Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => The Troubled Teen Industry => Topic started by: Rusty Goat on July 03, 2010, 02:44:09 PM
-
Yep, give it up folks, HR911 :bs: , it's a bad idea that's only getting worse with the BP oil spill and the economy. Fess up, it's doomed. I don't understand how survivors think this bill is a good idea, but whatever. To each their own. ::poke::
-
^this.. Not even a good start in the right direction. More like a good roll in a pile of stinky shit.
-
Yep, give it up folks, HR911 :bs: , it's a bad idea that's only getting worse with the BP oil spill and the economy. Fess up, it's doomed. I don't understand how survivors think this bill is a good idea, but whatever. To each their own. ::poke::
I don't know enough about it to agree or disagree with this, but would like to know more...
-
Yep, give it up folks, HR911 :bs: , it's a bad idea that's only getting worse with the BP oil spill and the economy. Fess up, it's doomed. I don't understand how survivors think this bill is a good idea, but whatever. To each their own. ::poke::
I don't know enough about it to agree or disagree with this, but would like to know more...
I second that.....
-
A free market allowing many different types of adolescent treamtent options will yield the best results, the quickest. The programs that have more unsatisfied parents and teens ultimately fall by the wayside, while the more effective and sought after types of treatment thrive. Parents know what is best for their kids, and they also listen to their kids when they get home and pass off this information. Government intervention is not going to help any kid, it will only stifle new and creative ways of treatment current adolescent issues and hamper new competition. Where would you rather go, to fedex or the post office? Would you rather go to a government run hospital or a private hospital? Its the same with treatment centers for adolescents. The free market works, parents and people in the industry knows what works not some government beuracrat interested in new tax revenue and control.
-
well, come down and jam for a while whilst we discuss it... :jamin: :rasta:
Yep, give it up folks, HR911 :bs: , it's a bad idea that's only getting worse with the BP oil spill and the economy. Fess up, it's doomed. I don't understand how survivors think this bill is a good idea, but whatever. To each their own. ::poke::
I don't know enough about it to agree or disagree with this, but would like to know more...
-
A free market allowing many different types of adolescent treamtent options will yield the best results, the quickest. The programs that have more unsatisfied parents and teens ultimately fall by the wayside, while the more effective and sought after types of treatment thrive.
Except the result of attending a poor program is much worse than being "unsatisfied". Honestly, look at the Gilded Age in the U.S.'s history, which ran under a similar principle. It wasn't until the Progressive Era where laws were passed by that pesky government did accurate advertising and sanitary labor conditions and products develop.
Parents know what is best for their kids,
This is not always the case, and you know it. Parents are regular people with faults, some more severe than others. Not every parent holds a doctorate degree in child and adolescent psychology. It would be fair to say that sometimes parents are not as informed or understanding as they would ideally be. They can also be deceived like anyone else. In addition, some parents are abusive, and please be aware that often abusive parents are not purposefully plotting to ruin their child's lives. They often just fail or refuse to realise the seriousness or danger of what they commit, even thinking it is for their child's own good.
and they also listen to their kids when they get home and pass off this information.
This is also not always the case, and you know that as well.
Government intervention is not going to help any kid, it will only stifle new and creative ways of treatment current adolescent issues and hamper new competition.
Hampering options which have the potential to be dangerous, I would say, is not a bad idea. Now, I may just be building a straw-man, but if I recall correctly, you do not advocate drug legalisation. If this is the case, I could hypothetically argue that drugs being illegal stifles new and creative forms of therapy and medicine.
Where would you rather go, to fedex or the post office? Would you rather go to a government run hospital or a private hospital?
However, a private hospital still has to follow government regulations. They can not just offer experimental, "new and creative", possibly dangerous ways of doing things legally outside these regulations. I'm sure if a fair number of patients got very sick in a private hospital on account of neglect, the government would step in.
-
911 need I say more? :poison:
-
A free market allowing many different types of adolescent treamtent options will yield the best results, the quickest. The programs that have more unsatisfied parents and teens ultimately fall by the wayside, while the more effective and sought after types of treatment thrive. Parents know what is best for their kids, and they also listen to their kids when they get home and pass off this information. Government intervention is not going to help any kid, it will only stifle new and creative ways of treatment current adolescent issues and hamper new competition. Where would you rather go, to fedex or the post office? Would you rather go to a government run hospital or a private hospital? Its the same with treatment centers for adolescents. The free market works, parents and people in the industry knows what works not some government beuracrat interested in new tax revenue and control.
Before you can have unsatisfied parents and teens, someone needs to be sacrificed. Who is volunteering their child to test a new program out?
If I was a parent seeking for a program, I would prefer some level of regulation. Most residential treatment has its flaws when it comes to months or years aftercare which should included in the overall packet. Parents are not aware of that and even HR911 is lacking at this point. It should be mandated to give this information to the families.
-
You had your chance to educate the public and end the abusive programs. Now you want the government to regulate them even though they have been abusing and killing kids for a very long time. What's the point? Don't compromise. STOP HR911 NOW! :beat:
-
What I think most people on this topic are missing is that the programs can't exist in an environment where some authority they can't bribe (Here's looking at you, Ken Stettler!) has oversight. Regulation, etc will simply cause them to shut down; if HR911 passes it'll likely go a good way towards breaking the back of the bulk of programs in Utah, finish off Aspen in one shot if they're not dying already, absolutely cripple the religious bullshit, and put an end to various other places listed on Fornits.
The objection to HR911 is that it will create a new class of government-sanctioned programs. This isn't going to happen. Feds are more like the Oregon DHS than Utah state cops.
-
Before you can have unsatisfied parents and teens, someone needs to be sacrificed. Who is volunteering their child to test a new program out?
Parents who have tried everything else, with no results. Parents with troubled teens who are intent on destroying themselves, as I was, don't give up they just try something new. Well some parents might give up, I don't know. But I'm glad my parents did not. Suicide is in the top 3 killers of adolescents, so we know that doing nothing is dangerous as well, although this is rarely mentioned on fornits for some reason. Apparently, only the suicides after someone goes through treatment count as political points to end the treatment industry. Many kids suffer because their parents ignore the symptoms and don't seek help for their teen, this is something completely ignored on this forum.
-
However, a private hospital still has to follow government regulations. They can not just offer experimental, "new and creative", possibly dangerous ways of doing things legally outside these regulations. I'm sure if a fair number of patients got very sick in a private hospital on account of neglect, the government would step in.
I've been in treatment run by the government, and I'd take private treatment programs any day of the week over that. If I had to pinpoint the most negative part of my entire treatment experience, it involves the state hospital/police. The worst things I ever saw were in the regulated hospitals and rehabs I was in, so that's where I'm coming from.
-
Hey P of DK, have been and may very well still be programs that have licenses that are subjected myriads of rules, regulations, etc... They've abused kids and had the full support of the Feds, States, politicians, you name it. It's not until the PUBLIC starts outcrying that these places run and hide, move, shut down, etc... All the government does is waste more taxpayer dollars doing the jobs of ordinary citizens. We don't need any more government support of programs. Are you familiar with the EPA? Case in point, if a company discharges 100 tons of nitrogen dioxide into the atmosphere every year, all they have to do is pay a pollution permit fee ( license) and walla... up go the fumes... We still sleep at night breathing that shit, but it's ok, they paid their fees and have a license. As long as they don't hold the exhaust pipe up the nose of the inspectors, they'll keep polluting (by law) and everything will be just fine. I know you already know that the US has not signed the UN Charter regarding abuse, etc... right? Ya'll are kidding yourselves if you think the government will make this industry better. :cheers:
-
my above reply was supposed to start with "There" :ftard:
-
Every situation is different. I know of situations that most of you are familiar with, that a bill such as H.R. 911 would be the difference between a particular program closing and staying open. But by in large the dirty little secret of this industry is that even most of the private programs do in fact have a license to operate. The States of Oregon, Arizona, Utah, and Georgia (save for some stronger language about access to a phone) just to name a few, require all programs to be licensed.
Ultimately it's people who are the regulators and the licensors. If you get someone who values and understands that say, making girls dress up in french maid outfits is in fact abusive and they have the authority to pull a license, then the State can work (i.e. Oregon). If you have someone with the values, but they don't have the authority, then maybe they'll care and can apply public pressure, but they can't actually legally do anything towards the facility (i.e. New York, North Carolina). If you have someone with the authority but not the values, then you have the facade of regulation (i.e. Utah) (if regulation was working, than there would be at least one program in the last few years that's had their license revoked).
The devil of H.R. 911 is in the details. Who will be responsible for the oversight is just as important as the language that is in the bill.
For the record, I'm in favor of the bill, but not because I think it will solve the problem, it'll be just one more tool in the toolbox for how to solve the problem, which right now includes the Internet, the network of Protection and Advocacy organizations, Child Protective Services in very small pockets, other forms of public awareness, and licensing agencies that are cooperative, among other things that I'm sure I didn't think of.
-
Every situation is different. I know of situations that most of you are familiar with, that a bill such as H.R. 911 would be the difference between a particular program closing and staying open. But by in large the dirty little secret of this industry is that even most of the private programs do in fact have a license to operate. The States of Oregon, Arizona, Utah, and Georgia (save for some stronger language about access to a phone) just to name a few, require all programs to be licensed.
Ultimately it's people who are the regulators and the licensors. If you get someone who values and understands that say, making girls dress up in french maid outfits is in fact abusive and they have the authority to pull a license, then the State can work (i.e. Oregon). If you have someone with the values, but they don't have the authority, then maybe they'll care and can apply public pressure, but they can't actually legally do anything towards the facility (i.e. New York, North Carolina). If you have someone with the authority but not the values, then you have the facade of regulation (i.e. Utah) (if regulation was working, than there would be at least one program in the last few years that's had their license revoked).
The devil of H.R. 911 is in the details. Who will be responsible for the oversight is just as important as the language that is in the bill.
For the record, I'm in favor of the bill, but not because I think it will solve the problem, it'll be just one more tool in the toolbox for how to solve the problem, which right now includes the Internet, the network of Protection and Advocacy organizations, Child Protective Services in very small pockets, other forms of public awareness, and licensing agencies that are cooperative, among other things that I'm sure I didn't think of.
This pretty much sums up my feeling on the situation.
I know it won't cure the problem. But I disagree with those who say it will make things worse. From my perspective, I believe the parents (whom some say will be made to feel more secure that the places are safe when they aren't) have no idea they aren't regulated - that there is no one with any authority over them - that when abuse and or neglect occurs there is no one with jurisdiction to investigate. It is assumed that any place that houses kids on site and provides education and health care of any sort would be seriously watched and regulated - After all, this is most everyone's experience with schools and health care facilities. It's shocking to realize this is not the case when you try and report problems.
One of the common defenses used by program parents is that if the allegations were true the place would be closed down. They really do believe this b/c this is what any reasonable person would expect. It is always difficult to get them to realize this is not the case with these private, for profit programs - that the sate they are in has no meaningful regulatory agency with jurisdiction; that local-yokel law enforcement is often on the pay role; and that state officials who might like to investigate, have no authority to do so with out the request of the local yokels; that the feds have no jurisdiction what so ever. . .
So, I say, give the feds jurisdiction. This way, it deprives the program industry of the benefit of avoiding regulations by clustering in states that have none. I feel confident they see it the same way - why else would they so strongly oppose this bill?
-
I think it could go either way. It could help shut some bad programs down but it could also give the industry legitimacy and provide parent with a false sense of security. Like RG, i'm not sure I trust the government with doing an adequate or even passable job of regulating this industry.
-
I think it could go either way. It could help shut some bad programs down but it could also give the industry legitimacy and provide parent with a false sense of security. Like RG, i'm not sure I trust the government with doing an adequate or even passable job of regulating this industry.
I'm sure your right. I've never argued the feds would do a good job. But at least it would be their job - and as such, people could raise cain with them and demand they do their job and once in awhile actually get something useful accomplished.
As it is now, it is no ones job so that even if they want to do something to help they can't.
-
Parents will still put their kids in harms way, regardless of the proposed bill and its rotting pork stench! Have you ever wondered why thousands of drivers challenge the power of trains when they cross the tracks, expecting the state funded RR gate to function properly? That's what's wrong with this country... it's "not my job" mentality. Why subscribe? Spread the awareness, government support only makes the job harder!
-
You're right - they will - for a lot of reasons.
If they later learn their child's education is worthless; that their child was a victim or witness to assault and battery, emotional black mail, sexual intimidation and abuse and medically neglected when ill or injured - there should be a governing/regulatory body that can take the complaint, do an investigation, and appropriately charge the perpetrators.
Because so many states refuse to provide this, we have no choice but to turn to the feds.
I'm all for the rampant talking - educating the public - getting this issue "out there" in every way possible Bill. We've had limited success with this method, but this is no reason to abandon it. Nor is it a reason to ignore or hold in disdain other efforts to do whatever else can be done.
-
I called the subcommittee handling HR911 a couple weeks ago, they asked what state I was calling from... What the hell difference does it make? Don't they work for all Americans? If someone from the committee that has the bill in hand won't talk about it due to state residency issues, then how do you expect parents will EVER get anything accomplished? Why would anyone support this bill even though it does not include offshore programs? So Johnny goes to Costa Rica or Samoa and OH WELL.. :beat: :beat: :beat: :beat: :beat: . It's time to kill HR911!!! ::unhappy::
-
I called the subcommittee handling HR911 a couple weeks ago, they asked what state I was calling from... What the hell difference does it make? Don't they work for all Americans? If someone from the committee that has the bill in hand won't talk about it due to state residency issues, then how do you expect parents will EVER get anything accomplished? Why would anyone support this bill even though it does not include offshore programs? So Johnny goes to Costa Rica or Samoa and OH WELL.. :beat: :beat: :beat: :beat: :beat: . It's time to kill HR911!!! ::unhappy::
D.C. always wants to know what state your in. Makes no difference who or why your calling.
As to off shore programs - with one notable exception I can think of, they were all eventually closed down by the governments of the nations they located in. Why can't we demand as much from the USofA?
-
out of over 300 MILLION people in the USA, there's maybe what... 20 who have gone out in public to make it known that program abuse should stop. Demand all you want... while yer waitin for results, try sinking an aircraft carrier with a BB gun. :wall:
-
How many statements from students, parents and ex-staff did ISAC have Bill? I honestly don't know and am sincerely asking - How many?
How many names are on the Turley plaintiffs list?
How many wrote one or more members of congress and or the White House on this issue?
I'm sure even accounting for duplication the list comes to more than 20. That said, I will concede we've never had the ground swell of outrage that this issue deserves and never will. I don't see how this translates to hopeless defeat. I continue to believe much can be done to improve a kid's chances of avoiding the trauma these programs will inflict by continuing business as usual.
-
People need to be willing to respond to the kids as individuals when the opportunity presents itself. It happened alot back in the day, be nice to see it happening again.
-
Why not a bill with new, concrete requirements, such as, say, not allowing it to be a privilege to contact parents, a limitation on the length of stays in isolation (I remember hearing Spring Creek only kept students for three days in isolation for the highest punishment because that was the most legally permissible), permission for students to speak with attorneys or child abuse hotlines unmonitored &c.
-
If you heard that about Spring Creek you heard a load of bull. There is one case on record of a young man spending 9 months in SCL's "hobbit" and Montana has no regulations over these private, for profit facilities at all. There was some talk of legislation some time back but the people they set up to over-see it where the people who operate the programs!
HR 911 does insist students have contact with family and access to a phone. How this will be enforced is the concern. The fear is it will increase parental confidence while in reality the kids will be just as isolated as ever.
-
How many statements from students, parents and ex-staff did ISAC have Bill? I honestly don't know and am sincerely asking - How many?
How many names are on the Turley plaintiffs list?
How many wrote one or more members of congress and or the White House on this issue?
I'm sure even accounting for duplication the list comes to more than 20. That said, I will concede we've never had the ground swell of outrage that this issue deserves and never will. I don't see how this translates to hopeless defeat. I continue to believe much can be done to improve a kid's chances of avoiding the trauma these programs will inflict by continuing business as usual.
Ok Buzzkill, I'll revise the number to 35. My post said "WHO HAVE GONE OUT IN PUBLIC", like holding a sign or going on camera for a local news story... Not private emails, letters, etc... Sure, there's lots more than 35 folks who have contributed to exposing the industry "under the radar" and even more who support what exposing folks do, but overt public outcry, only about 35 out of hundreds of millions. I've often likened this "movement" to a treasure hunt. Every clue leads to another clue but the treasure is never found. People oblige themselves to alert others about harmful treatment, that's a natural human thing to do. If let's say, 1,000 people showed up to protest somewhere, or that many folks at once were to jam a street, parking lot, park, landmark, whatever, then people would start to listen participate even more. Meanwhile, just keep plinkin away at that carrier.... :wall:
BTW, when is the vote for this bill? Nobody in that office on Cap Hill or in Richmond has responded to my inquiries.
-
Well, I suspect no one has responded b/c the bill is dead and not likely to be resurrected so you're probably safe and can stop with the banging of your head against "some mad bugger's wall".
We see going public differently. I see it as a public statement. You see it as bodily involvement. We're both right enuff I think.
All alone, or in two's,
The ones who really love you
Walk up and down outside the wall.
Some hand in hand
And some gathered together in bands.
The bleeding hearts and artists
Make their stand.
And when they've given you their all
Some stagger and fall, after all, it's not easy
Banging your heart against some mad bugger's wall.
-
Then why do people post petitions to support the bill if it's dead already? I'd just like an official confirmation one way or another but nobody seems to be able to offer it. What's a bugger's wall? I've heard that tune albeit many years ago, but I'm still attempting a correlation with this situation.
-
I can only assume people hope to get it revived as I do. May hope never die.
The wall thing is just a reference to your head banging "smilie" ( :wall: ) I thought I'd post the whole bit after using the one line b/c the whole bit is short enuff and I've always liked it. Thats all.
-
Well, I use the :wall: because it's how I feel when I try and tell folks that this bill should die ASAP (if it already hasn't). BUT, it would be really great if someone who knows its official status would be so kind as to provide an official certified etc... update. I am disappointed that people who work in that office in DC and even in VA would not return calls and emails regarding this matter, regardless of if it died or not. They're supposed to be working for the people, you know...
-
Other way around..
Government is served by the people didn't you know. We march in lockstep with our glorious leaders for a more prosperous and beige tomorrow.
-
Well, I use the :wall: because it's how I feel when I try and tell folks that this bill should die ASAP (if it already hasn't). BUT, it would be really great if someone who knows its official status would be so kind as to provide an official certified etc... update. I am disappointed that people who work in that office in DC and even in VA would not return calls and emails regarding this matter, regardless of if it died or not. They're supposed to be working for the people, you know...
I know how you feel Bill ( :wall: ) I sometimes think I've spent my life doing this.
As to DC, be patient. I wrote McConnel with-in days of being called to work for the Census as I had a beef or two I wanted to hash out and have explained. I got a response last week - about 6 weeks after the Census wrapped up and cut us all loose, so about 3 months since I wrote my letter. And, while it was polite and expressed interest there was no answer provided; just a promise to look into things.