the other hand, have MILLIONS of dollars at stake. Their corporate survival requires a benign public image.
-
One of the most notorious abusive programs, Straight Inc., never had any shortage of glowing reviews from parents and their brainwashed kids; http://survivingstraightinc.com/StPeter ... sement.pdf (http://survivingstraightinc.com/StPetersburgFLnewspaperArticles/5-15-1983-Parent-Paid-Straight-Advertisement.pdf) . I think, in light of this, positive program testimonials should be read with suspicion.
But businesses should not discontinue asking people for testimonials because of one place. Some places will reflect accurately what the business out put is while others will not. We need to all understand that the businesses are putting their best foot forward and they will never post the negative responses. But we can always look at fornits for the negative feedback. Looking at all the data gives us all a balanced view of the industry.
...
Not really, we have no monetary motive, unlike the programs. We really have nothing to gain by posting our opinions here, except for the hope that we may prevent this from happening to one more kid. The programs, on the other hand, have MILLIONS of dollars at stake. Their corporate survival requires a benign public image.
But we should not ignore the opinions because they make money. We cant just stop listening to any information that comes from industries which make a profit. 99% of the worlds information would stop being used. Maybe the company receives 10 bad references to every good one and only posts the good ones. At least it is information. We may not know the percentages. The same with survivor stories here on fornits, we are not guaranteed to get the whole story. If a child was abused or is still pissed off that he was sent to a program then he may withhold any positive experience he had and only write about the negative experiences to try to make the program look worse than it was.
So I think it is important to look at all aspects and all the information available and just be sensitive to the source of the information whether it be a business who is profiting or a child who did well or a child who did not do well.
...
-
One of the most notorious abusive programs, Straight Inc., never had any shortage of glowing reviews from parents and their brainwashed kids; http://survivingstraightinc.com/StPeter ... sement.pdf (http://survivingstraightinc.com/StPetersburgFLnewspaperArticles/5-15-1983-Parent-Paid-Straight-Advertisement.pdf) . I think, in light of this, positive program testimonials should be read with suspicion.
But businesses should not discontinue asking people for testimonials because of one place. Some places will reflect accurately what the business out put is while others will not. We need to all understand that the businesses are putting their best foot forward and they will never post the negative responses. But we can always look at fornits for the negative feedback. Looking at all the data gives us all a balanced view of the industry.
...
Not really, we have no monetary motive, unlike the programs. We really have nothing to gain by posting our opinions here, except for the hope that we may prevent this from happening to one more kid. The programs, on the other hand, have MILLIONS of dollars at stake. Their corporate survival requires a benign public image.
But we should not ignore the opinions because they make money. We cant just stop listening to any information that comes from industries which make a profit. 99% of the worlds information would stop being used. Maybe the company receives 10 bad references to every good one and only posts the good ones. At least it is information. We may not know the percentages. The same with survivor stories here on fornits, we are not guaranteed to get the whole story. If a child was abused or is still pissed off that he was sent to a program then he may withhold any positive experience he had and only write about the negative experiences to try to make the program look worse than it was.
So I think it is important to look at all aspects and all the information available and just be sensitive to the source of the information whether it be a business who is profiting or a child who did well or a child who did not do well.
...
Hah, as you say, I certainly did not "do well" being isolated from my family and friends, being removed from school and harassed and harangued non-stop for months by brainwashed cult imbeciles. I did not "do well" sitting on a wooden church pew for 12 or 14 hours a day, every day ( except Sunday, which was only 8 hours ), forced to "sit up straight and face forward" the whole time. I did not "do well" with some jackass holding my beltloop while I was trying to piss, EVERY DAY for 5 months. The programs, on the other hand, did quite well by spreading their ill gotten loot around to like minded policy makers and other authorities, staying in business long after they should have been shut down for institutionalized abuse. They also have the money to hire unethical psychologists to act as propagandists for their inhumane and experimental "treatment".
-
The reason there are more graduates on anti-program sites is that they saw more. Most graduates faked their way through the program because they realized they had no other way out. When you've been lying to your parents for years, who are they going to believe? You or the "responsible adults" holding you captive? And when the captors have a $5000/month incentive to keep you, to what lengths will they go to keep you?
Especially when they already know you wont be believed. You become the perfect victim, and your parents the perfect marks.
(Don't know what's been touched on in this thread, but I'll add my .02 just in case.) In Straight Inc, they knew what they were doing, and they set it up to have no one believe you. They pretty much accomplished this by keeping the cover going inside, and out: On the inside, there was the all-important rule known as "CONFIDENTIALITY." What you see here, hear here, and do here remains here. Better not talk about anything or use any names about anything that went on within those white walls, or else! On the outside, they usually managed to convince parents not to trust their own kids by telling them in advance that claims of abuse were tantamount to the kid trying to manipulate their way out of the program.
Also, on a side note, debating with Whooter is a lot like being Brer Rabbit having a discussion with the "Tar Baby." The more you try and reason with Whooter, the more deep into a pile of bullshit you seem to sink. It never ends, it just keeps going, and going, and going...
-
Hah, as you say, I certainly did not "do well" being isolated from my family and friends, being removed from school and harassed and harangued non-stop for months by brainwashed cult imbeciles. I did not "do well" sitting on a wooden church pew for 12 or 14 hours a day, every day ( except Sunday, which was only 8 hours ), forced to "sit up straight and face forward" the whole time. I did not "do well" with some jackass holding my beltloop while I was trying to piss, EVERY DAY for 5 months. The programs, on the other hand, did quite well by spreading their ill gotten loot around to like minded policy makers and other authorities, staying in business long after they should have been shut down for institutionalized abuse. They also have the money to hire unethical psychologists to act as propagandists for their inhumane and experimental "treatment".
Shady, that is a great example of a fornits regular who “Did not do well”. There are not any positive aspects at all, just negative. If we spoke to a person “who did well” in a program then we would hear things like how they enjoyed the rafting trips and they learned to enjoy reading and met some great people. They may talk about how bad the food was and the lack of diverse clothing and a staff member who wasn’t nice to them, some of the other kids dropped out or ran off, but overall the program helped them get past a bad patch in their life. The program would publish the best of the letters which didn’t have any negative parts in it about the program itself.
1.If we only looked at fornits we would believe that all kids had to sit on church pews for 18 hours a day, will be abused and "will not do well".
2.If we only looked at the kids feed back who did well we would believe that “most of the kids will do well” will have a good experience and would struggle through their time there somewhat.
3.If we only looked at the programs feedback we would believe that “all kids do well” and get set on the right path.
So as we can see it is important not to rely on any one source but rather look at feedback from all sides of the issue and then put it all together for a realistic balanced view of the industry.
...
-
Hah, as you say, I certainly did not "do well" being isolated from my family and friends, being removed from school and harassed and harangued non-stop for months by brainwashed cult imbeciles. I did not "do well" sitting on a wooden church pew for 12 or 14 hours a day, every day ( except Sunday, which was only 8 hours ), forced to "sit up straight and face forward" the whole time. I did not "do well" with some jackass holding my beltloop while I was trying to piss, EVERY DAY for 5 months. The programs, on the other hand, did quite well by spreading their ill gotten loot around to like minded policy makers and other authorities, staying in business long after they should have been shut down for institutionalized abuse. They also have the money to hire unethical psychologists to act as propagandists for their inhumane and experimental "treatment".
Shady, that is a great example of a fornits regular who “Did not do well”. There are not any positive aspects at all, just negative. If we spoke to a person “who did well” in a program then we would hear things like how they enjoyed the rafting trips and they learned to enjoy reading and met some great people. They may talk about how bad the food was and the lack of diverse clothing and a staff member who wasn’t nice to them, some of the other kids dropped out or ran off, but overall the program helped them get past a bad patch in their life. The program would publish the best of the letters which didn’t have any negative parts in it about the program itself.
1.If we only looked at fornits we would believe that all kids had to sit on church pews for 18 hours a day, will be abused and "will not do well".
2.If we only looked at the kids feed back who did well we would believe that “most of the kids will do well” will have a good experience and would struggle through their time there somewhat.
3.If we only looked at the programs feedback we would believe that “all kids do well” and get set on the right path.
So as we can see it is important not to rely on any one source but rather look at feedback from all sides of the issue and then put it all together for a realistic balanced view of the industry.
...
If I opened a treatment center where I would have Dick Cheney shoot all of the kids in the face with a shotgun, some of the kids would heal better and faster than others. Some would actually feel that they had been assaulted ( really! ). Some would accept that they “probably did something to bring this on themselves”. Some might even tell you it was a valuable growth experience, especially if Dick is standing there with his shotgun. We can hire snake oil salesmen to indoctrinate parents into the enormous benefits and spiritual rewards of shooting your kids in the face with a shotgun. Of course this is blatantly unethical but who cares, think of all that money! You want in?
-
The reason there are more graduates on anti-program sites is that they saw more. Most graduates faked their way through the program because they realized they had no other way out. When you've been lying to your parents for years, who are they going to believe? You or the "responsible adults" holding you captive? And when the captors have a $5000/month incentive to keep you, to what lengths will they go to keep you?
Especially when they already know you wont be believed. You become the perfect victim, and your parents the perfect marks.
(Don't know what's been touched on in this thread, but I'll add my .02 just in case.) In Straight Inc, they knew what they were doing, and they set it up to have no one believe you. They pretty much accomplished this by keeping the cover going inside, and out: On the inside, there was the all-important rule known as "CONFIDENTIALITY." What you see here, hear here, and do here remains here. Better not talk about anything or use any names about anything that went on within those white walls, or else! On the outside, they usually managed to convince parents not to trust their own kids by telling them in advance that claims of abuse were tantamount to the kid trying to manipulate their way out of the program.
Also, on a side note, debating with Whooter is a lot like being Brer Rabbit having a discussion with the "Tar Baby." The more you try and reason with Whooter, the more deep into a pile of bullshit you seem to sink. It never ends, it just keeps going, and going, and going...
[/i][/b]
Yeah, I know, but I need to practice civil discourse with people who turn my stomach. It is a "goal" in my "moral inventory".
-
If I opened a treatment center where I would have Dick Cheney shoot all of the kids in the face with a shotgun, some of the kids would heal better and faster than others. Some would actually feel that they had been assaulted ( really! ). Some would accept that they “probably did something to bring this on themselves”. Some might even tell you it was a valuable growth experience, especially if Dick is standing there with his shotgun. We can hire snake oil salesmen to indoctrinate parents into the enormous benefits and spiritual rewards of shooting your kids in the face with a shotgun. Of course this is blatantly unethical but who cares, think of all that money! You want in?
You democrats are all alike, always bringing ethics into it to challenge the profit margin. As long as income exceeds expenses and everyone walks away happy at the end of the day then we can call it successful.
I would be worried about the profit margin, though, Shady. I think if we could have the parents provide the shot gun and shells, have them pull their own permits in their kids names then we would not have to worry about the rising cost of ammunition and avoid having to spend good money on training our personnel and getting them licensed. My experience is that every-time we train an employee they expect a raise. Plus "State fire arm training" fills their heads with unnecessary safety precautions that just slows down the process and costs more money.
Dick Cheney would demand too high a salary but we could hire locals and have their names legally changed to Dick Cheney so that we could ethically advertise that Dick Cheney was part of the therapy on our brochures.
I like your thinking, Shady, but from experience I think we should hire someone and put them in charge of ethics but set him up off site somewhere so he wont interfere too much. That way we wont be bothered struggling with constant ethics questions during our daily updates and decision making meetings.
Ethics test for you shady:
Lets say you and I were partners and you were going through one of the kids backpacks upon intake and you came across a $10,000 Rolex watch. Would you tell me or would you keep it for yourself and not tell me about it?
...
-
(http://http://bastardlogic.files.wordpress.com/2006/12/cheney_gun.jpg)
-
Not while in the program, cause the whole "confidential " thing gets a lot of milage ,depending on who's using it.Used by the local monkeyfarm, its ultimately just a "divide and conquer" device,and besides the kids are all just "making it up" in order to "manipulate" the parents into withdrawing them . Right? Then you got yer genuine Kool-Aid drinkers.....they aint credible either...untill the "Shine" wears off that is....till they really think about it .....and realize what a load of crap theyve swallowed,and at last......voila....the truth comes out.
Speaking of "credible" why is it that someone who has NEVER sat on front row,never been belt-looped, and has no form of first hand knowledge, has anything in the same ballpark as credibility here? That is a seriously UN-qualified opinion. Like a blind man tryin to tell ya what blue is...... :nods:
-
Not while in the program, cause the whole "confidential " thing gets a lot of milage ,depending on who's using it.Used by the local monkeyfarm, its ultimately just a "divide and conquer" device,and besides the kids are all just "making it up" in order to "manipulate" the parents into withdrawing them . Right? Then you got yer genuine Kool-Aid drinkers.....they aint credible either...untill the "Shine" wears off that is....till they really think about it .....and realize what a load of crap theyve swallowed,and at last......voila....the truth comes out.
If you dont think that teenagers do not manipulate then you have never raised one. Try talking to a motivated kid who wants to meet their friends at the mall and their goal is to try to get you to give them your car keys lol. We have all been there. Many of the kids who were/are sent to programs have trust issues and is one of the reasons for their downfall, so add that to the fact that kids dont want to be in the program doing the hard work it is not a far stretch to think they will say anything to get themselves taken out of there.
Speaking of "credible" why is it that someone who has NEVER sat on front row,never been belt-looped, and has no form of first hand knowledge, has anything in the same ballpark as credibility here? That is a seriously UN-qualified opinion. Like a blind man tryin to tell ya what blue is...... :nods:
If we can sit here and tolerate listening to posters here give there advice and input when they have never raised an at risk teen, placed a child in a program or owned a program, been a staff in a program, had a friend die in a program, had a friend do extremely well in a program then we can tolerate just about anyone, becuase everyone seems to be an expert here on just about every aspect of the TTI.
...
-
Speaking of "credible" why is it that someone who has NEVER sat on front row,never been belt-looped, and has no form of first hand knowledge, has anything in the same ballpark as credibility here? That is a seriously UN-qualified opinion. Like a blind man tryin to tell ya what blue is...... :nods:
:notworthy: :tup: :rocker: :beat: :timeout: :soapbox: :spam: :sue: :roflmao:
-
I think programs work for some but not all, a person has to be strong minded and willed to make it in a program, and unfortunately many are not, and it's just over looked. Every one doesn't make it threw Boot Camp in the Military and thats ok,but at least the Gov throws them out right away for the most part.. But programs being Money motivated don't care and find pleasure I think in trampling the weaker folks of the world, and really causing them damage and problems for life.
Some people in life let everything roll off their back, and some hold onto it forever. It is no more complicated than that.Even the weak find strength,and they should be heard,thats how they can become strong and overcome their fears and haunts in life from the programs an find some understanding.There is a message in everyones words,Thats why there are open forums to talk and discuss,
I don't see it that way at all. Believing that the person you are has value, and not wanting zealots to crush that person out of you, does not make you weak. On the contrary, I was strong willed and strong minded enough to split as soon as they moved me to phase 2. You think that you just "let it roll off your back" and I am just "holding onto it". From where I'm standing, you just roll over and accept your role as victim, while I am still trying to tell anyone who will listen what kind of people run these places and what their real methods are so hopefully they will not do this to their children. And "weak", in the group setting, just means that you are different from the automatons that make up the group.
I am sorry if my description offended you, Perhaps read my post again,,I dont condemn anyone for bring up their past or complaining about parts of it. I am the King of Complaints about my childhood and programs,in the past. Elan did not do me any good, just reinforced the negative beliefs, I already had.I turn out pretty well, but not without allot of obstacles.But I credit nothing to programs, I was just in with other ass-holes like me at the time. I changed and so did some others,but some still are the same.
And life goes on,And as strong minded and willed as I am, I will never forget my days at Elan in Maine,Your right Shadyarces, somethings never go away,. We just try and grow from them,and be better than our past.And never give up, :cheers: :cheers: :rocker: :rocker: :peace: :peace:
-
Even Holocaust survivors who suffered one of the greatest losses retell their stories with recounts of friendships made, guards who were kind to the children etc.
Are you serious? :flame:
If you ever get a chance to visit Washington DC take some time out to visit the Holocaust Museum. Just walk thru the museum and read and listen, really listen. Listen to the words of the survivors and the tails of their experiences the loved ones the lose and the hardship they endured. You will not find one of them ever saying that all Germans are evil etc. They speak about the occurrences naturally. Life still occurs even under the most horrible circumstances.
If you read the survivors stories here on fornits many lack the natural details of life (they have been stripped from the readers view). Even someone who has never heard of programs before would never believe that every staff person is evil and abusive, yet that is how the stories are formulated here. Many try to lead the readers to believe that they never met a good friend, enjoyed a certain meal, learned to enjoy writing during their time their, connected with a staff member, enjoyed snow for the first time etc. Many of the stories lack credibility because of this.
If I was raped by my teacher at school and beaten I would be justified as saying I did not have a very good experience in highschool. But if I went onto a web site and started writing my story explaining how every teacher is a rapist and I never met one friend in highschool, the food was horrible, everychild was raped, I never learned to read or write, I learned science but I dont credit the teachers for that, I eventually went to college but I dont credit the highschool for that, I did it in spite of them. My story didnt include one positive aspect of my time in highschool then the whole story sinks and loses credibility. I think many here on fornits spend so much energy trying to paint the industry as evil as possible that they forget to tell the whole story.
...
I don´t need to go to any museum to learn about holocaust.
I wish I would not know so much about it.
I hope all parents looking for information will learn through this what kind of person you are, Whooter, because your argumentation is telling.
-
I don´t need to go to any museum to learn about holocaust.
You are too young to have experienced it first hand so you must be one of those people who wants to forget history and view museums as a waste of money.
I wish I would not know so much about it.
There are those people like yourself who wish they didnt know so much about the TTI. But unlike yourself I think it is important to continue to educate people and bring them the facts about places whether it be a program in Utah or a Wilderness program in South Carolina.
I hope all parents looking for information will learn through this what kind of person you are, Whooter, because your argumentation is telling.
Thank you, Maruska, I think everyone can agree that I am open minded and sometime rely on the past to give me road signs for the future. Whereas you like to just close your mind and pretend you know everything.
...
-
If you read the survivors stories here on fornits many lack the natural details of life (they have been stripped from the readers view).
Do you believe there is some grand, super seekret conspiracy underfoot here on fornits? Some kind of special text editor (!) which reams anything innocuous from folks' posts?
"Natural details of life?" Come-on! If you're telling the story of some god-awful experience you had as a kid, do you or does anyone feel compelled to add some positive material "for balance?" Just how "natural" is it to describe being horrifically abused or raped while at program, and to finish off your tale with, "Oh, in case I forgot, they made really good coffee there."
Even someone who has never heard of programs before would never believe that every staff person is evil and abusive, yet that is how the stories are formulated here. Many try to lead the readers to believe that they never met a good friend, enjoyed a certain meal, learned to enjoy writing during their time their, connected with a staff member, enjoyed snow for the first time etc. Many of the stories lack credibility because of this.
I think your statement lacks a great deal of credibility given that I have never gotten the impression that anyone here has claimed that EVERY staff member is "evil and abusive." In fact, a fair number of posters have even pointed out that many of the younger staff, especially, get sucked into this binnis due to good intentions and genuine desire to help "troubled youth." Often those staff don't last very long, or, they change.
But again, why is it necessary to provide readers with the ENTIRE INVENTORY of all of one's experiences in program, when one most desires to share or discuss what one feels most strongly about?
And that is really the point, which you absolutely refuse to believe. When you have been seriously abused, let alone seriously abused during a critical period in the development of your self-identity, the memory of that abuse lingers louder and longer than any so-called positive aspects of that time. People usually have a far larger need to recover from trauma, than they do from enjoyable times!
If I was raped by my teacher at school and beaten I would be justified as saying I did not have a very good experience in highschool. But if I went onto a web site and started writing my story explaining how every teacher is a rapist and I never met one friend in highschool, the food was horrible, everychild was raped, I never learned to read or write, I learned science but I dont credit the teachers for that, I eventually went to college but I dont credit the highschool for that, I did it in spite of them. My story didnt include one positive aspect of my time in highschool then the whole story sinks and loses credibility. I think many here on fornits spend so much energy trying to paint the industry as evil as possible that they forget to tell the whole story.
I can't even comment on that asshattery. It bears zero relation to fornits or reality in any universe that I can imagine.
-
Even Holocaust survivors who suffered one of the greatest losses retell their stories with recounts of friendships made, guards who were kind to the children etc.
Are you serious? :flame:
If you ever get a chance to visit Washington DC take some time out to visit the Holocaust Museum. Just walk thru the museum and read and listen, really listen. Listen to the words of the survivors and the tails of their experiences the loved ones the lose and the hardship they endured. You will not find one of them ever saying that all Germans are evil etc. They speak about the occurrences naturally. Life still occurs even under the most horrible circumstances.
If you read the survivors stories here on fornits many lack the natural details of life (they have been stripped from the readers view). Even someone who has never heard of programs before would never believe that every staff person is evil and abusive, yet that is how the stories are formulated here. Many try to lead the readers to believe that they never met a good friend, enjoyed a certain meal, learned to enjoy writing during their time their, connected with a staff member, enjoyed snow for the first time etc. Many of the stories lack credibility because of this.
If I was raped by my teacher at school and beaten I would be justified as saying I did not have a very good experience in highschool. But if I went onto a web site and started writing my story explaining how every teacher is a rapist and I never met one friend in highschool, the food was horrible, everychild was raped, I never learned to read or write, I learned science but I dont credit the teachers for that, I eventually went to college but I dont credit the highschool for that, I did it in spite of them. My story didnt include one positive aspect of my time in highschool then the whole story sinks and loses credibility. I think many here on fornits spend so much energy trying to paint the industry as evil as possible that they forget to tell the whole story.
I don´t need to go to any museum to learn about holocaust.
I wish I would not know so much about it.
I hope all parents looking for information will learn through this what kind of person you are, Whooter, because your argumentation is telling.
I don´t need to go to any museum to learn about holocaust.
You are too young to have experienced it first hand so you must be one of those people who wants to forget history and view museums as a waste of money.
I wish I would not know so much about it.
There are those people like yourself who wish they didnt know so much about the TTI. But unlike yourself I think it is important to continue to educate people and bring them the facts about places whether it be a program in Utah or a Wilderness program in South Carolina.
I hope all parents looking for information will learn through this what kind of person you are, Whooter, because your argumentation is telling.
Thank you, Maruska, I think everyone can agree that I am open minded and sometime rely on the past to give me road signs for the future. Whereas you like to just close your mind and pretend you know everything.
Wow. This whole interchange is very telling. Not sure who you are referring to, Whooter, when you state that "I think everyone can agree that I am open minded," but you are certainly not including me in your calculations!
-
If you read the survivors stories here on fornits many lack the natural details of life (they have been stripped from the readers view).
Do you believe there is some grand, super seekret conspiracy underfoot here on fornits? Some kind of special text editor (!) which reams anything innocuous from folks' posts?
"Natural details of life?" Come-on! If you're telling the story of some god-awful experience you had as a kid, do you or does anyone feel compelled to add some positive material "for balance?" Just how "natural" is it to describe being horrifically abused or raped while at program, and to finish off your tale with, "Oh, in case I forgot, they made really good coffee there."
Even someone who has never heard of programs before would never believe that every staff person is evil and abusive, yet that is how the stories are formulated here. Many try to lead the readers to believe that they never met a good friend, enjoyed a certain meal, learned to enjoy writing during their time their, connected with a staff member, enjoyed snow for the first time etc. Many of the stories lack credibility because of this.
I think your statement lacks a great deal of credibility given that I have never gotten the impression that anyone here has claimed that EVERY staff member is "evil and abusive." In fact, a fair number of posters have even pointed out that many of the younger staff, especially, get sucked into this binnis due to good intentions and genuine desire to help "troubled youth." Often those staff don't last very long, or, they change.
But again, why is it necessary to provide readers with the ENTIRE INVENTORY of all of one's experiences in program, when one most desires to share or discuss what one feels most strongly about?
And that is really the point, which you absolutely refuse to believe. When you have been seriously abused, let alone seriously abused during a critical period in the development of your self-identity, the memory of that abuse lingers louder and longer than any so-called positive aspects of that time. People usually have a far larger need to recover from trauma, than they do from enjoyable times!
If I was raped by my teacher at school and beaten I would be justified as saying I did not have a very good experience in highschool. But if I went onto a web site and started writing my story explaining how every teacher is a rapist and I never met one friend in highschool, the food was horrible, everychild was raped, I never learned to read or write, I learned science but I dont credit the teachers for that, I eventually went to college but I dont credit the highschool for that, I did it in spite of them. My story didnt include one positive aspect of my time in highschool then the whole story sinks and loses credibility. I think many here on fornits spend so much energy trying to paint the industry as evil as possible that they forget to tell the whole story.
I can't even comment on that asshattery. It bears zero relation to fornits or reality in any universe that I can imagine.
I think maybe you cannot see it because you have been reading here on fornits for a long time. Sometimes it is a good idea to flip the situation over and take a look at it from a different perspective.
Imagine that you were talking to a child who attended a program 20 years ago and they said it was one of the the best memories they have. The food was better than home..... all the staff were nice and the classrooms were clean and they advanced 2 grades during their years spent there. You ask if there was anything bad that occurred during their stay their and they reply "No, the whole experience was great even the beds were comfortable, I cant think of anything negative about the place".
Wouldnt this raise a flag for you? Wouldnt you expect some negativity like they were pissed because they couldnt call their friends or go to the mall on weekends? Have more control over their clothes? Its natural to speak about good and bad. Something more balanced should come out over time we would expect.
...
-
If you read the survivors stories here on fornits many lack the natural details of life (they have been stripped from the readers view).
Do you believe there is some grand, super seekret conspiracy underfoot here on fornits? Some kind of special text editor (!) which reams anything innocuous from folks' posts?
"Natural details of life?" Come-on! If you're telling the story of some god-awful experience you had as a kid, do you or does anyone feel compelled to add some positive material "for balance?" Just how "natural" is it to describe being horrifically abused or raped while at program, and to finish off your tale with, "Oh, in case I forgot, they made really good coffee there."
Even someone who has never heard of programs before would never believe that every staff person is evil and abusive, yet that is how the stories are formulated here. Many try to lead the readers to believe that they never met a good friend, enjoyed a certain meal, learned to enjoy writing during their time their, connected with a staff member, enjoyed snow for the first time etc. Many of the stories lack credibility because of this.
I think your statement lacks a great deal of credibility given that I have never gotten the impression that anyone here has claimed that EVERY staff member is "evil and abusive." In fact, a fair number of posters have even pointed out that many of the younger staff, especially, get sucked into this binnis due to good intentions and genuine desire to help "troubled youth." Often those staff don't last very long, or, they change.
But again, why is it necessary to provide readers with the ENTIRE INVENTORY of all of one's experiences in program, when one most desires to share or discuss what one feels most strongly about?
And that is really the point, which you absolutely refuse to believe. When you have been seriously abused, let alone seriously abused during a critical period in the development of your self-identity, the memory of that abuse lingers louder and longer than any so-called positive aspects of that time. People usually have a far larger need to recover from trauma, than they do from enjoyable times!
If I was raped by my teacher at school and beaten I would be justified as saying I did not have a very good experience in highschool. But if I went onto a web site and started writing my story explaining how every teacher is a rapist and I never met one friend in highschool, the food was horrible, everychild was raped, I never learned to read or write, I learned science but I dont credit the teachers for that, I eventually went to college but I dont credit the highschool for that, I did it in spite of them. My story didnt include one positive aspect of my time in highschool then the whole story sinks and loses credibility. I think many here on fornits spend so much energy trying to paint the industry as evil as possible that they forget to tell the whole story.
I can't even comment on that asshattery. It bears zero relation to fornits or reality in any universe that I can imagine.
I think maybe you cannot see it because you have been reading here on fornits for a long time. Sometimes it is a good idea to flip the situation over and take a look at it from a different perspective.
Imagine that you were talking to a child who attended a program 20 years ago and they said it was one of the the best memories they have. The food was better than home..... all the staff were nice and the classrooms were clean and they advanced 2 grades during their years spent there. You ask if there was anything bad that occurred during their stay their and they reply "No, the whole experience was great even the beds were comfortable, I cant think of anything negative about the place".
Wouldnt this raise a flag for you? Wouldnt you expect some negativity like they were pissed because they couldnt call their friends or go to the mall on weekends? Have more control over their clothes? Its natural to speak about good and bad. Something more balanced should come out over time we would expect.
...
I think maybe you cannot see it because you have been reading here on fornits for a long time. Sometimes it is a good idea to flip the situation over and take a look at it from a different perspective.
You think, you think, you think....I think, I think, I think. You put so much emphasis on your (Whooter) cranium intellectual strength that you are not even able to galvanize a pure empathic response to a situation that screams for emotional feedback. This is what fornits is at it's essence, Emotions swirling around trying to connect so one can validate a very horrific abusive time.
Whooter, you are jack hammering a square peg into a round hole and you are hurting people in the process, with your detached (emotionally) quasi sensible arguments, you think have merit.
Sad part you know all this. The more I read and really open my eyes to your world (On Fornits) you really are a sociopath by the very literal definition. I am not playing games here nor trying to bash you either, just look up the definition in any encyclopedia or better yet sit down with any Psychiatrist an explain exactly what you have been doing for the past five years, be honest. Even if it came out that you do work for some corporation and you are a shill, you do understand there are consequences for impersonating or assimilating a separate personality. It becomes you. Ask JOM or anyone else who has worked undercover or assumed a separate personality.
There is another consequence, I know you are a spiritual man. I would hate to be in your shoes if your judgment day came and you had not asked for forgiveness for the sins you are committing here. You are tormenting souls, that have already walked/crawled through hell.
Shame on you
-
Very few kids do not do well and the overwhelming majority of the kids benefit greatly from their stay at a program.
Citation please. And not a parental survey or the like. Clinical, long term, OBJECTIVE studies. Not some paper written by a college student.
Fornits does not represent your average cross section of kids who were sent to programs.
First, citation please. Second, there are many reasons that kids don't want to even revisit those times or what happened to them in there. Additionally, there is - even into adulthood - a small section of "devotees", not unlike Jim Jones. Those people SWORE up and down that he was the real deal....that he had the "answer". We all saw how that turned out.
This is an entirely different culture here which has its own language and definitions and is not representative of the majority of survivors.
You keep spouting that but provide no evidence of it. We've posted legitimate studies that have concluded that the type of "therapy" these kids are receiving, even today, is harmful to them. Senator Sam Ervin saw it way back when with the Seed. You can try and claim that things have changed since then but First, you provide no legitimate studies, Two, some are still brainwashed (Ervin's claim, not ours) and Three, many of them just want to forget the whole damn thing and try and pick up the pieces of their lives.
You would know this if you ever speak to a child who went to a program whether they did good or poorly they speak about the pros as well as the cons (they dont use the terms gulags, incarceration, kidnapping, isolation etc.).
I can't even begin to count the number of survivors (both pro and con) that use those terms. And I noticed that you dropped your usual "brainwashing" since the Ervin post went up.
Here on fornits a reader rarely reads a post which speaks of nothing but the negative aspects of a program.
Do you see what I mean?
No.
If we spoke to a person “who did well” in a program then we would hear things like how they enjoyed the rafting trips and they learned to enjoy reading and met some great people.
Not only have I spoken with graduates that "did well", I'm also one of those who actually graduated from my program. Yes, I did meet some great people there but they were clients, not staff.
1.If we only looked at fornits we would believe that all kids had to sit on church pews for 18 hours a day, will be abused and "will not do well".
The obvious reason for that is that, initially, this was set up as a board for kids who were abused in programs so you can't blame Fornits.
3.If we only looked at the programs feedback we would believe that “all kids do well” and get set on the right path.
Yes, if you only look at the marketing websites, most of whom are still 'washed'. And that's truly sad. Most of the kids I was in with and most of what I"m hearing about programs today, are so similar. Break them down and build them up in YOUR vision, not theirs.
You're coming on to a site that is mainly populated by kids who were harmed by these schysters. We suffered the abuse. You are looking in from the outside. You got what you wanted, at first. My Zappa signature explains this quite well. The more boring a child is, the more the parents, when showing off the child, receive adulation for being good parents-- because they have a tame child-creature in their house. ~~ Frank Zappa
If you dont think that teenagers do not manipulate then you have never raised one. Try talking to a motivated kid who wants to meet their friends at the mall and their goal is to try to get you to give them your car keys lol. We have all been there.
Yes.....normal part of growing up and discovering that they have minds, thoughts, and values of their own that may be different from the parents - which makes the parents prime targets. "Your kid will be deadinsaneorinjail" if you don't enroll him"
Many of the kids who were/are sent to programs have trust issues and is one of the reasons for their downfall,
And who's fault would that be? Why should the kids be punished for poor parenting?
so add that to the fact that kids dont want to be in the program doing the hard work it is not a far stretch to think they will say anything to get themselves taken out of there.
First, most probably DON'T need to be there. Second, these kids aren't getting the help they truly need (those that do actually need help). Third, Spoken like a true TTIbot. This is the mantra they've been selling for decades.
-
Citation please. And not a parental survey or the like. Clinical, long term, OBJECTIVE studies. Not some paper written by a college student.
…and don’t forget individual posts on websites like fornits, they cant count either, right?
First, citation please. Second, there are many reasons that kids don't want to even revisit those times or what happened to them in there. Additionally, there is - even into adulthood - a small section of "devotees", not unlike Jim Jones. Those people SWORE up and down that he was the real deal....that he had the "answer". We all saw how that turned out.
First, citation please. Second, there are many reasons that kids don't want to even revisit those times or what happened to them in there. Additionally, there is - even into adulthood - a small section of "devotees", not unlike Jim Jones. Those people SWORE up and down that he was the real deal....that he had the "answer". We all saw how that turned out.
There are people from all walks of life. I am sure there are people who would log onto fornits and post some bogus story about being abused in a program just for kicks. But I don’t think these people represent the average poster.
You keep spouting that but provide no evidence of it. We've posted legitimate studies that have concluded that the type of "therapy" these kids are receiving, even today, is harmful to them. Senator Sam Ervin saw it way back when with the Seed. You can try and claim that things have changed since then but First, you provide no legitimate studies, Two, some are still brainwashed (Ervin's claim, not ours) and Three, many of them just want to forget the whole damn thing and try and pick up the pieces of their lives.
Its all outdated Anne and doesn’t apply here. We have reviewed studies here on fornits that were conducted over the past decade which tell a different story. As far as the language goes we already covered this. People outside fornits don’t just throw around words like gulage and kidnapping to embellish their stories of being in a program. I know this first hand.
I can't even begin to count the number of survivors (both pro and con) that use those terms. And I noticed that you dropped your usual "brainwashing" since the Ervin post went up.
No, I include Brainwashing, notice the etc. at the end of the list. I must have missed the Ervin post (or forgotten it) so I don’t know what you are referring to.
The obvious reason for that is that, initially, this was set up as a board for kids who were abused in programs so you can't blame Fornits.
I am not blaming fornits. Fornits is defined by their posters (you and I).
Yes, if you only look at the marketing websites, most of whom are still 'washed'. And that's truly sad. Most of the kids I was in with and most of what I"m hearing about programs today, are so similar. Break them down and build them up in YOUR vision, not theirs.
You're coming on to a site that is mainly populated by kids who were harmed by these schysters. We suffered the abuse. You are looking in from the outside. You got what you wanted, at first. My Zappa signature explains this quite well. The more boring a child is, the more the parents, when showing off the child, receive adulation for being good parents-- because they have a tame child-creature in their house. ~~ Frank Zappa
Your Zappa quote is applied to whoever you choose to apply it to. That’s your choice. I personally don’t believe his quote. Maybe he was referring to the group of people he hung around with.
Yes.....normal part of growing up and discovering that they have minds, thoughts, and values of their own that may be different from the parents - which makes the parents prime targets. "Your kid will be deadinsaneorinjail" if you don't enroll him"
Some kids do die and end up in jail if we sit back and do nothing. You must know this too.
And who's fault would that be? Why should the kids be punished for poor parenting?
Why are you still blaming your parents because of your trust issues
First, most probably DON'T need to be there.
Citation, I need a long term clinical study that has been presented to the American Psychiatric association and embraced by at least 4 medical fields and printed on medium/fine 8X12 paper. lol
Second, these kids aren't getting the help they truly need (those that do actually need help).
Yes they are.
Third, Spoken like a true TTIbot. This is the mantra they've been selling for decades.
I must have missed this, citation please.
...
-
…and don’t forget individual posts on websites like fornits, they cant count either, right?
Which is a message board, not a clinical study like the ones that have been done on 'confrontational therapy' etc. that show that is doesn't help and often does more damage. I've cited them for you countless times so I'm sure you'll be able to pull them up.
There are people from all walks of life. I am sure there are people who would log onto fornits and post some bogus story about being abused in a program just for kicks. But I don’t think these people represent the average poster.
It's a message board, originally set up to provide support for survivors. You keep trying to compare apples to oranges. You can leave at any time you wish. The kids cannot.
Its all outdated Anne and doesn’t apply here.
It may be old, but it's most certainly not outdated. The fact is that what they did to us and are still doing to other kids has many, MANY similarities to programs.
We have reviewed studies here on fornits that were conducted over the past decade which tell a different story.
Those parental 'exit surveys'? That's not a study.
As far as the language goes we already covered this. People outside fornits don’t just throw around words like gulage and kidnapping to embellish their stories of being in a program. I know this first hand.
You used to include brainwashing in that but since the Ervin report came out I see you've dropped that.
No, I include Brainwashing, notice the etc. at the end of the list. I must have missed the Ervin post (or forgotten it) so I don’t know what you are referring to.
How convenient.
I am not blaming fornits. Fornits is defined by their posters (you and I).
Ok. So you can't blame the posters here who, by your own account, are mostly survivors.
Some kids do die and end up in jail if we sit back and do nothing. You must know this too.
Yes, but not for the normal adolescent breaking away from the parents behavior, which is why most of these kids are shipped off, IMO.
Why are you still blaming your parents because of your trust issues
Because they broke the trust when they sent me off to a wannabe guru who was a Malignant Narcissist.
Second, these kids aren't getting the help they truly need (those that do actually need help).
Yes they are.
Citation please. You're the one saying that these places are effective. The burden of proof is on you and those claiming so. Please give me a clinical, longitudinal, peer reviewed study that says they're effective.
-
No, I include Brainwashing, notice the etc. at the end of the list. I must have missed the Ervin post (or forgotten it) so I don’t know what you are referring to.
Well, now... wouldn't want ya to miss that one, eh? :D
Here's the thread; links to the original doc (in pdf and scribd.com formats) a coupla posts in:
- 1974 U.S. Senate report on Behavior Modification (The Seed)
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=31751 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=31751)
-
Which is a message board, not a clinical study like the ones that have been done on 'confrontational therapy' etc. that show that is doesn't help and often does more damage. I've cited them for you countless times so I'm sure you'll be able to pull them up.
The most recent studies indicate that programs are up to 85% successful up to a year after graduation.
It's a message board, originally set up to provide support for survivors. You keep trying to compare apples to oranges. You can leave at any time you wish. The kids cannot.
I am not comparing anything. All I am saying is we need to look at all the information (not just fornits). There are people who tell their story on alumni sites. There are surveys that are done. There are studies which included a 1,000 graduates and their parents. None of these are clinical studies but they are all information. They all need to be looked at.
It may be old, but it's most certainly not outdated. The fact is that what they did to us and are still doing to other kids has many, MANY similarities to programs.
There may be similarities but for the most part they are vastly different.
Those parental 'exit surveys'? That's not a study.
Fornits isn’t a study either, but it is information. We cant just discard your personal account of your time in straight because it isn’t clinically certified can we?
You used to include brainwashing in that but since the Ervin report came out I see you've dropped that.
I have no idea what you are talking about, Anne. Include brainwashing where? If you think I believe kids are being brainwashed in programs today then the answer is no I don’t.
Ok. So you can't blame the posters here who, by your own account, are mostly survivors
I don’t like to blame anyone.
Yes, but not for the normal adolescent breaking away from the parents behavior, which is why most of these kids are shipped off, IMO.
A very small minority of kids are placed in programs who should not be there IMO.
Because they broke the trust when they sent me off to a wannabe guru who was a Malignant Narcissist.
Sometimes it is the kids who broke the trust and the parents had no choice but to get the child help. We cant sit around and blame our parents for everything. At some point people need to stand up and be accountable for their own actions.
Citation please. You're the one saying that these places are effective. The burden of proof is on you and those claiming so. Please give me a clinical, longitudinal, peer reviewed study that says they're effective.
I have presented studies here,Anne, they just don’t meet your standard. Who has clinically approved your story? Should we discard it because it is just hearsay? How do we know any of the information on fornits is true? Before asking me to supply clinical level data you should supply that level yourself.
If you state these places are ineffective or abusive The burden of proof is on you and so far the only studies I have seen say that programs are effective and non abusive.
There have been many studies, surveys, posts which have been presented here on fornits. Some of these studies have covered up to a 1,000 graduates of programs and they found the programs to be 85% successful after graduation. This information was presented to the American Psychiatric Association.
We can all chose to accept or reject the study, but the information isn’t going to go away because you want something else.
...
-
Not while in the program, cause the whole "confidential " thing gets a lot of milage ,depending on who's using it.Used by the local monkeyfarm, its ultimately just a "divide and conquer" device,and besides the kids are all just "making it up" in order to "manipulate" the parents into withdrawing them . Right? Then you got yer genuine Kool-Aid drinkers.....they aint credible either...untill the "Shine" wears off that is....till they really think about it .....and realize what a load of crap theyve swallowed,and at last......voila....the truth comes out.
If you dont think that teenagers do not manipulate then you have never raised one. Try talking to a motivated kid who wants to meet their friends at the mall and their goal is to try to get you to give them your car keys lol. We have all been there. Many of the kids who were/are sent to programs have trust issues and is one of the reasons for their downfall, so add that to the fact that kids dont want to be in the program doing the hard work it is not a far stretch to think they will say anything to get themselves taken out of there.
Spoken like a true believer, Youve managed to prove my point, thank you
Speaking of "credible" why is it that someone who has NEVER sat on front row,never been belt-looped, and has no form of first hand knowledge, has anything in the same ballpark as credibility here? That is a seriously UN-qualified opinion. Like a blind man tryin to tell ya what blue is...... :nods:
If we can sit here and tolerate listening to posters here give there advice and input when they have never raised an at risk teen, placed a child in a program or owned a program, been a staff in a program, had a friend die in a program, had a friend do extremely well in a program then we can tolerate just about anyone, becuase everyone seems to be an expert here on just about every aspect of the TTI.
s
...
Spoken likk a miller lite
-
Sometimes it is the kids who broke the trust and the parents had no choice but to get the child help.
...
Help, that is a strange word for psychologically and emotionally crippling "behavior modification", also known as "coercive mind control" or "coercive thought reform". Did you know that the U.N. has recognized this as a form of torture? Did you know that this is one of the "cruel and unusual" punishments that our corrections institutions are not allowed to practice on convicts? Do you think you can find a dictionary with that definition of 'help' in it?
-
No, I include Brainwashing, notice the etc. at the end of the list. I must have missed the Ervin post (or forgotten it) so I don’t know what you are referring to.
Well, now... wouldn't want ya to miss that one, eh? :D
Here's the thread; links to the original doc (in pdf and scribd.com formats) a coupla posts in:
- 1974 U.S. Senate report on Behavior Modification (The Seed)
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=31751 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=31751)
I think that Anne feels I changed my mind about brainwashing since that was posted. The report is from the 1970's. The seed is radically different than the programs of today (or at least the ones I am aware of).
From what I have read the kids in the seed were not allowed to talk to old friends outside the program. They were not focused on studying for their SATS and leaving the program to visit colleges, take AP courses. The kids in the seed did play sports with local highschools and compete or go on white water rafting trips. The seed and places like them would bring in the entire family and they had to buy into to whole thought process like it was a religion of some sort. Some compared it to a cult.
The programs that I am familiar with work towards building self esteem, getting the kids grade point average up and improve their chances to get into a better school. They work on improving relations between family members and strengthening the bond between them. The parents would challenge some of the rules and methods and many times changes were made based on these requests. If a child tried to run away more than once he/she would be kicked out. The seed never did any of these things. Brainwashing just cannot take hold in an environment like this. Anyone who reads what is really required to attain complete compliance and brainwashing would quickly realize the programs of today dont maintain that type of environment.
I think Anne see similarities because they are both programs which house children but beyond that they don't have too much more in-common.
...
-
Sometimes it is the kids who broke the trust and the parents had no choice but to get the child help.
...
Help, that is a strange word for psychologically and emotionally crippling "behavior modification", also known as "coercive mind control" or "coercive thought reform". Did you know that the U.N. has recognized this as a form of torture? Did you know that this is one of the "cruel and unusual" punishments that our corrections institutions are not allowed to practice on convicts? Do you think you can find a dictionary with that definition of 'help' in it?
I have to agree with you Shady. I think it should be considered torture. If a person tried to use crippling mind control on anyone I knew or cared about I would sue the place or try to shut it down. But utilizing behavior modification is helpful. Anyone who has ever raised a child uses these techniques 24 hours a day. Many people here on fornits confuse techniques used in North Korea (to brainwash people) with those of a simple housewife applying behavior modification techniques to her child. There are similarities but one is abusive and harmful while the other is not.
It is a common scare tactic that many posters here use to scare parents and at the same time to try to maintain a connection to the seed of the 1970's and North Korea.
...
-
Well Whooter, there is no socially accepted definition of the point where mind control, thought reform, or ‘brainwashing’ crossed the line into what you call ‘crippling’ ‘abusive’ or ‘harmful’. So, in your opinion, what makes one program’s use of these techniques ‘good’ and another’s ‘bad’?
.
-
the overwhelming majority of the kids benefit greatly from their stay at a program.
How can you with your admittedly limited experience make such a claim? What data have you seen that would suggest this is true?
So I don’t expect you to embrace my outside information or anyone elses, but it doesn’t make it any less factual.
...
OK, for a balanced view. Last weekend we had our board retreat for CAFETY. We had the joy of having a parent at our retreat who sent thier child to what they thought was a normal boarding school. Her daughter wanted to go to boarding school for the experience, and her parents agreed.
Well what happened to her at this school was horrific. - same abuse , same stories, that we (that you practically call liars, or at least you insinuate that many of us are .... exagerrating our abuse, and how come almost everyone I was in group with at KIDS is out and claiming abuse? there are only a couple missing, and I think they just want to move on) have come forward about.
Its a nightmare for this woman, she was convinced by an educational consultant, who was given this kid's full information, knew she was a good kid, and had good grades, and was for all intents "normal and not troubled", and now, because of her experience at this TBS, she *is* troubled.
Thats scary.
My parents still claim "it did me good", and "I needed it" , and "they did their best", however I have had the same experience that everyone had, that Lulu C. and Rebecca E. successfully sued them for. I have tried to commit suicide at least once because I remembered a sexual assault in there, and then when I feel unsafe I start being paranoid and watching over my shoulder, and never knowing who might just "drag me back after all these years" (its not conscious, I just start feeling that way), which causes issues of course between myself and my partners.
So seriously? You want to insinuate we're lying, or at the very least exagerrating, and that somehow these schools and institutions are for the most part "doing a good job?" Come on.
As far as not knowing where to go, Phil Elberg says "I don't know where to tell people to go, but I do know, you don;t go to these places for help"
Come on. Who are you? (as far as I can tell, you're just a troll, I don;t know why people, including myself, humour you)
-
Sometimes it is the kids who broke the trust and the parents had no choice but to get the child help.
...
Help, that is a strange word for psychologically and emotionally crippling "behavior modification", also known as "coercive mind control" or "coercive thought reform". Did you know that the U.N. has recognized this as a form of torture? Did you know that this is one of the "cruel and unusual" punishments that our corrections institutions are not allowed to practice on convicts? Do you think you can find a dictionary with that definition of 'help' in it?
I have to agree with you Shady. I think it should be considered torture. If a person tried to use crippling mind control on anyone I knew or cared about I would sue the place or try to shut it down. But utilizing behavior modification is helpful. Anyone who has ever raised a child uses these techniques 24 hours a day. Many people here on fornits confuse techniques used in North Korea (to brainwash people) with those of a simple housewife applying behavior modification techniques to her child. There are similarities but one is abusive and harmful while the other is not.
It is a common scare tactic that many posters here use to scare parents and at the same time to try to maintain a connection to the seed of the 1970's and North Korea.
..
Ya know, I also find it odd that these methods have remained with us into the twenty-first century. The people who practice them seem to be able to bribe, corrupt and scare enough people to always stay in business SOMEWHERE. Straight was a direct outgrowth of The Seed. The program I was in, LIFE, was a direct outgrowth of Straight. LIFE, in turn, spawned KHK and Growing Together. Straight spawned Kids of NJ, Pathways, SAFE, and AARC. I have watched video testimonials from recent “clients” of these places and I can tell you that THE SAME METHODS WERE USED ON THEM THAT WERE USED ON ME TWENTY FIVE YEARS AGO! From what I have seen from the video testimonies on YouTube, the WWASP and Aspen programs and CEDU clones are just as bad or worse.
-
Well Whooter, there is no socially accepted definition of the point where mind control, thought reform, or ‘brainwashing’ crossed the line into what you call ‘crippling’ ‘abusive’ or ‘harmful’. So, in your opinion, what makes one program’s use of these techniques ‘good’ and another’s ‘bad’?
.
As long as the techniques are utilized in such a way as to increase a childs self esteem and they use positive feed back or reinforcement then I would say it is a safe model. From a parents perspective this would be similar the methods used at home or the use of "Token economy" in any mild "Applied behavior program" (ABA) used within many of our public school systems.
If you take a look at the techniques used to brainwash or instill mind control on a person you will quickly realize that the methods do not lend themselves to increasing a persons self esteem or leading them towards being more independent. These methods are very damaging to a person and any child subjected to these methods would not do well once they graduated and moved on to college or a world where they needed to compete in the job market.
I have noticed that many posters confuse these two vastly different methods.
...
-
Well Whooter, there is no socially accepted definition of the point where mind control, thought reform, or ‘brainwashing’ crossed the line into what you call ‘crippling’ ‘abusive’ or ‘harmful’. So, in your opinion, what makes one program’s use of these techniques ‘good’ and another’s ‘bad’?
.
As long as the techniques are utilized in such a way as to increase a childs self esteem and they use positive feed back or reinforcement then I would say it is a safe model. From a parents perspective this would be similar the methods used at home or the use of "Token economy" in any mild "Applied behavior program" (ABA) used within many of our public school systems.
If you take a look at the techniques used to brainwash or instill mind control on a person you will quickly realize that the methods do not lend themselves to increasing a persons self esteem or leading them towards being more independent. These methods are very damaging to a person and any child subjected to these methods would not do well once they graduated and moved on to college or a world where they needed to compete in the job market.
I have noticed that many posters confuse these two vastly different methods.
...
How do you think thought reform or mind control can be used to make someone improve their self esteem?
-
How do you think thought reform or mind control can be used to make someone improve their self esteem?
From what little I have read on the subject I dont think that they can. Do you think Behavior Modification is abusive?
...
-
Well Whooter, there is no socially accepted definition of the point where mind control, thought reform, or ‘brainwashing’ crossed the line into what you call ‘crippling’ ‘abusive’ or ‘harmful’. So, in your opinion, what makes one program’s use of these techniques ‘good’ and another’s ‘bad’?
.
As long as the techniques are utilized in such a way as to increase a childs self esteem and they use positive feed back or reinforcement then I would say it is a safe model.
...
How do you think thought reform or mind control can be used to make someone improve their self esteem?
From what little I have read on the subject I dont think that they can. Do you think Behavior Modification is abusive?
I don’t understand. You just said that programs can be good if they use mind control or thought reform techniques to improve the teen’s self esteem. Did you mean to say something else?
-
I don’t understand. You just said that programs can be good if they use mind control or thought reform techniques to improve the teen’s self esteem. Did you mean to say something else?
I read too quickly. I thought you had listed Behavior Modification along with mind control and brain washing techniques. Behavior Modification is okay to use in programs.
...
-
How do you think thought reform or mind control can be used to make someone improve their self esteem?
From what little I have read on the subject I dont think that they can. Do you think Behavior Modification is abusive?
"Token economy" or ABA are learning/teaching methods which do not ask access into a child's heart and soul, and seek to reconstruct that very being.
What occurs in the programs discussed on fornits and others like them, as if you didn't already know, involves "psychological reconditioning." A very different cup of tea, given the invasiveness.
-
I don’t understand. You just said that programs can be good if they use mind control or thought reform techniques to improve the teen’s self esteem. Did you mean to say something else?
I read too quickly. I thought you had listed Behavior Modification along with mind control and brain washing techniques. Behavior Modification is okay to use in programs.
There’s no harm in admitting you’re confused. So in your opinion, where do you draw the line between what is an ethically acceptable use of forced behavior modification (on teenagers) and what is thought reform, and/ or mind control?
How do you think thought reform or mind control can be used to make someone improve their self esteem?
From what little I have read on the subject I dont think that they can. Do you think Behavior Modification is abusive?
"Token economy" or ABA are learning/teaching methods which do not ask access into a child's heart and soul, and seek to reconstruct that very being.
What occurs in the programs discussed on fornits and others like them, as if you didn't already know, involves "psychological reconditioning." A very different cup of tea, given the invasiveness.
Good point.
-
Argh! Sorry. I quoted the wrong Whooter post. But... no matter. This is the one my previous post (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=31769&start=75#p387125) meant to address:
As long as the techniques are utilized in such a way as to increase a childs self esteem and they use positive feed back or reinforcement then I would say it is a safe model. From a parents perspective this would be similar the methods used at home or the use of "Token economy" in any mild "Applied behavior program" (ABA) used within many of our public school systems.
If you take a look at the techniques used to brainwash or instill mind control on a person you will quickly realize that the methods do not lend themselves to increasing a persons self esteem or leading them towards being more independent. These methods are very damaging to a person and any child subjected to these methods would not do well once they graduated and moved on to college or a world where they needed to compete in the job market.
I have noticed that many posters confuse these two vastly different methods.
So Whooter, although you can clearly see the difference between token economy based methods of teaching, and even ABA (generally used on autistics, though apparently the more intelligent and/or high functioning ones find it pretty brutal), from methods of "brainwashing" or "mind control," you fail to explain just how the methodologies that programs practice are anything at all similar to a "token economy" or even ABA.
IMO, they would seem to be more akin to "brainwashing" or "mind control" or, as noted in my previous post, "psychological reconditioning." That last was actually a term used to describe The Seed.
-
There’s no harm in admitting you’re confused.
Of course not! People should not feel bad for being confused or admitting to a mistake, I think you may tend to be too hard on people, awake. If you point out peoples mistakes too much they may tend to not want to open up or share their trust. I was just reading too quickly and thought you had included Behavior Modification.
So in your opinion, where do you draw the line between what is an ethically acceptable use of forced behavior modification (on teenagers) and what is thought reform, and/ or mind control?
I am not trained in the area but I think the key is protecting and increasing the self esteem and insuring that the child is building his/herself towards a point where they become self sufficient and independent. The child should earn his way using a reward system or step system where the child works his/her way through, build confidence by succeeding in their challenges. Incentives should be added like trips to the city, more freedoms in daily activities, special foods, social activities etc. similar to what parents use at home.
...
-
There’s no harm in admitting you’re confused.
Of course not! People should not feel bad for being confused or admitting to a mistake, I think you may tend to be too hard on people, awake. If you point out peoples mistakes too much they may tend to not want to open up or share their trust. I was just reading too quickly and thought you had included Behavior Modification.
I don’t know how other people feel, but I’m sorry if what I said felt harsh to you. And as it concerns troubled teen programs we should not hold back on pointing out what is being overlooked. I’m sorry you have taken it personally, confusion occurs anytime someone is expected to act in a situation in which they don’t have all the information. Do you think you really should feel the need to present facts about the troubled teen industry dishonestly because you get the impression you are being threatened?
I am not trained in the area but I think the key is protecting and increasing the self esteem and insuring that the child is building his/herself towards a point where they become self sufficient and independent. The child should earn his way using a reward system or step system where the child works his/her way through, build confidence by succeeding in their challenges. Incentives should be added like trips to the city, more freedoms in daily activities, special foods, social activities etc. similar to what parents use at home.
You are not knowledgeable in the area of thought reform, or mind control, or coercive persuasion, but you DO know that the troubled teen industry has roots in using such methods, yet you are describing methods that are used in thought reform. You say “ key is protecting and increasing the self esteem”. If this is the difference between an unethical use of thought reform, and an ethical use of behavior modification, then how do you think you can MAKE someone improve their self esteem?
-
I don’t know how other people feel, but I’m sorry if what I said felt harsh to you. And as it concerns troubled teen programs we should not hold back on pointing out what is being overlooked. I’m sorry you have taken it personally, confusion occurs anytime someone is expected to act in a situation in which they don’t have all the information. Do you think you really should feel the need to present facts about the troubled teen industry dishonestly because you get the impression you are being threatened?
I think people should present information that they have and be as honest as possible in presenting the facts. I think most people who have read what I post know that I don’t take much very personally. This is all a learning curve for all of us as none of us has all the information.
You are not knowledgeable in the area of thought reform, or mind control, or coercive persuasion, but you DO know that the troubled teen industry has roots in using such methods, yet you are describing methods that are used in thought reform. You say “ key is protecting and increasing the self esteem”. If this is the difference between an unethical use of thought reform, and an ethical use of behavior modification, then how do you think you can MAKE someone improve their self esteem?
I hear this over and over that the TTI has roots that can be traced back to North Korean Brain washing and torture. But what does that mean? They have also been able to trace all of humanity back to 8 people thousands of years ago. Programs from decades ago are going to have similarities to programs of today but it doesn’t mean they are the same. People rely so much on a single thread that may connect today to decades ago and try to convince themselves that Brainwashing and torture are occurring in every program today. I probably have ancestors that were murderers but that doesn’t mean I believe in murder or am a threat to anyone. Snake Venom can be turned into medicine.
I think it is important to understand where the industries roots began, but people need to open their eyes and look at what is happening today (not read about Korea). If one kid gets abused in a program in Utah and comes out and says he was brainwashed it doesn’t mean all programs are that way.
The use of Behavior Modification is not abusive and can be used to increase a childs self esteem. Allow them to grow and succeed and celebrate their milestones. I think the stories of straight and the seed and places like CEDU have over-shadowed fornits to the point where they believe all programs are like those were.
...
-
The use of Behavior Modification is not abusive and can be used to increase a childs self esteem. Allow them to grow and succeed and celebrate their milestones. I think the stories of straight and the seed and places like CEDU have over-shadowed fornits to the point where they believe all programs are like those were.
So you believe that behavior modification is never, and never has been, abusive? If you don’t believe that can be true, what about in the context of force? Can it be abusive then?
.
-
all I am saying is that is my point of view. Other readers my find the stories here very credible. I just seem to think there is something missing in many of the stories which raises a flag for me.
Your point of view counts for nothing. You have no first hand experience with them, we do. No one, and I mean no one finds your stories to be credible. You blather on and on about balance and how you dont see anything positive coming out of our stories. I'll reissue my challenge to you again, try and answer it without lying or making it about someone else.
Name one program running currently in the United States that you consider to be abusive. One.
-
The use of Behavior Modification is not abusive and can be used to increase a childs self esteem. Allow them to grow and succeed and celebrate their milestones. I think the stories of straight and the seed and places like CEDU have over-shadowed fornits to the point where they believe all programs are like those were.
So you believe that behavior modification is never, and never has been, abusive? If you don’t believe that can be true, what about in the context of force? Can it be abusive then?
.
Not at all, Behavior Mod can be abusive like anything else. But it doesnt have to be to be effective.
...
-
The use of Behavior Modification is not abusive and can be used to increase a childs self esteem. Allow them to grow and succeed and celebrate their milestones. I think the stories of straight and the seed and places like CEDU have over-shadowed fornits to the point where they believe all programs are like those were.
So you believe that behavior modification is never, and never has been, abusive? If you don’t believe that can be true, what about in the context of force? Can it be abusive then?
.
Not at all, Behavior Mod can be abusive like anything else. But it doesnt have to be to be effective.
...
Well you would be right in thinking that bevavior mod doesn't have to be effective to benefit the program owners. We certainly can't discount that money does motivate those applications which best suit the investors. I'm more interested in what you would consider abusive in this sense.
-
Well you would be right in thinking that bevavior mod doesn't have to be effective to benefit the program owners.
The program owners befit by the income from the business (they get paid). If the business doesn't do well then they will benefit less. So there is an incentive to make every child as successful as possible and do a little bit better than the next program.
We certainly can't discount that money does motivate those applications which best suit the investors.
We always need to keep in mind that people do what they do and are motivated by money. A good test of that would be to stop paying hospital employees and doctors and then see how many people are still working in the hospital after a month. There are many compassionate people in the world but we all need to profit from what we do to survive unless we want to be supported by the government.
I'm more interested in what you would consider abusive in this sense.
Any type of physical violence to try to change a kids behavior would be considered abusive in my opinion. Say, hitting a child with a stick every-time they made a mistake. This would not be considered positive feedback and would not further build a child's self esteem or self worth.
...
-
I'm more interested in what you would consider abusive in this sense.
Any type of physical violence to try to change a kids behavior would be considered abusive in my opinion. Say, hitting a child with a stick every-time they made a mistake. This would not be considered positive feedback and would not further build a child's self esteem or self worth.
And... what about psychological violence?
-
Any type of physical violence to try to change a kids behavior would be considered abusive in my opinion. Say, hitting a child with a stick every-time they made a mistake. This would not be considered positive feedback and would not further build a child's self esteem or self worth.
...
All that "positive peer pressure" jive and isolation from everything the child knows is tantamount to hitting their emotions, their psyche, with a stick, repeatedly, for months or years. And emotions, self worth, self esteem all take much longer to heal than your average switch welts. Many of us are still trying to heal after decades, even broken bones only take a couple of months.
-
I'm more interested in what you would consider abusive in this sense.
Any type of physical violence to try to change a kids behavior would be considered abusive in my opinion. Say, hitting a child with a stick every-time they made a mistake. This would not be considered positive feedback and would not further build a child's self esteem or self worth.
I hear that. So does that mean anytime behavior modification is used in a way does not give the child positive feedback and build their self esteem it is abusive? Or only in the case of physical violence?
-
Any type of physical violence to try to change a kids behavior would be considered abusive in my opinion. Say, hitting a child with a stick every-time they made a mistake. This would not be considered positive feedback and would not further build a child's self esteem or self worth.
...
All that "positive peer pressure" jive and isolation from everything the child knows is tantamount to hitting their emotions, their psyche, with a stick, repeatedly, for months or years.
The children are not isolated at all, Shady. They are engaged in many activities on and off the school property. Some kids work on community projects others need to work on themselves and others work more on academics depending on the individual childs needs. Our public schools can only provide a "One size fits all" solution which doesnt work for many children.
And emotions, self worth, self esteem all take much longer to heal than your average switch welts. Many of us are still trying to heal after decades, even broken bones only take a couple of months.
That is why many of these programs run for a year or more. These kids come into the program with many issues and low self esteem is very common and as you stated it takes time to turn this around. If it were just broken bones the child could be treated and sent home the same day. I think the difference is many of the programs today have recognized the need to build family ties and self esteem whereas this was not the focus back in the earlier programs as you have witnessed yourself.
...
-
I'm more interested in what you would consider abusive in this sense.
Any type of physical violence to try to change a kids behavior would be considered abusive in my opinion. Say, hitting a child with a stick every-time they made a mistake. This would not be considered positive feedback and would not further build a child's self esteem or self worth.
I hear that. So does that mean anytime behavior modification is used in a way does not give the child positive feedback and build their self esteem it is abusive? Or only in the case of physical violence?
If positive feedback or and increased self esteem is not attained then it is not abusive it would just be ineffective in my opinion.
...
-
I'm more interested in what you would consider abusive in this sense.
Any type of physical violence to try to change a kids behavior would be considered abusive in my opinion. Say, hitting a child with a stick every-time they made a mistake. This would not be considered positive feedback and would not further build a child's self esteem or self worth.
I hear that. So does that mean anytime behavior modification is used in a way does not give the child positive feedback and build their self esteem it is abusive? Or only in the case of physical violence?
If positive feedback or and increased self esteem is not attained then it is not abusive it would just be ineffective in my opinion.
...
Is giving negative feedback abusive?
-
I'm more interested in what you would consider abusive in this sense.
Any type of physical violence to try to change a kids behavior would be considered abusive in my opinion. Say, hitting a child with a stick every-time they made a mistake. This would not be considered positive feedback and would not further build a child's self esteem or self worth.
I hear that. So does that mean anytime behavior modification is used in a way does not give the child positive feedback and build their self esteem it is abusive? Or only in the case of physical violence?
If positive feedback or and increased self esteem is not attained then it is not abusive it would just be ineffective in my opinion.
...
Is giving negative feedback abusive?
No I wouldnt consider it abusive and sometimes it can be effective with some kids. Letting kids know they will not get pizza because of various reasons. The kids that do well get rewarded with a night out, extra money to spend at the store etc.
...
-
Is giving negative feedback abusive?
No I wouldnt consider it abusive and sometimes it can be effective with some kids. Letting kids know they will not get pizza because of various reasons. The kids that do well get rewarded with a night out, extra money to spend at the store etc.
Giving negative feedback can never be considered abusive? I disagree Whooter. If you were a teen in a program and a staff called you a lowlife piece of shit to get you to behave in the manner they want, I don’t think that would be ethical. I would consider that abuse. Wouldn't you?
-
Is giving negative feedback abusive?
No I wouldnt consider it abusive and sometimes it can be effective with some kids. Letting kids know they will not get pizza because of various reasons. The kids that do well get rewarded with a night out, extra money to spend at the store etc.
Giving negative feedback can never be considered abusive? I disagree Whooter. If you were a teen in a program and a staff called you a lowlife piece of shit to get you to behave in the manner they want, I don’t think that would be ethical. I would consider that abuse. Wouldn't you?
I didnt say negative feedback can never be considered abusive. I said I dont consider negative feedback abusive. In fact it can be effective with many kids. I think anything can be abusive if you want it to be. You can hold a gun to a kids head at night to force him to brush his teeth, which would be abusive, but that doesn't mean that brushing your teeth is abusive or telling the child he will miss afternoon snack the next day because he failed to brush his teeth. If a staff used language as you described then they should be fired on the spot.
...
-
Any type of physical violence to try to change a kids behavior would be considered abusive in my opinion. Say, hitting a child with a stick every-time they made a mistake. This would not be considered positive feedback and would not further build a child's self esteem or self worth.
...
All that "positive peer pressure" jive and isolation from everything the child knows is tantamount to hitting their emotions, their psyche, with a stick, repeatedly, for months or years.
The children are not isolated at all, Shady. They are engaged in many activities on and off the school property. Some kids work on community projects others need to work on themselves and others work more on academics depending on the individual childs needs. Our public schools can only provide a "One size fits all" solution which doesnt work for many children.
Hah! The program I was in, now that was a one size fits all approach. And by sending me there, my Mom sent a message, to me and to the whole world; MY SON IS NOT NORMAL. When in reality the opposite was true, I was normal, SHE WASN'T. And as I understand it, these places all still work on "phase" or "level" systems, in which first phase is completely isolated from family and community, and definitely friends. The LIFE program told my mother, and me at intake, that phase one lasts 2 - 4 weeks. THEY LIED. I stayed on phase one for five months.
And emotions, self worth, self esteem all take much longer to heal than your average switch welts. Many of us are still trying to heal after decades, even broken bones only take a couple of months.
That is why many of these programs run for a year or more. These kids come into the program with many issues and low self esteem is very common and as you stated it takes time to turn this around. If it were just broken bones the child could be treated and sent home the same day. I think the difference is many of the programs today have recognized the need to build family ties and self esteem whereas this was not the focus back in the earlier programs as you have witnessed yourself.
...
You know damn well I was referring to the "issues" these places INFLICT. If I had low self esteem going into that place, it was nothing compared to how low it was upon leaving. That program also claimed to be "building family ties and self esteem". "That's why we require the participation of the whole family" Mrs. Pete used to say. Again, they were LYING. They knew exactly what they were doing to us, breaking our spirits. And the best way to do that is to turn our own parents against us, they become a tool in our "breakdown". These people did not know a damned thing about drug culture so, by definition, all the things they told our parents to scare them were LIES. It seems to me that, at least in the case of LIFE, several "upstanding citizens" were scared shitless of youth culture and designed a way to keep their streets and shopping malls peaceful and quiet; by imprisoning and torturing all the "problem" young people without any kind of trial or due process. The old and boring declared WAR on the young because the way we dressed and talked, and maybe the fact that we smoked pot, TERRIFIED THEM due to their own bigotry and personal prejudices.
-
Is giving negative feedback abusive?
No I wouldnt consider it abusive and sometimes it can be effective with some kids. Letting kids know they will not get pizza because of various reasons. The kids that do well get rewarded with a night out, extra money to spend at the store etc.
Giving negative feedback can never be considered abusive? I disagree Whooter. If you were a teen in a program and a staff called you a lowlife piece of shit to get you to behave in the manner they want, I don’t think that would be ethical. I would consider that abuse. Wouldn't you?
I didnt say negative feedback can never be considered abusive. I said I dont consider negative feedback abusive. In fact it can be effective with many kids. I think anything can be abusive if you want it to be. You can hold a gun to a kids head at night to force him to brush his teeth, which would be abusive, but that doesn't mean that brushing your teeth is abusive or telling the child he will miss afternoon snack the next day because he failed to brush his teeth. If a staff used language as you described then they should be fired on the spot.
I’m guessing what you meant to say then is that you believe negative feedback is abusive in certain respects. How do you determine when negative feedback is abusive in behavior modification and when it is not?
.
-
You know damn well I was referring to the "issues" these places INFLICT. If I had low self esteem going into that place, it was nothing compared to how low it was upon leaving. That program also claimed to be "building family ties and self esteem". "That's why we require the participation of the whole family" Mrs. Pete used to say. Again, they were LYING. They knew exactly what they were doing to us, breaking our spirits. And the best way to do that is to turn our own parents against us, they become a tool in our "breakdown". These people did not know a damned thing about drug culture so, by definition, all the things they told our parents to scare them were LIES. It seems to me that, at least in the case of LIFE, several "upstanding citizens" were scared shitless of youth culture and designed a way to keep their streets and shopping malls peaceful and quiet; by imprisoning and torturing all the "problem" young people without any kind of trial or due process. The old and boring declared WAR on the young because the way we dressed and talked, and maybe the fact that we smoked pot, TERRIFIED THEM due to their own bigotry and personal prejudices.
I agree, the "establishment" as we called them just wanted us off the streets. It wasnt just the drugs it was our long hair and lack of a tie. We didnt respect their generation and for good reason with the way they were handling Vietnam and voting assholes into office. They started a war on drugs when they didnt even understand what or who they were fighting. I think that is why programs in the 1970 did so well in keeping their beds full. I might have ended up in one myself if I had been caught dealing or doing drugs, but I was cool about it and keep up with my studies and managed to stay out of trouble.
I dont think programs back then gave a damn about self esteem or building a family bond, they just wanted the kids fixed, cleaned up to look presentable. Now a days things are a little different, most parents tolerate their kids a little more and give them more space to grow into themselves.
...
-
I’m guessing what you meant to say then is that you believe negative feedback is abusive in certain respects. How do you determine when negative feedback is abusive in behavior modification and when it is not?
.
Well you dont want to shame the child and you want to protect their self esteem and sense of themself. Negative feedback can give the child a more pragmatic view of their actions without slamming them. Many kids are in a bad cycle.. blaming others, manipulation, lying, hurting themselves... all of which contributes to low self esteem and lowered self worth which if left unchecked can take a child down a dangerous path. Modifying their behavior is the only way to break this cycle and sometimes it involves negative feedback.
Every situation is different and I am not sure how we would determine when the negative feedback tips the scales into becoming abusive.
...
-
I really believe it is important to understand how negative feedback can be abusive and how that is facilitated in troubled teen programs.
Whooter, let’s say for instance I am a staff in a program and we are in a group session together. At some point you were dishonest about something, anything really, maybe you were caught hiding a nose ring that was part of your old image that you weren’t supposed to have. Let’s say I turn to another member in the group besides you and ask, “Hey so and so, when someone lies, what does that make them?”
In fact can someone else other than Whooter answer this for me? When someone lies what does that make them?
.
-
You know damn well I was referring to the "issues" these places INFLICT. If I had low self esteem going into that place, it was nothing compared to how low it was upon leaving. That program also claimed to be "building family ties and self esteem". "That's why we require the participation of the whole family" Mrs. Pete used to say. Again, they were LYING. They knew exactly what they were doing to us, breaking our spirits. And the best way to do that is to turn our own parents against us, they become a tool in our "breakdown". These people did not know a damned thing about drug culture so, by definition, all the things they told our parents to scare them were LIES. It seems to me that, at least in the case of LIFE, several "upstanding citizens" were scared shitless of youth culture and designed a way to keep their streets and shopping malls peaceful and quiet; by imprisoning and torturing all the "problem" young people without any kind of trial or due process. The old and boring declared WAR on the young because the way we dressed and talked, and maybe the fact that we smoked pot, TERRIFIED THEM due to their own bigotry and personal prejudices.
I agree, the "establishment" as we called them just wanted us off the streets. It wasnt just the drugs it was our long hair and lack of a tie. We didnt respect their generation and for good reason with the way they were handling Vietnam and voting assholes into office. They started a war on drugs when they didnt even understand what or who they were fighting. I think that is why programs in the 1970 did so well in keeping their beds full. I might have ended up in one myself if I had been caught dealing or doing drugs, but I was cool about it and keep up with my studies and managed to stay out of trouble.
And, apparently, YOUR mother was not as impressionable as wet clay.
I dont think programs back then gave a damn about self esteem or building a family bond, they just wanted the kids fixed, cleaned up to look presentable. Now a days things are a little different, most parents tolerate their kids a little more and give them more space to grow into themselves.
...
Are you kidding? WWASP programs seem to be trying to eclipse Straight Inc. with the number of abuses reported against them. They are having a "Discovery" seminar for parents in Las Vegas next weekend, you know.
-
Are you kidding? WWASP programs seem to be trying to eclipse Straight Inc. with the number of abuses reported against it. They are having a "Discovery" seminar for parents in Las Vegas next weekend, you know.
I have heard about reports coming from WWASP programs. But I never read where they represent all programs. One of the traps people fall into here is they read, for example, about a kid who had to sit and face the wall for 12 hours in a program and they take this information and falsely assume every kid in every program sits in front of a wall for 12 hours a day.
...
-
I really believe it is important to understand how negative feedback can be abusive and how that is facilitated in troubled teen programs.
Whooter, let’s say for instance I am a staff in a program and we are in a group session together. At some point you were dishonest about something, anything really, maybe you were caught hiding a nose ring that was part of your old image that you weren’t supposed to have. Let’s say I turn to another member in the group besides you and ask, “Hey so and so, when someone lies, what does that make them?”
In fact can someone else other than Whooter answer this for me? When someone lies what does that make them?
.
This is sort of a snap shot. We really dont know the history of this child. Maybe the staff has been working with this persons' honesty issues and they havent responded very well and finally decided to bring it up in group. Before sending the kid home or giving up on them it is important to see if they respond to peer pressure maybe.
...
-
Are you kidding? WWASP programs seem to be trying to eclipse Straight Inc. with the number of abuses reported against it. They are having a "Discovery" seminar for parents in Las Vegas next weekend, you know.
I have heard about reports coming from WWASP programs. But I never read where they represent all programs. One of the traps people fall into here is they read, for example, about a kid who had to sit and face the wall for 12 hours in a program and they take this information and falsely assume every kid in every program sits in front of a wall for 12 hours a day.
..
No, some of them lie face down on a concrete floor in "OP" for days. Some are drugged into a stupor. Some have to perform manual labor. Some have to run "punishment laps" until they vomit, or if that isn't deemed thorough enough, until they collapse. Some are raped or badly beaten, their assailants protected by the program's policy of "anonymity" and "confidentiality". Some are driven to suicide. Yes, there is much more diversity today, I see what you mean. Oh, and a person who lies is a LIAR, like the people who convinced my mother that I was some kind of time bomb waiting to explode and kill the whole family ( or whatever the hell they told her ).
-
Are you kidding? WWASP programs seem to be trying to eclipse Straight Inc. with the number of abuses reported against it. They are having a "Discovery" seminar for parents in Las Vegas next weekend, you know.
I have heard about reports coming from WWASP programs. But I never read where they represent all programs. One of the traps people fall into here is they read, for example, about a kid who had to sit and face the wall for 12 hours in a program and they take this information and falsely assume every kid in every program sits in front of a wall for 12 hours a day.
..
No, some of them lie face down on a concrete floor in "OP" for days. Some are drugged into a stupor. Some have to perform manual labor. Some have to run "punishment laps" until they vomit, or if that isn't deemed thorough enough, until they collapse. Some are raped or badly beaten, their assailants protected by the program's policy of "anonymity" and "confidentiality". Some are driven to suicide. Yes, there is much more diversity today, I see what you mean. Oh, and a person who lies is a LIAR, like the people who convinced my mother that I was some kind of time bomb waiting to explode and kill the whole family ( or whatever the hell they told her ).
There is much more diversity today and I dont think you would understand because you have only been able to see the negative stories here but there are many kids who benefit from these programs every day, Shady. I dont think one kid getting hurt justifies the thousands that are helped but we cant take the approach of shutting the industry down because of a few bad apples. We need to keep raising awareness like we have and the programs will continue to improve and the abusive ones will close down like we have seen them doing.
...
-
Are you kidding? WWASP programs seem to be trying to eclipse Straight Inc. with the number of abuses reported against it. They are having a "Discovery" seminar for parents in Las Vegas next weekend, you know.
I have heard about reports coming from WWASP programs. But I never read where they represent all programs. One of the traps people fall into here is they read, for example, about a kid who had to sit and face the wall for 12 hours in a program and they take this information and falsely assume every kid in every program sits in front of a wall for 12 hours a day.
..
No, some of them lie face down on a concrete floor in "OP" for days. Some are drugged into a stupor. Some have to perform manual labor. Some have to run "punishment laps" until they vomit, or if that isn't deemed thorough enough, until they collapse. Some are raped or badly beaten, their assailants protected by the program's policy of "anonymity" and "confidentiality". Some are driven to suicide. Yes, there is much more diversity today, I see what you mean. Oh, and a person who lies is a LIAR, like the people who convinced my mother that I was some kind of time bomb waiting to explode and kill the whole family ( or whatever the hell they told her ).
There is much more diversity today and I dont think you would understand because you have only been able to see the negative stories here but there are many kids who benefit from these programs every day, Shady. I dont think one kid getting hurt justifies the thousands that are helped but we cant take the approach of shutting the industry down because of a few bad apples.
YES WE CAN!
We need to keep raising awareness like we have and the programs will continue to improve and the abusive ones will close down like we have seen them doing.
...
Twenty five years have gone by and my mom still doesn't believe that LIFE was abusive. These programs are too good at covering up their myriad transgressions and the well being of even one child is not negotiable, not to be traded away for the "greater good". The only way is to shut them all down and start teaching these kids, and raising them, right in the first place. In my observation it is almost never the child's fault, they are a child and still learning, their problems arise from incompetent or self centered and self righteous parents, or from some kind of bigotry at their school, or some other crap they should not have to worry about, like sexual or physical abuse.
-
Twenty five years have gone by and my mom still doesn't believe that LIFE was abusive. These programs are too good at covering up their myriad transgressions and the well being of even one child is not negotiable, not to be traded away for the "greater good". The only way is to shut them all down and start teaching these kids, and raising them, right in the first place. In my observation it is almost never the child's fault, they are a child and still learning, their problems arise from incompetent or self centered and self righteous parents, or from some kind of bigotry at their school, or some other crap they should not have to worry about, like sexual or physical abuse.
You have a very strong bias against the industry and I am sure it is justified because of what you went through. A kid who was told he would be fine and be able to play football again only to wake up from an operation to find his leg amputated would not be able to easily be convinced that doctors are not evil shits and that hospitals should be shut down. He would not give a dam about the success stories and all the other kids who were helped buy hospitals.
My experience is that it is a combination of the child's and parents fault, there needs to be changes made at home while the child is in the program. Maybe the parents have a drinking problem or anger issues or are not very good at parenting. Maybe they allowed their child too much freedom etc. These issues all come out during the child's stay at the program. The child's psychologist works with the family to resolve the family issues and create a seamless transition back home and a safer environment for the child once he/she returns.
Why would we want to shut these programs down? Why deny the help that these families and children need?
...
-
I really believe it is important to understand how negative feedback can be abusive and how that is facilitated in troubled teen programs.
Whooter, let’s say for instance I am a staff in a program and we are in a group session together. At some point you were dishonest about something, anything really, maybe you were caught hiding a nose ring that was part of your old image that you weren’t supposed to have. Let’s say I turn to another member in the group besides you and ask, “Hey so and so, when someone lies, what does that make them?”
In fact can someone else other than Whooter answer this for me? When someone lies what does that make them?
.
This is sort of a snap shot. We really dont know the history of this child. Maybe the staff has been working with this persons' honesty issues and they havent responded very well and finally decided to bring it up in group. Before sending the kid home or giving up on them it is important to see if they respond to peer pressure maybe.
Are you saying that a program’s manipulation of peer pressure can be abusive? I would agree with that.
To clarify a point I was making, If I go around the room and ask each person ‘If someone lies, what does that make them?’ and they all respond, ‘they are a liar’, and then I turn to you,( and perhaps you may reflect on your own behavior here on fornits), and ask you, Whooter, what do you think that makes you?
What is your honest response to that?
.
-
but there are many kids who benefit from these programs every day,
Whooter what is your basis for this claim? How would you privy to this information?
-
Why would we want to shut these programs down? Why deny the help that these families and children need?
...
Well, I want to shut them down because they have a long and solid history of leaving people emotionally scarred long after they stop being children. Who says the children need help? I would rather see PARENTS locked into a program, since their kids problems are mostly their fault.
-
Why would we want to shut these programs down? Why deny the help that these families and children need?
...
Well, I want to shut them down because they have a long and solid history of leaving people emotionally scarred long after they stop being children.
Lets expose and shut those specific places down. We should allow the industry to still help those kids who are benefiting from their services.
Who says the children need help?
The childrens therapists, their parents, school guidance counselors etc.
I would rather see PARENTS locked into a program, since their kids problems are mostly their fault.
Even in the cases where the parents are mostly at fault it would be difficult to have the parent leave the home for any extended period of time for treatment because the other children in the home would need an income and parents to survive. The best scenario is to remove the child from the environment and then allow both parents and child to work on their issues.
I think that you are in the majority in your thinking, Shady. Most people here on fornits would like to see the industry shut down as a whole, but many here have only focused on the negative aspects of the industry so it is understandable.
...
-
but many here have only focused on the negative aspects of the industry so it is understandable.
Are there positive ones?
-
I don´t need to go to any museum to learn about holocaust.
You are too young to have experienced it first hand so you must be one of those people who wants to forget history and view museums as a waste of money.
I wish I would not know so much about it.
There are those people like yourself who wish they didnt know so much about the TTI. But unlike yourself I think it is important to continue to educate people and bring them the facts about places whether it be a program in Utah or a Wilderness program in South Carolina.
I hope all parents looking for information will learn through this what kind of person you are, Whooter, because your argumentation is telling.
Thank you, Maruska, I think everyone can agree that I am open minded and sometime rely on the past to give me road signs for the future. Whereas you like to just close your mind and pretend you know everything.
...
How do you know how old I am? Makes me wonder if all your statements here are so accurate... My mother was WWII survivor , all her family was killed by the Nazis. That is why I do not need to learn about holocaust in a museum.
Again - your argumentation is very telling, you know nothing about me, yet you spout off your judgement without knowing the facts. Sad , actually.
-
How do you know how old I am?
I dont know your exact age but most Holocaust survivors with any kind of memory of it were born prior to 1940. Your experience as depicted in your posts indicate you are much younger than that.
Makes me wonder if all your statements here are so accurate... My mother was WWII survivor
I would say most of my statements are very accurate although I am wrong on occasion. I am sorry your mother had to go through that.
, all her family was killed by the Nazis. That is why I do not need to learn about holocaust in a museum.
I was reading an article about people coming from overseas to visit the museum in Washington DC and the the majority of the visitors had ties back to the holocaust or holocaust survivors themselves. Your mindset that you defend being closed minded and believing that you know everything about a subject and dont need to learn more spills over into your view of the TTI. You feel you know everything about it because of your individual tie to it.
There is so much more you could learn about that time period over and above what your mother remembers. Also if you opened your mind a little more you could learn much more about the TTI as well.
Again - your argumentation is very telling, you know nothing about me, yet you spout off your judgement without knowing the facts. Sad , actually.
I am not judging you martuska, I am sharing my perspective.
...
-
How do you know how old I am?
I dont know your exact age but most Holocaust survivors with any kind of memory of it were born prior to 1940. Your experience as depicted in your posts indicate you are much younger than that.
Makes me wonder if all your statements here are so accurate... My mother was WWII survivor
I would say most of my statements are very accurate although I am wrong on occasion. I am sorry your mother had to go through that.
, all her family was killed by the Nazis. That is why I do not need to learn about holocaust in a museum.
I was reading an article about people coming from overseas to visit the museum in Washington DC and the the majority of the visitors had ties back to the holocaust or holocaust survivors themselves. Your mindset that you defend being closed minded and believing that you know everything about a subject and dont need to learn more spills over into your view of the TTI. You feel you know everything about it because of your individual tie to it.
There is so much more you could learn about that time period over and above what your mother remembers. Also if you opened your mind a little more you could learn much more about the TTI as well.
Again - your argumentation is very telling, you know nothing about me, yet you spout off your judgement without knowing the facts. Sad , actually.
I am not judging you martuska, I am sharing my perspective.
...
Yeah, why is everyone always picking on those poor misunderstood Nazis? They were just trying to help those ungrateful, manipulative jews, right Whooter? This might be a new low for you. Maybe YOU should go check out the holocaust museum, and reflect on what happens when man steals the humanity from his fellow man. The only good Nazi is a dead Nazi. You disgust me.
-
Yeah, why is everyone always picking on those poor misunderstood Nazis? They were just trying to help those ungrateful, manipulative jews, right Whooter?
I believe this is one of the reasons why you lose so much credibility here, shady. You come out against all forms of programs yet you feel the Nazis are just misunderstood and the jews were being manipulative.
Maybe YOU should go check out the holocaust museum.....
I have been to the Museum, Shady, and I suggest giving some thought to who you choose to align yourself with. When you are telling us that you are "pro Nazi" yet anti-program tells the readers that you really have no sense of what happened to these people in Germany or you would not take that stance. You seem to be a little twisted or just dont understand your history much.
I think we can safely assume that you did not visit the holocaust museum (or if you did you closed your eyes and ears) because no one with any compassion could believe what you do after listening and learning about the history of the Jews in Germany before and during the war.
...
-
Yeah, why is everyone always picking on those poor misunderstood Nazis? They were just trying to help those ungrateful, manipulative jews, right Whooter?
I believe this is one of the reasons why you lose so much credibility here, shady. You come out against all forms of programs yet you feel the Nazis are just misunderstood and the jews were being manipulative.
Maybe YOU should go check out the holocaust museum.....
I have been to the Museum, Shady, and I suggest giving some thought to who you choose to align yourself with. When you are telling us that you are "pro Nazi" yet anti-program tells the readers that you really have no sense of what happened to these people in Germany or you would not take that stance. You seem to be a little twisted or just dont understand your history much.
I think we can safely assume that you did not visit the holocaust museum (or if you did you closed your eyes and ears) because no one with any compassion could believe what you do after listening and learning about the history of the Jews in Germany before and during the war.
...
Look up sarcasm in the dictionary, genius. I also said "The only good Nazi is a dead Nazi". THAT was NOT sarcastic. I think you know as well as I do that the research into all this "behavior modification" started in those camps.
-
Look up sarcasm in the dictionary, genius.
Right, but you need to apply that to someone who is defending the Nazis and/or appears to be a sympathizer to their cause. I was talking about visiting the Holocaust museum and seeing the horrors that were done by the Nazis during the war. So you dont fully understand the use of the term "sarcasm", it came across as you miss-read the post or were a Nazi Sympathizer.
I also said "The only good Nazi is a dead Nazi". THAT was NOT sarcastic.
I think we can agree here. Although if you were a Nazi sympathizer this phrase may be considered sarcasm.
I think you know as well as I do that the research into all this "behavior modification" started in those camps.
Actually you are grossly misinformed. Behavior modification has been around for hundreds of years.
...
-
Even Holocaust survivors who suffered one of the greatest losses retell their stories with recounts of friendships made, guards who were kind to the children etc.
Are you serious? :flame:
If you ever get a chance to visit Washington DC take some time out to visit the Holocaust Museum. Just walk thru the museum and read and listen, really listen. Listen to the words of the survivors and the tails of their experiences the loved ones the lose and the hardship they endured. You will not find one of them ever saying that all Germans are evil etc. They speak about the occurrences naturally. Life still occurs even under the most horrible circumstances.
If you read the survivors stories here on fornits many lack the natural details of life (they have been stripped from the readers view). Even someone who has never heard of programs before would never believe that every staff person is evil and abusive, yet that is how the stories are formulated here. Many try to lead the readers to believe that they never met a good friend, enjoyed a certain meal, learned to enjoy writing during their time their, connected with a staff member, enjoyed snow for the first time etc. Many of the stories lack credibility because of this.
If I was raped by my teacher at school and beaten I would be justified as saying I did not have a very good experience in highschool. But if I went onto a web site and started writing my story explaining how every teacher is a rapist and I never met one friend in highschool, the food was horrible, everychild was raped, I never learned to read or write, I learned science but I dont credit the teachers for that, I eventually went to college but I dont credit the highschool for that, I did it in spite of them. My story didnt include one positive aspect of my time in highschool then the whole story sinks and loses credibility. I think many here on fornits spend so much energy trying to paint the industry as evil as possible that they forget to tell the whole story.
...
No, all Germans weren't evil, but the vast majority of them were evil enough, or gullible enough, to be seduced or intimidated by an ABSOLUTELY evil government. Much like the vast majority of program parents are selfish enough, or gullible enough, to think that SENDING THEIR KID AWAY and BLAMING THEM for all of the families problems will help bring them "back into the family" and back to "healthy living". I will say this again; If you can't be bothered to raise your kid, IT ISN'T YOUR KIDS FAULT SO DO NOT PUNISH THEM FOR IT! Send them to a REGULAR, non-punitive, non-"behavior modification", non-"emotional growth" boarding school, make it a nice one. It is not easy being a kid who knows that his family does not want him. You are sick Whooter, seek help.
-
No, all Germans weren't evil, but the vast majority of them were evil enough, or gullible enough, to be seduced by an ABSOLUTELY evil government. Much like the vast majority of program parents are selfish enough, or gullible enough, to think that SENDING THEIR KID AWAY and BLAMING THEM for all of the families problems will help bring them "back into the family" and back to "healthy living". I will say this again; If you can't be bothered to raise your kid, IT ISN'T YOUR KIDS FAULT SO DO NOT PUNISH THEM FOR IT! Send them to a REGULAR, non-punitive, non-"behavior modification", non-"emotional growth" boarding school. You are sick Whooter, seek help.
If parents didnt care about how their kid turned out or didnt want to raise them then they would just do nothing. They would put the $100,000 towards retirement and let the kid head down his own destructive path. If a kid gets cancer some parents may decide to do nothing and keep them home and hope for the best. Others may ship them off to hospitals to have other people fix the kids (as you call it) and have doctors do the job for them. It all depends on your perspective and what you think is right for the family and for your child.
Some parents "home school" their kids and other parents ship them off to have strangers do the job for them. Some parents cook for their children and other have total strangers cook and serve them at McDonalds. I guess you could say one set of parents cares more for their child then the other but which ones? and who gets to decide?
Does the parent who seeks help and spends $100,000 to try to help their child care more than the parent who turns a blind eye and hopes for the best? The parents who decide to forgo the copay and keep their child home from the hospital?
...
-
No, all Germans weren't evil, but the vast majority of them were evil enough, or gullible enough, to be seduced by an ABSOLUTELY evil government. Much like the vast majority of program parents are selfish enough, or gullible enough, to think that SENDING THEIR KID AWAY and BLAMING THEM for all of the families problems will help bring them "back into the family" and back to "healthy living". I will say this again; If you can't be bothered to raise your kid, IT ISN'T YOUR KIDS FAULT SO DO NOT PUNISH THEM FOR IT! Send them to a REGULAR, non-punitive, non-"behavior modification", non-"emotional growth" boarding school. You are sick Whooter, seek help.
If parents didnt care about how their kid turned out or didnt want to raise them then they would just do nothing. They would put the $100,000 towards retirement and let the kid head down his own destructive path.
...
I disagree, if they did nothing then the kid would continue to embarrass them with their music, style of dress, "undesirable" friends, etc.. Their neighbors and the other parents at the PTA meetings would continue to point and whisper, which is something that most of these parents can't bear. They care less about their children than they do about their own "reputations" as parents. Maybe the "destructiveness" of the kid's path has been just a wee bit exaggerated to justify getting their embarrassing ass out of the house. And, if you put your kid in a behavior modification school or the like, you BETTER have money set aside for your retirement because that kid will have just as much sympathy towards you as you had toward him and will see your poverty as your problem.
-
I disagree, if they did nothing then the kid would continue to embarrass them with their music, style of dress, "undesirable" friends, etc.. Their neighbors and the other parents at the PTA meetings would continue to point and whisper, which is something that most of these parents can't bear. They care less about their children than they do about their own "reputations" as parents. Maybe the "destructiveness" of the kid's path has been just a wee bit exaggerated to justify getting their embarrassing ass out of the house.
I think we disagree greatly here Shady. This may be reflective you your own situation but it is not the norm. I am sorry this happened to you if this was the case. Most of the kids are in programs to get the help that they need and deserve to get. If we could do one thing and require a third party sign-off this would go a long way in reducing the number kids who are placed unnecessarily.
And, if you put your kid in a behavior modification school or the like, you BETTER have money set aside for your retirement because that kid will have just as much sympathy towards you as you had toward him and will see your poverty as your problem.
Very few parents over the past several decades rely on their kids to support them during retirement. This was popular in the 1800's and earlier but people have a safety net now with Social security. The next generation (most of the posters here) will have their 401k's to rely on at retirement.
...
-
Getting back on topic again I don’t think being in a program makes the child’s voice any less credible. If the child had been manipulative and not very truthful prior to going into a program than they will not be any less so after they initially arrive there. Even a child who rarely lied may be motivated to do so once they are exposed to the hard work of waking up every day early, making their beds, doing chores going to school, clearing the table after meals, studying etc. I could see a few phones calls going out to mom and dad saying they were being tortured and wanting to come home.
But I don’t think we can just brand all kids in programs as not being credible. Each child should be treated as an individual. I think over time the trust comes, the manipulations wane and the family works on their issues more as a unit.
...
-
RED TEXT IS MINE
Getting back on topic again I don’t think being in a program makes the child’s voice any less credible. If the child had been manipulative and not very truthful prior to going into a program than they will not be any less so after they initially arrive there. Even a child who rarely lied may be motivated to do so once they are exposed to the hard work of waking up every day early, making their beds, doing chores going to school, clearing the table after meals, studying,starving, being beaten or "restrained", being bullied by "more responsible" oldcomers, being denied sleep, being told you are a worthless and ungrateful liar, being told that you are an incurable addict and you will be struggling with it your WHOLE LIFE, being forced to lie because the program WILL NOT ACCEPT THE TRUTH etc. I could see a few phones calls going out to mom and dad saying they were being tortured and wanting to come home.
But I don’t think we can just brand all kids in programs as not being credible. Each child should be treated as an individual. I think over time the trust comes, the manipulations wane and the family works on their issues more as a unit.
...
Really? I think it can be safely assumed that the kids who say "This program saved my life!" are certainly NOT credible. How could they know this? Did the program catch them after they jumped off a bridge? Snatch them from the path of a speeding truck? No. They have OBVIOUSLY been coached to say this as part of the brainwashing that they and their parents have received. According to most of these places, any kid who has smoked pot will die now without their help.
-
Really? I think it can be safely assumed that the kids who say "This program saved my life!" are certainly NOT credible. How could they know this? Did the program catch them after they jumped off a bridge? Snatch them from the path of a speeding truck? No. They have OBVIOUSLY been coached to say this as part of the brainwashing that they and their parents have received. According to most of these places, any kid who has smoked pot will die now without their help.
Mostly hindsight, looking back on their life and seeing where they were heading prior to being placed. Meeting up with old friends and seeing their friends have not matured at the same pace and are in a bad space etc. Maybe you dont see it because things have never turned around for you in a dramatic way or maybe not at all.
I think what you are trying to say is if someone has only good things to say about programs and seems over the top, never saying anything negative about thier stay there. Similar to people who have only negative things to say about programs, believe that "All" programs are evil and abusive. When you listen to people who are extreme on either end then their story comes across as fabricated or not credible.
...
-
Really? I think it can be safely assumed that the kids who say "This program saved my life!" are certainly NOT credible. How could they know this? Did the program catch them after they jumped off a bridge? Snatch them from the path of a speeding truck? No. They have OBVIOUSLY been coached to say this as part of the brainwashing that they and their parents have received. According to most of these places, any kid who has smoked pot will die now without their help.
Mostly hindsight, looking back on their life and seeing where they were heading prior to being placed. Meeting up with old friends and seeing their friends have not matured at the same pace and are in a bad space etc. Maybe you dont see it because things have never turned around for you in a dramatic way or maybe not at all.
On the contrary, many of us feel that our lives were going along fine ( if not perfectly ) until being forced into a mind control cult, which DEFINITELY turned things around, for the worse. And most of my old friends did far BETTER than me, despite being more "rebellious" and "less disciplined" than me, because they did not have to get over the horrible trauma of living through one of these places.
I think what you are trying to say is if someone has only good things to say about programs and seems over the top, never saying anything negative about thier stay there. Similar to people who have only negative things to say about programs, believe that "All" programs are evil and abusive. When you listen to people who are extreme on either end then their story comes across as fabricated or not credible.
...
You think wrong. The goal of these places is to make the child HATE his former self and all aspects of his former life. Any glowing review from a former resident is just proof that those brainwashing tactics work, at least temporarily. I do not think it is "over the top", which implies dishonesty. I think it is Stockholm Syndrome. They are afraid to challenge what they have been told so forcefully and repeatedly by people who had COMPLETE control over them. It is obviously wishful thinking on your part that our "stories come across as fabricated or not credible." because YOU think they are extreme. Your opinion means nothing here, you are literally the only person here who has (a) never been in one of these places, (b) admitted to having a "fiduciary interest" in Aspen, and (c) spent years here trying to discredit survivors.
-
You think wrong. The goal of these places is to make the child HATE his former self and all aspects of his former life. Any glowing review from a former resident is just proof that those brainwashing tactics work, at least temporarily. I do not think it is "over the top", which implies dishonesty. I think it is Stockholm Syndrome. They are afraid to challenge what they have been told so forcefully and repeatedly by people who had COMPLETE control over them. It is obviously wishful thinking on your part that our "stories come across as fabricated or not credible." because YOU think they are extreme. Your opinion means nothing here, you are literally the only person here who has (a) never been in one of these places, (b) admitted to having a "fiduciary interest" in Aspen, and (c) spent years here trying to discredit survivors.
You have the disadvantage of only being able to speak from your single personal experience based on one program. There are many programs besides the one that you attended. I am sorry that you had such a bad experience, Shady, but it is not representative of the industry as a whole. You dont even fully understand Stockholm syndrome or you would not be bringing it up. You experienced a totally different world then the majority of the kids do.
I have seen first hand and on many kids the bond being reformed with their families, the kids understand themselves much more. They can criticize the program and themselves and see things more objectively.
I think that you were damaged by the program you were in, Shady, and can only see the industry through your own experience and therefore cannot even fathom the thought of these kids doing better and moving on to a better live. You view this as brainwashing or Stockholm syndrome.
I have never profited from the industry (in fact I paid a good sum into it! lol), never spent years discrediting anyone and yes I have never attended a program but you have never attend one of these programs which we speak about today. I have atleast been to them and witnessed their success. You have never witnessed any of these successes. For some reason it bothers you that these kids are doing well and you need to label them to help cover your eyes and ears which is sad.
...
-
How do you know how old I am?
I dont know your exact age but most Holocaust survivors with any kind of memory of it were born prior to 1940. Your experience as depicted in your posts indicate you are much younger than that.
Makes me wonder if all your statements here are so accurate... My mother was WWII survivor
I would say most of my statements are very accurate although I am wrong on occasion. I am sorry your mother had to go through that.
, all her family was killed by the Nazis. That is why I do not need to learn about holocaust in a museum.
I was reading an article about people coming from overseas to visit the museum in Washington DC and the the majority of the visitors had ties back to the holocaust or holocaust survivors themselves. Your mindset that you defend being closed minded and believing that you know everything about a subject and dont need to learn more spills over into your view of the TTI. You feel you know everything about it because of your individual tie to it.
There is so much more you could learn about that time period over and above what your mother remembers. Also if you opened your mind a little more you could learn much more about the TTI as well.
Again - your argumentation is very telling, you know nothing about me, yet you spout off your judgement without knowing the facts. Sad , actually.
I am not judging you martuska, I am sharing my perspective.
...
I never said I know everything about holocaust....but I think I know more about it then you from your museum visit....(And I asssure you I visited many museums and concetration camps, it is part of our European education system to visit those places) ...my point was,try to tell a holocaust survivor, that he should not be so negative and remember the good times in concetration camps...particularly how the nazis were good to children...try it...
You are wrong, terribly wrong...You have no idea how offending and cruel your words are.
And also - I love to learn, I am learning more and more about troubled teens industry (not only here on fornits I assure you) and the more I learn the more I am sure, that is not the way to go.
-
I never said I know everything about holocaust....but I think I know more about it then you from your museum visit....(And I asssure you I visited many museums and concetration camps, it is part of our European education system to visit those places) ...my point was,try to tell a holocaust survivor, that he should not be so negative and remember the good times in concetration camps...particularly how the nazis were good to children...try it...
You are wrong, terribly wrong...You have no idea how offending and cruel your words are.
... and I never said to tell holocaust survivors anything, that they were nice to children or to remember the good times (could we call your post lying?). I asked you to "listen" to their stories, not to tell them anything. This is why people should listen more, maruska, you misinterpret things and then judge people for you misunderstandings. This may be why you are so anti-program? You dont listen well and you have a tendency to judge and categorize people.
And also - I love to learn, I am learning more and more about troubled teens industry (not only here on fornits I assure you) and the more I learn the more I am sure, that is not the way to go.
Well, in some of your posts you seem open minded and in others you just breeze over what people say and then interpret it anyway you like.
...
-
Even a child who rarely lied may be motivated to do so once they are exposed to the hard work of waking up every day early, making their beds, doing chores going to school, clearing the table after meals, studying etc. I could see a few phones calls going out to mom and dad saying they were being tortured and wanting to come home.
Do you have any examples of a kid claiming the above mentioned tasks were abusive or torture?
-
You are wrong, terribly wrong...You have no idea how offending and cruel your words are.
I dont think my words are offending or cruel. Calling someone a liar, an industry shill, program parent who doesnt care about kids, child rapist etc. those words may be considered cruel. I am pointing out some inconsistencies in stories here that may be of interest to people.
If you have read and listened to survivor stories from the holocaust you would know that even in the midst of the war and retelling of the horrors the Jews experienced Jews would recount a neighbor here who helped them or a young Nazi solder who was kind to their children and helped them get food. Stories of bonding with those around them. Most did not try to omit pieces of the story because it may break the pattern of horror or reveal that not all Germans were evil. I found their ability to be honest and open in all aspects of their story uplifting.
...
-
You are wrong, terribly wrong...You have no idea how offending and cruel your words are.
I dont think my words are offending or cruel. Calling someone a liar, an industry shill, program parent who doesnt care about kids, child rapist etc. those words may be considered cruel. I am pointing out some inconsistencies in stories here that may be of interest to people.
...
No, you're not. You are CLAIMING to point out "inconsistencies" in the stories of people who have been abused as children. Because you just made up some garbage about "stories have to be balanced or else they aren't believable". You have been told repeatedly how cruel and hurtful your opinions are here. It is frighteningly obvious what manner of person you must be and what line of work you are most likely in. The program I was in didn't consider itself "offending or cruel" either. It was.
-
You are wrong, terribly wrong...You have no idea how offending and cruel your words are.
I dont think my words are offending or cruel. Calling someone a liar, an industry shill, program parent who doesnt care about kids, child rapist etc. those words may be considered cruel. I am pointing out some inconsistencies in stories here that may be of interest to people.
...
No, you're not. You are CLAIMING to point out "inconsistencies" in the stories of people who have been abused as children. Because you just made up some garbage about "stories have to be balanced or else they aren't believable". You have been told repeatedly how cruel and hurtful your opinions are here. It is frighteningly obvious what manner of person you must be and what line of work you are most likely in. The program I was in didn't consider itself "offending or cruel" either. It was.
The topic is the credibility of kids in programs, I didnt start this thread. I am pointing out that there is an element missing and am curious as to why, thats all. Why do you see me as being cruel and hurtful but never spoke out about others here on fornits being cruel to families like the Reubens? We had Robert Bruce bragging about writing emails to survivors making fun of the fact that his brother committed suicide and no one besides Che spoke up about it. We had Dysfunction junction posting pictures of the survivors family members and laughing, joking about a survivors mother dying before her other son committed suicide. Shady, you will never convince anyone (especially myself) here on fornits that you care about people being cruel or hurtful in general. You are just saying this to me because you dont like my opinions or the discussion we are having. People on fornits tolerate cruel in spades. We had a mother come on to fornits to inquire about her son and all she got were posters pretending they knew him and telling her he performs oral sex on other kids in the program. No one helped this woman but when I stepped forward people got pissed because I pretended to have a son in the same program to ease her pain a little. But the regulars were more pissed at me for caring about her than the scum who were being cruel to her... lol. Its a sick group of people, Shady.
The people, like yourself, who stand on the sidelines and tolerate this with your silence are just as bad as the ones being cruel.
...
-
Compare this to fornits stories which are striped of anything positive. Any first time reader will quickly realize there is an agenda to paint the industry as negative. You dont realize it because you have been here so long ans have learned to accept the negativity.
Sometimes "negativity" as you paint it, is simply the unvarnished truth. When an organization exists that mistreats kids for profit (or misplaced ideology) there is often very little that's positive. Hey. At the program I was in I had one or two positive experiences (mostly with learning to build furniture -- which the program sold at a profit -- for some bizarre reason I liked it), but the rest of it was pretty much universally negative. One good thing does not outweigh all the bad and when you're giving an overall evaluation of a program it's very easy to forget to mention it. It's simply not relevant.
Psy, this is one of those topics that just raises a red flag for me (and I am sure many other readers who dont post), just like the kidnapping topic. I am sure I will come across as insensitive in trying to express my thoughts on this topic. I have read stories from regulars here that are stripped bare of anything positive from that time period. If you read stories from Shaggy and a few others they will tell you honestly that the place was abusive but maybe the food was okay or they had a couple of good staff members or met a really good friend or learned how to paint etc. These things happen naturally in life. Even Holocaust survivors who suffered one of the greatest losses retell their stories with recounts of friendships made, guards who were kind to the children etc.
Reading stories that paint the entire experience negative from the color of the walls to every staff member just losses all credibility in my opinion and shows that there is an obvious agenda present, so we, as readers, are left not knowing what to believe within that account except the kid is angry and probably abused, but the details are not credible.
I have pointed out posts which show a high level of credibility which outlined the abuse that occurred along with the positive aspects of the program. Why are people afraid to say they met a good friend or enjoyed pizza when it was served or a helpful staff member? Why try to lay the negative paint on so thick that their story losses credibility? Do survivors just not see this in each others stories?
...
...
Even Holocaust survivors who suffered one of the greatest losses retell their stories with recounts of friendships made, guards who were kind to the children etc.
Are you serious? :flame:
here - there you have it...this sentence says a lot about you ...guards who were kind to their children?!? good times , right?!? I am so sure the mother was so happy that a guard smiled at her child - before he killed the same child in front of her....
Do you know how many children were killed in the concetration camps? Do you know how? Do you know what torture do they had to endure? Ever heard about Dr.Mengele? Please, get off fornits and learn, read, educate yourself.
you may start here :
http://en.auschwitz.org.pl/m/ (http://en.auschwitz.org.pl/m/)
Only a really twisted mind could use such an example. I wonder why did you use it in the first place?
-
here - there you have it...this sentence says a lot about you ...guards who were kind to their children?!? good times , right?!? I am so sure the mother was so happy that a guard smiled at her child - before he killed the same child in front of her....
Do you know how many children were killed in the concetration camps? Do you know how? Do you know what torture do they had to endure? Ever heard about Dr.Mengele? Please, get off fornits and learn, read, educate yourself.
you may start here :
http://en.auschwitz.org.pl/m/ (http://en.auschwitz.org.pl/m/)
Only a really twisted mind could use such an example. I wonder why did you use it in the first place?
You stated earlier that you visited many holocaust sites in highschool but you were probably too busy giggling with your friends to learn anything. You should be mad at yourself.
I find it odd, and fascinating at the same time, that you are mad at me because of what happened in Germany and the way people chose to tell their stories. Why is that? Why do you close your mind so much and pretend that I think a mother enjoyed watching her children get killed describing it as good times? I think you have formed this opinion of holocaust survivors based on very little information. You admitted earlier that you have closed yourself off to learning any more about this time period when I mentioned the Museum in DC.
Why does it bother you so much that some holocaust survivors retell their stories with recounts of friendships made? Or guards who were kind to their children? Do you think you would withhold these points if you were in this person position? Why does it make you so angry? Your reaction to these stories is very telling in my opinion. If you did a little less preaching and listened to some of these survivors stories you would see what I mean. You think you know a lot about the Holocaust, Matuska, but if you ever get the opportunity to visit the Holocaust museum give yourself a chance to learn a little more about what transpired during that time period. It is very moving to hear the individual recounts and stories. You and I can view the holocaust differently but listening to the stories retold by survivors themselves gives you a new perspective before lashing out at people out of ignorance.
...
-
Calling someone a liar, an industry shill, program parent who doesnt care about kids, child rapist etc. those words may be considered cruel
Are they still considered cruel if they're true? I look at them as simply stating facts.
-
What a joke, Whooter. Fornits doesn't exist because kids had to get up early, learn, and do chores. The learning part is baloney because we didn't have real school - it was a sham. But we did have chores galore - laborious, exhaustive chores. And trust me, you'd get no complaints from me. For me, chores meant that at that moment, I was saved from brutal and abusive raps and psychodrama. I'd rather be worked to the bone than have my head fucked with. Or anyone's. Because it was just as painful to watch the daily, demeaning onslaught other people had to endure.
-
What a joke, Whooter. Fornits doesn't exist because kids had to get up early, learn, and do chores. The learning part is baloney because we didn't have real school - it was a sham. But we did have chores galore - laborious, exhaustive chores. And trust me, you'd get no complaints from me. For me, chores meant that at that moment, I was saved from brutal and abusive raps and psychodrama. I'd rather be worked to the bone than have my head fucked with. Or anyone's. Because it was just as painful to watch the daily, demeaning onslaught other people had to endure.
That was your experience, Samara, but many teenagers would rather be in study hall or outside in the pool or walking the skiing trails then to do chores of any kind. You have to understand that many of these kids came from households where they were not required to work, make their bed, do chores etc. so this was not an easy step for them. Initially you would hear the kids complaining that the program should hire maids with all the money they were making lol. But eventually they catch on to the process of working together.
If you have ever read about kids who were in the seed or straight you would see that they had an awful time of it, rotted food, no competitive sports or trips to town for date night, abuse. They barely got enough education to get them into a community college.
Once the kids get use to the routine of doing their chores, doing a good job it actually helps their self esteem (vs sitting around watching a maid clean your room. Lol). I cant imagine having to be in a program which separates families and damages self esteem.
...
-
I went to a rich kid TBS. I can assure you that the chores do not come to mind when reminiscing about the abusive aspects of the program.
Not that anyone would make the mistake of complaining more than once.
-
I went to a rich kid TBS. I can assure you that the chores do not come to mind when reminiscing about the abusive aspects of the program.
Not that anyone would make the mistake of complaining more than once.
Our kids complained on our first visit. We met up with all the other parents, sat in a circle and went over what had transpired over the first month or so on campus. Then we broke up into groups of 4 or 6 and spoke with the counselors along with the kids and when asked what the toughest part was we heard:
"Getting up at 7:00 am".... "Being away from friends"....."Being away from home"......."Cleaning our rooms"..."School!".. "cleaning the hallways"... "You think they could afford to hire help with all the money you parents spend here" lol. No one really complained about the food too much because it was pretty good, we ate with the other kids while we were there. There was one kid who never had to do homework apparently, because he thought the worst part was being forced to finish his homework assignment each night. My daughter didn't like getting up early.
...
-
I went to a rich kid TBS. I can assure you that the chores do not come to mind when reminiscing about the abusive aspects of the program.
Not that anyone would make the mistake of complaining more than once.
Our kids complained on our first visit. We met up with all the other parents, sat in a circle and went over what had transpired over the first month or so on campus. Then we broke up into groups of 4 or 6 and spoke with the counselors along with the kids and when asked what the toughest part was we heard:
"Getting up at 7:00 am".... "Cleaning our rooms"..."School!".. "cleaning the hallways"... "You think they could afford to hire help with all the money you parents spend here" lol. No one really complained about the food too much because it was pretty good, we ate with the other kids while we were there. There was one kid who never had to do homework apparently, because he thought the worst part was being forced to finish his homework assignment each night. My daughter didn't like getting up early.
"Our kids" How many did you send to programs whooter?
-
I went to a rich kid TBS. I can assure you that the chores do not come to mind when reminiscing about the abusive aspects of the program.
Not that anyone would make the mistake of complaining more than once.
Our kids complained on our first visit. We met up with all the other parents, sat in a circle and went over what had transpired over the first month or so on campus. Then we broke up into groups of 4 or 6 and spoke with the counselors along with the kids and when asked what the toughest part was we heard:
"Getting up at 7:00 am".... "Cleaning our rooms"..."School!".. "cleaning the hallways"... "You think they could afford to hire help with all the money you parents spend here" lol. No one really complained about the food too much because it was pretty good, we ate with the other kids while we were there. There was one kid who never had to do homework apparently, because he thought the worst part was being forced to finish his homework assignment each night. My daughter didn't like getting up early.
"Our kids" How many did you send to programs whooter?
By "Our kids" I am referring to the kids in our peer group. In the program my daughter went to they grouped the kids together into groups of 10 or 12 and called them a peer group and they moved through the process together and graduated together. It was a nice way of doing it. After a few months we (the other parents and ourselves) would refer to the kids as our kids. I had my daughter there at the time.
...
-
Your story has changed so much that I don't find even your secondhand accounts credible.
-
Your story has changed so much that I don't find even your secondhand accounts credible.
Where has my story changed?
...
-
Perhaps over the gender of your child.
Our kids complained on our first visit. We met up with all the other parents, sat in a circle and went over what had transpired over the first month or so on campus. Then we broke up into groups of 4 or 6 and spoke with the counselors along with the kids and when asked what the toughest part was we heard:
"Getting up at 7:00 am".... "Being away from friends"....."Being away from home"......."Cleaning our rooms"..."School!".. "cleaning the hallways"... "You think they could afford to hire help with all the money you parents spend here" lol. No one really complained about the food too much because it was pretty good, we ate with the other kids while we were there. There was one kid who never had to do homework apparently, because he thought the worst part was being forced to finish his homework assignment each night. My daughter didn't like getting up early.
So it sounds like you're saying you have no evidence of this occuring. Unless of course you'd like to show a post of someone saying something along these lines?
-
This is sort of a snap shot. We really dont know the history of this child. Maybe the staff has been working with this persons' honesty issues and they havent responded very well and finally decided to bring it up in group. Before sending the kid home or giving up on them it is important to see if they respond to peer pressure maybe.
Are you saying that a program’s manipulation of peer pressure can be abusive? I would agree with that.
I guess it could be, but you may want to try to spark some response in him or her before having the kid sent home or before you loss him to running away. If the program isnt working for him/her or they are not applying themselves then it would be a waste of the staffs/programs time, effort and money to just let the child pass through the program without advancing or growing. Granted that it is a business that wants to make money but at the same time they want to show their model is successful and if a child isnt responding well then it is best to cut them lose so that they can increase their success rate.
Do you see what I mean?
...
-
What do you mean you 'guess' it could be? I think the potential for causing psychological trauma to a kid by manipulating them through peer pressures is enormous in such totalitarian environments like troubled teen programs.
-
What do you mean you 'guess' it could be? I think the potential for causing psychological trauma to a kid by manipulating them through peer pressures is enormous in such totalitarian environments like troubled teen programs.
If they manipulate the peer pressure in a good way then I think it could be beneficial to a child who is on the fence and thinking of running or leaving the program. The last thing you want is for a child to end up back where they started and even worse off. If the present program isnt working for them then changes need to be made to the process or the child needs to be sent home.
...
-
Would you say manipulation of peer pressure by staff in programs on kids has an equal potential to be harmful as it can be good, Whooter?
.
-
Would you say manipulation of peer pressure by staff in programs on kids has an equal potential to be harmful as it can be good, Whooter?
.
I would think it would. It depends on the staff involved.
...
-
Would you say manipulation of peer pressure by staff in programs on kids has an equal potential to be harmful as it can be good, Whooter?
.
I would think it would. It depends on the staff involved.
...
You'd be correct that that theory is substantiated in the field of group dynamics an human relations training, however this would be in a completely democratic context in which all parties are there with complete informed consent as to the process, unlike the teen who is often forcefully taken into a program. I think that adds further risk of harm in using it. I would agree the human element of error by staff further increases the risk, as no one can truly know what another person is experiencing. I would identify the directions ofthe organization itself upon it's staff to be more important than that in producing a harmful effect.
The vast majority of programs are going to be based on a peer pressure system to change behavior and induce conformity. There is no law that dictates when programs can’t abuse that control method. So if manipulation of peer pressure by staff is harmful and abusive if misapplied, isn’t every kid that goes to a program at risk of being abused?
BTW I know you haven’t looked into it much but what I hear you saying is that you might actually believe thought reform, mind control and coercive persuasion are justified forms of therapy as behavior modification. Peer pressure based behavior motivation is intrinsic to programs and thought reform. It may be worth looking into.
viewtopic.php?f=81&t=31447 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=81&t=31447)
viewtopic.php?f=81&t=30423 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=81&t=30423)
-
You'd be correct that that theory is substantiated in the field of group dynamics an human relations training, however this would be in a completely democratic context in which all parties are there with complete informed consent as to the process, unlike the teen who is often forcefully taken into a program. I think that adds further risk of harm in using it. I would agree the human element of error by staff further increases the risk, as no one can truly know what another person is experiencing. I would identify the directions ofthe organization itself upon it's staff to be more important than that in producing a harmful effect.
The vast majority of programs are going to be based on a peer pressure system to change behavior and induce conformity. There is no law that dictates when programs can’t abuse that control method. So if manipulation of peer pressure by staff is harmful and abusive if misapplied, isn’t every kid that goes to a program at risk of being abused?
BTW I know you haven’t looked into it much but what I hear you saying is that you might actually believe thought reform, mind control and coercive persuasion are justified forms of therapy as behavior modification. Peer pressure based behavior motivation is intrinsic to programs and thought reform. It may be worth looking into.
viewtopic.php?f=81&t=31447 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=81&t=31447)
viewtopic.php?f=81&t=30423 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=81&t=30423)
Exactly, awake, there is nothing intrinsic to the programs design which would unnecessarily expose the child to abuse. I can agree that there are levels of risk associated with, and dependent upon, the training of the staff members involved in overseeing a peer pressure system. But the use of peer pressure isn’t abusive in and of itself nor by design and to answer your question as to whether there is a risk involved in sending a child to a program. The answer is “Yes”, definitely. But before a child is sent to a program the parents and professionals need to weigh the risk of “not” sending the child to a program.
As far as thought reform and mind control I have read up on these and do not consider them an acceptable form of therapy. In fact I don’t consider them therapy at all.
...
-
You'd be correct that that theory is substantiated in the field of group dynamics an human relations training, however this would be in a completely democratic context in which all parties are there with complete informed consent as to the process, unlike the teen who is often forcefully taken into a program. I think that adds further risk of harm in using it. I would agree the human element of error by staff further increases the risk, as no one can truly know what another person is experiencing. I would identify the directions ofthe organization itself upon it's staff to be more important than that in producing a harmful effect.
The vast majority of programs are going to be based on a peer pressure system to change behavior and induce conformity. There is no law that dictates when programs can’t abuse that control method. So if manipulation of peer pressure by staff is harmful and abusive if misapplied, isn’t every kid that goes to a program at risk of being abused?
BTW I know you haven’t looked into it much but what I hear you saying is that you might actually believe thought reform, mind control and coercive persuasion are justified forms of therapy as behavior modification. Peer pressure based behavior motivation is intrinsic to programs and thought reform. It may be worth looking into.
viewtopic.php?f=81&t=31447 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=81&t=31447)
viewtopic.php?f=81&t=30423 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=81&t=30423)
Exactly, awake, there is nothing intrinsic to the programs design which would unnecessarily expose the child to abuse. I can agree that there are levels of risk associated with, and dependent upon, the training of the staff members involved in overseeing a peer pressure system. But the use of peer pressure isn’t abusive in and of itself nor by design and to answer your question as to whether there is a risk involved in sending a child to a program. The answer is “Yes”, definitely. But before a child is sent to a program the parents and professionals need to weigh the risk of “not” sending the child to a program.
As far as thought reform and mind control I have read up on these and do not consider them an acceptable form of therapy. In fact I don’t consider them therapy at all.
The intrinsic flaw you have missed is the element of free choice on the part of the teen. That is the design flaw that is in denial of an individuals’ existential qualities. So with that in mind do you think techniques that are used to coerce, from thought reform, mind control are acceptable forms of behavior modification for programs to use in any way that fits the business model by troubled teen programs?
.
-
The intrinsic flaw you have missed is the element of free choice on the part of the teen. That is the design flaw that is in denial of an individuals’ existential qualities.
I never understood this argument that kids entering into programs should be given all this free choice and adult status. It should be just the opposite in my opinion. The child was making poor choices when they were outside of the program and therefore their choices should be further restricted not opened up more. Wouldn’t you agree with this?
So with that in mind do you think techniques that are used to coerce, from thought reform, mind control are acceptable forms of behavior modification for programs to use in any way that fits the business model by troubled teen programs?
Thought reform and mind control should not be used on anyone, period. What many posters here try to do is tie a dotted line back to North Korean torture techniques and say “There you go this place is abusive” when it is not necessarily true. For example:
For example if a refrigerator salesman at Home Depot utilizes the “Hard Sell” on you then you could label that as “coercive persuasion”. Which we all know is rooted in thought reform and mind control which was used extensively on POWs by the North Koreans and or Chinese. Therefore (based on some peoples logic here) HomeDepot is an abusive company which has roots in thought reform and can safely be labeled a cult.
...
-
The best salesman in the world isn't going to have the ability to deny his potential customers food, sleep, or shelter. If he tries screaming at the customer telling them unless they buy his refridgerator they're going to end up "deadorinjail" he's going to be fired. If he tackles the customer and attempts to "restrain" him until he agrees to purchase said fridge not only will he be fired, but he'll go to jail as well.
You keep somehow missing these facts with your bad analogies.
As far as you not believing kids should have choices, can you show us anything suggesting coercion therapy works? When you take the kids choice away you've already failed. That's supposed to be the difference between prison and rehab. One has people there by choice, one does not.
-
Whooter, I thought you had read up on thought reform and coercive persuasion? If you had you would know that it requires a totalistic environment like a troubled teen program to be implemented. To think that the kind of abusive used of peer pressure in programs that have total environmental control over teens is translatable to a seller/ customer interaction at Home Depot, well, I think any reasonable person can read through the last few pages of conversation I’ve had with you and find that there is a clear difference there. Go ahead and read though the links I left you again, I’m sure it will point out why your thinking is incorrect.
viewtopic.php?f=81&t=31447 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=81&t=31447)
viewtopic.php?f=81&t=30423 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=81&t=30423)
Actually you neglected the part of my post before that was intended to help you answer your questions Whooter. I believe it can help bring full circle to the last few pages of conversation we’ve had together.
I really believe it is important to understand how negative feedback can be abusive and how that is facilitated in troubled teen programs.
Whooter, let’s say for instance I am a staff in a program and we are in a group session together. At some point you were dishonest about something, anything really, maybe you were caught hiding a nose ring that was part of your old image that you weren’t supposed to have. Let’s say I turn to another member in the group besides you and ask, “Hey so and so, when someone lies, what does that make them?”
In fact can someone else other than Whooter answer this for me? When someone lies what does that make them?
.
This is sort of a snap shot. We really dont know the history of this child. Maybe the staff has been working with this persons' honesty issues and they havent responded very well and finally decided to bring it up in group. Before sending the kid home or giving up on them it is important to see if they respond to peer pressure maybe.
Are you saying that a program’s manipulation of peer pressure can be abusive? I would agree with that.
To clarify a point I was making, If I go around the room and ask each person ‘If someone lies, what does that make them?’ and they all respond, ‘they are a liar’, and then I turn to you,( and perhaps you may reflect on your own behavior here on fornits), and ask you, Whooter, what do you think that makes you?
What is your honest response to that?
.
It is worth it for your own awareness to give an answer here.
-
The best salesman in the world isn't going to have the ability to deny his potential customers food, sleep, or shelter. If he tries screaming at the customer telling them unless they buy his refridgerator they're going to end up "deadorinjail" he's going to be fired. If he tackles the customer and attempts to "restrain" him until he agrees to purchase said fridge not only will he be fired, but he'll go to jail as well.
You keep somehow missing these facts with your bad analogies.
As far as you not believing kids should have choices, can you show us anything suggesting coercion therapy works? When you take the kids choice away you've already failed. That's supposed to be the difference between prison and rehab. One has people there by choice, one does not.
:tup:
-
Awake you asked me this:
So with that in mind do you think techniques that are used to coerce, from thought reform, mind control are acceptable forms of behavior modification for programs to use in any way that fits the business model by troubled teen programs?
Depending on what the techniques are they may or may not be acceptable. The total use of thought control or brainwashing is not acceptable in my opinion, but some of the techniques that are used may be I really dont know. Like the appliance salesman who uses the hard sell ( coercive persuasion) I would not consider this to be abusive although it falls under the category of thought reform techniques.
Are you saying that a program’s manipulation of peer pressure can be abusive? I would agree with that.
To clarify a point I was making, If I go around the room and ask each person ‘If someone lies, what does that make them?’ and they all respond, ‘they are a liar’, and then I turn to you,( and perhaps you may reflect on your own behavior here on fornits), and ask you, Whooter, what do you think that makes you?
What is your honest response to that?
I would respond that one event doesn’t define someone or label them. If a wife asks her husband : “Does this dress make me look fat” and he responds “No, dear, you look lovely in it”. Then I would say he is acting out of compassion and we would call him compassionate. If three friends are throwing rocks and Jimmy breaks a window and the owner comes out and asks “Who broke my window” and you step forward and say “I did” taking the blame for Jimmy knowing his father is known to hand out harsh beatings and your dad would probably only ground you then I would call him a good friend.
So I would guess it depends on the circumstances but you cant depend on these events to repeat themselves nor should you label these people based on single events in their lives. They may be habitual liars other than those snap shots or they may not be. We would need a little bit more information.
...
-
Awake you asked me this:
So with that in mind do you think techniques that are used to coerce, from thought reform, mind control are acceptable forms of behavior modification for programs to use in any way that fits the business model by troubled teen programs?
Depending on what the techniques are they may or may not be acceptable. The total use of thought control or brainwashing is not acceptable in my opinion, but some of the techniques that are used may be I really dont know. Like the appliance salesman who uses the hard sell ( coercive persuasion) I would not consider this to be abusive although it falls under the category of thought reform techniques.
Are you saying that a program’s manipulation of peer pressure can be abusive? I would agree with that.
To clarify a point I was making, If I go around the room and ask each person ‘If someone lies, what does that make them?’ and they all respond, ‘they are a liar’, and then I turn to you,( and perhaps you may reflect on your own behavior here on fornits), and ask you, Whooter, what do you think that makes you?
What is your honest response to that?
I would respond that one event doesn’t define someone or label them. If a wife asks her husband : “Does this dress make me look fat” and he responds “No, dear, you look lovely in it”. Then I would say he is acting out of compassion and we would call him compassionate. If three friends are throwing rocks and Jimmy breaks a window and the owner comes out and asks “Who broke my window” and you step forward and say “I did” taking the blame for Jimmy knowing his father is known to hand out harsh beatings and your dad would probably only ground you then I would call him a good friend.
So I would guess it depends on the circumstances but you cant depend on these events to repeat themselves nor should you label these people based on single events in their lives. They may be habitual liars other than those snap shots or they may not be. We would need a little bit more information.
...
Whooter, what is not commendable is your true intent in these conversations you have with sincere members here on this site. You, I believe get a perverse pleasure antagonizing them with your fake benign quotations. Your analogies today do no justice to the children who have suffered and are still suffering under the thumbs of programs misusing the label, "healthy treatment". You have no point at all, this has been established. Awake has presented countless articles and studies for you to comment on and you hesitate to answer. Why??? You have no answer intellectually or emotionally to come back with. "NO EXPERIENCE" professionally or personally.
You are a comical buffoon playing a part that comes from some disturbed latent behavior.
Here is a example of a confused inexperienced comment you constantly make; "The total use of thought control or brainwashing is not acceptable in my opinion, but some of the techniques that are used may be I really dont know".
You really do not know what you want to say, better you say nothing. (Old saying; Better a fool say nothing then speak and leave no shadow of a doubt.)
-
Whooter, what is not commendable is your true intent in these conversations you have with sincere members here on this site. You, I believe get a perverse pleasure antagonizing them with your fake benign quotations. Your analogies today do no justice to the children who have suffered and are still suffering under the thumbs of programs misusing the label, "healthy treatment". You have no point at all, this has been established. Awake has presented countless articles and studies for you to comment on and you hesitate to answer. Why??? You have no answer intellectually or emotionally to come back with. "NO EXPERIENCE" professionally or personally.
Heretik, Why just step in and attack me like that? I think that it is possible it is because you may lack the bandwidth to understand and follow along in Awakes and my conversation. I have made an honest effort in answering Awakes question and I think she has responded well to my requests without resorting to attacking me. I have noticed that you struggle with conversations which involve critical thinking and as a result you resort to attacking and labeling people which is apparent in this post to me and that is why I have rarely engaged you in conversation here on fornits.
You are a comical buffoon playing a part that comes from some disturbed latent behavior.
Here is a example of a confused inexperienced comment you constantly make; "The total use of thought control or brainwashing is not acceptable in my opinion, but some of the techniques that are used may be I really dont know".
You really do not know what you want to say, better you say nothing. (Old saying; Better a fool say nothing then speak and leave no shadow of a doubt.)
If you could step back and open your mind a little what you will see that I am saying is that submerging an individual into brainwashing or mind control (as they are defined by the use of them on POW’s in North Korea) is in my opinion abusive. Using individual techniques which were developed during this process may not necessarily be abusive whatever they are. For example Hypnosis is not abusive if the person chooses it. If a person is removed from a harmful environment then this isolation from these people would not be considered abusive either. Scare tactics is another technique that could be used and not be abusive. So just to name a few it seems clear that there is room for discussion in an area in which you have closed your mind off to (too bad for you).
Heretik if you look at your input in this thread you will notice that you have avoided any discussion and as a result of your lack of knowledge you resort to an emotional argument among other strategies to protect your closed mind. If this works for you then that is fine you can leave the discussion up to myself and Awake and if at any point you feel threatened again or feel the need to purge then feel free to jump in and attack me anytime you like, I can take it because I care much more for the truth than I do about what people, like yourself, think about me.
...
-
Whooter, what is not commendable is your true intent in these conversations you have with sincere members here on this site. You, I believe get a perverse pleasure antagonizing them with your fake benign quotations. Your analogies today do no justice to the children who have suffered and are still suffering under the thumbs of programs misusing the label, "healthy treatment". You have no point at all, this has been established. Awake has presented countless articles and studies for you to comment on and you hesitate to answer. Why??? You have no answer intellectually or emotionally to come back with. "NO EXPERIENCE" professionally or personally.
Heretik, I think that you may lack the bandwidth to understand Awakes and my conversation. I have made an honest effort in answering Awakes question and I think she has responded well to my requests without resorting to attacking me. I have noticed that you struggle with conversations which involve critical thinking and as a result resort to attacking and labeling people which is apparent in this post to me.
You are a comical buffoon playing a part that comes from some disturbed latent behavior.
Here is a example of a confused inexperienced comment you constantly make; "The total use of thought control or brainwashing is not acceptable in my opinion, but some of the techniques that are used may be I really dont know".
You really do not know what you want to say, better you say nothing. (Old saying; Better a fool say nothing then speak and leave no shadow of a doubt.)
If you could step back and open your mind a little what you will see that I am saying is that submerging an individual into brainwashing or mind control (as they are defined by the use of them on POW’s in North Korea) is in my opinion abusive. Using individual techniques which were developed during this process may not necessarily be abusive whatever they are. For example Hypnosis is not abusive if the person chooses it. If a person is removed from a harmful environment then this isolation from these people would not be considered abusive either. Scare tactics is another technique that could be used and not be abusive. So just to name a few it seems clear that there is room for discussion in an area in which you have closed your mind off to (too bad for you).
Heretik if you look at your input in this thread you will notice that you have avoided any discussion and as a result of your lack of knowledge you resort to an emotional argument among other strategies to protect your closed mind. If this works for you then that is fine you can leave the discussion up to myself and Awake and at any point you feel threatened again feel free to jump in and attack me anytime you like, I can take it because I care much more for the truth than I do about what people think about me. You, Heretik, on the other hand are so narrow-minded you can see through a keyhole with both eyes.
...
Whooter, I can run through at least a hundred of your posts where you give the same response, when you are confronted with your integrity within your posts. We are always attacking you as you see it. No, Whooter I or we are not attacking you, just bringing the truth to light. Your conversations have little or no constructive value in regards to the subject matter that Awake has brought fourth. They are antagonistic attempts by you to interject nonsense which demeans the experiences of survivors. Just because you come across in your written words as benign, please do not think for a second it is taken for anything more then what it is, fake.
Here is the reason you are a fake because you continue to talk as if everyone we are discussing is a adult. You refuse to address the victims for who they are children, all of your analogies are from the adult perspective. So it appears to me that some latent memory or pathology is happening here.
So please do not tell me about being closed minded, lacking in knowledge and being emotional. The first two are simply false and the last I will not make excuses for.
BTW, I don't need to add anymore comment to what Awake is posting because I concur, I have had these conversations with other survivors, psychiatrists and friends many times. I do not profess to know everything about this travesty we call the TTI and I am open minded to sincere debates.
I am sorry but your foolishness just bores me.
-
Whooter, I can run through at least a hundred of your posts where you give the same response, when you are confronted with your integrity within your posts. We are always attacking you as you see it. No, Whooter I or we are not attacking you, just bringing the truth to light. Your conversations have little or no constructive value in regards to the subject matter that Awake has brought fourth. They are antagonistic attempts by you to interject nonsense which demeans the experiences of survivors. Just because you come across in your written words as benign, please do not think for a second it is taken for anything more then what it is, fake.
Here is the reason you are a fake because you continue to talk as if everyone we are discussing is a adult. You refuse to address the victims for who they are children, all of your analogies are from the adult perspective. So it appears to me that some latent memory or pathology is happening here.
So please do not tell me about being closed minded, lacking in knowledge and being emotional. The first two are simply false and the last I will not make excuses for.
BTW, I don't need to add anymore comment to what Awake is posting because I concur, I have had these conversations with other survivors, psychiatrists and friends many times. I do not profess to know everything about this travesty we call the TTI and I am open minded to sincere debates.
I am sorry but your foolishness just bores me.
Then run away and hide, Heretik, if my words threaten your beliefs. If you feel I should be addressing the children or the adults then speak up, dont be afraid to give your opinion or challenge my thoughts. If you feel left out because you dont fully understand the roots of where thought reform or brainwashing began then read the links that Awake provided as a start and try to catch up. I am still a student of this industry myself and am still learning and hopefully will continue to learn new aspects about it every day from posters like awake and others. Unlike you I dont pretend to know everything, predict people motives and have not closed myself off to other peoples perspective no matter how far fetched they seem to be.
I am sorry this thread and my words bother you so much. There is an ignore feature which fornits provides which works out quite well for some folk here which may serve you well also. Good luck in your quest of judging and attacking those posts which you do not agree with lol. They say alot about you. But if at some point you want to shed your insecure attacking ways and share your opinions with the readers we will still be here and will treat your opinions equally and will not judge you as harshly as you judge others.
...
-
I had no "history of lying and manipulation"! I was totally credible, and my parents knew it from the day I took them out to the ball field and told them the truth about the facility I was in. They started adding things up, and kept track of the lies. When the shit hit the fan, my parents knew who was telling the truth. It was not the facility. It was there lesbian daughter! I was simply sent away for being lesbian! I was discharged at patient's request, and rightfully so! Programs are NEVER credible. Get a grip.
-
You'd be correct that that theory is substantiated in the field of group dynamics an human relations training, however this would be in a completely democratic context in which all parties are there with complete informed consent as to the process, unlike the teen who is often forcefully taken into a program. I think that adds further risk of harm in using it. I would agree the human element of error by staff further increases the risk, as no one can truly know what another person is experiencing. I would identify the directions ofthe organization itself upon it's staff to be more important than that in producing a harmful effect.
The vast majority of programs are going to be based on a peer pressure system to change behavior and induce conformity. There is no law that dictates when programs can’t abuse that control method. So if manipulation of peer pressure by staff is harmful and abusive if misapplied, isn’t every kid that goes to a program at risk of being abused?
BTW I know you haven’t looked into it much but what I hear you saying is that you might actually believe thought reform, mind control and coercive persuasion are justified forms of therapy as behavior modification. Peer pressure based behavior motivation is intrinsic to programs and thought reform. It may be worth looking into.
viewtopic.php?f=81&t=31447 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=81&t=31447)
viewtopic.php?f=81&t=30423 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=81&t=30423)
Exactly, awake, there is nothing intrinsic to the programs design which would unnecessarily expose the child to abuse. I can agree that there are levels of risk associated with, and dependent upon, the training of the staff members involved in overseeing a peer pressure system. But the use of peer pressure isn’t abusive in and of itself nor by design and to answer your question as to whether there is a risk involved in sending a child to a program. The answer is “Yes”, definitely. But before a child is sent to a program the parents and professionals need to weigh the risk of “not” sending the child to a program.
As far as thought reform and mind control I have read up on these and do not consider them an acceptable form of therapy. In fact I don’t consider them therapy at all.
The intrinsic flaw you have missed is the element of free choice on the part of the teen. That is the design flaw that is in denial of an individuals’ existential qualities. So with that in mind do you think techniques that are used to coerce, from thought reform, mind control are acceptable forms of behavior modification for programs to use in any way that fits the business model by troubled teen programs?
I never understood this argument that kids entering into programs should be given all this free choice and adult status. It should be just the opposite in my opinion. The child was making poor choices when they were outside of the program and therefore their choices should be further restricted not opened up more. Wouldn’t you agree with this?
This beckons back to the concept of INFORMED CONSENT. What do you feel about the necessity of, let alone feasibility of providing, "informed consent," Whooter? Aren't kids basically incapable of providing fully informed consent given that they are still minors by definition?
-
I had no "history of lying and manipulation"! I was totally credible, and my parents knew it from the day I took them out to the ball field and told them the truth about the facility I was in. They started adding things up, and kept track of the lies. When the shit hit the fan, my parents knew who was telling the truth. It was not the facility. It was there lesbian daughter! I was simply sent away for being lesbian! I was discharged at patient's request, and rightfully so! Programs are NEVER credible. Get a grip.
So the program is not the one who determines the childs credibility. If a child was lying to their parents prior to being placed then they would probably have a difficult time convincing their parents that the program was not a very good fit for them or the the program was abusive. Whereas in the cases like yours where you had a strong trusting bond with your family when push came to shove your parents believed you.
This was the case with my daughter, I knew her well enough, on certain levels, that if she were having a problem she could tell me and I would believe her.
...
-
This beckons back to the concept of INFORMED CONSENT. What do you feel about the necessity of, let alone feasibility of providing, "informed consent," Whooter? Aren't kids basically incapable of providing fully informed consent given that they are still minors by definition?
This is always the gray area to me. Some kids are mature enough to be left alone in the house after school at age 10 and seem mature enough to vote and have an adult conversation, others couldn't be trusted alone at age 18. Each child is different and the law states that the parents need to handle the "Consent" until age 18.
Many processes require consent in order for them to be successful. Therapy is one of them. But if we waited around for the child to ask for therapy then there wouldnt be a need for child therapists because most kids just don't ask . Its up to the parents to recognize the child's need and get them set up with a therapist with the hopes that the child will open up to it down the road. They may resist at first or be uncomfortable but in many cases the bond takes hold and the therapy becomes effective.
...
-
duplicate...
-
Whooter, I can run through at least a hundred of your posts where you give the same response, when you are confronted with your integrity within your posts. We are always attacking you as you see it. No, Whooter I or we are not attacking you, just bringing the truth to light. Your conversations have little or no constructive value in regards to the subject matter that Awake has brought fourth. They are antagonistic attempts by you to interject nonsense which demeans the experiences of survivors. Just because you come across in your written words as benign, please do not think for a second it is taken for anything more then what it is, fake.
Here is the reason you are a fake because you continue to talk as if everyone we are discussing is a adult. You refuse to address the victims for who they are children, all of your analogies are from the adult perspective. So it appears to me that some latent memory or pathology is happening here.
So please do not tell me about being closed minded, lacking in knowledge and being emotional. The first two are simply false and the last I will not make excuses for.
BTW, I don't need to add anymore comment to what Awake is posting because I concur, I have had these conversations with other survivors, psychiatrists and friends many times. I do not profess to know everything about this travesty we call the TTI and I am open minded to sincere debates.
I am sorry but your foolishness just bores me.
Then run away and hide, Heretik, if my words threaten your beliefs. If you feel I should be addressing the children or the adults then speak up, dont be afraid to give your opinion or challenge my thoughts. If you feel left out because you dont fully understand the roots of where thought reform or brainwashing began then read the links that Awake provided as a start and try to catch up. I am still a student of this industry myself and am still learning an.d hopefully will continue to learn new aspects about it every day from posters like awake and others. Unlike you I dont pretend to know everything, predict people motives and have not closed myself off to other peoples perspective no matter how far fetched they seem to be.
I am sorry this thread and my words bother you so much. There is an ignore feature which fornits provides which works out quite well for some folk here which may serve you well also. Good luck in your quest of judging and attacking those posts which you do not agree with lol. They say alot about you. But if at some point you want to shed your insecure attacking ways and share your opinions with the readers we will still be here and will treat your opinions equally and will not judge you as harshly as you judge others.
...
Here is your typical patent answer above to any criticism you receive. Whooter, your words are not threatening to me, why would they be. I wish you would stop referring to my criticism of your intent as attacking you, it is not. Far from it. I amass my opinions through your postings, sorry your truth is hard to hear.
"Unlike you I dont pretend to know everything, predict people motives and have not closed myself off to other peoples perspective no matter how far fetched they seem to be".
This comment is interesting, I really think you should read your words again. Whooter you do exactly this everyday here.
As far as informed consent, it would be a pleasure to hear you speak for the children as everyone else has here. We have never been discussing adult situations.
-
As far as informed consent, it would be a pleasure to hear you speak for the children as everyone else has here. We have never been discussing adult situations.
You are fairly new here,Heretik and probably were never involved or exposed to any of the discussions of the adult situations after programs. There have been many over the years. I think if we can all also focus on the children ("In programs today"!!) it would go a long way in helping them. Speaking about what occurred 3 or 4 decades ago is interesting and all but doesn't do much to help today's kids.
I believe the majority of the programs today are structured to help the kids build up their self esteem, build family bonds and get them set on a healthy track. As we find programs to be abusive we need to identify them and expose them the best we can.
...
-
Speaking about what occurred 3 or 4 decades ago is interesting and all but doesn't do much to help today's kids.
I believe the majority of the programs today are structured to help the kids build up their self esteem, build family bonds and get them set on a healthy track. As we find programs to be abusive we need to identify them and expose them the best we can.
...
I have provided numerous links showing that not only are the programs today run nearly identical to programs ten years ago, but that the same sick people are still running them under different names. I have provided enough links to prove my argument, you on the other hand haven't provided a single shred of evidence that proves yours. Advertisements by programs are not any evidence to prove they are not the horrible places they have always been. And the ONLY reports I have seen from independent psychiatrists warn of the dangers of programs.
So enough of the hot air Whooter, show us a fact. Just one.
-
Speaking about what occurred 3 or 4 decades ago is interesting and all but doesn't do much to help today's kids.
I believe the majority of the programs today are structured to help the kids build up their self esteem, build family bonds and get them set on a healthy track. As we find programs to be abusive we need to identify them and expose them the best we can.
...
I have provided numerous links showing that not only are the programs today run nearly identical to programs ten years ago, but that the same sick people are still running them under different names. I have provided enough links to prove my argument, you on the other hand haven't provided a single shred of evidence that proves yours. Advertisements by programs are not any evidence to prove they are not the horrible places they have always been. And the ONLY reports I have seen from independent psychiatrists warn of the dangers of programs.
So enough of the hot air Whooter, show us a fact. Just one.
10 years ago isnt that far off, Gonzo. I presented a study which was conducted surveying 1,000 graduates and their parents covering various areas of many programs. The results showed that the programs were up to 85% successful.
There was a guy who spent 16 months in a program following a peer group, had full access and then wrote a book on it. His description doesnt even compare to some of the stories were read bout here from 20 30 years ago.
Also if you take a look at the personal accounts of people in programs 20 or 30 years ago they describe the kids being held in these places with no predetermined time when they would get out. If the kids ran away or broke the rules of the program they were still held there or brought back. Kids would get almost no education and very few moved onto college. Its much different today.
...
-
Whooter, I have seen you making insinuations about others that they are narrow minded. And you’d be right in thinking that it’s not quite the case when you’re willing put yourself in the shoes of a troubled teen. Do you think you yourself could open up a bit more to that? I had been asking you a question awhile ago, maybe you are willing to answer it now.
I was wondering, why did you need to run from your therapy and not decide to stick with your program? Couldn’t opening up to it have helped you attain a bit of perspective?
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=29442&hilit=education+about+forced+therapy (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=29442&hilit=education+about+forced+therapy)
.
-
Whooter, I have seen you making insinuations about others that they are narrow minded. And you’d be right in thinking that it’s not quite the case when you’re willing put yourself in the shoes of a troubled teen. Do you think you yourself could open up a bit more to that? I had been asking you a question awhile ago, maybe you are willing to answer it now.
I was wondering, why did you need to run from your therapy and not decide to stick with your program? Couldn’t opening up to it have helped you attain a bit of perspective?
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=29442&hilit=education+about+forced+therapy (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=29442&hilit=education+about+forced+therapy)
.
Granted, Initially the kids are forced into the therapeutic process but most of them eventually embrace it if they connect and get along with their therapist. So it is consensual and the child benefits from it the same way an adult would. The only difference is that the child doesn't consent at the onset.
...
-
Whooter, I have seen you making insinuations about others that they are narrow minded. And you’d be right in thinking that it’s not quite the case when you’re willing put yourself in the shoes of a troubled teen. Do you think you yourself could open up a bit more to that? I had been asking you a question awhile ago, maybe you are willing to answer it now.
I was wondering, why did you need to run from your therapy and not decide to stick with your program? Couldn’t opening up to it have helped you attain a bit of perspective?
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=29442&hilit=education+about+forced+therapy (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=29442&hilit=education+about+forced+therapy)
.
Granted, Initially the kids are forced into the therapeutic process but most of them eventually embrace it if they connect and get along with their therapist. So it is consensual and the child benefits from it the same way an adult would. The only difference is that the child doesn't consent at the onset.
.
It sounds like you are saying you didn't open up enough to give this a chance. Do you think it's possible that some of the negative sentiment to you on this board has something to do with you being closed off to their experience? I hear your sentiment there, and see it as better for your awareness for you not to avoid it. Down deep I think you feel this experience would have been good for you if you were willing to open up a bit.
.
-
I believe the majority of the programs today are structured to help the kids build up their self esteem, build family bonds and get them set on a healthy track.
...
Funny, that is EXACTLY what my mom believed 25 years ago, along with all the idiots who counseled her to put me in one of them. The reason she believed this is simple, the program told her so. Just like the ones that exist today will tell you this. How many children will have to have their minds irreparably damaged before parents stop being so naive and gullible? ANYONE WHO WANTS TO TAKE YOUR KID AWAY AND NOT LET YOU SEE THEM CANNOT BE TRUSTED!!! Complete cult indoctrination can be accomplished in a reasonably short time, do not let anyone sequester your child, for any length of time. Especially people who have a long history of cult behavior, or who work in an industry with a long history of cult behavior.
-
Whooter, I have seen you making insinuations about others that they are narrow minded. And you’d be right in thinking that it’s not quite the case when you’re willing put yourself in the shoes of a troubled teen. Do you think you yourself could open up a bit more to that? I had been asking you a question awhile ago, maybe you are willing to answer it now.
I was wondering, why did you need to run from your therapy and not decide to stick with your program? Couldn’t opening up to it have helped you attain a bit of perspective?
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=29442&hilit=education+about+forced+therapy (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=29442&hilit=education+about+forced+therapy)
.
Granted, Initially the kids are forced into the therapeutic process but most of them eventually embrace it if they connect and get along with their therapist. So it is consensual and the child benefits from it the same way an adult would. The only difference is that the child doesn't consent at the onset.
...
They embrace it if they want to ever get out of there, it is called COERCION. So it is NOT CONSENSUAL, do you see what I mean?
-
Shadyacres wrote:
"They embrace it if they want to ever get out of there, it is called COERCION. So it is NOT CONSENSUAL, do you see what I mean?"
Whooter this comment here is in reference to children not adults. Also I don't believe whether I am new to fornits or not has any bearing on my capacity to understand, "lack of informed consent and coercion".
-
I believe the majority of the programs today are structured to help the kids build up their self esteem, build family bonds and get them set on a healthy track.
...
Funny, that is EXACTLY what my mom believed 25 years ago, along with all the idiots who counseled her to put me in one of them. The reason she believed this is simple, the program told her so. Just like the ones that exist today will tell you this. How many children will have to have their minds irreparably damaged before parents stop being so naive and gullible? ANYONE WHO WANTS TO TAKE YOUR KID AWAY AND NOT LET YOU SEE THEM CANNOT BE TRUSTED!!! Complete cult indoctrination can be accomplished in a reasonably short time, do not let anyone sequester your child, for any length of time. Especially people who have a long history of cult behavior, or who work in an industry with a long history of cult behavior.
Geesh, Shady, you come across as very paranoid. You cannot very easily be brainwashed or indoctrinated into a cult if you are busy preparing for your SATs, competing with other schools in sports, going on trips and talking to your family. If you read up on brainwashing/cults you will see that the person needs to be totally isolated and dependent on another person or group of people. You blow this stuff way out of proportion.
...
-
Granted, Initially the kids are forced into the therapeutic process but most of them eventually embrace it if they connect and get along with their therapist. So it is consensual and the child benefits from it the same way an adult would. The only difference is that the child doesn't consent at the onset.
...
They embrace it if they want to ever get out of there, it is called COERCION. So it is NOT CONSENSUAL, do you see what I mean?
You can call it coercion if you like, but the kids are underage and until they are 18 they need to listen to those in charge. If a parent says: "Get on that school bus whether you like it or not". That is coercion also, but most of the time the child learns in school in-spite of being forced to go and many kids even end up enjoying it.
...
-
Getting on the bus and doing chores is not the same as being coerced to give up all mental and emotional boundaries and participate in mindraping psychodramas by cultists. You know that, Whooter. We aren't talking about eating your veggies.
-
Getting on the bus and doing chores is not the same as being coerced to give up all mental and emotional boundaries and participate in mindraping psychodramas by cultists. You know that, Whooter. We aren't talking about eating your veggies.
If you want to beef it up with all your drama of being submerged into a cult and being mindraped then sure it sounds horrible like forcing a kid onto the bus to attend school at Columbine High School 2 days after the shootings. We could all give extreme examples. The programs I am aware of give the parents a time line like 12 to 14 months, work on getting into college, building a bond with their family at home, communication with friends and family etc. We all know cults dont do this.
We were talking about being forced into therapy, Samara. Kids many times resist but eventually benefit from therapy which is the same with many things kids need to be pushed into.
...
-
If you read up on brainwashing/cults you will see that the person needs to be totally isolated and dependent on another person or group of people.
Which is exactly what happens in these places. That's why communication is restricted/monitored/disallowed. They don't want any outside influence entering the "students" minds.
And it's far easier to brainwash someone than you think.
-
Whooter, what is not commendable is your true intent in these conversations you have with sincere members here on this site. You, I believe get a perverse pleasure antagonizing them with your fake benign quotations. Your analogies today do no justice to the children who have suffered and are still suffering under the thumbs of programs misusing the label, "healthy treatment". You have no point at all, this has been established. Awake has presented countless articles and studies for you to comment on and you hesitate to answer. Why??? You have no answer intellectually or emotionally to come back with. "NO EXPERIENCE" professionally or personally.
You are a comical buffoon playing a part that comes from some disturbed latent behavior.
Here is a example of a confused inexperienced comment you constantly make; "The total use of thought control or brainwashing is not acceptable in my opinion, but some of the techniques that are used may be I really dont know".
You really do not know what you want to say, better you say nothing. (Old saying; Better a fool say nothing then speak and leave no shadow of a doubt.)
:notworthy:
-
If you read up on brainwashing/cults you will see that the person needs to be totally isolated and dependent on another person or group of people.
Which is exactly what happens in these places. That's why communication is restricted/monitored/disallowed. They don't want any outside influence entering the "students" minds.
And it's far easier to brainwash someone than you think.
If you take some time to read up on brainwashing and thought control you will see that this cannot occur if the child is in school all day and is focused on preparing for his/her SAT's playing sports with the local highschool, spending time with his/her parents, visiting with brothers and sisters, writing and calling them, going on trips into town, visiting colleges etc. The child needs total isolation from outside influences and dependence on a single person or group.
...
-
I believe the majority of the programs today are structured to help the kids build up their self esteem, build family bonds and get them set on a healthy track.
...
Funny, that is EXACTLY what my mom believed 25 years ago, along with all the idiots who counseled her to put me in one of them. The reason she believed this is simple, the program told her so. Just like the ones that exist today will tell you this. How many children will have to have their minds irreparably damaged before parents stop being so naive and gullible? ANYONE WHO WANTS TO TAKE YOUR KID AWAY AND NOT LET YOU SEE THEM CANNOT BE TRUSTED!!! Complete cult indoctrination can be accomplished in a reasonably short time, do not let anyone sequester your child, for any length of time. Especially people who have a long history of cult behavior, or who work in an industry with a long history of cult behavior.
Geesh, Shady, you come across as very paranoid. You cannot very easily be brainwashed or indoctrinated into a cult if you are busy preparing for your SATs, competing with other schools in sports, going on trips and talking to your family. If you read up on brainwashing/cults you will see that the person needs to be totally isolated and dependent on another person or group of people. You blow this stuff way out of proportion.
...
Only in the beginning, the 'indoctrination phase'. That is why that first month is always restricted, no contact with anyone. They have had 30 years to fine tune their indoctrination and I imagine they are pretty good at it by now. I think this is a perfect example of the old adage; Parents should not wonder if they are being paranoid, they should wonder if they are being paranoid ENOUGH. If you force your child into a "school" that turns out to be an abusive cult, it will have a negative effect on the rest of his/her life, and yours. And I don't think you are qualified to say whether or not I am blowing "this stuff" out of proportion, since you have never been enrolled in one of these places.
-
Only in the beginning, the 'indoctrination phase'. That is why that first month is always restricted, no contact with anyone. They have had 30 years to fine tune their indoctrination and I imagine they are pretty good at it by now. I think this is a perfect example of the old adage; Parents should not wonder if they are being paranoid, they should wonder if they are being paranoid ENOUGH. If you force your child into a "school" that turns out to be an abusive cult, it will have a negative effect on the rest of his/her life, and yours. And I don't think you are qualified to say whether or not I am blowing "this stuff" out of proportion, since you have never been enrolled in one of these places.
Shady, I dont think anyone is going to buy into the (fast food/ drive through) 30 day brainwashing theory. Your experience is limited to one program and there are hundreds of different models and programs out there. If you look into what is required to brainwash someone and the definition of a cult you will quickly realize that if a child is competing in sports with local highschools, going to school all day, preparing for their SAT's, visiting colleges, writing to friends and family, going into town on weekends etc. that this environment cannot support brainwashing or fit the definition of a cult. The conditions dont exist for these theories to take hold, Shady.
It appears that you are trying to compare your experience to programs today and various other models. Not all programs are the same. We need to focus on those programs which are not succeeding in helping kids or have a high level of abuse and expose them. Lying to parents telling them that all programs are the same and that they brainwash kids and are cults isnt going to help anyone or increase your credibility any. You come across as uniformed.
...
-
Whooter I know you decided to skip out of your program. What about it was hard for you specifically?
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=29442&hilit=education+about+forced+therapy (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=29442&hilit=education+about+forced+therapy)
.
-
Shady, I dont think anyone is going to buy into the (fast food/ drive through) 30 day brainwashing theory.
You really should do some research on brainwashing. It doesn't take long at all. Especially is such an isolated environment.
Your experience is limited to one program and there are hundreds of different models and programs out there.
You keep saying that, but most of the use the same "treatment" models.
If you look into what is required to brainwash someone and the definition of a cult you will quickly realize that if a child is competing in sports with local highschools, going to school all day, preparing for their SAT's, visiting colleges, writing to friends and family, going into town on weekends etc. that this environment cannot support brainwashing or fit the definition of a cult. The conditions dont exist for these theories to take hold, Shady.
And you don't get to do any of those things in programs.
It appears that you are trying to compare your experience to programs today and various other models. Not all programs are the same.
Not exactly the same, but most use the same techniques. I didn't think anything could be worse than Straight then I started reading about Tranquility Bay, WWASPS etc.
You come across as uniformed.
:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:
Yeah, it's HER that's uninformed. The one who has been on the inside. You, who've never been exposed to this kind of "treatment" are the expert. :twofinger: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:
-
Only in the beginning, the 'indoctrination phase'. That is why that first month is always restricted, no contact with anyone. They have had 30 years to fine tune their indoctrination and I imagine they are pretty good at it by now. I think this is a perfect example of the old adage; Parents should not wonder if they are being paranoid, they should wonder if they are being paranoid ENOUGH. If you force your child into a "school" that turns out to be an abusive cult, it will have a negative effect on the rest of his/her life, and yours. And I don't think you are qualified to say whether or not I am blowing "this stuff" out of proportion, since you have never been enrolled in one of these places.
Shady, I dont think anyone is going to buy into the (fast food/ drive through) 30 day brainwashing theory. Your experience is limited to one program and there are hundreds of different models and programs out there. If you look into what is required to brainwash someone and the definition of a cult you will quickly realize that if a child is competing in sports with local highschools, going to school all day, preparing for their SAT's, visiting colleges, writing to friends and family, going into town on weekends etc. that this environment cannot support brainwashing or fit the definition of a cult. The conditions dont exist for these theories to take hold, Shady.
This is exactly what I am talking about Whooter, your disconnection to the actual reality. We are talking about children 13-17 in trouble (?) being admitted into a program (first day) and told everything they were used to will change, now.
Next.....
Where does Whooter go, to some happy go lucky H.S., commemorating positive experiences of SAT's, visiting colleges, competing in sports ect... This is your perverse pleasure coming through again. You enjoy playing the fool here and yet you cry foul when called on it.
It appears that you are trying to compare your experience to programs today and various other models. Not all programs are the same. We need to focus on those programs which are not succeeding in helping kids or have a high level of abuse and expose them. Lying to parents telling them that all programs are the same and that they brainwash kids and are cults isnt going to help anyone or increase your credibility any. You come across as uniformed.
.......and you really believe the audience here looks to you for credibility.
...
-
This is exactly what I am talking about Whooter, your disconnection to the actual reality. We are talking about children 13-17 in trouble (?) being admitted into a program (first day) and told everything they were used to will change, now.
I am talking about kids 13-17 also. But being told their world will change doesnt define brainwashing.
Where does Whooter go, to some happy go lucky H.S., commemorating positive experiences of SAT's, visiting colleges, competing in sports ect... This is your perverse pleasure coming through again. You enjoy playing the fool here and yet you cry foul when called on it.
I was describing a program, Heretik, I know it is a long way from the seed or straight but things have changed in many areas of the industry of the past several decades.
.......and you really believe the audience here looks to you for credibility.
I dont think people look to me for credibility. Its up to all of us to choose as individual who we think is credible and who is not based on their experience and willingness to view all aspect of the industry with an open mind.
...
-
Shady, I dont think anyone is going to buy into the (fast food/ drive through) 30 day brainwashing theory.
You really should do some research on brainwashing. It doesn't take long at all. Especially is such an isolated environment.
Your experience is limited to one program and there are hundreds of different models and programs out there.
You keep saying that, but most of the use the same "treatment" models.
If you look into what is required to brainwash someone and the definition of a cult you will quickly realize that if a child is competing in sports with local highschools, going to school all day, preparing for their SAT's, visiting colleges, writing to friends and family, going into town on weekends etc. that this environment cannot support brainwashing or fit the definition of a cult. The conditions dont exist for these theories to take hold, Shady.
And you don't get to do any of those things in programs.
It appears that you are trying to compare your experience to programs today and various other models. Not all programs are the same.
Not exactly the same, but most use the same techniques. I didn't think anything could be worse than Straight then I started reading about Tranquility Bay, WWASPS etc.
You come across as uniformed.
:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:
Yeah, it's HER that's uninformed. The one who has been on the inside. You, who've never been exposed to this kind of "treatment" are the expert. :twofinger: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:
Hey, I'm not a her. And chicks dig a man in a uniform.
-
If you look into what is required to brainwash someone and the definition of a cult you will quickly realize that if a child is competing in sports with local highschools, going to school all day, preparing for their SAT's, visiting colleges, writing to friends and family, going into town on weekends etc. that this environment cannot support brainwashing or fit the definition of a cult. The conditions dont exist for these theories to take hold, Shady.
And you don't get to do any of those things in programs.
At ASR they prepare you for SAT's and they provide transportation to the local testing site. There was one kid in my daughters peer group who was pulled out by his parents to visit colleges for a week. I dont think the school was thrilled because it was disruptive but parents are able to do this. My daughter was able to write letters to me as often as she liked and she had one friend which was approved that she could communicate with. They had a sign-up sheet if you wanted to go into town for date night. If you were not on restriction then you were eligible to go, although, they got to choose the person you would go on a date with. ASR has competitive sport teams who play against the local highschools
...
-
For example Hypnosis is not abusive if the person chooses it.
Interesting that you would focus in on that. Is hypnosis abusive if the person doesn't choose it?
.
-
For example Hypnosis is not abusive if the person chooses it.
Interesting that you would focus in on that. Is hypnosis abusive if the person doesn't choose it?
.
Hmmm. That would be an interesting discussion. I brought that up originally because it is part of the mind control / brainwashing process.
...
-
For example Hypnosis is not abusive if the person chooses it.
Interesting that you would focus in on that. Is hypnosis abusive if the person doesn't choose it?
.
Hmmm. That would be an interesting discussion. I brought that up originally because it is part of the mind control / brainwashing process.
...
Yes, I believe that’s what you were elaborating on. How were you defining hypnosis as you were referring to it there?
.
-
For example Hypnosis is not abusive if the person chooses it.
Interesting that you would focus in on that. Is hypnosis abusive if the person doesn't choose it?
.
Hmmm. That would be an interesting discussion. I brought that up originally because it is part of the mind control / brainwashing process.
...
Yes, I believe that’s what you were elaborating on. How were you defining hypnosis as you were referring to it there?
.
I didnt intend to define it, awake, I was just indicating that it was part of the whole brainwashing process.
...
-
For example Hypnosis is not abusive if the person chooses it.
Interesting that you would focus in on that. Is hypnosis abusive if the person doesn't choose it?
.
Hmmm. That would be an interesting discussion. I brought that up originally because it is part of the mind control / brainwashing process.
...
Yes, I believe that’s what you were elaborating on. How were you defining hypnosis as you were referring to it there?
.
I didnt intend to define it, awake, I was just indicating that it was part of the whole brainwashing process.
I’m not sure I understand. You were in the middle of insinuating someone might not be open minded enough and ‘lack the bandwidth’ to understand how individual techniques of thought reform and mind control could be abusive. Then you make a specific example out of hypnosis in that regard. Now you are saying not only do you not have any idea whether you believe using hypnosis can be abusive, but you don’t know what it is?
.
-
I’m not sure I understand. You were in the middle of insinuating someone might not be open minded enough and ‘lack the bandwidth’ to understand how individual techniques of thought reform and mind control could be abusive. Then you make a specific example out of hypnosis in that regard. Now you are saying not only do you not have any idea whether you believe using hypnosis can be abusive, but you don’t know what it is?
I didnt insinuate that anyone lacked the bandwidth to understand mind control techniques. At least I dont think I did.
Speaking to Heretik I stated:
..... you may lack the bandwidth to understand and follow along in Awakes and my conversation.
Understanding all the various techniques of thought reform and Mind Control is not something most people know, myself included, and people spend careers working to understand all the various affects positive and negative.
I understand hypnosis as a layman, not in the professional capacity. I have never used it myself nor studied it professionally.
...
-
I’m not sure I understand. You were in the middle of insinuating someone might not be open minded enough and ‘lack the bandwidth’ to understand how individual techniques of thought reform and mind control could be abusive. Then you make a specific example out of hypnosis in that regard. Now you are saying not only do you not have any idea whether you believe using hypnosis can be abusive, but you don’t know what it is?
I didnt insinuate that anyone lacked the bandwidth to understand mind control techniques. At least I dont think I did.
Speaking to Heretik I stated:
..... you may lack the bandwidth to understand and follow along in Awakes and my conversation.
Why did you cut your own single sentence quote short? This is what you really said.
I think that it is possible it is because you may lack the bandwidth to understand and follow along in Awakes and my conversation.
.
-
So enough of the hot air Whooter, show us a fact. Just one.
10 years ago isnt that far off, Gonzo. I presented a study which was conducted surveying 1,000 graduates and their parents covering various areas of many programs. The results showed that the programs were up to 85% successful.
There was a guy who spent 16 months in a program following a peer group, had full access and then wrote a book on it. His description doesnt even compare to some of the stories were read bout here from 20 30 years ago.
Also if you take a look at the personal accounts of people in programs 20 or 30 years ago they describe the kids being held in these places with no predetermined time when they would get out. If the kids ran away or broke the rules of the program they were still held there or brought back. Kids would get almost no education and very few moved onto college. Its much different today.
...
I'm sorry, I thought I clearly stated for you to show some PROOF to back up your ridiculous claims. I know it is pointless to ask since you have none, but thanks for playing.
-
I'm sorry, I thought I clearly stated for you to show some PROOF to back up your ridiculous claims. I know it is pointless to ask since you have none, but thanks for playing.
Hey, Gonzo, be nice.
Here are a couple of links for you:
1) This was a study conducted surveying 1,000 parents and graduates of a few programs. The study was overseen by WIRB (The Western Institutional Review Board) and they also approved the study. The results were presented at the Annual meeting of the APA American Psychological Association.
Link (http://http://www.scribd.com/doc/503084/Residential-Treatment-Outcomes-Study)
2) There was a writer who spent 14 months (I thought it was 16 months) inside a program and then wrote a book about his findings
Link (http://http://www.davemarcus.com/content/what-it-takes-pull-me-through-about-book)
A Pulitzer Prize-winning writer untangles the mysteries of the
teenage mind as he witnesses troubled kids transformed by fourteen
months at a school that offers therapy for adolescents in
crisis.
Millions of parents struggle to grasp what goes on in their kids' heads,
on their computers, and among their friends. As an education correspondent
for U.S. News & World Report, David L. Marcus wrestled with similar
questions while reporting on the welter of pressures American teenagers
now face – a resurgent drug culture, proliferating temptations and threats
on-line, skyrocketing suicide rates (three times higher than in the
1960s).
To find answers, Marcus gained unfettered access to students, staff,
and parents at the Academy at Swift River in the hills of western
Massachusetts. The kids at Swift River had already ventured down a
number of perilous paths all parents fear their own children might
take – drug use, violence, theft, internet addictions, eating disorders,
promiscuity. Known for combining intensive academics, a wilderness
program and group therapy, the school helps troubled teenagers emotional
health.
...
-
Your experience is limited to one program and there are hundreds of different models and programs out there.
Which is still one up on your experiences as you have never been in a program. Our testimony will forever weight more than yours Whooter. Why do you keep missing this?
-
Shady, I dont think anyone is going to buy into the (fast food/ drive through) 30 day brainwashing theory.
You really should do some research on brainwashing. It doesn't take long at all. Especially is such an isolated environment.
Your experience is limited to one program and there are hundreds of different models and programs out there.
You keep saying that, but most of the use the same "treatment" models.
If you look into what is required to brainwash someone and the definition of a cult you will quickly realize that if a child is competing in sports with local highschools, going to school all day, preparing for their SAT's, visiting colleges, writing to friends and family, going into town on weekends etc. that this environment cannot support brainwashing or fit the definition of a cult. The conditions dont exist for these theories to take hold, Shady.
And you don't get to do any of those things in programs.
It appears that you are trying to compare your experience to programs today and various other models. Not all programs are the same.
Not exactly the same, but most use the same techniques. I didn't think anything could be worse than Straight then I started reading about Tranquility Bay, WWASPS etc.
You come across as uniformed.
:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:
Yeah, it's HER that's uninformed. The one who has been on the inside. You, who've never been exposed to this kind of "treatment" are the expert. :twofinger: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:
Hey, I'm not a her. And chicks dig a man in a uniform.
Where's the embarrassed, red faced emoticon when I need it. I'm so sorry! :-*
And I definitely dig a man in uniform!
-
Hey, I'm not a her. And chicks dig a man in a uniform.
Where's the embarrassed, red faced emoticon when I need it. I'm so sorry! :-*
And I definitely dig a man in uniform!
Dont feel embarrassed, I thought it was funny, I sometimes do the same thing.
...
-
2) There was a writer who spent 14 months (I thought it was 16 months) inside a program and then wrote a book about his findings
And that would have nothing to do with the fact that he's trying to sell his book, right? ::)
To find answers, Marcus gained unfettered access to students, staff,
and parents at the Academy at Swift River in the hills of western
Massachusetts.
Sure he did. ::) Yeah, I remember when Beth Polson of 60 Minutes came to Straight to do a 'report'. Things were very different at Straight when she was in the building. No beatings, no harsh confrontation.....none of the abusive crap that we endured daily. She ended up with a book deal out of it too. And a movie.
What we're looking for....what is really needed to objectively evaluate these places are clinical, longitudinal studies by qualified persons. Not people looking to line their pockets with a book deal.
-
Hey, I'm not a her. And chicks dig a man in a uniform.
Where's the embarrassed, red faced emoticon when I need it. I'm so sorry! :-*
And I definitely dig a man in uniform!
Dont feel embarrassed, I thought it was funny, I sometimes do the same thing.
Was I talking to you? No? Then STFU.
-
I have always argued that any one person, telling the kinds of stories we're all so familiar with about any program, facility or school would lack credibility. After all, the accounts of what takes place are incredible. This is why it is so easy for the program staff to get the parents accepting it is all lying manipulation. What makes the accounts credible are the multiple, consistent, persistent accounts of these incredible things.
When you have someone telling a story that deviates significantly from what is consistently expressed there may be some reason to have doubts. There are a couple of occasions where I have thought some embellishment has taken place, simply b/c no one else ever made a similar claim. But for the most part, given time, you'll find multiple witnesses to even the most hard to believe accounts.
When you have persons from many various facilities, scattered across the world, describing the same kinds of abuses, neglect and deprivation you have to accept the allegations are credible. If you don't, it is simply b/c it pays you not to - and I hope this "blindness" will end up costing you. . .
-
I’m not sure I understand. You were in the middle of insinuating someone might not be open minded enough and ‘lack the bandwidth’ to understand how individual techniques of thought reform and mind control could be abusive. Then you make a specific example out of hypnosis in that regard. Now you are saying not only do you not have any idea whether you believe using hypnosis can be abusive, but you don’t know what it is?
I didnt insinuate that anyone lacked the bandwidth to understand mind control techniques. At least I dont think I did.
Speaking to Heretik I stated:
..... you may lack the bandwidth to understand and follow along in Awakes and my conversation.
Why did you cut your own single sentence quote short? This is what you really said.
I think that it is possible it is because you may lack the bandwidth to understand and follow along in Awakes and my conversation.
.
Have you had enough time to think of what your answer is here? You're not trying to avoid it are you?
.
-
I’m not sure I understand. You were in the middle of insinuating someone might not be open minded enough and ‘lack the bandwidth’ to understand how individual techniques of thought reform and mind control could be abusive. Then you make a specific example out of hypnosis in that regard. Now you are saying not only do you not have any idea whether you believe using hypnosis can be abusive, but you don’t know what it is?
I didnt insinuate that anyone lacked the bandwidth to understand mind control techniques. At least I dont think I did.
Speaking to Heretik I stated:
..... you may lack the bandwidth to understand and follow along in Awakes and my conversation.
Why did you cut your own single sentence quote short? This is what you really said.
I think that it is possible it is because you may lack the bandwidth to understand and follow along in Awakes and my conversation.
.
Have you had enough time to think of what your answer is here? You're not trying to avoid it are you?
.
Wow, you are picky here Awake. I went back to look at our conversation and you asked why I stated someone lacked the bandwidth to understand techniques of mindcontrol and thought reform. As I reviewed my comments I found that I did not insinuate that, I was stating Heretik may lack the bandwidth to follow Awakes and my conversation. To point this out to you I segmented the part where I stated this specifically without pasting the rest. I find it easier to read if I cut and paste just the comment itself. Another approach is to cut and paste the entire post and then hi-light the area in question. I just chose the earlier one.
Here is another way I could have communicated the same thing:
Heretik, Why just step in and attack me like that? I think that it is possible it is because you may lack the bandwidth to understand and follow along in Awakes and my conversation. I have made an honest effort in answering Awakes question and I think she has responded well to my requests without resorting to attacking me. I have noticed that you struggle with conversations which involve critical thinking and as a result you resort to attacking and labeling people which is apparent in this post to me and that is why I have rarely engaged you in conversation here on fornits.
Do you see what I mean? They both accomplish the same thing but the first one is easier to follow in my opinion and gets my point across with less words.
...
-
I’m not sure I understand. You were in the middle of insinuating someone might not be open minded enough and ‘lack the bandwidth’ to understand how individual techniques of thought reform and mind control could be abusive. Then you make a specific example out of hypnosis in that regard. Now you are saying not only do you not have any idea whether you believe using hypnosis can be abusive, but you don’t know what it is?
I didnt insinuate that anyone lacked the bandwidth to understand mind control techniques. At least I dont think I did.
Speaking to Heretik I stated:
..... you may lack the bandwidth to understand and follow along in Awakes and my conversation.
Why did you cut your own single sentence quote short? This is what you really said.
I think that it is possible it is because you may lack the bandwidth to understand and follow along in Awakes and my conversation.
.
Have you had enough time to think of what your answer is here? You're not trying to avoid it are you?
.
Wow, you are picky here Awake. I went back to look at our conversation and you asked why I stated someone lacked the bandwidth to understand techniques of mindcontrol and thought reform. As I reviewed my comments I found that I did not insinuate that, I was stating Heretik may lack the bandwidth to follow Awakes and my conversation. To point this out to you I segmented the part where I stated this specifically without pasting the rest. I find it easier to read if I cut and paste just the comment itself. Another approach is to cut and paste the entire post and then hi-light the area in question. I just chose the earlier one.
Here is another way I could have communicated the same thing:
Heretik, Why just step in and attack me like that? I think that it is possible it is because you may lack the bandwidth to understand and follow along in Awakes and my conversation. I have made an honest effort in answering Awakes question and I think she has responded well to my requests without resorting to attacking me. I have noticed that you struggle with conversations which involve critical thinking and as a result you resort to attacking and labeling people which is apparent in this post to me and that is why I have rarely engaged you in conversation here on fornits.
Do you see what I mean? They both accomplish the same thing but the first one is easier to follow in my opinion and gets my point across with less words.
.
Actually I asked why you Insinuated someone didn’t have the bandwidth to understand techniques of mind control and thought reform and then went on to example hypnosis and scare tactics, and then said you only have a laymans knowledge concerning hypnosis.
You may mistake being picky for being diligent in this case, I could understand if this is uncomfortable for you though. I want to get to the truth about abuse in programs and I think those kinds of inconsistencies get overlooked all too often. And, I still don’t understand. You aren’t insinuating anything by your statement above?
Do you think you are making insinuations with these comments you made to Heretik in the very same post? I don’t know the history you and Heretik have together, but just because emotional arguments arise doesn’t mean someone is closed minded or lacks knowledge. Sometimes emotions are valid Whooter. I know you don’t like to show yours, but it wouldn’t be a bad thing if you did.
If you could step back and open your mind a little what you will see that I am saying is that submerging an individual into brainwashing or mind control (as they are defined by the use of them on POW’s in North Korea) is in my opinion abusive. Using individual techniques which were developed during this process may not necessarily be abusive whatever they are. For example Hypnosis is not abusive if the person chooses it. If a person is removed from a harmful environment then this isolation from these people would not be considered abusive either. Scare tactics is another technique that could be used and not be abusive. So just to name a few it seems clear that there is room for discussion in an area in which you have closed your mind off to (too bad for you).
Heretik if you look at your input in this thread you will notice that you have avoided any discussion and as a result of your lack of knowledge you resort to an emotional argument among other strategies to protect your closed mind. If this works for you then that is fine you can leave the discussion up to myself and Awake and if at any point you feel threatened again or feel the need to purge then feel free to jump in and attack me anytime you like, I can take it because I care much more for the truth than I do about what people, like yourself, think about me.
Well, I guess hypnosis appears to be too unfamiliar a subject to be commenting on at this point, so we’ll leave it for later. But how about scare tactics? When does the use of scare tactics become abusive in the TTI to you Whooter?
.
-
Link (http://http://www.scribd.com/doc/503084/Residential-Treatment-Outcomes-Study)
...
http://canyonrc.com/experience.html (http://canyonrc.com/experience.html)
This is a psychologist that makes her money off of selling programs . I'm sorry Whooter, but anybody who profits from programs has reason to lie and fabricate positive info on programs. You know, like you.
And she is based in Utah, the state of WWASPS. Which is very well known for buying off pro-program legislation and legislators. No chance they would purchase a psychologist to pump their poison as well? HMMMMM.
Well we could just look at the bottom of her page, whats that, Aspen Education is a client of hers? You don't say.
Any links to any info that it not tainted with program money?
-
I'm sorry, I thought I clearly stated for you to show some PROOF to back up your ridiculous claims. I know it is pointless to ask since you have none, but thanks for playing.
Hey, Gonzo, be nice.
Here are a couple of links for you:
1) This was a study conducted surveying 1,000 parents and graduates of a few programs. The study was overseen by WIRB (The Western Institutional Review Board) and they also approved the study. The results were presented at the Annual meeting of the APA American Psychological Association.
Link (http://http://www.scribd.com/doc/503084/Residential-Treatment-Outcomes-Study)
2) There was a writer who spent 14 months (I thought it was 16 months) inside a program and then wrote a book about his findings
Link (http://http://www.davemarcus.com/content/what-it-takes-pull-me-through-about-book)
A Pulitzer Prize-winning writer untangles the mysteries of the
teenage mind as he witnesses troubled kids transformed by fourteen
months at a school that offers therapy for adolescents in
crisis.
Millions of parents struggle to grasp what goes on in their kids' heads,
on their computers, and among their friends. As an education correspondent
for U.S. News & World Report, David L. Marcus wrestled with similar
questions while reporting on the welter of pressures American teenagers
now face – a resurgent drug culture, proliferating temptations and threats
on-line, skyrocketing suicide rates (three times higher than in the
1960s).
To find answers, Marcus gained unfettered access to students, staff,
and parents at the Academy at Swift River in the hills of western
Massachusetts. The kids at Swift River had already ventured down a
number of perilous paths all parents fear their own children might
take – drug use, violence, theft, internet addictions, eating disorders,
promiscuity. Known for combining intensive academics, a wilderness
program and group therapy, the school helps troubled teenagers emotional
health.
...
-
Neither of those links prove anything at all. I know this is a pointless game to play because you have no proof to back up anything you say. So somebody wrote a book saying that Swift River helped these kids. Well we could put all of your BS posts together and call it a book too. The other link is to a Psychologist who is paid by Aspen Education.
PROOF Whooter, with facts. Haha, talk about your oxymorons.
-
Neither of those links prove anything at all. I know this is a pointless game to play because you have no proof to back up anything you say. So somebody wrote a book saying that Swift River helped these kids. Well we could put all of your BS posts together and call it a book too. The other link is to a Psychologist who is paid by Aspen Education.
PROOF Whooter, with facts. Haha, talk about your oxymorons.
sorry it hurts so much Gonzo. The book was independent. (you cant shake that). The study was independent too (had oversight by a third party). Cant shake that either.
Do I think for a moment that you will accept this? Not at all, how could you? How could anyone here on fornits? What would happen to this site?
But the studies are out there. It was also presented to the APA annual meeting. I have a friend who thinks all the cancer studies are fixed because the researchers are doctors who work for the industry. He can think what he wants just like you can Gonzo.
You wanted Studies and a book by a Pulitzer prized winning author.. you got it lol and I provided links
If you want to reject them, it is up to you.
...
-
I have always argued that any one person, telling the kinds of stories we're all so familiar with about any program, facility or school would lack credibility. After all, the accounts of what takes place are incredible. This is why it is so easy for the program staff to get the parents accepting it is all lying manipulation. What makes the accounts credible are the multiple, consistent, persistent accounts of these incredible things.
When you have someone telling a story that deviates significantly from what is consistently expressed there may be some reason to have doubts. There are a couple of occasions where I have thought some embellishment has taken place, simply b/c no one else ever made a similar claim. But for the most part, given time, you'll find multiple witnesses to even the most hard to believe accounts.
When you have persons from many various facilities, scattered across the world, describing the same kinds of abuses, neglect and deprivation you have to accept the allegations are credible. If you don't, it is simply b/c it pays you not to - and I hope this "blindness" will end up costing you. . .
Thank-You :notworthy:
-
@ Whooter. I found myself feeling interested in some comments of yours saying that today’s programs don’t contain the same kind of ‘brainwashing’ tactics (I prefer the term thought reform for certain reasons) and abuses that they did 30 yrs ago in programs like Seed and Straight.
But along with abusive programs like the Seed and Straight you have included Cedu in your list of program models you think have been sufficiently removed from the program mainstream, yet Cedu closed in 2005. 5 yrs ago is not a long time. May I ask what it is about Cedu that makes you personally consider it abusive?
.
-
I'm actually still interested to see if he'd be willing to name a single program currently operating in the US that he would consider to be abusive.
-
I'm actually still interested to see if he'd be willing to name a single program currently operating in the US that he would consider to be abusive.
I'd like to see that too. It doesn't seem that there's one that we've discussed here that he disagrees with.
-
I'm actually still interested to see if he'd be willing to name a single program currently operating in the US that he would consider to be abusive.
I'd like to see that too. It doesn't seem that there's one that we've discussed here that he disagrees with.
Maybe they closed all the abusive ones down and only good ones are left. We should look into that.
...
-
I'm actually still interested to see if he'd be willing to name a single program currently operating in the US that he would consider to be abusive.
I'd like to see that too. It doesn't seem that there's one that we've discussed here that he disagrees with.
Maybe they closed all the abusive ones down and only good ones are left. We should look into that.
Answer the question honestly. Do you have a problem with ANY of the programs running today?
-
I'm actually still interested to see if he'd be willing to name a single program currently operating in the US that he would consider to be abusive.
I'd like to see that too. It doesn't seem that there's one that we've discussed here that he disagrees with.
Maybe they closed all the abusive ones down and only good ones are left. We should look into that.
Answer the question honestly. Do you have a problem with ANY of the programs running today?
I have given out a list a few times in the past. How about you being honest and listing the programs you consider non abusive?
...
-
I have given out a list a few times in the past. How about you being honest and listing the programs you consider non abusive?
Why must you always turn it around to someone else? The question was posed to YOU, not me.
I must have missed your list. Would you please repost the list of programs you consider to be abusive?
Off the top of my head I can think of PMI (Pinellas Marine Institute). The kids aren't slammed with confrontational 'therapy', have mentors that don't scream at them or make them wear silly signs to designate them as this or that, see real doctors and learn real world skills, i.e. marine mechanics etc. There may be other AMI programs that have abusive qualities, but from what I've personally seen at PMI, it's not too bad.
-
I have given out a list a few times in the past. How about you being honest and listing the programs you consider non abusive?
Why must you always turn it around to someone else? The question was posed to YOU, not me.
I must have missed your list. Would you please repost the list of programs you consider to be abusive?
Off the top of my head I can think of PMI (Pinellas Marine Institute). The kids aren't slammed with confrontational 'therapy', have mentors that don't scream at them or make them wear silly signs to designate them as this or that, see real doctors and learn real world skills, i.e. marine mechanics etc. There may be other AMI programs that have abusive qualities, but from what I've personally seen at PMI, it's not too bad.
I dont have a list off the top of my head. I posted 8 programs in the past that I thought were good. The bad ones I think are mostly closed, I would stay away from the WWASP programs.
...
-
I have given out a list a few times in the past. How about you being honest and listing the programs you consider non abusive?
Why must you always turn it around to someone else? The question was posed to YOU, not me.
I see you ignored that question and I answered yours below.
I must have missed your list. Would you please repost the list of programs you consider to be abusive?
Off the top of my head I can think of PMI (Pinellas Marine Institute). The kids aren't slammed with confrontational 'therapy', have mentors that don't scream at them or make them wear silly signs to designate them as this or that, see real doctors and learn real world skills, i.e. marine mechanics etc. There may be other AMI programs that have abusive qualities, but from what I've personally seen at PMI, it's not too bad.
I dont have a list off the top of my head.
How convenient. I could at least come up with one that I consider less harmful. You can't come up with even ONE current program that you consider abusive?
I posted 8 programs in the past that I thought were good.
And those would be......?
The bad ones I think are mostly closed,
Isn't HLA closed? Did you not consider that to be abusive? How about Paradise Cove? How about Judge Rotenberg Educational Center using electroshock "therapy"?
I would stay away from the WWASP programs.
I'm truly shocked.
I'd still like an answer to the original question. Dig around if you need to.
I'm actually still interested to see if he'd be willing to name a single program currently operating in the US that he would consider to be abusive.
-
Darrington Academy in Georgia I think has problems and pending lawsuits.
-
Darrington Academy in Georgia I think has problems and pending lawsuits.
So do a half-dozen Aspen programs. They are abusive too and should therefore be avoided.
-
Darrington Academy in Georgia I think has problems and pending lawsuits.
So do a half-dozen Aspen programs. They are abusive too and should therefore be avoided.
If there are any programs which are under investigation for abuse or found to be abusive then they should be avoided also. I think we agree here.
...
-
Aspen has lots of problems and several active lawsuits. They are abusive. Several Aspen programs were shut down for abusing and even killing kids.
-
Aspen has lots of problems and several active lawsuits. They are abusive. Several Aspen programs were shut down for abusing and even killing kids.
Then those programs should be avoided. I think one area that we all agree on is that if a program is abusive it should be avoided and or shut down. It doesnt matter who owns it in my opinion.
...
-
sorry it hurts so much Gonzo. The book was independent. (you cant shake that). The study was independent too (had oversight by a third party). Cant shake that either.
Do I think for a moment that you will accept this? Not at all, how could you? How could anyone here on fornits? What would happen to this site?
But the studies are out there. It was also presented to the APA annual meeting. I have a friend who thinks all the cancer studies are fixed because the researchers are doctors who work for the industry. He can think what he wants just like you can Gonzo.
You wanted Studies and a book by a Pulitzer prized winning author.. you got it lol and I provided links
If you want to reject them, it is up to you.
...
Why would a program let a journalist come in and write anything bad about it. I guarantee you that they made him sign a contract that it had to be a pro-program book or they would not let him use the information he found there. They would have sued his ass if he defamed them.
And as far as you "psychologist" link, all she does for a living is help programs. She makes her entire livelihood off of programs. And again, she is from Utah. Red flags left and right, WWASPS birthplace, lack of child safety laws. Not to mention the fact that SEVERAL Aspen programs are clients of hers.
When you provide info, if you want it to be taken seriously, it must be independent information. People who profit from programs are obviously biased, why would they shoot themselves in the foot? That would be like you coming on here and admitting that you profit from programs and you and all your cohorts are lying thieving pieces of shit.
dO yOu seE WHat I MeAN? :ftard: :beat:
20/20 did a story on Paradise Cove exposing their abuse, it was shut down not long after, the footage from that show is now banned in the US. Why? Because programs buy their way out of trouble ALL THE TIME!
-
Why would a program let a journalist come in and write anything bad about it. I guarantee you that they made him sign a contract that it had to be a pro-program book or they would not let him use the information he found there. They would have sued his ass if he defamed them.
Ha,Ha,Ha Yup a "Pulitzer prized" author is going to sign a contract to lie in his book. Hmmmm.
And as far as you "psychologist" link, all she does for a living is help programs. She makes her entire livelihood off of programs. And again, she is from Utah. Red flags left and right, WWASPS birthplace, lack of child safety laws. Not to mention the fact that SEVERAL Aspen programs are clients of hers.
Oh no she is from Utah, Red flag. I think you convinced all of us, great argument. lol
...