Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => The Troubled Teen Industry => Topic started by: ZenAgent on February 14, 2008, 09:02:24 AM
-
When I googled strugglingteens, this new catch phrase came up:
"Provides alternatives to military schools and boot camps for at-risk teens."
Lon, you're back-sliding, pal. You used to have your advertising groups set-up to include boot camps and military-style programs prominently. God, what a bunch of feeble, mealy-mouthed...
That's how you rise to the challenge, Lon?
-
When I googled strugglingteens, this new catch phrase came up:
"Provides alternatives to military schools and boot camps for at-risk teens."
Lon, you're back-sliding, pal. You used to have your advertising groups set-up to include boot camps and military-style programs prominently. God, what a bunch of feeble, mealy-mouthed...
That's how you rise to the challenge, Lon?
Zen, if you look closely at the trends you will see that Boot Camps and Military style Schools are starting to fall from favor with many parents and industry professionals and are considered too harsh for most. Parents are seeking more therapeutic alternatives to the “tough love” approaches. The landscape is slowly changing… the old whip kids into shape is becoming a thing of the past. Screaming at kids is not effective long term or short term and the industry is moving towards structure, guidance and therapy which has proven to be a more effective approach to helping children at-risk. So I wouldn’t view this as “Back peddling” but see it more as “keeping in step” with the changing industry.
...
-
God bless the ignore user feature. I know people think this guy needs to be answered, but the sticky post at the top sends the message better than arguing with it. If I want to read pro-program rhetoric, I'll go to strugglingteens, where Lon gets his points across more clearly (still erroneous and profit-driven) and it's a month before he slings the next batch.
Ignore the guy.
-
God bless the ignore user feature.
AMEN brother!
-
I recall referring to PV as a "boot camp" only to be corrected by an irate pro PV parent.
"PV is NOT a boot camp!!!! Nuff said" (direct quote)
Same parent referred to PV as a "therapeutic boarding school :ftard:", but I still can't ascertain exactly WHAT PV is.
I've seen many former PV patients call it a H*LL HOLE and that is what is was for me and my child (and countless relatives who were not allowed any contact with her).
Will hell hole be considered an alternative to boot camps and military academy's?
-
It was close to a year ago when I happened to notice a veritable shitstorm of posts on the thread entitled "The Who." Pages and pages of people arguing with this Who guy, and it was going nowhere.
"What a waste of time," I thought to myself...so I jumped in, suggesting that people stop wasting their breath on him only to hear, "But...this," "But..that."
I posted to TheWho suggesting that he stop posting so much and that he go listen to the Live at Leeds Deluxe Edition and get back to us. Subsequently I recommended he listen to Animals by Pink Floyd, hoping that would strike a chord with him somehow.
Of course neither my suggestions that people stop the useless back and forth with him nor my musical prescriptions to TheWho seemed to help at all. It wasn't long after that I suggested a sticky thread that would 'explain' TheWho to the newer people who might come along. That way, the diligent breath-wasters could finally rest, hopefully...
It's good to see that this has been put into effect with some resolution, thanks to my idea...
Thank you, that is all. :D
-
It was close to a year ago when I happened to notice a veritable shitstorm of posts on the thread entitled "The Who." Pages and pages of people arguing with this Who guy, and it was going nowhere.
"What a waste of time," I thought to myself...so I jumped in, suggesting that people stop wasting their breath on him only to hear, "But...this," "But..that."
I posted to TheWho suggesting that he stop posting so much and that he go listen to the Live at Leeds Deluxe Edition and get back to us. Subsequently I recommended he listen to Animals by Pink Floyd, hoping that would strike a chord with him somehow.
Of course neither my suggestions that people stop the useless back and forth with him nor my musical prescriptions to TheWho seemed to help at all. It wasn't long after that I suggested a sticky thread that would 'explain' TheWho to the newer people who might come along. That way, the diligent breath-wasters could finally rest, hopefully...
It's good to see that this has been put into effect with some resolution, thanks to my idea...
Thank you, that is all. :D
Hey, Ganja, how ya been? I remember I actually took your advice and went out and bought “Animals”. I had the original album but not the CD yet. If you look at the forum now versus the way it was when you left you will notice a big difference. The sticky (you had suggested) has worked out well along with the “Ignore” option which many of us have been advocating for months were finally implemented a few weeks ago.
Prior to these changes this thread would have been trashed, derailed with about 50 posts by those who disagreed with me (and others). Now people can just press the ignore button and “wala”… problem solved and the parents don’t have to wade thru a ton of trash and flame posts to get to the responses of the people trying to hold a civil conversation.
...
-
Hey Who:
(http://http://i189.photobucket.com/albums/z163/P4r4DoX/sign_asshat.jpg)
-
I recall referring to PV as a "boot camp" only to be corrected by an irate pro PV parent.
"PV is NOT a boot camp!!!! Nuff said" (direct quote)
Same parent referred to PV as a "therapeutic boarding school :ftard:", but I still can't ascertain exactly WHAT PV is.
I've seen many former PV patients call it a H*LL HOLE and that is what is was for me and my child (and countless relatives who were not allowed any contact with her).
Will hell hole be considered an alternative to boot camps and military academy's?
It is confusing and there is no agreed upon definition that I am aware of but the way I try to make the distinction to other parents is that a boot camp typically is a shorter stay (30/60 days) and work with the impression that the children are angry defiant kids so they deal with them with screaming back at them with the intent of getting their butts in line thru gaining control.
A TBS on the other hand takes a more softer approach (runs over 12 months) and works with kids thru providing a highly structured environment along with individual guidance and therapy……. An RTC could be a hybrid with varying amounts of “Boot Camp” qualities and “TBS” qualities.
It is important to contact each school and get familiar with each schools policy towards discipline, structure and academics.
…
-
Sometime the changes are forced. Look at Aspens Excel Academy.
They have always issued orange jumpsuits to newcomers and they have always taken them down to the local jail for a little scare.
Suddenly they state that they no longer want to treat conduct problems, but addicts alone. Why?
Answer: There is a new sheriff in town.
A boy had been through the mandatory jailtrip where the inmates were allowed to put a little Vaseline on his backside after he had been ordered to strip. Suddenly the new sheriff arrested one of the staffmembers and ordered this practice to stop.
They had no choice to alter their program, because the new sheriff had removed the key-elements in it.
Here is the press release: The new Excel academy (http://http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/publish/EXCELAcademyTexasPR_080206.shtml) from the Fornits wiki page. (http://http://www.fornits.com/wiki/index.php/Excel_Academy) and here is something about the incident: Deputy Charged Over Alleged Discipline (http://http://www.click2houston.com/news/15140011/detail.html)
Some critics may say that it was a political stunt on the behalf of the sheriff, but I think he hit the target very well.
-
Good for the sheriff! Don Vardell will a month or two there before the pressure gets to him and he flees again.
-
I have never been a big fan of those scare tactics. Our local police advocate having the kids arrested and thrown in jail for a day to teach the kids a lesson (minus the vasoline, I am sure). They push this on parents and high schools but I think we will start to see this stop. The sheriff had no choice but to fire his deputy for doing this regardless of what state they are in or school he was associated with.
It is good to see these TBS’ moving away from the tough love and boot camp mentality. I think we will start seeing more of this in the future:
A little piece from their new improvements:
Our target student population and profile must include substance abuse as a primary issue. We do not take youth with conduct disorders and we typically prefer to have a full range of testing prior to acceptance.
“Our purpose: program and staff are all focused on ensuring our students learn to make the right choices, develop and maintain healthy relationships, and learn the skills for a successful life in recovery. We are doing this without coercive techniques and in a transparent and family engaging way.”
...
-
A little piece from their new improvements:
Our target student population and profile must include substance abuse as a primary issue. We do not take youth with conduct disorders and we typically prefer to have a full range of testing prior to acceptance.
“Our purpose: program and staff are all focused on ensuring our students learn to make the right choices, develop and maintain healthy relationships, and learn the skills for a successful life in recovery. We are doing this without coercive techniques and in a transparent and family engaging way.”
...
This is all lies and propaganda.... part of the "Sales Pitch"
-
I think all of us realize that it takes a wakeup call, sometimes, to recognize an opportunity and implement improvements. What Excel Academy is doing is a reflection of the changes being made to the entire industry. It seems many of the more successful TBS's are heading in a new direction with a softer approach to helping teens at-risk and better defining the types of kids that they are most successful in helping based on the schools' individual model.
It is becoming more and more important to review multiple placements as the schools are becoming more specialized in the type of children they can accept and successfully help.
Here is a link for your review of Excel Academys changes:
http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/publish/EXCELAcademyTexasPR_080206.shtml (http://http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/publish/EXCELAcademyTexasPR_080206.shtml)
...
-
I think all of us realize that it takes a wakeup call, sometimes, to recognize an opportunity and implement improvements. What Excel Academy is doing is a reflection of the changes being made to the entire industry. It seems many of the more successful TBS's are heading in a new direction with a softer approach to helping teens at-risk and better defining the types of kids that they are most successful in helping based on the schools' individual model.
It is becoming more and more important to review multiple placements as the schools are becoming more specialized in the type of children they can accept and successfully help.
Here is a link for your review of Excel Academys changes:
http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/publish/EXCELAcademyTexasPR_080206.shtml (http://http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/publish/EXCELAcademyTexasPR_080206.shtml)
...
Right..... And we survivors were just born yesterday.
Again more propaganda and sales pitches.
-
Right..... And we survivors were just born yesterday.
Again more propaganda and sales pitches.
I don’t think anyone is trying to take away what you have experienced personally, Botched, but we do realize that it is sometimes difficult for some to believe that improvements are ongoing.
I am always a little skeptical myself, so you are not alone. It is up to all us to hold their feet to the fire to insure changes are implemented and sustained. The proof is in the pudding, as they say, so we will just have to wait and see.
…
-
The proof is in the pudding, as they say, so we will just have to wait and see.
…
[/quote]
When I was in KHK being tortured and brainwashed, noone from the outside could see what was happening to me and the other kids in the group. Everyone on the outside was told lies about what went on inside the building. I remember the executive staff claiming to be a better, different program now. I also remember them stating that they had adjusted or eliminated some of their methods to improve the quality of treatment for us. That was in 1986 and it was a complete fabrication. The people that run behavior modification programs presently are stating the same apologetic phrases as others have stated in the past.
This "wait and see" approach is futile. If we cannot see the day to day operations or have access to conduct surprise interviews with kids and staff, we will not be able to know the truth. I will never trust any behavior modification program to regulate themselves. I have been through one of these programs and have seen what evils can be allowed to foster within groups run by mentally ill program staff. This loosely regulated industry is a magnet for these sick, perverted individuals. The "troubled teen" industry is one that needs to be abolished. Being a "troubled teen" is a normal occurence and it is only worsened by irresponsible parents and/or a society that has lost focus on being healthy. Naturally, kids will experiment and go through troubled times and most will grow to become healthy adolescents and adults regardless of their many stumbles. A small percentage of kids will die regardless of what treatment options are available. This is life.
Behavior modification programs serve no productive purpose, they can only harm our society. I am hoping I can be a part of shutting them down completely. I do not need proof when there is no pudding, especially tainted pudding.
This deputy has exhibited behavior consistent with a serious mental illness. An illness I seem to be reading more about as time goes by associated with staff at behavior modification programs. I recognize this widespread behavior across the United States as the same I experienced 20 years ago. This is not an issue about treating "troubled teens" or "drug addiction", this is an issue about child abuse in behavior modification programs.
-
Sometime the changes are forced. Look at Aspens Excel Academy.
They have always issued orange jumpsuits to newcomers and they have always taken them down to the local jail for a little scare.
Suddenly they state that they no longer want to treat conduct problems, but addicts alone. Why?
Answer: There is a new sheriff in town.
A boy had been through the mandatory jailtrip where the inmates were allowed to put a little Vaseline on his backside after he had been ordered to strip. Suddenly the new sheriff arrested one of the staffmembers and ordered this practice to stop.
They had no choice to alter their program, because the new sheriff had removed the key-elements in it.
Here is the press release: The new Excel academy (http://http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/publish/EXCELAcademyTexasPR_080206.shtml) from the Fornits wiki page. (http://http://www.fornits.com/wiki/index.php/Excel_Academy) and here is something about the incident: Deputy Charged Over Alleged Discipline (http://http://www.click2houston.com/news/15140011/detail.html)
Some critics may say that it was a political stunt on the behalf of the sheriff, but I think he hit the target very well.
Thanks for the info Covergaard!!!!!
-
Yeah, it's a blood pudding, isn't it?
Lon Woodbury promoted boot camps and military-style programs until the GAO started investigating these "schools" - now Lon backs away from them and wants to offer alternatives? All that tells me is the guy never did his homework about the places he allowed to advertise on ST, or he knew all along the places were vile but paying customers.
And why is it every time StrugglingTeens is mentioned on TT, the Spew appears like a nasty rash? We had been spewless until ST appeared. Odd, huh?
-
When I was in KHK being tortured and brainwashed, noone from the outside could see what was happening to me and the other kids in the group. Everyone on the outside was told lies about what went on inside the building. I remember the executive staff claiming to be a better, different program now. I also remember them stating that they had adjusted or eliminated some of their methods to improve the quality of treatment for us. That was in 1986 and it was a complete fabrication. The people that run behavior modification programs presently are stating the same apologetic phrases as others have stated in the past.
This "wait and see" approach is futile. If we cannot see the day to day operations or have access to conduct surprise interviews with kids and staff, we will not be able to know the truth. I will never trust any behavior modification program to regulate themselves. I have been through one of these programs and have seen what evils can be allowed to foster within groups run by mentally ill program staff. This loosely regulated industry is a magnet for these sick, perverted individuals. The "troubled teen" industry is one that needs to be abolished. Being a "troubled teen" is a normal occurence and it is only worsened by irresponsible parents and/or a society that has lost focus on being healthy. Naturally, kids will experiment and go through troubled times and most will grow to become healthy adolescents and adults regardless of their many stumbles. A small percentage of kids will die regardless of what treatment options are available. This is life.
Behavior modification programs serve no productive purpose, they can only harm our society. I am hoping I can be a part of shutting them down completely. I do not need proof when there is no pudding, especially tainted pudding.
This deputy has exhibited behavior consistent with a serious mental illness. An illness I seem to be reading more about as time goes by associated with staff at behavior modification programs. I recognize this widespread behavior across the United States as the same I experienced 20 years ago. This is not an issue about treating "troubled teens" or "drug addiction", this is an issue about child abuse in behavior modification programs.
I think one thing that many struggle with is thinking that all programs are the same, all staff members are the same. You don’t need to know the industry very long to know this is simply not true. There is not a prevalent mental illness that runs thru all of them, Although, I can see that this could be the perception of some who have had bad experiences with a school like yourself.
I can agree with you that we always should be striving for more and more transparency within the industry. Regulation I am on the fence with. I really don’t think regulation is going to solve anything (look at our public school system). The licensing and regulation may help to weed out and close down the abusive programs but may actually drag down some of the better ones if not implemented correctly.
As far as accepting the fact that some kids will die anyway (with or with out help) I just cannot accept that and cant agree with you. I don’t think any parent should just give up on their kids and allow them to head down a destructive path. The parents need to step in and take control and do whatever it takes to keep their children safe.
Behavior modification is an intrical part of our society, we all start using it on our children (and each other) from the very beginning to help them build healthy self esteem, starting from simple phrases like "Good job"!!
The towns deputy who placed this child in the prison was wrong in allowing the inmates to take over on their own with the child, but I am not sure we can state that the deputy is mentally ill or going thru some type of break down. Most sheriffs would step in and get the deputy the help he needed if they felt mental illness was a factor, but based on the fact that the deputy was fired is a strong indication that he just over stepped his bounds and used poor judgement in placing the child at-risk. Short of turning the child over to the inmates the practice of exposing kids to prison life is a common procedure in many communities throughout the US.
I think the one thing you cannot see that I have witnessed over the years is the evolution of the TBS industry. The schools are not the same ones that many here experienced in the 1970 or 80s or 90 or even a few years ago. The better schools listen to their alumni and parents and make changes to improve the models that they are working to. I was part of this process and saw the changes implemented that myself and other parents suggested.
...
-
"This user is currently ignored" ;D
Spew, I have no idea why you feel compelled to keep beleaguering this, or if your comments are a response to what I wrote. Like everything you write, it's sound and fury, signifying nothing. That's why I have you blocked.
No one cares what you say. You're the industry's full-time troll assigned to Fornits.
-
This is nothing new. That's what Straight did every time they were caught or suspected of various abuses. These people are adept businessmen and they watch the trends. Every single program seems to hold itself up as being the 'kinder, gentler' version, or the 'new and improved' or they're using a 'completely different approach'. Yeah, right. All they're really doing is tailoring their marketing approaches to swing with the times. When the climate calls for the 'get tough' policies, you see the boot camps rise. When the pendulum swings back the other way, you start to see the 'alternative' "schools", or the "faith based" indoctrination camps.
Same shit, different wrapper.
-
This is nothing new. That's what Straight did every time they were caught or suspected of various abuses. These people are adept businessmen and they watch the trends. Every single program seems to hold itself up as being the 'kinder, gentler' version, or the 'new and improved' or they're using a 'completely different approach'. Yeah, right. All they're really doing is tailoring their marketing approaches to swing with the times. When the climate calls for the 'get tough' policies, you see the boot camps rise. When the pendulum swings back the other way, you start to see the 'alternative' "schools", or the "faith based" indoctrination camps.
Same shit, different wrapper.
Which is exactly what PV is trying to pull at the moment - heat's on, they sack every member of the clinical team with a doctorate. They've done this in the past, and kids who were in the program at various times over a decade describe the same abusive program. The only person who's been the mainstay is Bob Pegler, a guy with no degree (not a real one, despite claiming to have a degree in psychiatry on the website for a year) who must be the keeper of the abusive tradition.
-
"This user is currently ignored" ;D
Spew, I have no idea why you feel compelled to keep beleaguering this, or if your comments are a response to what I wrote. Like everything you write, it's sound and fury, signifying nothing. That's why I have you blocked.
No one cares what you say. You're the industry's full-time troll assigned to Fornits.
Zen, my posts were not in response to your posts. We are trying to have a conversation. The reason we suggested the ignore feature was to reduce the amount of trolling and flame wars that were occurring. This has been working very well, if you have noticed, over the past month. If you would like to join in the conversation then feel free but don’t pretend to ignore people and then respond to their posts with the purpose of derailing the thread.
Try to follow along and contribute on Topic "please" or keep the ignore feature “on” that’s what it is there for.
...
-
This is nothing new. That's what Straight did every time they were caught or suspected of various abuses. These people are adept businessmen and they watch the trends. Every single program seems to hold itself up as being the 'kinder, gentler' version, or the 'new and improved' or they're using a 'completely different approach'. Yeah, right. All they're really doing is tailoring their marketing approaches to swing with the times. When the climate calls for the 'get tough' policies, you see the boot camps rise. When the pendulum swings back the other way, you start to see the 'alternative' "schools", or the "faith based" indoctrination camps.
Same shit, different wrapper.
Which is exactly what PV is trying to pull at the moment - heat's on, they sack every member of the clinical team with a doctorate. They've done this in the past, and kids who were in the program at various times over a decade describe the same abusive program. The only person who's been the mainstay is Bob Pegler, a guy with no degree (not a real one, despite claiming to have a degree in psychiatry on the website for a year) who must be the keeper of the abusive tradition.
Yep. That's what really blows me away about all of it. This is precisely what they've done for the past 40 - 50 years and they continue to do so. The stories don't really change, just a few of the incidentals. The same systematic abusive techniques are still being used, they're just tweaked a little to make the parents feel better about what they've done.
-
And I think this is at the root of most of it.......
http://fornits.com/smf/http://www.forni ... 20#p308620 (http://fornits.com/smf/http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=308620#p308620)
Two ways of subduing defiance are to criminalize it and to pathologize it, and U.S. history is replete with examples of both. In the same era that John Adams' Sedition Act criminalized criticism of U.S. governmental policy, Dr. Benjamin Rush, the father of American psychiatry (his image adorns the APA seal), pathologized anti-authoritarianism. Rush diagnosed those rebelling against a centralized federal authority as having an "excess of the passion for liberty" that "constituted a form of insanity." He labeled this illness "anarchia."
-
Good info!!
Cleaning house is a standard technique throughout every successful business. Sometimes people get so set in their ways or saddled with bad habits that the only way for the business to take a new direction is to “clean house”. I think we need to be more leery of those places which never seem to promote or grow their own people. Good people typically don’t want to stay in the same job for very long. Most people want to grow and be promoted and many times this means seeking jobs outside their present employer… and on the other hand companies don’t want to keep people who become stuck in their position for too long so they need to give them a little push.
So it is good to hear that the industry has been doing this for so long, the change and growth from this seems to have paid off. The programs that refuse to grow have closed and will continue to do so and the better ones will continue to get better.
...
-
The difficulty with the who's generalities about the industry is that it ignores the awful pain and suffereng experienced by all of the adolescents that were horribly harmed over the years as the industry became more sophisticated and the families that were promised they would be helped and were actually ripped asunder by an industry that said it was about kids and families but was actually about money and junk science using kids as guinea pigs and the kids and families being hurt today in theindustry's most recent incarnation. If you and your industry are serious about doing what is right let's talk about some general rules based on the law and what we know and you seem to acknowledge about adolescent development and the lack of support for facilities that abuse kids and call the abuse- therapy.
Can we agree on these fundamental principles.
1) All facilities, however they describe themselves, will provide the minimum education required in the state in which each adolescent resided before arriving at the facility. The right and obligation of adolescents to an education will be acknowledged and not treated as a privilege which must be earned.
2) Facilities, whatever they call themselves, will not seek to have health insurance pay any portions of tuition in the absence of a report for a psychiatrist who is unaffiliated with the facility, that the child has an illness that is recognized in the DSM 4 and that the facility treats in a manner consistent with the standard of care for that illness.
3) efore using the word therapy to describe any of what they do the child who is to receive the therapy will be diagnosed with a condition or an illness and the facility will represent that the therapy is appropriate for the condition or illness.
4) No facility, however they describe themselves, will accept adolescents who are picked up by transport services in the middle of the night recognizing that the use of such services is destructive to the relationship between children and their parents and is an act of cowardice and immaturity on the part of the parents.
5) Recognizing that the relationship of children with their parents is important, no facility will accept a child whose parents are divorced where the placement will impact on the non custodial parents visitation rights without first being provided with a court order permitting the placement.
6) All facilities will include in their promotional material specific details on the educational levels and certifications of all employees providing professional services. The distinction between services being provided by licensed professional and services being provided by others will be made clear.
7) All facilities will make available information about the number of adolescents admitted to the program in the past five years and the number that successfully “graduated” from the program..
8) All facilities will make it clear that it does not approve or tolerate physical abuse of adolescents, the use of exercise as punishment, the withholding of food or sleep as therapy or punishment, and the humiliation of adolescents as therapy.
9) All facilities will permit adolescents regular and unmonitored contact with their parents after an initial blackout period not to exceed two weeks.
10) No adolescent will be admitted to a facility based on a diagnosis contained within the DSM 4 unless they have first been treated for the condition that the facility diagnosed on an out patient basis in the community in which they live and if the diagnosis includes a disorder premised on an inability to get along with their parents the family has had a course of family therapy with a licensed therapist.
I suspect this would not work for the industry because if they followed them an industry, based on junk science, would seek to exist.
I suspect that many of these principles would not be acceptable because if they were the industry could not exist.
-
I get what you're saying, and you're right....the industry couldn't function under those circumstances. But, if you've got a legit diagnosis then shouldn't a kid be receiving actual medical help, in an actual medical facility rather than quack 'therapies'? Programmies definitions of 'success' and a normal person's are vastly different, in my experience. Ask them for any proof that any of their techniques work and all they can come up with is "well, it worked for Suzy".
-
I prepared the list only to respond to who's generalities. These are simple principles based on the law and being honest.
Either you think education is a right or you don't. Either you think that preventing communication in an unmonitored way with parents is ok or its not. Either you think facilities should be transparent or you don't. I am just asking that we get beyond the generalities. That seems fair to me. We can argue about what constitutes success. That will be different for different folks but we should be clear about what transparency means and what is acceptable and what is not.
-
I prepared the list only to respond to who's generalities. These are simple principles based on the law and being honest.
Either you think education is a right or you don't. Either you think that preventing communication in an unmonitored way with parents is ok or its not. Either you think facilities should be transparent or you don't. I am just asking that we get beyond the generalities. That seems fair to me. We can argue about what constitutes success. That will be different for different folks but we should be clear about what transparency means and what is acceptable and what is not.
Yes, but when you say "will represent that the therapy is appropriate for the condition or illness"...that leaves the door so open for interpretation by the program proponents. They believe that what they do IS appropriate.
-
I prepared the list only to respond to who's generalities. These are simple principles based on the law and being honest.
Either you think education is a right or you don't. Either you think that preventing communication in an unmonitored way with parents is ok or its not. Either you think facilities should be transparent or you don't. I am just asking that we get beyond the generalities. That seems fair to me. We can argue about what constitutes success. That will be different for different folks but we should be clear about what transparency means and what is acceptable and what is not.
thumbs up (where are the old emoticons??)
-
anne
the point you are commenting on was put in only because of the industry's repeated use of the word "therapy" to make ordinary activities sound like they have deeper meanings- so going into the woods becomes wilderness therapy etc. The misuse of language is central to their marketing just as the who's use of language and his speaking in generalities rather then specifics is central to his ability to focus on what does not matter rather then what does.
-
Yep, I think that's what I was trying (and failing) to get at. IMO, no matter what regulations, restrictions or whatever this industry tries to do to justify what they do are not going to do anything. These people are very good at what they do (scamming). They've become very adept at fear mongering, loading language, setting up false scenarios and in general twisting every good intention that there might be among people.
I was just reading in another thread about coercive therapy....a complete oxymoron. You can't have therapy w/o trust, you can't have trust w/ deception or coercion therefore....coercive therapy doesn't exist. I can't think of one kid who would voluntarily expose themselves to that mindrape, so they disguise everything about the place and its policies. They lie, for their own good. They trick, for their own good. They manipulate, for their own good. The end justifies the means with these people. Always has, always will.
But yes, I agree with all in that post.
-
Yep, I think that's what I was trying (and failing) to get at. IMO, no matter what regulations, restrictions or whatever this industry tries to do to justify what they do are not going to do anything. These people are very good at what they do (scamming). They've become very adept at fear mongering, loading language, setting up false scenarios and in general twisting every good intention that there might be among people.
I was just reading in another thread about coercive therapy....a complete oxymoron. You can't have therapy w/o trust, you can't have trust w/ deception or coercion therefore....coercive therapy doesn't exist. I can't think of one kid who would voluntarily expose themselves to that mindrape, so they disguise everything about the place and its policies. They lie, for their own good. They trick, for their own good. They manipulate, for their own good. The end justifies the means with these people. Always has, always will.
But yes, I agree with all in that post.
I especially agree that the industry believes the end justifies the means - StrugglingTeens has given glowing reviews to some no longer extant programs. They ignore the gaffes. The whole industry is that way, never admit fault, never answer questions.
If there were a virus sweeping through programs, they would be quarantined/shut-down (unless it's PV - keep it from the public) until the issue was resolved. The industry is a disease, and yet people like who keep insisting there are "good" programs, they can't be lumped in with the Chads, Thayers, and Tranquility Bays...until it can be sorted out, the whole industry needs to come to a halt, or can Lon and who "justify" more deaths as long as the profit is still there?
-
1) All facilities, however they describe themselves, will provide the minimum education required in the state in which each adolescent resided before arriving at the facility. The right and obligation of adolescents to an education will be acknowledged and not treated as a privilege which must be earned.
Exactly, but we need to keep in mind that every child will be at a different point in their academic progress.
2) Facilities, whatever they call themselves, will not seek to have health insurance pay any portions of tuition in the absence of a report for a psychiatrist who is unaffiliated with the facility, that the child has an illness that is recognized in the DSM 4 and that the facility treats in a manner consistent with the standard of care for that illness.
If it is within the law and the school is entitled to file for insurance reimbursement then I think they should apply.
3) efore using the word therapy to describe any of what they do the child who is to receive the therapy will be diagnosed with a condition or an illness and the facility will represent that the therapy is appropriate for the condition or illness.
Well, this is a tough one..therapy can be a quiet walk along the beach for some.=and can be defined as such. I will go one step further to say if they offer individual therapy then the therapist should be licensed with the state that they are practicing in.
4) No facility, however they describe themselves, will accept adolescents who are picked up by transport services in the middle of the night recognizing that the use of such services is destructive to the relationship between children and their parents and is an act of cowardice and immaturity on the part of the parents.
I am not a fan of escorts, but I do understand that they are needed in some circumstances. If the child can meet the parents halfway and attend school, not place other family members or themselves at risk etc. then the use of escorts should not be needed. I think the individual families can work that out themselves and the child can have the option of being escorted or traveling with their parents.
You tilted your hand a little by calling this an act of cowardice and immaturity. It shows you know little about parenting yourself.
5) Recognizing that the relationship of children with their parents is important, no facility will accept a child whose parents are divorced where the placement will impact on the non custodial parents visitation rights without first being provided with a court order permitting the placement.
Sounds reasonable, both parents should be involved if they both have physical custody.
6) All facilities will include in their promotional material specific details on the educational levels and certifications of all employees providing professional services. The distinction between services being provided by licensed professional and services being provided by others will be made clear.
Sounds reasonable.
7) All facilities will make available information about the number of adolescents admitted to the program in the past five years and the number that successfully “graduated” from the program..
Don’t see why not.
All facilities will make it clear that it does not approve or tolerate physical abuse of adolescents, the use of exercise as punishment, the withholding of food or sleep as therapy or punishment, and the humiliation of adolescents as therapy.
Seems we are in agreement. The exercise I am not too up to date on. I know the local sports teams do this if you are not paying attention or get in trouble.
9) All facilities will permit adolescents regular and unmonitored contact with their parents after an initial blackout period not to exceed two weeks.
Sure, although the the initial period could be longer depending on how the child adjust during the beginning.
10) No adolescent will be admitted to a facility based on a diagnosis contained within the DSM 4 unless they have first been treated for the condition that the facility diagnosed on an out patient basis in the community in which they live and if the diagnosis includes a disorder premised on an inability to get along with their parents the family has had a course of family therapy with a licensed therapist.
This seems reasonable
I suspect this would not work for the industry because if they followed them an industry, based on junk science, would seek to exist.
I think the existing industry would work well under these guidelines.
-
Behavior modification is an intrical part of our society,
...
Yea.... Behavior Modification was an intrical part of the the governments MK-Ultra experiment on mind control. It's amazing that even though MK-Ultra mind control was developed in the 40's by the Nazi's, it still continues today in so called treatment centers, TBS's, etc.
(http://http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/history/e1950/mkultra/mkultraHearingHeader.jpeg)
-
Your general agreement with these points demonstrates that either you know little about the operation of the industry (which I doubt) or are just making it up. Please name five facilities that follow even seven of these ten principles. I am confident that you can not because they do not exist.
With respect to my comment about the use of escort services I beg to differ. The idea that a parent has gotten themselves into a situation with a child who is not incarcerated that they can't gain physical control over them to get them to where they should be is the product of cowardice or immaturity or in some cases laziness. I can envision an extraordinary situation in which an adolescent can't be controlled but that does not explain the creation of an industry as it exists or the routine use of such services. I have spoken to so many parents who have hired transporters and adolescents that were transported and the common denominator is that in retrospect for both it made no sense and did as much as any other single act to assure that the family would never be put back together again.
-
......the whole industry needs to come to a halt, or can Lon and who "justify" more deaths as long as the profit is still there?
See, this is where you show you lack of problem solving skills or the ability to see the larger picture. This is such an uneducated view point, Zen, nothing personal. But this is not anyway to solve issues, problems are more complex than this.
If the ford Mustang was having problems with its braking system and people were dying then a broad decision of halting the entire industry may seem like a safe and smart solution to people like yourself but your short sightedness wouldn't allow you to see that you also shut down fire trucks, law enforcement and rescue vehicles and after a week you would see that you decision caused more deaths. If you had focused more on the root cause of the problem and attacked it from a more informed position you could allow the people who are benefitting from the use of the industry to continue utilizing it.
No offense, but you should try to look at the 1,000's of people who are benefitting from the industry before advocating to shut it down.
...
-
one more point- your comparison of sports teams using exercise to train their athletes or requiring extra exercise for kids that aren't working hard enough is again either naive or intentionally dishonest. Adolescents choose to play high school sports. The facilties we are tallking about are filled with children who do not have a choice about being there.
-
Your general agreement with these points demonstrates that either you know little about the operation of the industry (which I doubt) or are just making it up. Please name five facilities that follow even seven of these ten principles. I am confident that you can not because they do not exist.
I am saying the industry would do well working within these parameters. They are not unreasonable.
With respect to my comment about the use of escort services I beg to differ. The idea that a parent has gotten themselves into a situation with a child who is not incarcerated that they can't gain physical control over them to get them to where they should be is the product of cowardice or immaturity or in some cases laziness. I can envision an extraordinary situation in which an adolescent can't be controlled but that does not explain the creation of an industry as it exists or the routine use of such services. I have spoken to so many parents who have hired transporters and adolescents that were transported and the common denominator is that in retrospect for both it made no sense and did as much as any other single act to assure that the family would never be put back together again.
I don’t think that the decision should be made lightly, but maturity and cowardice does not enter into it, in my opinion. I believe the parents know the child well enough to know if the child would follow their authority to travel with them to the facility. If it is in the child best interest to go then they need to get there one way or another.
Think of it as if the child needed a kidney transplant… would it be responsible for the parents to just say okay if the kid doesn’t want to go then we should just let him stay home? Would the parents be considered immature or cowards if they forced the child to go to the hospital?
...
-
Saying that it would be good for the industry to work within these parameters is nonsense. Lots of things would be good. The question is why they do not and will not and the answer is that if they did they would not exist. If you were being honest, started with the desperation of parents and understood the extent to which the industry preys on vulnerable parents you would acknowledge that.
Your physically ill child analogy is completely preposterous because we are not talking about children that are physically ill. There is no doubt in my mind that the parents do not think that they are acting in an immature or cowardly way. They all believe, for a variety of reasons including what they have been told by the facility they are sending their child to that having men show up and wake their child from sleep and take them off without goodbyes or explanations is somehow good. Even the most basic understanding of adolescent development or families should make it clear that this is a horrible idea. The parents receptivity to the argument for forced transportation is a tribute, in most cases, to the industries dishonest marketing imposed on frightened parents who are also often immature and or cowardly. Their sincere belief that they are doing something good and necessary does not change that. You hypothesize children that are out of control and parents who have exhausted every reasonable method to control their children. Why can't you also hypothesize parents whose own immaturity and problems and marital situation caused them to be out of control in a different way and not see their children for who they are and to make awful mistakes as a result.
-
Same ol' back and forth.... you make some good points, though (make it simple).
Don't you ever get tired of this, Who?
-
One more thing who because I think what you have done with my ten points for transparent treatment consistent with what is good for troubled adolescents and the law is dishonest. You have posted repeatedly and defended the industry and talked about trends in the industry and how all kinds of good things are happening. It all sounds reasonable but it is all presented in generalities and you get away with it because so many posters here speak in generalties too. For example , your description of the parents who send kids away is accurate about some parents but misrepresents what we know about so many of the kinds of kids that are sent away and the families that send them. What percentage of the adolescents that are sent away have as their principle problem that they are failing to adequately integrate into a step family created after their parents divorce or have as their principal problem that their divorced parent can't see the difference between their adoelscent and the spouse they got rid of. There are too many of those families and they are easy prey for marketers in the industry you defend.
Now you are telling me that my ten points are reasonable. That sounds good but it ignores the point. The point is that the industry that you defend does not observe them and the question is why not. I have no interest in your opinion that that they are reasonable if you can't tell me who follows them or why they do not. That is what this is about. You want to have a debate.
Let's go!
-
Saying that it would be good for the industry to work within these parameters is nonsense. Lots of things would be good.
Exactly. I could ask for the schools to respect each and every childs religious beliefs provide a place for them to worship. I could ask for Vegan menus for families who are vegan or for the children to have access to telephones so they could call home each night.
The question is why they do not and will not and the answer is that if they did they would not exist.
Most of what you stated the schools do.. many schools allow the kids to call home unmonitored.. many schools ask for the children to be tested prior to acceptance.. etc… some schools don’t accept kids who are transported by escorts… yes the schools would operate fine within these parameters.
Your physically ill child analogy is completely preposterous because we are not talking about children that are physically ill.
No they are not, that is why I used an analogy. The child is in need of help whether it be mental or physical or emotional and the local prescriptions at home are not helping the child so they need to be seen in an environment outside the home.
There is no doubt in my mind that the parents do not think that they are acting in an immature or cowardly way.
I am glad you said that because I never met a parent who felt they were immature or cowardly when advocating for their own child.
They all believe, for a variety of reasons including what they have been told by the facility they are sending their child to that having men show up and wake their child from sleep and take them off without goodbyes or explanations is somehow good.
Of course they do or they wouldn’t be having it done.
Even the most basic understanding of adolescent development or families should make it clear that this is a horrible idea. The parents receptivity to the argument for forced transportation is a tribute, in most cases, to the industries dishonest marketing imposed on frightened parents who are also often immature and or cowardly. Their sincere belief that they are doing something good and necessary does not change that. You hypothesize children that are out of control and parents who have exhausted every reasonable method to control their children. Why can't you also hypothesize parents whose own immaturity and problems and marital situation caused them to be out of control in a different way and not see their children for who they are and to make awful mistakes as a result.
Of course there are all types of parents out there, even ones that want to do their children harm. So yes if you want to conclude that there are immature parents and cowards then you are right, all kinds exist. But the ones who are immature and cowardly (in my opinion) would not be standing up and looking for a way to help their own child… the easy and cowardly path is to do nothing and let the kid live an at-risk life and put the family at risk and pretend everything is okay. The champion is going to be the parent who recognizes that their child needs help and moves heaven and earth to get it for them… even in the face of criticism of those who call them cowards for doing it.
MIS, you need to realize that the majority of kids will get thru their teen years and do fine but there is a small minority of kids who need intervention and neither you or I are going to change this fact… what we can change and identify is the type of intervention that is most effective in keeping these kids safe and getting them on the right track.
...
-
Your statement that "Most of what you stated the schools do.. many schools allow the kids to call home unmonitored.. many schools ask for the children to be tested prior to acceptance.. etc… some schools don’t accept kids who are transported by escorts… yes the schools would operate fine within these parameters" is dishonest. There may be schools that ask for testing and some may allow some unmonitored calls and some that do not accept children who are "escorted." But the overwhelming number of facilities do not do most of what is on the list and you can't name five that do seven of them and you can't explain why any of them are unacceptable. And most of the facilities do none of them.
With respect to your generality about most kids getting through adolescence ok but some needhelp the devil is in the details and there is no method for culling out which adolescents are in which category and if a unregulated facility that observes none of the principles that you found reasonable convinces a scared parent that there kid is in your latter category he gets shipped off.
Your statement about parents don't send kids unless they are desperate and that sending kids away is the brave thing to do is also a generality that ignores the truth about what is happening out there. The facilities you love are filling upwith kids that go from one facility to another from the agre of 13 to 18 because there parents do not want them home, convince themselves it is about the kid but it is really about something else or parents that just gotterrible advice from folks like you who speak in generalities, steal therapeutic language and ignore everything that science had taught us about adolescence.
-
Same ol' back and forth.... you make some good points, though (make it simple).
Don't you ever get tired of this, Who?
No, I guess I dont... I should, though, after all these years. This is always a good topic and if we can accomplish just keeping one child out of an abusive facility or educate a new parent it is worth the time (for me).
...
-
http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?la ... gteens.com (http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=Fornits.com&word2=strugglingteens.com)
Hee hee...
And sue scheff?
http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?la ... ftruth.com (http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=suescheff.com&word2=sueschefftruth.com)
And .. in the epic battle:
http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?la ... &word2=Psy (http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=TheWho&word2=Psy)
-
I recall referring to PV as a "boot camp" only to be corrected by an irate pro PV parent.
"PV is NOT a boot camp!!!! Nuff said" (direct quote)
Same parent referred to PV as a "therapeutic boarding school :ftard:", but I still can't ascertain exactly WHAT PV is.
They'll never change. The'll just call it something different. No news here.
-
Your statement that "Most of what you stated the schools do.. many schools allow the kids to call home unmonitored.. many schools ask for the children to be tested prior to acceptance.. etc… some schools don’t accept kids who are transported by escorts… yes the schools would operate fine within these parameters" is dishonest. There may be schools that ask for testing and some may allow some unmonitored calls and some that do not accept children who are "escorted." But the overwhelming number of facilities do not do most of what is on the list and you can't name five that do seven of them and you can't explain why any of them are unacceptable. And most of the facilities do none of them.
You may think it is the majority or the minority but it would be reckless to shut down the entire industry when children are being helped
With respect to your generality about most kids getting through adolescence ok but some needhelp the devil is in the details and there is no method for culling out which adolescents are in which category and if a unregulated facility that observes none of the principles that you found reasonable convinces a scared parent that there kid is in your latter category he gets shipped off.
Sure you are talking about the minority again. There will be parents that are scared because their kids smokes pot and then ship them off. There are parents who have kids that place their entire family at risk and the parents decide to do nothing about it and eventually affects the siblings… should these parents be brought up on charges for not seeking help for their child.. many would think they should.
We should focus on getting the more ineffective and abusive facilities exposed and regulated (if that is what it takes). But lets not pull the plug because there are a few corrupt used car salesmen out there.
Your statement about parents don't send kids unless they are desperate and that sending kids away is the brave thing to do is also a generality that ignores the truth about what is happening out there.
I didn’t mention desparate nor generalize. There are families that have kids that are at risk. There are people out there who put pressure on parents to do nothing.. they tell the parents the kids will grow out of it and get past it. Thousands of these kids take their lives everyyear and they are kids who didn’t get the help they needed or the warning signs were ignored due to bad advice.
The facilities you love are filling upwith kids that go from one facility to another from the agre of 13 to 18 because there parents do not want them home,
For a person who doesn’t like to generalize this is a fairly general statement. I am not in love with any facilities and the parents that I know didn’t shuffle their kids around from one facility to the next. They had a plan which they felt would help their child and followed it thru. All the parents wanted their children home as soon as possible (what type of parent would not?), I don’t think I have ever meet a parent who didn’t want their own child to be home with them.
… convince themselves it is about the kid but it is really about something else or parents that just gotterrible advice from folks like you who speak in generalities, steal therapeutic language and ignore everything that science had taught us about adolescence.
The mere definition of a parent speaks to this as a priority… we need to be focusing on the parents who need guidance in recognizing that there is help available for their children and that we don’t have to let them continue. Debating on whether a parent cares about their own children is a non issue in my opinion.
...
-
You are doing exactly what you keep accusing the young people who have been through these programs of doing. They speak of all kids who have been through these programs as if they are like them. You speak of all parents as if they are just like you would like to think you are. You are making it up. Do you have statistics about the percentage of kids that are sent away whose parents have been through divorces and most often angry ones? I think the statistics would be humiliating for the industry. Don't you?
I offered ten fundamental principles that you called reasonable. Then you said that some programs do some of them. Why shouldn't they all do all of them? most of them? What programs do most of them? half of them? I asked you for five that do seven of them. You changed the subject. How about five programs that do five of them. How about three programs that do seven of them? Why shouldn't natsap require them? Be specific.
-
You are doing exactly what you keep accusing the young people who have been through these programs of doing. They speak of all kids who have been through these programs as if they are like them. You speak of all parents as if they are just like you would like to think you are. You are making it up.
So based on your logic if I am making it up then all the kids posting here are also. I don’t think this will be a popular conclusion... I am speaking from a position of knowledge both first hand and second hand.
Do you have statistics about the percentage of kids that are sent away whose parents have been through divorces and most often angry ones? I think the statistics would be humiliating for the industry. Don't you?
No, I don’t have those numbers .. I, for one, wish there was more data available so we caould see these correlations.
I offered ten fundamental principles that you called reasonable. Then you said that some programs do some of them. Why shouldn't they all do all of them? most of them? What programs do most of them? half of them? I asked you for five that do seven of them. You changed the subject. How about five programs that do five of them. How about three programs that do seven of them? Why shouldn't natsap require them? Be specific.
I really don’t have the answers to your questions. You are one person.. if you asked 10 people you may get ten different lists of principles ( I have my own) and I am sure the schools couldn’t appease us all. Your list was reasonable but just because the schools don’t follow your list to the letter doesn’t make them wrong. They have their own way of doing things and they get feed back from many parents with many different opinions.
...
-
sorry Who- your failure to name facilities that follow the principles I set forth or explain why they don't follow them speaks volumes. Initially you said that a lot of facilities follow them. You have now retreated. How come? The facilities you support do not operate in a manner that is consistent with the principles on the list because if they did they would not exist. It is also nonsense to say that anyone could make a list. Of course they could but the list I made would require the schools to operate transparently and follow legally required educational policies and the standard of care for the conditions they purport to treat. The list goes to the heart of the facilities marketing, the conning of parents and the abuse of kids. If you made a similarly specific list they would not abide by it either.
I am not interested in discussions of who is offended or not by what I write. I am interested only in having you explain why the facilities you espouse don't publish meaningful statistics, do use psychiatric language but ignore standard practices, routinely have "therapy" provided by uncertified individuals, have lengthy black out periods without involving mental health professional in the black out decisions, routinely accept adolescents into treatment over the objection of non custodial parents. If you want to go through the items on the list one at a time I would be gald to explain why the facilities do not and will not abide by the standards i set forth but I think you already know that.
One more question. You keep talking about your concern for kids. What do you do to protect kids and their families from what you consider to be the bad facilities? You know which ones they are. Don't you think it would be a better use of your time to work at closing those facilities then trying so hard to influence the discussion here? And wouldn't convincing the facilities you respect, but that you refuse to identify, to adopt the ten reasonable principles be something important that you ought devote some time to. I guess not.
-
sorry Who- your failure to name facilities that follow the principles I set forth or explain why they don't follow them speaks volumes. Initially you said that a lot of facilities follow them. You have now retreated. How come?
Show me where I said that.
The facilities you support do not operate in a manner that is consistent with the principles on the list because if they did they would not exist.
Of course they don’t, they work to their own list.. why should they listen to you? When did you consult them and ask them to follow your list? The facilities would work fine abiding by your list.
It is also nonsense to say that anyone could make a list. Of course they could but the list I made would require the schools to operate transparently and follow legally required educational policies and the standard of care for the conditions they purport to treat.
Why don’t you back up what you say then.. for example where does it say the child should be able to make their initial phone call within a minimum of 2 weeks? Some schools may do 4 weeks… what do you base your 2 weeks on?
The list goes to the heart of the facilities marketing, the conning of parents and the abuse of kids. If you made a similarly specific list they would not abide by it either.
Exactly my point, you could ask 10 different people to make a list and you would get 10 different lists… which one would be right? Which one should the schools follow? If you were starting a TBS would you call some teenager who has no education in the field to make a list for them to follow? Of course not. If you didn’t follow everyone’s list would they have right to call you a con artist and say that you abuse kids?
I am not interested in discussions of who is offended or not by what I write. I am interested only in having you explain why the facilities you espouse don't publish meaningful statistics, do use psychiatric language but ignore standard practices, routinely have "therapy" provided by uncertified individuals, have lengthy black out periods without involving mental health professional in the black out decisions, routinely accept adolescents into treatment over the objection of non custodial parents. If you want to go through the items on the list one at a time I would be gald to explain why the facilities do not and will not abide by the standards i set forth but I think you already know that.
If the schools are not meeting standards set down by the laws in their state then they should be exposed in these areas and corrected. If you are going to state that kids should have initial contact within 2 weeks I need to understand where you get these requirements from? If they need to publish specific types of statistics then lets take a look at what is required. Some schools are more data driven than others and publish statistics. Some schools don’t publish statistics at all.
One more question. You keep talking about your concern for kids. What do you do to protect kids and their families from what you consider to be the bad facilities?
If a parent contacts me I try to lead them away from the more abusive facilities and/or have them read specific threads I have earmarked here on fornits for them.
You know which ones they are. Don't you think it would be a better use of your time to work at closing those facilities then trying so hard to influence the discussion here? And wouldn't convincing the facilities you respect, but that you refuse to identify, to adopt the ten reasonable principles be something important that you ought devote some time to. I guess not.
No, shutting facilities down does not work.. they will gather themselves up and open up shop someplace else. What we need to do is strengthen the ones that are good and the bad ones will go out of business. You need to beat them on a business level.
Your 10 principles you came up with are fine, MIS, and I agree with most of them… many schools run along the same lines that you propose but they all go by a different list…. Every school is different. If every school adopted your list it still wouldn’t solve all the issues that schools face today… the schools need to become more specialized in the types of kids they accept so that they can focus more closely on the individual childs needs. Accepting children who are violent and placing them in the same environment with kids who are working on issues which are the result of violence in their past is not a good idea, in my opinion, and schools have recognized this and are moving to become more selective in their acceptance criteria.
Another item which was not on your list is a minimum requirement for the educational levels for the staff that are interfacing with the children. I think this would be a needed addition to the list also.
These are the areas that we need to be working on. If some of the better schools keep raising the standards and increasing their success rates then the rest of the industry will need to keep up or they will go out of business. Government regulation isn’t going to do crap in protecting the kids, in my opinion.
...
-
I'm so glad I no longer feel obligated to reply to that pile of meaningless shit.
Simple, you can either continue the yammering session with this idiot or you can spend your time writing letters to congressmen and joining the YLF.
Just because his arguments are completely devoid of merit doesn't stop him from keeping on going. We proved that last year. Quit wasting your time and go talk to people who matter.
-
Ignore him. He's insulting, arrogant, and heavily into the "group think" of the industry. He's an example of how low the industry will go to keep itself afloat. For all his denial of any connections to StrugglingTeens, he's a big part of what they do. I wouldn't be surprised if he's one of the regular posters on the forum. Of course, I can't read their forums, or post - they can't deal with any opinion that goes against industry "group think".
Neither can the spew. He squeals, he oinks...I don't know why he gravitated to this thread so quickly, except to defend Lon Woodbury. Maybe he is Lon. The only thing we know conclusively about spew is that he's a liar.
Don't encourage the parasite, use the ignore button. You can see that he's polluting, but you don't have to read the crap.
-
So lets be clear who
You do nothing affirmitive to expose or close schools that you think are abusive despite your involvement in this field. If noone calls you then you sit back and let kids be abused at facilities you know are abusive. If people like you do nothing who do you think should-
You can't name any facility that follows any of the guidelines I suggested.
Can you at least name a few facilities that have an equivalent set of guidelines that are specific and not just platitudes? I didn't think so.
Even if you can't name the facility can you at least provide a set of guidelines followed by any facility that is equivalent to what I offered. You can't do that either.
All right - how about if you provide a specific list of ten items that are not generalities that would make facilities more transparent?
People on this site get frustrated with you. I do not. I just will keep asking you for specifics.
-
So lets be clear who
You do nothing affirmitive to expose or close schools that you think are abusive despite your involvement in this field. If noone calls you then you sit back and let kids be abused at facilities you know are abusive. If people like you do nothing who do you think should-
You can't name any facility that follows any of the guidelines I suggested.
Can you at least name a few facilities that have an equivalent set of guidelines that are specific and not just platitudes? I didn't think so.
Even if you can't name the facility can you at least provide a set of guidelines followed by any facility that is equivalent to what I offered. You can't do that either.
All right - how about if you provide a specific list of ten items that are not generalities that would make facilities more transparent?
People on this site get frustrated with you. I do not. I just will keep asking you for specifics.
Excellent. If you can avoid being frustrated and stick questions like that to him, you might frustrate him.
-
You do nothing affirmitive to expose or close schools that you think are abusive despite your involvement in this field. If noone calls you then you sit back and let kids be abused at facilities you know are abusive. If people like you do nothing who do you think should-
If you want to criticize others that is okay. But I feel I make a positive contribution
You can't name any facility that follows any of the guidelines I suggested.
No I cant… that doesn’t mean that they dont exist.
Can you at least name a few facilities that have an equivalent set of guidelines that are specific and not just platitudes? I didn't think so.
Guess you already have that answer.
Even if you can't name the facility can you at least provide a set of guidelines followed by any facility that is equivalent to what I offered. You can't do that either.
Seems you already anticipated what my answer would be.
All right - how about if you provide a specific list of ten items that are not generalities that would make facilities more transparent?
I think your list is a good start…
I would add the 2 items I listed above and would also like to see more statistics. I would like to see the schools involve the family members in their model as a way to bring the family closer together during the childs healing process. Schools should be more selective with the children they accept to insure a better success rate. The use of restraints should be clearly defined and used according to state guidelines. The parents should be informed of all phases of the model used and types of punishments imposed.
People on this site get frustrated with you. I do not. I just will keep asking you for specifics.
That is good, it shows you still have an open mind. The reason many are frustrated with me is because they have already made their minds up about the entire industry and don’t want to hear anything outside of their belief system. I have always had a hard time with group hatred. People who are drawn to group hatred do so because it is simple and there are very few rules to follow.. like hating all blacks or Jews… hating all schools and staff members..hating all program parents. Discussing the possibility that there are staff people that are good and are there to help the kids would force them to challenge the group position or think for themselves.. the same with the idea that many kids benefit from the teen help industry. If they admitted to themselves that even one child benefited from their stay at a TBS would open the door to the possibility that many kids could do well also.. you see what I mean? So they try different ways to silence, isolate or discredit the person asking the questions or pursuing open discussion.
I wish you had a log in name …I would be curious to see how long you last before you join the others and start rejecting new ideas and free thinking. I have watched so many people start out being open minded only to be criticized by the group and then slowly being drawn into the group here. I hope this doesn’t come across as being critical because I am not..... I do understand that people feel safer when they are with a group…… but just try this as you speak to others here on fornits.. ask them if they believe there are kids that benefit from attending a TBS or if there are any good TBS’s out there… if they say every school is corrupt and every child was abused (or not helped) then you will know they are a regular fornits group member.
Wow I guess I am rambling again.. sorry
...
-
Dear who
Lets be clear. I have no concern about being criticized by the group or anyone who posts here. I am not nearly that insecure.
And I have no interest in your comments about my having an open mind. I really do not have an open mind about this at all anymore then you do except that if you would point me to a facility that treats conditions that I can understand with methods that are describable in clear terms and that makes available information about their success rate (that is other then testimonials from a few satisfied parents) I would be happy to consider the efficacy of that facility. Until then I am pretty comfortable with my firmly held belief that the industry that you espouse does not stand for anything and has a floating set of principles that is based on very little of value.
So lets get back to specifics because now that we have established that neither the industry you defend or you can provide a set of basic standards I must ask the next logical question. What are its guiding principles? What are the common denominators? Is there an industry organization that publishes anything that will give me what I am asking for?
The reality who is that you have frustrated people on this site because they often speak in absolutes and you respond with a little of this and a little of that and come across sounding reasonable. I am not interested in how you sound. You advocate for an industry that useslanguage artfully to cover up the absence of a scientific or studied basis for its claims and often hurts kids and families as a result. I am interested in specifics.
And in regard to your request that I identify myself I would be glad to provide all the details you want including my name and connection to these issues if you will do the same.
-
Lets be clear. I have no concern about being criticized by the group or anyone who posts here. I am not nearly that insecure.
Great, you wouldn’t believe how many people gravitate to the group position just to be part of the majority. You didn’t seem like the type to run for shelter.
And I have no interest in your comments about my having an open mind. I really do not have an open mind about this at all anymore then you do.
That’s too bad, MIS, I consider myself open minded to the point that I believe there are good programs as well as bad ones. To consider yourself close minded I think is a shame, but to eachs own, I guess.
…except that if you would point me to a facility that treats conditions that I can understand with methods that are describable in clear terms and that makes available information about their success rate (that is other then testimonials from a few satisfied parents) I would be happy to consider the efficacy of that facility. Until then I am pretty comfortable with my firmly held belief that the industry that you espouse does not stand for anything and has a floating set of principles that is based on very little of value.
Well, I am sorry to hear that
So lets get back to specifics because now that we have established that neither the industry you defend or you can provide a set of basic standards I must ask the next logical question.
It is, for the most part, an unregulated industry so you will not see any basic set of standards. I think that was the problem you were having with your 10 items of compliance. Many schools meet many of the items on your list but I don’t think any one school meets all of them. I think your list is reasonable and most schools would agree with you also, I would imagine…. They were not far off the norm.
What are its guiding principles? What are the common denominators? Is there an industry organization that publishes anything that will give me what I am asking for?
I am not an expert on the industry any more than you are, but the common denominators might be to meet the needs of as many at-risk teens as they can and to bring families back into balance again. What I typically suggest is to see a local therapist with your child and they can assess which (if any) school would be a good next step. Each school/program is different and each have their own strengths.
The reality who is that you have frustrated people on this site because they often speak in absolutes and you respond with a little of this and a little of that and come across sounding reasonable.
I agree with you, I just don’t believe in absolutes… I don’t think that all staff people are evil or abusive… that all schools are abusive or that every child does poorly. I am more realistic because I have enough experience in industry (and life) to know this is not how it is. There are good people and bad people in all walks of life, many of these schools help a tremendous amount of at-risk teenagers and turn their lives around and bring their families into balance again.
I have not been damaged by the industry so I can have a more open minded approach to each school.
I am not interested in how you sound.
That is good, so it seems you are a little more open minded than you think you are.
You advocate for an industry that useslanguage artfully to cover up the absence of a scientific or studied basis for its claims and often hurts kids and families as a result. I am interested in specifics.
I cannot agree with you here. I don’t advocate for the entire industry.. I recognize that some of these schools need to be regulated. Fornits focuses primarily on the children who have been hurt by the industry and I understand this and believe something should be done about it.. what I don’t agree with is trying to close down the good with the bad because that would be harming a great number of children. The last thing we want to do is harm more children. There needs to be a rational voice to be used as a benchmark in determining which schools are helpful and which are not.
And in regard to your request that I identify myself I would be glad to provide all the details you want including my name and connection to these issues if you will do the same.
Ha,Ha,Ha, many people think the same thing. By getting yourself a log-in name you are not revealing who you are and do not have to give your name and address/phone number. I go by “TheWho” … you could chose a name and log-in account and still be totally anonymous. I would never ask anyone for personal information.
...
-
NO go who.
YOu are saying nothing of value.
What facilities that do what are good?
What schools that dow aht are bad?
HOw can you tell one form another?
I haveno doubt that sincere people go to work at some of tehse facilities. I am sure that oncludes facilities that you think are not good by whatever standard you use.
As long as you say nothing specific this is a game you are playing in which the absolutes from the people that you frustrate compete with the cotton candy that you offer.
-
NO go who.
YOu are saying nothing of value.
What facilities that do what are good?
There are some programs which are careful on who they accept into their program and try to make a clear understanding of what their program does and how they intend to help a particular child. They have therapists who see the child weekly and are independent from the schools (paid separately) and they report back to the Childs therapist at home (if they have one). They work hard to bring the families together by having the families visit the school and work with their child… Parents can visit the schools and walk the campus, speak with other children at random, have lunch with them.
What schools that dow aht are bad?
If you read a little bit more here you will learn about schools like straight which acted more like a cult and was only interested in building their population and keeping families apart, not building self esteem and not encouraging the kids to grow and become independent…..
HOw can you tell one form another?
By listening to the graduates and parents who have sent their children to various schools.. by reading here on fornits.
I haveno doubt that sincere people go to work at some of tehse facilities. I am sure that oncludes facilities that you think are not good by whatever standard you use.
Well good for you, you have separated yourself from many here and I believe you think more independently than you give yourself credit for. I believe 99% of all people wake up in the morning and want to do a good job.. very few people set out to intentionally screw up or hurt people.
As long as you say nothing specific this is a game you are playing in which the absolutes from the people that you frustrate compete with the cotton candy that you offer.
Well if this is a game for me than it is a very time consuming one with no apparent winner thus far. I see it more as educating parents. Most of what you read here are specific examples of kids who had a bad experience with the industry and from their vantage point they visualize that what they experienced applies to everyone else and that every school is the same and every child has a bad time of it.
I know this not to be true.. many kids should not be sent to RTC’s or TBS’s because they are being set up for failure… the key is to get the right child matched with the right school…. Take a more proactive position and try to help the kids instead of throwing anger around and trying to tear places down… the abusive places will expose themselves in time (with the help of graduates and parents). But we cant take our eyes off the ones that are helping our young kids and doing right by them. Both sides need to be represented here and I try to fill those shoes.. although not very effectively some times…Ha,Ha,Ha, I must humbly admit.
...
-
we are making some progress who. You have told me that straight was bad - I know something about straight- and that a school that has outside therapists and involves the family is good. I agree with you that having unaffiliated therapists and involving the family is a good thing. Then I am sure you also agree with me that the facility should be located as close to the child's home as possible so as to facilitate the parent's involvement. Do you? It is unrealistic to think the parents can be involved in a serious way if they live on the other side of the country. Isn't it?
I also believe that you can count on one hand the number of facilities that utilize unaffiliated therapists. I did not know there were any.That is not true of the overwhelming majority of the facilities you tout. What are other characteristics of the good facilities?
I am happy to make the unaffiliated therapist # 1 on the list of standards I will help you come up with.
-
we are making some progress who. You have told me that straight was bad - I know something about straight- and that a school that has outside therapists and involves the family is good. I agree with you that having unaffiliated therapists and involving the family is a good thing. Then I am sure you also agree with me that the facility should be located as close to the child's home as possible so as to facilitate the parent's involvement. Do you? It is unrealistic to think the parents can be involved in a serious way if they live on the other side of the country. Isn't it?
The closer the better, I agree, although I don’t know how this could be controlled. I was fortunate because my daughter attended a school within our own state, but there were many parents from the west coast and even over seas. But they did show up for the family sessions and were involved. It is very difficult, but contrary to the popular belief here on fornits the parents are dedicated to bringing the familys back together.
You will read many posts that parents just want to send their kids away so they can take a vacation which shows how out much misinformation is distributed here.
I also believe that you can count on one hand the number of facilities that utilize unaffiliated therapists. I did not know there were any.That is not true of the overwhelming majority of the facilities you tout.
What do you mean facilities I tout? Which ones did you think I tout?
What are other characteristics of the good facilities? I am happy to make the unaffiliated therapist # 1 on the list of standards I will help you come up with.
I think another would be unmonitored phone conversations with their parent(s). Modes of discipline should be spelled out and made clear to the parents also.
...
-
allright who. We really are moving along. I appreciate it.
We have two principles we can agree on
#1- there should be unaffiliated therapists providing therapy. The family should be involved in the therapy and the facility should be as close to the family's home as is reasonably possible.
#2 Unmonitored phone calls should be available to the adolescents
Can we agree that any decent facility will provide a diagnosis and then provide care which is within the standard of care or at least only evidence based treatment for individuals who have that diagnosis
Any more?
-
allright who. We really are moving along. I appreciate it.
We have two principles we can agree on
#1- there should be unaffiliated therapists providing therapy. The family should be involved in the therapy and the facility should be as close to the family's home as is reasonably possible.
#2 Unmonitored phone calls should be available to the adolescents
Can we agree that any decent facility will provide a diagnosis and then provide care which is within the standard of care or at least only evidence based treatment for individuals who have that diagnosis
Any more?
I would reword it to say that each child should see a licensed therapist prior to entering a TBS and have the consent or recommendation by the therapist. The therapist could decide if a particular model would be beneficial for the child. The reason I state that is typically most of the routine therapies have failed to help the child at this point and the last resort is a TBS. I feel the school should be as clinically based as possible, though.
I think another would be a fixed or predetermined length of stay... or maybe a small window of 14 -16 months..... 6-9 months .... 30 - 60 days etc.
...
-
I have no idea what you mean when you use the word model. There are conditions and illnesses that adolescents sometimes have and there are evidence based and standard of care methods for treating them. Give me an example of a "model." That sounds like jargon. The clinical director of straight used the word model a lot. It impressed parents and that was its only function. Also, are you saying that it is not important to have the treatment at the facility supervised by someone from outside the facility. Perhaps you can rewrite # 1 so that you feel comfortable with it. Just try not to make it too general
Regarding a predetermined length of stay- That sounds like a good idea- what would that be based on? Would it be the recommended length of time for treatment of the specific condition or illness or something else. What would the something else be?
-
I have no idea what you mean when you use the word model. There are conditions and illnesses that adolescents sometimes have and there are evidence based and standard of care methods for treating them. Give me an example of a "model." That sounds like jargon. The clinical director of straight used the word model a lot. It impressed parents and that was its only function.
The term is widely used throughout many industries. The model would be the definition of the general program steps and procedures. It may include items like length of stay, disciplinary procedures, structure of each day, academic structure etc.
Also, are you saying that it is not important to have the treatment at the facility supervised by someone from outside the facility. Perhaps you can rewrite # 1 so that you feel comfortable with it. Just try not to make it too general
It is fine the way it is. I like the idea of having someone independent from the school perform the individual therapy.
Regarding a predetermined length of stay- That sounds like a good idea- what would that be based on? Would it be the recommended length of time for treatment of the specific condition or illness or something else. What would the something else be?
No the length of stay for everyone. Each school or program would have a fixed length of stay. The parents and child would be informed as to how long they can expect to be there. Some kids take longer than others so there would have to be some latitude there.
So :
#3 A fixed or predetermined length of stay... or maybe a small window of 14 -16 months..... 6-9 months .... 30 - 60 days etc. depending on the school/program.
...
-
I get it who. when you use the word model you simply mean the program and rules used by the facility you are talking about. Ok- I just want to keep it simple.
Are we in agreement that all treatment should be evidence based and consistent with any applicable standrad of care for whatever specific condition or illness is being treated. Can we add that as # 3- All treatment should be evidence based and consistent with any applicable standard of care for whatever specific condition or illness is being treated. #4- all programs should have clearly spelled out lengths of treatment
How is that?
-
#3 each child should see a licensed therapist prior to entering a TBS and have the consent or recommendation by the therapist.
This will allow the therapist to review the schools procedures and model to determine if it is a good fit. Many times all the standard procedures have been tried and have failed. A TBS can offer something that is outide the norm.
...
-
so you don't agree that treatment should be evidence based and consistent with standards of care but you think that is ok as long as a referring therapist approves the treatment? Would you agree that unless there is a referral form an outside and unaffiliated therapist the treatment must be evidence based and consistent with the standard of care?
How about #4 - unless the treatment is specificallapproved by an outside therapist it must be evidence based and consistent with nay applicable standard of care. That is reasonable isn't it?
One more thing who:
wouldn't a therapist that approved a treatment plan that was not evidence based and not consistent with the standards of care be guilty of what people call malpractice?
And don't you think that facilities should explicitly tell parents that their treatment is outside the norm and is not evidence based? Aren't parents entitled to that?
And don't you think that if facilities use treatment that is not evidence based it is that much more important that they publish their results and have outsiders evaluate them?
-
allright who. We really are moving along. I appreciate it.
We have two principles we can agree on
#1- there should be unaffiliated therapists providing therapy. The family should be involved in the therapy and the facility should be as close to the family's home as is reasonably possible.
#2 Unmonitored phone calls should be available to the adolescents
Can we agree that any decent facility will provide a diagnosis and then provide care which is within the standard of care or at least only evidence based treatment for individuals who have that diagnosis
Any more?
I would reword it to say that each child should see a licensed therapist prior to entering a TBS and have the consent or recommendation by the therapist. The therapist could decide if a particular model would be beneficial for the child. The reason I state that is typically most of the routine therapies have failed to help the child at this point and the last resort is a TBS. I feel the school should be as clinically based as possible, though.
I think another would be a fixed or predetermined length of stay... or maybe a small window of 14 -16 months..... 6-9 months .... 30 - 60 days etc.
...
Please mention any program or school that you believe is "good". Also, indicate why you believe this and supply detailed information about why it is good.
Are there any programs or schools that you support that allow the parent(s) and teen to communicate with each other at any time they wish in private and in person from day one? Also will these programs or schools allow the teen to leave with their parents for any reason deemed appropriate by the parent(s) without staff being present from day one?
From the research I have conducted, I cannot find "good" programs or schools specifically intended for the treatment of adolescents. Do you have any proof of these "good" programs or schools whom you defend?
You may have listed this information on some other post, so you will forgive me if these requests are redundant.
These questions are not rhetorical, I am truly interested in your responses.
If some parents wish to opt-out and send their adolescents to an expensive parenting service, I don't have a problem with that. There will always be irresponsible parents looking for the easy way out. The problem I have is that wherever these adolescents are dropped off, they seem to lose all respect and dignity as young people. They lose their rights and are abused. In these cases, the blame falls onto the program or school if the parent has been deceived. In these cases, the parent is only guilty of ignorance. In other words, if a parent wants to send their adolescent to a program or school that treats the youth with respect and offers freedom from any abuses, I am willing to offer my interest. Strict government regulation would be a good first step to insure this type of dignified parenting service is fair and ethical.
When you get old and cannot take care of yourself, remember that your child might have the decision to take care of you at home or send you away to a nursing home, a nursing home where the advertised care is abundant and the truth is pain and isolation. If you could see the nursing homes I have seen, you would understand. This is not an issue of "troubled teens", this is an issue of a social epidemic.
-
Ive come to this discussion kind of late and as usual it has been derailed. But in response to Zen's original post, ST had always in theory been opposed to boot camps. (in spite of letting them advertise)
When Michelle Sutton died he did an editorial stating that what she went to was not "wilderness therapy" but a boot camp and that this was why some other kids of the era like Kirsten Chase also suffered similar fates. i dont know how he defined it as such as it did not according to Mrs Sutton have any paramilitary aspect. The trouble is that since those days so may kids have died in the industry so it has become harder for him to try and explain the difference. Here is the article Zen if you are interested
http://www.strugglingteens.com/archives ... ews02.html (http://www.strugglingteens.com/archives/1990/11/news02.html)
-
so you don't agree that treatment should be evidence based and consistent with standards of care but you think that is ok as long as a referring therapist approves the treatment? Would you agree that unless there is a referral form an outside and unaffiliated therapist the treatment must be evidence based and consistent with the standard of care?
The point I was trying to make is many times all the standard treatments have been tried and failed. The last resort is to try something new, something “outside of the box”. So I believe the parents should get the opinions of professionals before deciding on which TBS to send their child to. The TBS’s should not engage in shock therapy, prescribe medications or use restraints etc. without the consent of the parents… this should be know up front. So we should give the schools some latitude to try different approaches to various problems.
How about #4 - unless the treatment is specificallapproved by an outside therapist it must be evidence based and consistent with nay applicable standard of care. That is reasonable isn't it?
Yes, that may cover it. This way the school has some latitude to try new approaches.
One more thing who:
wouldn't a therapist that approved a treatment plan that was not evidence based and not consistent with the standards of care be guilty of what people call malpractice?
Unfortunately they are always exposed to malpractice, it is the world we live in. If a doctor suggests that a patient should join a team sport in high school as a way to alleviate depression or raise self esteem and that child gets seriously hurt then the doctor is exposed to a law suit unless he can show long term clinical studies to back up his proposed treatment.
And don't you think that facilities should explicitly tell parents that their treatment is outside the norm and is not evidence based? Aren't parents entitled to that?
No I don’t think it should be phrased that way. They should talk a little bit about what they do and explain how successful or unsuccessful they have been with past students/families.
And don't you think that if facilities use treatment that is not evidence based it is that much more important that they publish their results and have outsiders evaluate them?
Sure, that would be great I am always one to push for more data. But if they are not required to then there would have to be a reason to do it. They could always collect the data and only make it known to prospective parents.
...
-
wait a minute who. I am losing you. The expression "Evidence based treatment" has a meaning. It is not something "out of the box" or "outside the norm" unless there is a basis to suggest it works and the way professionals (your word) show a basis to believe it works is by publishing results. You can't agree to what I proposed as # 4 and then say that facilities can advocate methods out of the norm for illnesses and a variety of diagnosable conditions, many of them contained in the DSM 4, without providing the specifics that demonstrate their efficacy. And I am sure you would agree with me that no professional would be satisfied with proof from a few parents or adolescents that the facility changed their lives. Either we are talking about professional treatment or we are not.
-
Are there any programs or schools that you support that allow the parent(s) and teen to communicate with each other at any time they wish in private and in person from day one? Also will these programs or schools allow the teen to leave with their parents for any reason deemed appropriate by the parent(s) without staff being present from day one?
No I don’t. Most places that I know of have a waiting period before the child can call home and then after that they can only call at specified times. Each program is different.
From the research I have conducted, I cannot find "good" programs or schools specifically intended for the treatment of adolescents. Do you have any proof of these "good" programs or schools whom you defend?
I would suggest speaking to the schools themselves. Most schools will have a list of parents with whom you can speak to who had children attend the program and this will give you a feel for if your child would be a good fit or not.
You may have listed this information on some other post, so you will forgive me if these requests are redundant.
I don’t want to list the names of schools here on the forum.
These questions are not rhetorical, I am truly interested in your responses.
If some parents wish to opt-out and send their adolescents to an expensive parenting service, I don't have a problem with that. There will always be irresponsible parents looking for the easy way out. The problem I have is that wherever these adolescents are dropped off, they seem to lose all respect and dignity as young people. They lose their rights and are abused. In these cases, the blame falls onto the program or school if the parent has been deceived. In these cases, the parent is only guilty of ignorance. In other words, if a parent wants to send their adolescent to a program or school that treats the youth with respect and offers freedom from any abuses, I am willing to offer my interest. Strict government regulation would be a good first step to insure this type of dignified parenting service is fair and ethical.
Yes, regulation would make many people feel more comfortable. TBS’s are typically for those kids who did not respond to local services and or standard therapies. This is not something you want to jump into blindly or lightly.
When you get old and cannot take care of yourself, remember that your child might have the decision to take care of you at home or send you away to a nursing home, a nursing home where the advertised care is abundant and the truth is pain and isolation. If you could see the nursing homes I have seen, you would understand. This is not an issue of "troubled teens", this is an issue of a social epidemic.
Yes, good point, nursing homes are a lot like the Troubled teen industry. There are good ones and bad ones and not all the people that are there need to be there. I am sure there are people who feel we should shut down all the nursing homes too.
...
-
and while we are at it who- I thought of another item that we should be able to agree should be standard and required practice at every facility.
All employees of the facility that provide treatment or therapy or educational services to the adolescent should be considered mandatory reporters of allegations of child abuse and the facility will promptly report to the appropriate child welfare agency in the state that the adolescent lived in before being sent to the facility all reports of sexual or physical abuse that the adolescents discloses they were subjected to before arriving at the facility.
One of the saddest problems in the industry Who are the children that are sent away by parents that abused them and then told atthe facility that they are responsible for being there as a result of the bad choices they made. It is particularly important that the report of possible abuse be made in the state where the child originated because that is where the alleged abuser is going to be.
Can we make this item # 5 who?
-
who- your response to wdtony is typical of the naive or intellectuallly dishonest responses you provide because
1) the nursing industry is only like the facilities that you support in that they both involve providing traetment for people. Nursing homes are subject to an enormous number of regulations by both the federal and state government with respectto staffing, have reports about their histpory available from public agencies and provide medical treatment in accordance with the standard of care. The facilities you support- not so much
Your comments about getting a list of parents from the chool to speak to sounds good but there are always people that will say wonderful things about awful places. You used Straight as an example of a bad place. One of the reasons Straight and its progeny continued for so long and hurt so many people was because of the available of a seemingly endless supply of parents and even graduates that described the program in glowing and life saving terms. There are still people out there that will tell you how wonderful Straight was. Sadly some of them are the parents of people who post on this forum.
-
wait a minute who. I am losing you. The expression "Evidence based treatment" has a meaning. It is not something "out of the box" or "outside the norm" unless there is a basis to suggest it works and the way professionals (your word) show a basis to believe it works is by publishing results. You can't agree to what I proposed as # 4 and then say that facilities can advocate methods out of the norm for illnesses and a variety of diagnosable conditions, many of them contained in the DSM 4, without providing the specifics that demonstrate their efficacy. And I am sure you would agree with me that no professional would be satisfied with proof from a few parents or adolescents that the facility changed their lives. Either we are talking about professional treatment or we are not.
Not sure I agree. A professional therapist could see a TBS as a possible answer for a child who has not responded well to their medication or local therapist. A highly structured environment, living among their peers might be a last hope for the child and may get them back on the right path. If the school doesn’t have a clinical study to provide everyone, I don’t think this should stop the child from attending. I think we can all agree that if standard practices were effective, for these children, then there would be no need for TBS’s.
#4 - unless the treatment is specifically approved by an outside therapist it must be evidence based and consistent with any applicable standard of care.
I think the way it is worded allows the parent to choose a TBS (on their own) but they need to get the approval of a local therapist first to insure the particular TBS’s model would not be harmful to the child.
...
-
who- your response to wdtony is typical of the naive or intellectuallly dishonest responses you provide because
1) the nursing industry is only like the facilities that you support in that they both involve providing traetment for people. Nursing homes are subject to an enormous number of regulations by both the federal and state government with respectto staffing, have reports about their histpory available from public agencies and provide medical treatment in accordance with the standard of care. The facilities you support- not so much
So based on the abuse we see taking place in nursing homes we can conclude that this enormous amount of oversight and regulation is ineffective. This is why I don’t feel regulation is the answer for the TBS industry.
Your comments about getting a list of parents from the chool to speak to sounds good but there are always people that will say wonderful things about awful places.
Yes, there are, I typically suggest talking to several people.
You used Straight as an example of a bad place. One of the reasons Straight and its progeny continued for so long and hurt so many people was because of the available of a seemingly endless supply of parents and even graduates that described the program in glowing and life saving terms. There are still people out there that will tell you how wonderful Straight was. Sadly some of them are the parents of people who post on this forum.
Yes there is that risk. But speaking with past customers is an acceptable and effective way of learning about a school or business.
...
-
who- envision a nursing home industry that was not regulated. Do yo think older people would be treated better? I think a bad sitiuation would be much and that there would be many more cases of abuse. Maybe it would sort of be like the industry you tout. By the way, I have trouble every time you use the word therapeutic and put it in front of the words boarding school because I think that is about marketing and nothing else unless one is specific about the therapy. I have an idea. Maybe nursing homes should all change their names to therapeutic nursing homes. We could call them tnh's. It might be good for business. they woudl do exactly what they do now but the people that send familiy members there would feel more comfortable with their choices.
And no who- the expression "evidence based treatment" has a meaning. It does not refer to anything that someone who buys abuilding and sets upa web site can sell to parents as good for their children,
BUt lets come back to my list. Later today I will relist the items and we can see if we can tighten the language and continue.
-
for those who haven't figured out his game, make it simple is actually theWho.
-
who- envision a nursing home industry that was not regulated. Do yo think older people would be treated better? I think a bad sitiuation would be much and that there would be many more cases of abuse.
You could be right, but we can agree that all the oversight and regulation hasnt done that much to protect these people. Have you ever visited a nursing home? Not the nicest places to live some of them.
Maybe it would sort of be like the industry you tout.
That’s my point, the ones you tout and the ones I tout are the same except TBS’s are unregulated.
By the way, I have trouble every time you use the word therapeutic and put it in front of the words boarding school because I think that is about marketing and nothing else unless one is specific about the therapy. I have an idea. Maybe nursing homes should all change their names to therapeutic nursing homes. We could call them tnh's. It might be good for business. they woudl do exactly what they do now but the people that send familiy members there would feel more comfortable with their choices.
If they are based on healing then maybe you have a point. The reason they use the term TBS’s is because they are boarding schools which provide therapy. This way they can differentiate themselves from regular boarding schools.
If it was just about marketing they would call themselves PBS’s for “Panacea Boarding Schools”, but since they realize they cant cure everyone they call themselves TBS’s.
And no who- the expression "evidence based treatment" has a meaning. It does not refer to anything that someone who buys abuilding and sets upa web site can sell to parents as good for their children,
I don’t recall challenging the definition, I accept its meaning.
BUt lets come back to my list. Later today I will relist the items and we can see if we can tighten the language and continue.
I think we left off here:
#1- there should be unaffiliated therapists providing therapy. The family should be involved in the therapy and the facility should be as close to the family's home as is reasonably possible.
#2 Unmonitored phone calls should be available to the adolescents
#3 A fixed or predetermined length of stay... or maybe a small window of 14 -16 months..... 6-9 months .... 30 - 60 days etc. depending on the school/program.
#4 -Unless the treatment is specifically approved by an outside therapist it must be evidence based and consistent with any applicable standard of care.
...
-
for those who haven't figured out his game, make it simple is actually theWho.
On what do you base this speculation? Or is it speculation (maybe you're an admin)?
-
who- how about my # 5-reporting sexual and other abuse in the state where the alleged abuser resides. That requirement makes sense. It would also eliminate virtually every facility you tout. So would your agreement to number four but that is for later. Are we also in agreement that no adolescent will be admitted without the agreement of a licensed thaerapist unaffilaited with the institution and located in the state where the adoelscent's family resides. I think we lost that one somehow.
And lets be clear who- I am not advocating any faxcility. There is no secret here. When we are done with this list there will be no facility that you can name or a parent can find that will abide by them
-
who- how about my # 5-reporting sexual and other abuse in the state where the alleged abuser resides. That requirement makes sense.
Not sure why it needs to be reported in the state the child resides. I would think it would be important to report it to the community where the offense occurred. Is there some type of law to this effect?
It would also eliminate virtually every facility you tout. So would your agreement to number four but that is for later. Are we also in agreement that no adolescent will be admitted without the agreement of a licensed thaerapist unaffilaited with the institution and located in the state where the adoelscent's family resides. I think we lost that one somehow.
No I think we discussed it but settled on this wording:
#4 -Unless the treatment is specifically approved by an outside therapist it must be evidence based and consistent with any applicable standard of care.
And lets be clear who- I am not advocating any faxcility. There is no secret here. When we are done with this list there will be no facility that you can name or a parent can find that will abide by them
I think this was implied at the very beginning. At least it was on my end. I did this same thing on cars.. a few of us defined the ideal car i.e 100 miles to the gallon…. 500 horsepower etc. but we knew it did not exist. This is a great exercise because it puts the industry in perspective from a customer’s point of view of what the ideal TBS would look like. After we are done we could rank the items in order of importance. There isn’t a school that is meeting all of our requirements because , for 1, unless they are reading this they have never seen our list and 2 we are just 2 people out of thousands and we could be missing some very important items which we have not thought of. The schools themselves have been in the business for awhile and could probably add some perspective as well as psychologists in the field and other professionals.
How about this:
# 5-reporting sexual and other abuse to the proper authorities.
...
-
The proper state is the state where the abuse occured and the key is making all employees at the facility mandatory reporters. Do you agree with that?
Lets take a break though who so you can provide a list of wilderness programs that meet what is on the list so far?
I think that would be 0
Without the names of facilities you could be just making things up.
The list- who?
-
The proper state is the state where the abuse occured and the key is making all employees at the facility mandatory reporters. Do you agree with that?
Sounds great…
Lets recap on our wish list:
#1- there should be unaffiliated therapists providing therapy. The family should be involved in the therapy and the facility should be as close to the family's home as is reasonably possible.
#2 Unmonitored phone calls should be available to the adolescents
#3 A fixed or predetermined length of stay... or maybe a small window of 14 -16 months..... 6-9 months .... 30 - 60 days etc. depending on the school/program.
#4 -Unless the treatment is specifically approved by an outside therapist it must be evidence based and consistent with any applicable standard of care.
#5-reporting sexual and other abuse to the proper authorities.
Lets take a break though who so you can provide a list of wilderness programs that meet what is on the list so far?
What we would need to do is get a copy of each schools procedure and then compare it to the list we have put together. I would imagine many of the not so good schools would fall out.. not so sure the number would be zero though.
Without the names of facilities you could be just making things up.
Making what up?
The list- who?
We could start with NATSAPs list of schools and start going thru them one by one, but we would need to get a copy of their procedures to determine which of the items they adhere to. I don’t see much luck in doing that. Do you have access to any of them?
...
-
you could be just making things up
Are you just now figuring this out?
-
sorry who- you are the person touting the industry. YOu need to provide the list whioch will necessarily exclude any facility that does not require a letter from a local therapist approving of the treatment at the facility. I think your list will be short.
moving along who-remember we want to be specific and not speak in generalities
what evidence or study or statistic can you refer me to that supports the notion that what you call wilderness therapy is helpful for any of the diagnosis contained within the dsm 4? If your answer is going to be something other then a study or statistic or evidence then don't botehr because I will just answer the question again?
If you can give me the name of the facilities that limit admissions to adolescemts whose threapists have prescribed what the facility offer and any evidence, study or statistics that support the efficacy of wilderness programs for dsm diagnoses we can go on.
-
sorry who- you are the person touting the industry. YOu need to provide the list whioch will necessarily exclude any facility that does not require a letter from a local therapist approving of the treatment at the facility. I think your list will be short.
moving along who-remember we want to be specific and not speak in generalities
what evidence or study or statistic can you refer me to that supports the notion that what you call wilderness therapy is helpful for any of the diagnosis contained within the dsm 4? If your answer is going to be something other then a study or statistic or evidence then don't botehr because I will just answer the question again?
If you can give me the name of the facilities that limit admissions to adolescemts whose threapists have prescribed what the facility offer and any evidence, study or statistics that support the efficacy of wilderness programs for dsm diagnoses we can go on.
Unless someone can provide me with the procedures I dont think we will be able to do that. Too bad you are bailing out so soon. I think the first 5 points were good ones.
I think I will continue on without you, though. This has proven to be a good start to defining an ideal TBS...
...
-
You want the ideal TBS?
Well look no further!!
http://fornits.com/SIBS (http://fornits.com/SIBS)
SIBS: The wave of the future in drug treatment.™
-
Moving on --
#6-The ability for the children to earn high school diplomas and take the PSAT and SAT's.
These are not in any specific order, but I think once the child is stabilized they should get back on track with their studies and the school should be able to offer a well rounded education.
...
-
who
why are you quitting?
I am not going anywhere. I amjust going to keep asking the same question.
Name faciliities that meets the first five and we can go on.
Provide a reference to any evidence statistic or study that suggests that wilderness programs help with any illness in the dsm.
It should be easy
Otherwise you are defending something that appears to be a figment of your imagination. In teh absence of specifics you are making statements that are the equivalent of telling us that it is better to be rich and healthy then it is to be poor ans sick.
This is simple who-
You go-don't quit now.
-
I've asked TheWho to stop making an ass out of himself on this forum, but to no avail. He insists on spouting his generalities and making us all look bad with his incessant jibber-jabber.
Who, isn't it past your bedtime?
-
Ive come to this discussion kind of late and as usual it has been derailed. But in response to Zen's original post, ST had always in theory been opposed to boot camps. (in spite of letting them advertise)
When Michelle Sutton died he did an editorial stating that what she went to was not "wilderness therapy" but a boot camp and that this was why some other kids of the era like Kirsten Chase also suffered similar fates. i dont know how he defined it as such as it did not according to Mrs Sutton have any paramilitary aspect. The trouble is that since those days so may kids have died in the industry so it has become harder for him to try and explain the difference. Here is the article Zen if you are interested
http://www.strugglingteens.com/archives ... ews02.html (http://www.strugglingteens.com/archives/1990/11/news02.html)
Thanks, Oz girl. Definitions in the TTI are nebulous, and if Lon limits his definition of "boot camps" to programs with a paramilitary style, he's got blinders on. Sorry to always cite PV, but experience dictates...Peninsula Village advertised on StrugglingTeens under the categories "Wilderness Therapy" and "Boarding School", with the two in my mind being far-removed from one another. PV does business as Peninsula Village School, Peninsula Village Treatment Center, Peninsula Village Behavioral Health(the name applied to the complex of mental health facilities PV is part of) and Peninsula Village, a division of Parkwest Medical Center(used when they want to appear "clinical" or they need to establish the source of their JCAHO certification).
The Special Treatment Unit at PV isn't a boot camp, it's worse. It's a level five lockdown facility, where the patients are told to sit and think about the manipulations that brought them there. All the kids go through STU, regardless of what brought them there - STU is "one size fits all" treatment. So, what "manipulations" brought victims of sexual abuse, traumatic experience, depression, or eating disorders to the near-constant restraints they witness (or experience)? What's the purpose in placing a traumatized kid in seclusion? It's to "warehouse" them. Here's PV's admission criteria, and the program has been very flexible in the past with the "exclusionary criteria":
Admission Criteria
Patients come to Peninsula Village with a wide range of problems, diagnoses and symptoms including, but not limited to the following:
* Depression, Anxiety, and other Mood Disorders
* Alcohol and/or drug abuse/dependency
* Disordered conduct and oppositional behavior
* ADD/ADHD
* Effects of traumatic experience
* Disrespect of adult authority
* Inability to tolerate frustration or boredom
* Unhealthy self-centeredness
* Unwillingness to adhere to conventional values/standards
* Inability to behave independently and autonomously
* Self-mutilation and/or other self-harming behaviors
* Pattern of excessive passivity and clinging dependency in relationships
* Eating disorders that are medically stable
Exclusionary Criteria
Peninsula Village is unable to help every adolescent. Some problems that we cannot treat are:
* Intelligence below the average range (Full Scale IQ below 90)
* History of fire setting and pyromania
* Sexual Offenders / Sexual Disorders
* History of chronic/severe physical aggression including use of weapons
* Physical or medical condition that would hinder participation in vigorous, outdoor activities (diabetes, epilepsy)
* Homicidal intent at time of admission
* Psychotic Disorders
* Pregnancy (females)
* Impairment resulting from traumatic brain injury / Neuro-psychiatric issues
* Eating disorders that are not medically stable
We've seen PV take sexual offenders and kids convicted of conspiring to commit mass murder. The identities of these teenage "exceptions" are public knowledge, because they were convicted as adults. PV admitted a young man who walked into a Knoxville-area high school with a bomb, and his placement there stopped any criminal charges from being filed, PV was his "sentence". There's been one common link between these exceptions to PV's admissions policy: all of these kids were from wealthy families who paid out-of-pocket for their troubled teens to go to PV, shielding them from the fate kids with lesser resources committing the same crimes would face - prison, or the juvenile justice system, with neither being an "easy fit" for rich White kids. PV provides an expensive but viable alternative, with a much quicker return to the community for the offenders. Once the heat dies down and the media has moved on, a family therapist declares the kid "fit" and sends them home, sometimes in less than six months. Six months beats fifteen years in "grown-up" jail...
So what is Peninsula Village? A "last ditch effort" for the treatment resistant? No, I know first-hand PV will take kids who profit from outpatient treatment. Is PV a teen prison? Their exclusion list should rule that definition out, but... Is it a school? Only if you're putting the program on the spot concerning their clinical methods, and since the GAO became involved PV is leaning heavily toward the "school" title and away from "treatment center", at least in their press releases.
Peninsula Village is whatever it needs to be to get a parent to sign the admission papers. Once PV admissions staff hear the troubles a parent is having, they paint a picture of PV as the solution to those troubles. It's a Summer Camp, it's a caring place for the traumatized, a lockdown rehab for the addicts, a penal camp for violent offenders, "warm and fuzzy" treatment for kids with eating disorders, sensitive therapy for cutters.
In reality, violent offenders and the victims of violence, the sexually abused and sexual abusers, depressed, passive kids and nascent psychopaths, are all thrown into the same milieu. To make matters worse, PV uses "peer on peer" as part of their treatment. How can a depressed rape victim be considered a "peer" of a sexual offender or a kid with homicidal impulses? What are the chances the traumatized patients will be victimized by their more aggressive "peers", and see the tormentors rewarded for cruelty by the staff for helping the withdrawn kids "get real", get "honest"
Right now, I have no doubt a kid is in PV who's terrified, has no business being there, and has no way to get help - absolutely none. Their parents have been warned by PV not to believe their kids if they claim they're being abused or their peers are "psycho". If a kid says the wrong thing during phone therapy, the family therapist ends the call immediately and the kid receives "care methods" for manipulation.
PV's not a boot camp, wilderness treatment, hospital or school, it's hell. Trying to pin a definition on programs is impossible.
-
As scattered as the so-called answers may be, I would like to thank "the who" for answering my questions.
I have also noticed some similarities between "the who's" writing and the writing of "make it simple". I am not implying they are the same person but if it is the same person, I would advise being more careful when writing proper grammar and spacing. I suppose it could be possible for one to adopt habits from the other.
To Oz-girl: Derailing a thead? There isn't a rail to derail.
To the best of my knowledge, I conclude there are no "good programs". I will keep an open mind but without proof, I cannot, in good conscience, accept what I have read here on fornits, or anywhere else, to be anything symbolizing evidence of such a program.
I will continue to be a part of the campaign to shut down all behavior modification programs.
I would like to thank everyone for the interesting conversation.
Tony
-
I just keep noticing their agreement that they need a therapist's note for a kid to be in a program. Nice way of side stepping the constitutional rights of children in my book by relying on therapists and such. Considering how many of these "therapists" have turned out to be shills for the industry its not surprise that this little clause has been bandied about.
-
MIS, we sort of side stepped the original direction of this thread lets continue someplace else and let the others continue... click on new thread below:
New Thread (http://http://fornits.com/smf/index.php?PHPSESSID=c6kkgqoiumflu44oj2aqaqi093&topic=25324.0#new)
...
-
Like everyone else in the industry, Lon Woodbury only points an accusatory finger at a firetrap after the place is engulfed in flames:
New Perspectives - August, 2001 Issue #84
HIGH IMPACT BOOT CAMP
Baja California, Mexico
Dwayne Lee, Admissions Coordinator –
Parent Resources Hotline
Hurricane, Utah
800-793-5156
[I called their web site number to ask some questions about the Parent Resources Hotline, identifying myself as an educational consultant. The person answering the phone informed me he was only authorized to send a packet of information and did not answer any of my questions. The packet I received included a photocopy of a letter from Dwayne Lee of Parent Resources Hotline, a Sample Daily Schedule for WWASP Programs, a brochure for High Impact, a Video Tape and a brochure for the World Wide Association of Specialty Programs: Casa by the Sea, Carolina Springs Academy, Cross Creek Academy, Spring Creek Lodge and Tranquility Bay. Apparently Parent Resources Hotline exclusively markets High Impact and WWASP programs.-Lon]
High Impact describes itself as a 28 day+ boot camp for defiant teens “that is well defined and well structured. This experience is designed to help teens replace destructive attitudes and behaviors with new perspectives and direction in their lives. This is accomplished by focusing on the three R’s of Reality, Respect, and Responsibility.” One of their stated goals “is to help participants gain an appreciation for home and family by learning to take total and complete responsibility for themselves.” They use a ranch setting “along with the rigors of an authentic military type schedule….” The typical schedule presented starts with “Wakeup” at 6:00 AM, and “Shutdown” at 8:00 PM, including four hours of “Marching” and six hours of “Worksheets.” The remaining time is devoted to Hygiene, Inspection and meals. “Staff members maintain 24-hour ‘round the clock’ supervision and interaction with participants. They teach values, acceptable behavioral norms and proper respect for authority….Our ‘gender separated’ compound” is designed to create an environment with “minimal distraction.”
The program describes its short-term program as a “wake-up” call for the teen, that parents can use to buy some time while deciding whether to enroll their child in their long-term program. The audiotape sent with the promotional packet consisted of a number of testimonials by parents and ex-students, mostly, however, apparently referring to the long-term WWASP programs rather than High Impact. A price list was included for the various WWASP programs, but none for High Impact.
Lon, you've claimed to be against boot camps for twenty years, yet that opinion doesn't seem clear as I scan the ST archives. The rather nebulous report on High Impact might have looked like an endorsement to a desperate parent. A trip down to Mexico could have enabled you to give an informed opinion, and it would have been worth it. High Impact shocked the Mexican government with their over-the-top child abuse, causing the Federales to document the torture and shut High Impact down. Mexico apparently values human rights and child safety more than the desensitized U.S.
So often, though, EdCons pay a visit to a program and get paid via the "golden handshake" to see no evil. No implication toward ST-only a broad, who-like generality.
No one bats a thousand, Lon, and you're looking like the strike-out king. You must have been thrown a curve ball by DeSisto School, considering how you praised their program and wrote about Michael DeSisto like he was the Second Coming.
Not good EdConning on that call, Lon.
-
there is a quite quite list of glowing reports from st for schools and programs that closed down for being shithouse. Cascade got 2 thumbs up reports. Also 2 positive reviews of Tranquility Bay one of which dismisses negative rumors as lies. Crater lake school was also a struggling teens review classic. Not a word about Bobbi Cristensen running a previous school that drowned 3 kids before closing
http://www.strugglingteens.com/archives ... sit01.html (http://www.strugglingteens.com/archives/1991/8/visit01.html)
http://www.strugglingteens.com/archives ... sit04.html (http://www.strugglingteens.com/archives/2000/9/visit04.html)
http://www.strugglingteens.com/archives ... /np01.html (http://www.strugglingteens.com/archives/1998/10/np01.html)
http://www.strugglingteens.com/archives ... sit01.html (http://www.strugglingteens.com/archives/2000/8/visit01.html)