Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - psy

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 368
61
Open Free for All / Re: Vice article on The Troubled Teen Industry
« on: May 24, 2013, 12:18:09 PM »
Quote from: "none-ya"
Quote from: "psy"
Quote from: "none-ya"
I really didn't expect you to endorse any program. But  if you really can't trust anybody, then why trust whooter?
Lord knows I've never implied anybody should.
Again,(at the risk of redundancy), why give someone you don't trust,a platform? Seems counter productive.
And off topic, but to answer your question it's because I have no wish to censor this forum so only stuff I agree with remains.  All i'm going to do is enforce a set of rules in the hopes of creating discussion.  If you want a survivors only forum, there are plenty.

62
Quote from: "Muppeteer"
The program held the money in a student account, there was no personal cash allowed to be kept. If wages were earned off campus, the money would have to be turned in to someone who would place it in the account. I myself was too young to work off campus when I was in re-entry, so I worked in the Elan 3 kitchen for a couple of dollars an hour.

If students decided to leave the program or were demoted during this period, what would happen to their money?  In my case, if they left, the money became the program's.  If they were demoted to a lower level, most of the time the money was held, but the program could "fine" that away arbitrarily.  Was this the case in Elan?  Were their fines as well?

Quote
I know from speaking with many of my peers, it was fairly common to band together after graduation for a time. Speaking just for myself, I know that for several years I kept in close contact with 4 or 5 of my closest friends, some of them even visiting for weeks at a time, which certainly stressed out my parents :) as we were up to no good. lol.

Did you talk about the program during this time?  Adhere to the programs' beliefs?  How common was this?  What i'm trying to gauge is how long on average true believers' beliefs would survive on the outside when you're only associating with other program members?  Did you have other friends after graduation?  Was this common?  What did they think about your experiences if you discussed it?

63
Open Free for All / Re: Vice article on The Troubled Teen Industry
« on: May 24, 2013, 11:54:33 AM »
Quote from: "none-ya"
I really didn't expect you to endorse any program. But  if you really can't trust anybody, then why trust whooter?
Lord knows I've never implied anybody should.

64
Quote from: "none-ya"
Psy, if you feel so strongly, I don't understand the need to give the opposition a voice.

Because I want to understand how industry representatives think and argue.  I want others to see it too.  It also provides a catalyst for discussion.

Quote
Unless of course you could recommend a  good program.

Even if thought I knew of a good program, I would not.  I could never be sure.  Moreover, why should parents trust me?  Becuase of my experiences?  What about parents like Sue Scheff or students like Kevin August or some others who I can think of who have had experiences and yet still refer (and not to good places either)?  This is a discussion that has been had many times on Fornits. If there is one message i'd like parents to hear is that they should trust nobody.

65
Quote from: "Muppeteer"
Once in re-entry, you could work off campus if you were of age to do so, or you could work in the Elan 3 kitchen for low/minimum wage.

Were wages paid directly, or did the program hold onto the money for "safe keeping" (the CEDU based program I was in did this)?  Was it common for people to stay past the 3 month graduation point or to live communally with other elan folk after graduation?

66
Quote from: "Whooter"
If your child is in need of an anti-cancer medication and all other avenues have been tried unsuccessfully then most parents would be willing to try a medication that is still undergoing trial studies to see if it has an effect on their child.

The difference is parents are warned by doctors that often untested treatments have as much potential for harm as they do to help.  There is an informed consent.  How many programs, how many, will tell the honest to god truth by saying "What we do is experimental. We are not sure that what we do works, but we believe it does as a result of their anecdotal experience; however there have been a significant number of former students who report being harmed as a result of our treatment".  How many will say that, Whooter?  Why is there no warning label on programs like there is on even a bottle of Aspirin?

67
Quote from: "Muppeteer"
shotdown
worker
ramrod
expeditor trainee
department head
full expeditor
chief expeditor
shingle expeditor
coordinator trainee
guru
full coordinator

re-entry

It sounds to me like these are staff levels.  Were participants in the programs groomed to become staff?  Also, what's re-entry?

68
Quote from: "Whooter"
Her book did get good reviews, I think we all agreed to that several years ago.  But she never had the opportunity to witness and experience the day to day operations of a program which was unfortunate.

Like none-ya said. You don't have to drink poison to know it's bad for you.  You don't have to have had cancer to know how to treat it. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to know that if you have 1000 kids saying they had a horrible experience in program and only 100 saying they were saved, there might very well be a problem.  Maia does not go so far as to say that all programs across the board are bad.  What she says is that because it's impossible to tell a good program from a bad one, effectively all programs are unsafe.  Straight was once thought to be the cat's meow.  CEDU as well.  WWASP had it's day, and the lists goes on.  The programs of today will no doubt fall into disrepute and the ones that come after will no doubt claim to be "better".  To have "learned from the mistakes".  And so it all repeats and nothing really changes but the names.  CEDU becomes Aspen.  "Propheets" become workshops of "LifeSteps".  "Raps" become "group".  "Bans" becomes "non-com".  If the programs really worked, Whooter -- f they really have changed -- why is it that there has never been a single peer reviewed study -- not a single one -- that has shown that programs are effective in the long term and cause no lasing harm?

69
Quote from: "Whooter"
Hi PODK, its good to see you back again.  I remember the discussion a few years ago also.  There were many posters here on fornits who did not like the report/book because Dave Marcus found The Academy at Swift river to be helpful to most children.  He lived and taught there and followed a peer group for 14 months.  He reported on the good as well as the bad aspects of the industry.

He lived and taught what he was permitted to see and teach.  I remember clearly how the program I was in would clean up and outright lie to visitors.  They presented a false front when it was convenient.  Even if Dave Marcus did witness an sanitized version of the program, after being there 14 months i'm not at all convinced he wouldn't have "gone native".  The bizarre starts to seem normal after a while.  Let me quote an amazon review of the book:

Quote
What would have been a less harsh and equally effectvie solution for jerome, the boy who had never touched an illicit drug and who only needed greater attention academically to thrive? Why was his mother not encouraged to look at the alternative school that he ended up at first? Is there a potential danger in putting a naive and socially struggling kid from the suburbs in a place with world weary drug taking sophisticates? Would it be culturally appropriate for a hispanic girl with devout catholic beliefs to have to confess her sexual sins publically?

This book also presents the kids relapses as an unfortunate accident without extensively delving into why. It strikes me that Trevor, the witty and easygoing Englishman never really learnt how to survive outside of the highly artificial world of ASR. Perhaps this was because it did not give him the self worth to refuse to engage in behaviours extreme enough to be lifethreatening or the practical tools to say no to a very real and strong temptation.

And what of the staff? Only one line was devoted to the fact that the enthusiastic English teacher left claiming the only thing she loved about the place was the kids. Why was this so?

And whhat is the effect of such a high turnover of staff on vulnerable troubled young people? DJ the ADD adoptee began a down hill slide when his favourite PE teacher Big Mike abruptly left.

Finally it does not question at all the morality of the programme. Actively punishing harrdworking kids such as Jerome for not turning in their friends when they confide in each other does not teach loyalty or strengthen friendship. It comes across as meanspirited and unjust. Does any school have the moral right to tell a mother what she should or should not put in a letter to her child?

Apparently, none of these things seemed to shock Dave Marcus in the least -- certainly not in retrospect.  Anyway, wasn't he  And even if what he saw and reported was completely accurate, it's still anecdote.  There is no proof whatsoever that a single kid was ever saved by a program.  There are plenty who think they were, but then again, there are plenty who swear by homeopathy, or Scientology, or foul smelling exotic fruits.

Speaking of exotic fruits, the Noni fruit, which Whooter is so fond of is not allowed to be sold in Europe as a health product.  It's permitted to be sold as a food, but it's not permissible to sell it with any claims about health benefits.  Why?  Because there is no real evidence there are any.  Why then is it OK to send kids to a programs that makes claims about "saving" kids when there is no evidence that has ever happened and there is considerable evidence the methods often employed are harmful?  Should parents be able to subject their kids, as their property, to any untested treatment whatsoever?

That's really the core issue here.  Desperate parents are willing to try anything when they feel like their kids are spiraling out of control and programs are more than willing to sell them a solution.  The viability or efficacy of the solution doesn't matter.  What matters is that it makes the parents feel good and as far as i'm concerned, that's the number one goal of many of these programs -- not helping the kids.  Whooter would argue that by helping the kids, the parents are pleased.  I would counter that programs need not actually help the kids.  All they have to do is get the kids to believe, and openly profess, that they were helped.  If they explode later -- well.  It's anybody's fault but the program.

70
Quote from: "Whooter"
Drinking red wine can cause liver damage also but is also good for your heart.

Possibly.  Then again, the article says:

Quote from: "Mayo Clinic"
Red wine seems to have even more heart-healthy benefits than other types of alcohol, but it's possible that red wine isn't any better than beer, white wine or liquor for heart health. There's still no clear evidence that red wine is better than other forms of alcohol when it comes to possible heart-healthy benefits.

Antioxidants in red wine called polyphenols may help protect the lining of blood vessels in your heart. A polyphenol called resveratrol is one substance in red wine that's gotten attention.

Resveratrol in red wine

Resveratrol might be a key ingredient in red wine that helps prevent damage to blood vessels, reduces "bad" cholesterol and prevents blood clots.

Most research on resveratrol has been done on animals, not people. Research in mice given resveratrol suggests that the antioxidant might also help protect them from obesity and diabetes, both of which are strong risk factors for heart disease. However, those findings were reported only in mice, not in people. In addition, to get the same dose of resveratrol used in the mice studies, a person would have to drink over 60 liters of red wine every day.

Wow.  So basically to get the health benefits from red wine you would have to drink so much you'd die of alcohol poisoning long before.  And only if you're a mouse.

Quote
I think most people collect as much information as they can and make an informed decision whether it be their children or their health.

And as you've just pointed out with both this and the Noni juice, what often seems like an informed, good decision, based on what you've casually overhead on the 7-o-clock news or what seems to be "common knowledge", is often not in actual fact, a good idea (or at best, completely benign).  Parents think, based on superficial research, tv "experts, or "common knowledge", that programs are a good idea for their kids.  In actual fact, there has never been any evidence, aside from anecdote, to support that conclusion.  We do know, however, based on actual research, that confrontational techniques like the ones commonly used in programs can cause lasting harm.  In other words, in order to get the possible, theoretical benefits of Resveratrol, you have to take the very real and documented risk of alcohol poisoning.

71
Quote from: "Whooter"
Quote from: "psy"

This is the crux of the issue right here.  He believes he was helped by his treatment and took it upon himself to treat others in turn.  It doesn't matter whether the treatment was objectively helpful in comparison to say, a control group.  All that matters is that he believes he was helped.

I really dont see this as a problem at all Psy.  This is how the whole world has evolved.  People try things and if they benefit from them then they pass it on, if they eat a berry and feel sick or die then others take note and no one will eat that particular berry.

Except that a berry might not kill everybody who eats it, and some might see it as beneficial.  One good example is with Mescal Beans.  The psychedelic dose is very close to a lethal one.  I certainly wouldn't suggest people try it.

Quote
Right now I am adding Noni juice to a morning shake that I make.  It has been reported that it boosts the immune system, although I cannot find any studies that support this I have read enough to know the risk is good and have added it to my diet.  Most people are not willing to wait for outcome studies on anything, even when it comes to their health or childrens health.  People assess the risks and then make a decision.

So there's this juice that nobody really knows what it does, there has been at least one study linking it to liver and kidney damage (click side effects, also see Wikipedia), there has been no published concrete evidence of any health benefits whatsoever -- and you've decided it's a good idea to drink it on a regular basis.  Well.  If your risk assessment deems that suitable -- it's your body to do with what you please.  Thank heavens for organ donors.  And as you note since kids are little more than property of their parents, the parents are also free to experiment on their kids with similar abandon.  Science be damned.  Peer reviewed studies be damned.  Anecdote and false hope should be enough for anybody.

72
Link here.

It mentions Josh Shipp, Aspen Education, Swift River Academy, and others.

Full text here minus videos and photos for posterity (emphasis added):

Quote
AMERICAN TEENS ARE BEING TRAPPED IN ABUSIVE 'DRUG REHAB CENTRES'
By Matt Shea

If you like Army Wives, Preachers’ Daughters, Dance Moms or any other TV show attempting to create a taxonomy of women based on the professions of their husbands, fathers and children, then you may well have caught an episode of Teen Trouble. It’s a reality TV show on the US Lifetime network where a guy named Josh Shipp sends “at-risk teens” to "alternative rehab centres", where they’re forced to endure emotional and physical abuse before being allowed to rejoin society.  

Shipp is your classic Jerry Springer brand of therapist – no real qualifications, a huge ego and a penchant for money and entertaining TV over science and genuine psychology. “I’m a teen behaviour specialist,” he says in the intro. “My approach is gritty, gutsy and in your face.”

But the show is a lot grittier than you might expect from that typical teleprompter spiel. The unregulated "troubled teen" industry is able to persist despite numerous allegations of physical and sexual abuse, torture and death at various institutions, and Shipp is exploiting that same system for monetary gain. Even when they aren’t abusive and/or deadly, the pseudoscientific practices used at “tough love boarding schools” have often proven to be ineffective and can lead to PTSD, anxiety, depression and drug addiction. Maia Szalavitz, author of Help at Any Cost: How the Troubled-Teen Industry Cons Parents and Hurts Kids, told me about some of the horror stories her own research uncovered.

“The classic list is food deprivation, sleep deprivation, public humiliation, beatings and denial of access to the bathroom to the point where you wet or soil yourself. But I’m also constantly hearing stories of people being forced to re-enact various traumas, like being raped,” she told me.

Szalavitz continued, "At Mount Bachelor Academy,

an Aspen facility

Quote
an investigation found bed sheets that had been used during re-enactments, and one of them had, ‘I am the yes girl, spray your cum on my tits,’ written on it. Let’s be real: this is not therapy.”

The methods used at these facilities are arguably traceable to an anti-drug cult in the 60s called the Church of Synanon. Their method was to abduct addicts and then “rehabilitate” them through beatings and humiliation. “I found that virtually all of the programmes that exist today using the harshest tactics were either founded by former Synanon members or sent people to Synanon to learn the treatment,” Szalavitz told me.

Former patients have been airing their stories on Reddit and other websites, so I contacted a few of them to find out more. It soon became clear that today’s residential teen treatment centres still have all the trappings of a cult.

One night, Nick Quinn was roused from sleep at his home and taken to Aspen Education’s Outback programme in Utah (the same programme Josh Shipp sent Jacob to in episode two of Teen Trouble) because his parents caught him smoking weed.

“At 4.30AM, I was woken up by two strangers holding handcuffs. They took my wallet and phone and told me that if I didn’t want to go easily they would make it hard for me. I thought I was being kidnapped. Next thing I know, I’m in a big white truck on my way to the airport,” he told me.

Once he arrived, Nick was given new clothes and survival gear, tied up and shipped into the wilderness, where he would remain for eight weeks. His boots were taken away at night to prevent him from escaping on the freezing cold ground. All of which seems a little aggressive for smoking a bit of weed.

After his ordeal, Nick was sent to another Aspen institute – the Swift River Academy in Massachusetts – where he was kept for seven months. “I was lucky my parents pulled me out. You could just tell they wanted the kids to be there as long as possible. They were milking it; my parents spent around $150,000 (£98,407).”

At Swift River, Nick endured the same kind of “therapy” I’d heard about from every other young victim, and which numerous academics had told me can lead to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). According to Szalavitz, the goal is to break the child down psychologically and brainwash them: “The reasons these tactics sound similar to enhanced interrogation techniques, AKA torture, is because they're the ways you can break people and leave minimal marks.”

Now, years later, Nick has developed an anxiety disorder, experiences recurring nightmares from his time in “therapy” and still smokes weed. Understandably, his parents regret sending him there as it seems to have caused more damage than it prevented – something that appears to be a recurring theme with victims of troubled teen camps.

"Pretty much all the kids who I’m in touch with [from the camps] have dropped out of school," Nick told me. "Most get re-addicted to drugs. When you get out, you have all this freedom and you don’t know what to do with it. You lose control, you know?”

Aria Leonard, who was sent to the Monarch School in Montana seven years ago, had similar experiences. Aria told me her mother sent her there because she “disliked the friends she was making because they were ‘different’ – black, gay, etc.” After a pricey $2,000 (£1,312) visit to an “educational consultant”, Aria was diagnosed as depressed, as a drug addict and told by her parents she’d be going to “boarding school”.

Aria first realised it was no ordinary boarding school when her belongings were taken and she was strip-searched on entry.

“Right after that I was taken directly to a group session. People were talking about drugs, sex and alcohol, then everyone started screaming and crying. I was really confused and started to wonder if there had been some sort of mistake. I was then asked what drugs I'd done to be put there, and – despite my insistence that I'd never done drugs, was a virgin and wasn’t violent – they didn't believe me.”

Aria was forced to undertake pointless physical labour, like cutting down huge trees and dragging them along the ground for half an hour, as well as being told to sit opposite a wall at night and continuously write stuff like, "I am a slut" and "I'm not good enough".

Like most victims of the troubled teen industry, Aria was forced to divulge “disclosures” – a form of ludicrously invasive confessional. “You had to write about everything bad you'd ever done, with an emphasis on ‘sexual disclosures’. I had very little experience in sexual anything, but they wouldn’t believe me, so in the end I just made it up,” she said.

Aria was also put through the same emotional breaking-down sessions inflicted on Nick. During procedures known as “insights”, teens were denied bathroom access, food and sleep for three to five days. They would also be made to perform role-playing exercises that ended in them acting out their own death – exercises Shia likened to the kind of “therapy” seen in this bizarre video.

Aria remained in the centre for 18 months. Like Nick, she has since been diagnosed with anxiety and depression and continues to have nightmares about her experience.

Liz went to 39 residential treatment centres and describes being abused and raped multiple times. Rape claims are common in the industry, but – as the children are completely under staff's control for years – lawsuits rarely surface.

“The excessive use of punishment and humiliating procedures isn't only unhelpful, but also traumatising for young people," said Professor Robert Friedman, a child psychologist. "As is the practice of having strangers wake them in the middle of the night and transport them far away without any preparation.”

And it’s not just the trauma-inducing methodology that makes the industry questionable; it’s also the diagnosis. "What is a 'troubled teen'?" Szalavitz wonders. “The idea that we put kids with Asperger’s, heroin addictions, depression and extreme anxiety disorders in one programme with a rigid, regimented schedule and expect it to help all of those kids – how could that be?

“Americans have this idea that addiction and drug use is about complete hedonistic abandon, seeking extra pleasure and defying your parents. They missed the fact that the people who really tend to have problems with drugs are people in pain seeking relief. Their idea is that these people don’t have enough pain, so we need to give them more pain to fix them,” she said.

No matter the intention, these forms of therapy aren't only pointless and outdated, but cruel and damaging. Any emotional trauma that teenagers suffer at Aspen Education’s institutes must only be matched by the neglect they feel at being abandoned by their parents for an important part of their formative years.

While these practices might seem abhorrent, the troubled teen industry is huge, powerful and experienced in deflecting allegations. In 2002, Forbes magazine’s Erika Brown estimated its worth at $2 billion, and since then it's only been on the rise. The industry has managed to stick around in some incarnation since the 60s due to its powerful Republican and Christian roots. Many programmes can be traced back to Straight, Incorporated, Nancy Reagan and George Bush Sr's favourite anti-drug programme that was closed due to abuse lawsuits in the early 90s.

Here, I disagree.  The influences come from Synanon, est, LifeSpring, and whatever else worked.  There are facilities that are Christian and mormon, but in most cases the religious dogma had less to do with practices and more as a cover.  Also, few programs today are direct Straight decedents.  Most are spawn of CEDU, which in turn is a spawn of Synanon.  WWASP is a spawn of LifeSpring and other Utah facilities such as Provo Canyon.  Yeah republicans have also been in support of the industry, but I hate it when they bring politics into this.  Democrats would just as easily have supported places like CEDU clones.  Hell. I'm willing to bet Whooter votes democrat.

Quote
Today, funding from Mitt Romney’s private equity firm Bain Capital (of which he has resigned as CEO, but continues to profit from) has allowed the industry to thrive. The biggest name in the business, Aspen Education, is owned by CRC Health Group, which was bought by Bain Capital in 2006 and is responsible for many of the institutes used on Shipp’s show. Since the takeover, Aspen has seen six deaths occur in its facilities, mainly due to neglect. Worryingly, the US Department of State advertises Aspen programmes for teens on their website.

Hardly known as a bastion of Republicans.

Quote
I confronted Shipp about the issue, but he brushed it aside as an unfortunate change of staffing in a few of the programmes, rather than a powerful nationwide industry that’s rotten to the core. “Treatment facilities can change ownership, management and staffing quite regularly," Shipp told me. "Parents need to proceed with caution with any programme at all and be armed with the right questions to ask.”

Shipp also assured me that, “A family therapist chose the aftercare for each kid based on the situation they were going through.” But if there’s one reason that the industry has managed to survive other than money, it’s that there’s almost no supervision for psychological treatments in the USA, which is kind of at odds with Shipp's claims. As Szalavitz told me, “If I wanted to start a addiction rehab centre tomorrow where treatment just involves standing on your head for extended periods of time, then I could do just that.”

It’s not difficult for the industry to legitimise itself. Professor Friedman told me that “groups like Aspen are now trying to build an empirical case for their programmes by hiring evaluators to conduct supposedly independent studies that validate the effectiveness of the programmes. These studies aren't independent and are more of a marketing effort than a genuine evaluation.”

This kind of “therapy” comes from an older America: one which believes that society is subject to moral decay and that the solution is to force outliers to conform to Republican and Christian ideals of abstinence and hard work. It’s an America that puts its faith in the ecstatic emotional climaxes of TV evangelism and “tough love” over the tried scientific methods of modern psychology.

Again. Unnecessary and polarizing.  Christian dogma has nothing whatsoever to do with, for example, the human potential leanings of many program's workshops.  There is nothing in the Bible that even speaks to drug or alcohol0 prohibition at all.  According to the Bible, Jesus drank, and not just for ceremonial purposes.  His first miracle was to convert water to wine so people at a party could get drunker than they already were.  I'm not a fan of Christianity (or Islam, or any religion for that matter), but I hate it when journalists blame it for a paranoid, reactionary, prohibitionist culture that developed independently and only as of this past century worked it's way into mainstream Christianity, and only by blatantly ignoring things like Jesus's fondness for wine.

All this does is to convince Christians reading the article that it's just written by some atheist leftist with an unfair grudge against all things moral.  It undermines the core arguments which should otherwise be important to everybody regardless of faith or political persuasion.  Articles like this will only keep kids of OWS Democrats out of programs.

Quote
Where we see experimentation and the pushing of boundaries, it sees sin and societal corruption that must be violently scared out of people. Normal teenagers are being told that they are wrong and worthless, then broken and abused with the goal of making them “born again” as upstanding adults. And all the while, their parents’ bank accounts are being emptied straight into the coffers of America’s richest men. (The recession has dampened the industry’s growth, but CRC Health lists the net revenue per child in outdoor programmes as $438.96 per day, and in residential programmes as $257.87 per day.)

And yet, while minor investigations have forced individual rehab centres to change staff, the industry continues to thrive. That's because these institutions use the same methods, have the same roots and are funded by the same people. Which begs the question: Why has there been no attempt at state regulation of treatment centres? Until there is, American kids are destined to continue suffering in these abusive institutions.

Follow Matt on Twitter: @Matt_A_Shea

73
There is a good Vice article on the industry that mentions Josh Shipp, Aspen, and others. I'm starting a new thread here as I think it deserves it's own thread.

74
Quote from: "blombrowski"
But other than some writings by Tom Croke, I haven't seen anything that even reads like an excuse (i.e. well, back in the 90's CEDU was the best thing going for us since medical psychiatry wasn't effective at getting our kids to grow up fast enough, but now we know we can achieve forced maturity without torturing kids).

Yet even he continues to refer kids and young adults to CEDU clones.  To me it sounds like little more than an attempt at obfuscation.  To superficially acknowledge mistakes of the past and pretend those mistakes are no longer the practice when we know from places like MBA that very little if anything has actually changed.

75
Quote from: "Whooter"
Hey, Zen, I hope all is well.  Here is my 2 cents.

I dont think Josh shipp should be judged based on if he is on “our side” or someone else’s side.  Josh works for what he believes in.  He was abused as a child and struggled with addiction and because he was helped by adults he was able to overcome many of his problems.  Just like Jacqueline Danforth and many others he wanted to give back and help others to succeed in life.  I don’t think they should be criticized and beaten down for trying to help others.

This is the crux of the issue right here.  He believes he was helped by his treatment and took it upon himself to treat others in turn.  It doesn't matter whether the treatment was objectively helpful in comparison to say, a control group.  All that matters is that he believes he was helped.

In the same way a child of an abusive parent can justify his abuse as "it made me the man I am today", so many "professionals" in the industry are simply repeating the treatment they received in the blind faith that it's objectively helpful.  There is no science to back the belief up.  All that's there is dogma.

Not all kids who were abused by their parents grow up and say "i'll never treat my kids that way" in the same way that not all kids who were abused or mistreated in programs recognize what happened to them as wrong.  Often they see it as having been necessary, or even good.  It's in this way programs spawn.  To give just one example, a client from Kids went on to start AARC in Canada.  It doesn't matter that Kids was shut down due to it's abuse.  The guy believes what happened to him to be the only way to save kids, and is determined to bring his righteous faith to the unwashed infidel masses.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 368