Fornits

Fornits Home for Wayward Web Fora
An open discussion about the troubled parent industry

Sad it is possibly not enough to look for abusive incidents at the school. The first thing you need to do is look at the key staff on the programs website. Usually it will say that they have x amount of years industry experience. Sometimes they will list other programs that they worked for. Then try to find out about their previous employers. If this is not on their website then ask. This is important because it often means that they adopt abusive or ineffective techniques that they learned at other places. In many cases they could have been actively involved with a specific incident. You cant know for sure.
Also take natsap membership with a grain of salt it was founded by people who were shut down by the state of oregon for abuse.

As I regularly drank underage and sampled pot and exctacy and also had the most obnoxious boyfriend in the country. I too would have qualified for a program. Aside from these things i was actually pretty nerdy. I didnt even grow up to be that interesting in that i am not some kind of bohemian artist. My point. Just about any kid is potentially a program kid because they dont knock anyone back for problems that are too mild.

Open sky is run by Emily Demong her bio said she got her start at aspen acheivement academy. The admissions counsellor Lauren Lollini also worked at aac at the time british brat camp was filmed. This place has a long history of disturbing incidents. One boy tried to hang himself. Another incident involved some boys running away and wandering alone in the utah desert in the dangerously hot summer months for days.
The british version of brat camp also depicted one girl getting into a an argument with her admissions counsellors and throwing her shoe at them in temper. The response was for 2 women twice her size to wrestle her to the ground. When she cried out in pain one woman pushed her arm further up her back to show her what "real pain" was. The same series also showed another uncooperative girl being subjected to their "pain compliance technique" which consisted of giving her Chinese burns till she became obedient. This girl was obviously pretty stubborn because they said it went on for a couple of hours. This was the stuff they were willing to be open about. I cant imagine what they do to kids behind closed doors. You say your daughter is acting out due to trauma. Some of the more confronting therapies may exacerbate this. This could potentially lead to physical abuse. Ask the staff a lot of questions about what their time at aspen achievement academy taught them as professionals. Then ask why they condoned the practices of a place that uses pain compliance and see what they say.

I think it depends on your definition. I am willing to believe that some places are not abusive in the physical or sexual sense. But there is a wider justice issue here. The first question is whether detaining anyone for an extended period of time when they have not committed a crime that they have been legitmately tired for is OK. I would say that it certainly is not. So from that perspective then this industry is generally not moral in any place that claims to live by the general principals of modern democracy.
In the event that children end up in this industry because they have genuinely broken a law and been legally tried, it becomes a question of whether it is humane, effective and likely to prevent re offence.  boot camps have not met the test of being humane. In the infamous Marin Lee Anderson case as well as Gina Score, and so many others the testimony of their peers has consistently shown that they were not victims of the abuse of isolated "bad eggs" but the casualties of a system designed to be cruel and excessive in its punishment.
For those offenders who end up in privately owned and run places there is the question of whether private operators should be allowed to profit from punishment. I dont see how this is OK. When anyone is jailed the penalty is supposed to be loss of liberty. It is meant to be a last resort measure to keep society safe. These young people loose far more than liberty and somebody makes a profit to the damage that is done to them as human beings. It is also worth examining what these so called criminals are jailed for. In the case of many their crimes are petty at best. I dont think it is reasonable to say as in the case of Gina Score that her theft of beanie babies made her enough of a danger to society that the streets needed to be kept safe from her. I certainy find it unfathomable that the cost of a trinket is worth a human life. There is also no proof that imprisonment or "wilderness jail" makes any kid less likely to offend. If anything some studies have shown the opposite. So i Dont think the industry can justify itself as good here either. Not for the offender and not for society.
There is also a wider cultural context. Western society has somehow fallen in love with the theatre of cruelty that is reality TV, uglyness and punishment and indignity is celebrated and complex issues are presented as simple. On a recent episode of Dr Phil 2 parents were booed and jeered when they opted not to send their badly behved daughters to turn about ranch. Apparently working out a way to live together as a family made these people weak. it was preferable to send 2 underage girls to a place where children are tied together like horses. Even shows like survivor ultimately celebrate turning on your friends, stabbing each other in the back and generally behaving like an asshole to get ahead. the weak and kind are "losers".
The best anyone can hope for in sending their kid away to be "treated" is that their liberty and right to freedom of thought and movement is the only thing that is taken away. The industry knows this but also knows that as long as western culture feels that tough is right and parental fear and love is exploitable it can make a profit

If boystown currently appears to do no more bad than good it might be that it is not inherently abusive any more than the boy scouts or any catholic parish school are. Given the amount of people who have come forward to complain about systemically abusive practices at just about everywhere else that operates under this system, i dont see why there would be an irrational fear of doing the same at boystown. Particularly since it is a place kids choose to attend which is the key difference bwtween it and just about evry other gulag. As i have said in the past I don't know whether i really support an orphanage sort of model for kids who genuinely can not live at home and so to some extent i agree with blombro's post. An institution is not a home. But to accuse a place of systemic abuse there needs to be some recent evidence. Particularly when boys town provides many legitimate social services.

To the best of my knowledge we do not have bootcamps here as such here. I could be wrong and if we do they are very well hidden and have no internet presence. There have been a few wilderness type things but the kids go consensually and they only last for about a week. One i know of is called Operaton flinders. Of the kids i have spoken to the response was overall positive although it did not do anything to stop any of the kids i spoke to from continuing to be "at risk". Most say it is pretty demanding physically but they are given several warnings of this before signing on. in terms of "therapy" there is none as such. The Therapy is doing the course itself. The theory is the kids feel a sense of achievement for signing on and seeing it through. Medically the kids are very well taken care of as the program is sponsored in part by SA Ambulance. Of the kids i spoke to they all said they got very good medical care. The food sounded pretty crappy as it is carried mostly in the backpacks with the exception of a few of the dinners. hope this helps

the whole idea seems a little mean. People go to 12 step meetings because they are trying to address some personal issue or flaw. They are not hurting anyone and they are a vulnerable population. It seems a bit harsh to have them pour their hearts out to you only to be publically humiliated. Im with Psy leave them be.