Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => Aspen Education Group => Topic started by: Troll Control on July 23, 2010, 12:14:01 PM
-
We all know about Mount Bachelor Academy's recent closure due to child abuse and neglect (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=30803) and that Aspen Education has claimed in court that it provides no therapy. (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=28735)
MBA was one of the programs that was studied in Behrens' work. The fact that MBA was closed for abusing children and that Behrens concluded MBA was "effective" despite offering no therapy and abusing hundreds of children is terribly troubling to say the least.
Here's a list of the all of the programs she looked at:
Academy at Swift River, Aspen Ranch, Copper Canyon Academy, Mount Bachelor Academy, Stone Mountain School, Pine Ridge Academy, SunHawk Academy,Turnabout Ranch, and Youth Care, Inc.
Academy at Swift River has been cited by state authorities for child abuse.
How many of the others have been as well? Are there any untainted entities in this study?
-
Anybody else have familiarity with these other programs?
-
youth care was where brendan blum died. He complained and they ignored it charges were filed against the staff. His mother researched the place and was lead to beleive he would get top quality care. I wonder if this study was one of the things that convinced her that the poor boy would be in good hands.
Charges Filed in Death of Brendan Blum
2 youth counselors charged in California boy's death
14-year-old was staying at treatment center in Draper
By Pat Reavy and Rebecca Palmer
Deseret Morning News
Published: October 12, 2007
Two counselors at a residential youth treatment center in Draper where a 14-year-old boy died in June were charged Thursday in connection with the boy's death.
Deborah Cole and Jorge Ramirez, from Youth Care Inc., 12600 Minuteman Drive, each face one count of abuse or neglect of a child, a third-degree felony.
On June 27, Brendan Blum of California was suffering bowel and stomach problems. He had been vomiting and suffering from diarrhea all night, said Draper Police Sgt. Gerry Allred. Rather than contacting the on-call nurse as the facility's policy dictates, the boy was simply given some medicine and put in a separate room away from the rest of the boys, he said. The next morning, the boy, who was listed as a disabled child because he had Asperger's syndrome, was found dead on his mattress.
"There was no really good reason why they didn't take him ... no explanation except they just thought it was an upset stomach," Allred said.
An autopsy determined the boy had an obstructed bowel that deteriorated as the night went on, Allred said. The on-call nurse, who was later interviewed by police, said if she had been called to look at the boy she would have advised he immediately go to the hospital, he said.
The Utah State Medical Examiner concurred, "if medical intervention had been obtained, (the boy's) death would have been preventable," according to court documents.
The boy's mother, Dana Blum, said she is appalled that workers at the facility didn't take him to an emergency room. Any time a child dies while in the care of a licensed facility, the facility should be shut down immediately, she said.
Blum has filed a complaint with the Utah licensing board and is waiting for the investigation to be completed.
She hopes the individuals who operated the facility will be held accountable along with the workers.
"I don't wish them any ill, I would just like to see justice done for my son," she said.
The facility issued a statement shortly after the boy's death saying it was the result of a "medical condition." The group home is operated by Aspen Education Group, based in Cerritos, Calif. It is a division of the CRC Health Group, which runs boarding schools, outdoor education programs and weight-loss camps.
Ironically, the charges came one day after the Government Accountability Office in Washington, D.C., found thousands of abuse allegations at camps and other private treatment facilities around the country.
Blum hopes the national attention will result in stricter standards and more accountability across the board.
Brendan was placed in the facility following treatment at a California hospital. Blum said she researched Youth Care Inc. extensively before sending her son there.
"This is double-edged sword for me," she said. "I am not a deadbeat mom."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Caretakers at Draper youth care center charged with child abuse in death of 14-year-old
By Jason Bergreen
The Salt Lake Tribune Article
Last Updated: 10/11/2007 05:22:00 PM MDT
Two caretakers at a Draper assisted-living facility were charged Thursday with failing to provide medical aid to a 14-year-old resident who died under their supervision in June. Jorge Ramirez and Deborah Cole were both on duty at Youth Care Inc. on June 27 when 14-year-old Brendan Blum of Santa Barbara, Calif., died.
An autopsy concluded that Blum died from an inadequate blood supply to his small bowel, according to a criminal complaint filed in 3rd District Court. On the night of his death, Blum had a loss of bowel control, vomited and complained of stomach pain, but Ramirez and Cole did not provide or seek medical help for him, the complaint states.
Blum was found dead on the morning of June 28. A state medical examiner concluded that Blum's death could have been prevented if he had been given medical attention.
"Secure treatment facilities are responsible for providing appropriate medical treatment and care for the children entrusted to their supervision," Salt Lake County District Attorney Lohra Miller said in a news release. "In this case, it is alleged that a young boy's need for emergency medical treatment was ignored and that this negligence resulted in the boy's death." Miller also said that state law requires that treatment facilities and their employees be held to a "heightened standard of care."
Blum was at the facility because he had Asperger's Syndrome, a disorder related to autism.
Cole and Ramirez are each charged with one third-degree felony count of abuse or neglect of a child. The crime is punishable by up to five years in jail.
Posted by Teen Advocates USA at 10:50 AM
Labels: Aspen Education Group, Barbe Stamps, Brendan Blum, CRC Health Group, Teen Advocates USA, Youth Care
Newer Post Older Post Home
WEBSITE
* Teen Advocates USA
Photo Copyright 2007 by Teen Advocates USA and Barbe Stamps. All Rights Reserved.
My Photo
Teen Advocates USA
Teen Advocates USA is a private not-for-profit children's rights educational and public advocacy website dedicated to improving the status and well-being of America's youth through judicial, legislative and social policy reforms.
View my complete profile
Blog Archive
* ? 2007 (4)
o ? October (2)
+ A Mother's Quest for Accountability
+ Charges Filed in Death of Brendan Blum
o ? September (2)
+ WHO'S WATCHING THE CAREGIVERS?
+ News Reports
TAUSA WEBLOG
* Aaron Bacon: Tragedy in the Wilderness
* Barbe Stamps
* Betrayed Innocence
* Carey Bock Appeal
* Cash For Kids
* End Institutionalized Child Abuse Act 2005
* HOLY THE CHILDREN
* KID NATION
* Paradise Abused: Memoirs of a Search for Truth
* Remembering Brendan Blum
* Remembering Michelle Sutton
* Self Medicated The Movie
* Stop Child Profiteering in America
* Teen Advocates USA 10 Year Anniversary
* The Troubled Teen Industry
* Tough Love America
* What Price Wilderness Therapy?
* HOLY THE CHILDREN
Holy The Children is a memorial that seeks to honor and remember children who tragically lost their lives while in the custodial care of a private or state-run residential children's program or institution. Created by Barbe Stamps and online since 1999 there are over 125 children's names currently listed on the memorial wall which also includes informational articles and resources for parents, other family members and friends.
BRENDAN BLUM MEMORIAL WEBPAGE
Naymz Profile for Barbe Stamps
Teen Advocates USA
-
Charges Filed in Death of Brendan Blum
2 youth counselors charged in California boy's death
14-year-old was staying at treatment center in Draper
By Pat Reavy and Rebecca Palmer
Deseret Morning News
Published: October 12, 2007
Two counselors at a residential youth treatment center in Draper where a 14-year-old boy died in June were charged Thursday in connection with the boy's death.
Deborah Cole and Jorge Ramirez, from Youth Care Inc., 12600 Minuteman Drive, each face one count of abuse or neglect of a child, a third-degree felony.
On June 27, Brendan Blum of California was suffering bowel and stomach problems. He had been vomiting and suffering from diarrhea all night, said Draper Police Sgt. Gerry Allred. Rather than contacting the on-call nurse as the facility's policy dictates, the boy was simply given some medicine and put in a separate room away from the rest of the boys, he said. The next morning, the boy, who was listed as a disabled child because he had Asperger's syndrome, was found dead on his mattress.
"There was no really good reason why they didn't take him ... no explanation except they just thought it was an upset stomach," Allred said.
An autopsy determined the boy had an obstructed bowel that deteriorated as the night went on, Allred said. The on-call nurse, who was later interviewed by police, said if she had been called to look at the boy she would have advised he immediately go to the hospital, he said.
The Utah State Medical Examiner concurred, "if medical intervention had been obtained, (the boy's) death would have been preventable," according to court documents.
The boy's mother, Dana Blum, said she is appalled that workers at the facility didn't take him to an emergency room. Any time a child dies while in the care of a licensed facility, the facility should be shut down immediately, she said.
Blum has filed a complaint with the Utah licensing board and is waiting for the investigation to be completed.
She hopes the individuals who operated the facility will be held accountable along with the workers.
"I don't wish them any ill, I would just like to see justice done for my son," she said.
The facility issued a statement shortly after the boy's death saying it was the result of a "medical condition." The group home is operated by Aspen Education Group, based in Cerritos, Calif. It is a division of the CRC Health Group, which runs boarding schools, outdoor education programs and weight-loss camps.
Ironically, the charges came one day after the Government Accountability Office in Washington, D.C., found thousands of abuse allegations at camps and other private treatment facilities around the country.
Blum hopes the national attention will result in stricter standards and more accountability across the board.
Brendan was placed in the facility following treatment at a California hospital. Blum said she researched Youth Care Inc. extensively before sending her son there.
"This is double-edged sword for me," she said. "I am not a deadbeat mom."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Caretakers at Draper youth care center charged with child abuse in death of 14-year-old
By Jason Bergreen
The Salt Lake Tribune Article
Last Updated: 10/11/2007 05:22:00 PM MDT
Two caretakers at a Draper assisted-living facility were charged Thursday with failing to provide medical aid to a 14-year-old resident who died under their supervision in June. Jorge Ramirez and Deborah Cole were both on duty at Youth Care Inc. on June 27 when 14-year-old Brendan Blum of Santa Barbara, Calif., died.
An autopsy concluded that Blum died from an inadequate blood supply to his small bowel, according to a criminal complaint filed in 3rd District Court. On the night of his death, Blum had a loss of bowel control, vomited and complained of stomach pain, but Ramirez and Cole did not provide or seek medical help for him, the complaint states.
Blum was found dead on the morning of June 28. A state medical examiner concluded that Blum's death could have been prevented if he had been given medical attention.
"Secure treatment facilities are responsible for providing appropriate medical treatment and care for the children entrusted to their supervision," Salt Lake County District Attorney Lohra Miller said in a news release. "In this case, it is alleged that a young boy's need for emergency medical treatment was ignored and that this negligence resulted in the boy's death." Miller also said that state law requires that treatment facilities and their employees be held to a "heightened standard of care."
Blum was at the facility because he had Asperger's Syndrome, a disorder related to autism.
Cole and Ramirez are each charged with one third-degree felony count of abuse or neglect of a child. The crime is punishable by up to five years in jail.
--> LINK (http://http://brendanblum.blogspot.com/2007/10/charges-filed-in-death-of-brendan-blum.html) for the above two articles.
-
Charges Filed in Death of Brendan Blum
2 youth counselors charged in California boy's death
14-year-old was staying at treatment center in Draper
By Pat Reavy and Rebecca Palmer
Deseret Morning News
Published: October 12, 2007
Two counselors at a residential youth treatment center in Draper where a 14-year-old boy died in June were charged Thursday in connection with the boy's death.
Deborah Cole and Jorge Ramirez, from Youth Care Inc., 12600 Minuteman Drive, each face one count of abuse or neglect of a child, a third-degree felony.
On June 27, Brendan Blum of California was suffering bowel and stomach problems. He had been vomiting and suffering from diarrhea all night, said Draper Police Sgt. Gerry Allred. Rather than contacting the on-call nurse as the facility's policy dictates, the boy was simply given some medicine and put in a separate room away from the rest of the boys, he said. The next morning, the boy, who was listed as a disabled child because he had Asperger's syndrome, was found dead on his mattress.
"There was no really good reason why they didn't take him ... no explanation except they just thought it was an upset stomach," Allred said.
An autopsy determined the boy had an obstructed bowel that deteriorated as the night went on, Allred said. The on-call nurse, who was later interviewed by police, said if she had been called to look at the boy she would have advised he immediately go to the hospital, he said.
The Utah State Medical Examiner concurred, "if medical intervention had been obtained, (the boy's) death would have been preventable," according to court documents.
The boy's mother, Dana Blum, said she is appalled that workers at the facility didn't take him to an emergency room. Any time a child dies while in the care of a licensed facility, the facility should be shut down immediately, she said.
Blum has filed a complaint with the Utah licensing board and is waiting for the investigation to be completed.
She hopes the individuals who operated the facility will be held accountable along with the workers.
"I don't wish them any ill, I would just like to see justice done for my son," she said.
The facility issued a statement shortly after the boy's death saying it was the result of a "medical condition." The group home is operated by Aspen Education Group, based in Cerritos, Calif. It is a division of the CRC Health Group, which runs boarding schools, outdoor education programs and weight-loss camps.
Ironically, the charges came one day after the Government Accountability Office in Washington, D.C., found thousands of abuse allegations at camps and other private treatment facilities around the country.
Blum hopes the national attention will result in stricter standards and more accountability across the board.
Brendan was placed in the facility following treatment at a California hospital. Blum said she researched Youth Care Inc. extensively before sending her son there.
"This is double-edged sword for me," she said. "I am not a deadbeat mom."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Caretakers at Draper youth care center charged with child abuse in death of 14-year-old
By Jason Bergreen
The Salt Lake Tribune Article
Last Updated: 10/11/2007 05:22:00 PM MDT
Two caretakers at a Draper assisted-living facility were charged Thursday with failing to provide medical aid to a 14-year-old resident who died under their supervision in June. Jorge Ramirez and Deborah Cole were both on duty at Youth Care Inc. on June 27 when 14-year-old Brendan Blum of Santa Barbara, Calif., died.
An autopsy concluded that Blum died from an inadequate blood supply to his small bowel, according to a criminal complaint filed in 3rd District Court. On the night of his death, Blum had a loss of bowel control, vomited and complained of stomach pain, but Ramirez and Cole did not provide or seek medical help for him, the complaint states.
Blum was found dead on the morning of June 28. A state medical examiner concluded that Blum's death could have been prevented if he had been given medical attention.
"Secure treatment facilities are responsible for providing appropriate medical treatment and care for the children entrusted to their supervision," Salt Lake County District Attorney Lohra Miller said in a news release. "In this case, it is alleged that a young boy's need for emergency medical treatment was ignored and that this negligence resulted in the boy's death." Miller also said that state law requires that treatment facilities and their employees be held to a "heightened standard of care."
Blum was at the facility because he had Asperger's Syndrome, a disorder related to autism.
Cole and Ramirez are each charged with one third-degree felony count of abuse or neglect of a child. The crime is punishable by up to five years in jail.
--> LINK (http://http://brendanblum.blogspot.com/2007/10/charges-filed-in-death-of-brendan-blum.html) for the above two articles.
(http://http://a4.vox.com/6a00c225257507604a00fae8c21e94000b-500pi)
-
youth care was where brendan blum died. He complained and they ignored it charges were filed against the staff. His mother researched the place and was lead to beleive he would get top quality care. I wonder if this study was one of the things that convinced her that the poor boy would be in good hands.
It was so sad to hear of that boys death and that it could have been so easily prevented. Does anyone know if the two people who did this received jail time?
Oz Girl, The study was released and presented at the APA convention in 2006 so it is possible she read the study prior to placement.
...
-
youth care was where brendan blum died. He complained and they ignored it charges were filed against the staff. His mother researched the place and was lead to beleive he would get top quality care. I wonder if this study was one of the things that convinced her that the poor boy would be in good hands.
It was so sad to hear of that boys death and that it could have been so easily prevented. Does anyone know if the two people who did this received jail time?
Oz Girl, The study was released and presented at the APA convention in 2006 so it is possible she read the study prior to placement.
Youth Care Inc. was placed on probation but was free to take on new clients. After nine months or so, charges against the two counselors were subsequently dismissed. It's Utah, so... how could anyone be surprised at this point?
-
Facility put on probation, but free to take new clients (http://http://www.teenadvocatesusa.org/BrendanBlum.html)
By Kirsten Stewart The Salt Lake Tribune
Article Last Updated: 10/13/2007 12:55:43 AM MDT
A residential youth treatment center was cited on Friday for providing inadequate medical care to Brendan James Blum, a 14-year-old California boy who died at its Draper facility.
Utah licensers placed Youth Care of Utah on probation, requiring the center to, among other requirements, retool employee training. Youth Care was not fined and it is free to accept new clients, though no more than five every 30 days.
The disciplinary action was reached as part of a settlement between the facility and lawyers for the state Human Services Office of Licensing, which regulates Utah's teen-help industry. Licensing director Ken Stettler said he hopes Friday's action shows the state takes its watchdog role seriously. It comes a day after criminal neglect charges were filed against two former Youth Care counselors in connection with Brendan's June 28 death.
It also coincides with a congressional probe into wilderness camps, which detailed thousands of cases of abuse nationwide since 1990. Of 10 deaths detailed in the federal report, five occurred in Utah.
The cases showed a pattern of lax government oversight and medical neglect, with counselors assuming the teens were making up their symptoms. Brendan Blum's mother, Dana Blum, fears the same issues may have played a role in her son's death. Blum said she "feels" for the employees at Youth Care, but said the facility should have been shut down, at least temporarily, and the owners held accountable.
"Nothing will bring Brendan back," said Blum. "But the bottom line is that when a parent makes a difficult decision to place their child in a treatment program, the management and caretakers have a responsibility to ensure their safety. There shouldn't be any tolerance for the death of a child."
# # #
-
Licensing director Ken Stettler said he hopes Friday's action shows the state takes its watchdog role seriously.
:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:
A meaningless "probation" and laughable "requirements" are what he thinks will fix this? Really?
Ken Stettler can't be taken seriously at all.
-
Licensing director Ken Stettler said he hopes Friday's action shows the state takes its watchdog role seriously.
:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:
A meaningless "probation" and laughable "requirements" are what he thinks will fix this? Really?
Ken Stettler can't be taken seriously at all.
This has been observed many a time, by many a poster.
-
Deseret News
Charges against youth counselors in teen's death dismissed (http://http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,700259414,00.html)
Published: Wednesday, Sept. 17, 2008 12:00 a.m. MDT
A 3rd District Court judge has dismissed neglect charges against two counselors of a residential youth treatment center in Draper.
Deborah Cole and Jorge Ramirez, from Youth Care Inc., 12600 Minuteman Drive, were charged last October with one count each of abuse or neglect of a child, a third-degree felony. The charges stemmed from the death of California resident Brendan Blum in June 2007.
Blum was having stomach problems and had been vomiting and suffering from diarrhea all night. But rather than contacting the facility's on-call nurse, Blum was given some medicine and placed in a room away from the other boys. The next morning he was found dead on his mattress.
An autopsy later revealed the boy had an obstructed bowel that deteriorated as the night progressed. Police said when they later interviewed the nurse, she said she would have recommended he go to the hospital immediately.
Defense attorneys argued to dismiss the case, noting that Blum suffered from a rare medical condition that presented itself as flu-like symptoms. Prosecutors fought the motion. But in late July, Judge Robert Adkins ordered the charges dismissed, finding no probable cause that Blum was neglected.
Alicia Cook, with the Salt Lake District Attorney's Office, said her office felt it was the right decision to file charges in the case, but that, "We are understanding of the decision (to dismiss). In all fairness, we have to acknowledge the reasons underlying the judge's decision."
# # #
-
youth care was where brendan blum died. He complained and they ignored it charges were filed against the staff. His mother researched the place and was lead to beleive he would get top quality care. I wonder if this study was one of the things that convinced her that the poor boy would be in good hands.
It was so sad to hear of that boys death and that it could have been so easily prevented. Does anyone know if the two people who did this received jail time?
Oz Girl, The study was released and presented at the APA convention in 2006 so it is possible she read the study prior to placement.
Youth Care Inc. was placed on probation but was free to take on new clients. After nine months or so, charges against the two counselors were subsequently dismissed. It's Utah, so... how could anyone be surprised at this point?
I am surprised the counselors were not charged, although we dont have all the information. Many of these deaths come down to proper training and the slowness to react because they think the kids are faking. So there is no intent to harm the kids is what I am reading from the lack of prosecution on many of these.
I remember my daughter saying it was tough to get people to realize you were really sick because there were so many kids faking it to get out of chores or school. If you were running a fever or had the flu the kids got to sleep in the nurses office and they would bring you snacks and drinks. I think this may play into why many of the kids are not taken seriously right away and make take a little longer to realize there is a real issue.
...
-
[quote="Whooter]So there is no intent to harm the kids is what I am reading from the lack of prosecution on many of these.
[/quote]
No, they just assume they're all druggie brats who are faking and they couldn't care less about them.
-
youth care was where brendan blum died. He complained and they ignored it charges were filed against the staff. His mother researched the place and was lead to beleive he would get top quality care. I wonder if this study was one of the things that convinced her that the poor boy would be in good hands.
It was so sad to hear of that boys death and that it could have been so easily prevented. Does anyone know if the two people who did this received jail time?
Oz Girl, The study was released and presented at the APA convention in 2006 so it is possible she read the study prior to placement.
Youth Care Inc. was placed on probation but was free to take on new clients. After nine months or so, charges against the two counselors were subsequently dismissed. It's Utah, so... how could anyone be surprised at this point?
I am surprised the counselors were not charged, although we dont have all the information. Many of these deaths come down to proper training and the slowness to react because they think the kids are faking. So there is no intent to harm the kids is what I am reading from the lack of prosecution on many of these.
I remember my daughter saying it was tough to get people to realize you were really sick because there were so many kids faking it to get out of chores or school. If you were running a fever or had the flu the kids got to sleep in the nurses office and they would bring you snacks and drinks. I think this may play into why many of the kids are not taken seriously right away and make take a little longer to realize there is a real issue.
Ah, but the counselors WERE charged; however, those charges were later dismissed. See above article, "Charges against youth counselors in teen's death dismissed (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=30836&p=371276#p371272)," if you don't believe me.
That same article was also published under the following header eleven days later, also by the Deseret News:
Deseret News
Judge drops charges against 2 counselors at Draper center (http://http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,700262437,00.html)
Published: Sunday, Sept. 28, 2008 12:19 a.m. MDT[/list]
-
[quote="Whooter]So there is no intent to harm the kids is what I am reading from the lack of prosecution on many of these.
No, they just assume they're all druggie brats who are faking and they couldn't care less about them.[/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote]
There were not many kids at ASR that had serious drug problems. The staff that I had met (and my daughter knew) cared for the kids in their group and many kept in touch long after they graduated. I think the point was that many of the kids would try real hard to get a day in the nurses office to avoid the rigid schedule of program life. So if a kid said he had a stomach ache in a program it may be met with a little more skepticism as compared to a kid in your local high-school saying the same thing and therefore the process to validate the problem may require a few more steps or a longer process.
@ Ursus, what I guess I meant to say was convicted (or served time)
...
-
ASR, part of the study, was also charged by the state of MA with abusing kids. MBA was shut down. Kids were abused and died in other programs in the study. All it says is that abused kids are likely to self-report improvement in order to escape the program and the abuse. It's called "sample bias" and this study is rife with it, and the study itself calls out its own bias.
The main conclusion of the study is that abusing kids is effective in making them say they are well to make it stop. No control group, no follow up, no peer review, no oversight of program b-mod procedures, nothing.
These kids could be made to self report improvement just by beating them daily until they said what Whooter wanted them to. He'd then claim "success" without discussing his methods, like this garbage study does.
-
ASR, part of the study, was also charged by the state of MA with abusing kids. MBA was shut down. Kids were abused and died in other programs in the study. All it says is that abused kids are likely to self-report improvement in order to escape the program and the abuse. It's called "sample bias" and this study is rife with it, and the study itself calls out its own bias.
The main conclusion of the study is that abusing kids is effective in making them say they are well to make it stop. No control group, no follow up, no peer review, no oversight of program b-mod procedures, nothing.
These kids could be made to self report improvement just by beating them daily until they said what Whooter wanted them to. He'd then claim "success" without discussing his methods, like this garbage study does.
Hmmm. this is really getting to you. Can you show us where this was concluded in the study? lol
All this time you have been hammering the table asking for an independent Study..... now we have an independent Study with third party oversight which has been presented to the professional community and DJ is ready to burst a vein in his neck.
Oh no! We cant accept this study.. uhmm I didnt read it in my journal... yup thats it!! I reject the study... its garbage!! lol Oh wait phase II isnt done yet so we can reject phase I !!!
...
-
So you're not arguing the topic of the thread I see. These programs that were part of the study have maimed, killed and abused kids and the program itself that Aspen uses is intrinsically abusive. Why didn't the researcher discuss the methods of the programs and instead just take a survey? Because it's a marketing whitepaper that cannot withstand scientific rigor, which is why it has never been reviewed or published. A real study would have examined the methods and described how they effected change in the subjects.
I think Whooter is the one "popping a vein" trying to defend it. Punching holes in it is actually easy and not stressful in the least.
I would like to see this thread stay on topic, though. The topic is "Programs in Behrens Study Charged with Abuse." Thanks.
-
So you're not arguing the topic of the thread I see. These programs that were part of the study have maimed, killed and abused kids and the program itself that Aspen uses is intrinsically abusive. Why didn't the researcher discuss the methods of the programs and instead just take a survey? Because it's a marketing whitepaper that cannot withstand scientific rigor, which is why it has never been reviewed or published. A real study would have examined the methods and described how they effected change in the subjects.
I think Whooter is the one "popping a vein" trying to defend it. Punching holes in it is actually easy and not stressful in the least.
I would like to see this thread stay on topic, though. The topic is "Programs in Behrens Study Charged with Abuse." Thanks.
DJ's fantasy feedback:
Oh No!!! DJ says the study is now just a marketing white-paper which cannot withstand scientific rigor.
Oh No!!! DJ says: “A real study(lol) would have examined the methods and described how they effected change in the subjects.”
So this independent study which was overseen by a third party and presented at the annual APA convention was not a real study according to DJ. Maybe the study only exists in the minds of others? Hmmmm. Maybe people have been brainwashed to believe there is a study but none has really been done! Lol.
...
-
Soooo...no argument that the programs "studied" abused, neglected, maimed and killed kids. The avoidance of this fact speaks volumes from Aspen's marketer.
Let's stay on topic. No need to spam both threads with repetive drivel. Keep spamming the other thread with "study spam" and this thread will be for discussing the inevitable facts that the programs studied are/were rife with systemic abuse.
-
Two female restaurant workers likely will be charged with assault and theft in connection with an alleged July 13 attack on a male college student at a Richmond McDonald's.......
So I guess all those studies on fast food must be voided because one of the McDonalds is abusive. Instead of studying the effectiveness of food they should have studied the abuse that takes place within the industry. lol McDonalds must be kicking themselves for not listening to DJ and getting their studies peer reviewed by Burger King. Now look at the mess they are in.
...
-
A gunman allegedly shot dead three people after a drunken argument in the queue at a McDonald's all-night drive-through in Finland turned deadly, police say.
Why does McDonalds conduct studies on their food and not revel the fact that people are dying at their restaurants? Why wasnt this picked up? Wasnt death part of their study? Who oversaw all these studies? If this study was peer reviewed by Burger King then it would never have been released!!
...
-
We all know about Mount Bachelor Academy's recent closure due to child abuse and neglect (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=30803) and that Aspen Education has claimed in court that it provides no therapy. (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=28735)
MBA was one of the programs that was studied in Behrens' work. The fact that MBA was closed for abusing children and that Behrens concluded MBA was "effective" despite offering no therapy and abusing hundreds of children is terribly troubling to say the least.
Here's a list of the all of the programs she looked at:
Academy at Swift River, Aspen Ranch, Copper Canyon Academy, Mount Bachelor Academy, Stone Mountain School, Pine Ridge Academy, SunHawk Academy,Turnabout Ranch, and Youth Care, Inc.
Academy at Swift River has been cited by state authorities for child abuse.
How many of the others have been as well? Are there any untainted entities in this study?
OP re-posted for relevance...
-
A gunman allegedly shot dead three people after a drunken argument in the queue at a McDonald's all-night drive-through in Finland turned deadly, police say.
Why does McDonalds conduct studies on their food and not revel the fact that people are dying at their restaurants? Why wasnt this picked up? Wasnt death part of their study? Who oversaw all these studies? If this study was peer reviewed by Burger King then it would never have been released!!
...
:poison: :poison: :poison: :poison: :poison: :poison: :poison: :poison: :poison: :poison: :poison: :poison: :poison: :poison: :poison: :poison: :poison: :poison: :poison: :poison: :poison: :poison: :poison: :poison: :poison: :poison: :poison:
LUCIFER CAN YOU BELIEVE THIS GUY? :clown:
-
We all know about Mount Bachelor Academy's recent closure due to child abuse and neglect (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=30803) and that Aspen Education has claimed in court that it provides no therapy. (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=28735)
MBA was one of the programs that was studied in Behrens' work. The fact that MBA was closed for abusing children and that Behrens concluded MBA was "effective" despite offering no therapy and abusing hundreds of children is terribly troubling to say the least.
Here's a list of the all of the programs she looked at:
Academy at Swift River, Aspen Ranch, Copper Canyon Academy, Mount Bachelor Academy, Stone Mountain School, Pine Ridge Academy, SunHawk Academy,Turnabout Ranch, and Youth Care, Inc.
Academy at Swift River has been cited by state authorities for child abuse.
How many of the others have been as well? Are there any untainted entities in this study?
OP re-posted for relevance...
LOL, thanks Ursus, We have come full circle on this topic ....... I think I have managed to make my point.
...
-
OK, so what we have so far is that the Behrens study concluded that abusing children is effective in biasing them to self-report improvement in order to be allowed to leave the program.
Programs Included in Behrens' Work:
ASR - cited for child abuse by the state of MA
MBA - forcibly closed for "systematic child abuse and neglect" by the state of OR
Youth Care - killed a boy through neglect and was cited by state authorities
Anyone have further info on the other programs behrens concluded were "effective"?
-
OK, so what we have so far is that the Behrens study concluded that abusing children is effective in biasing them to self-report improvement in order to be allowed to leave the program.
Programs Included in Behrens' Work:
ASR - cited for child abuse by the state of MA
MBA - forcibly closed for "systematic child abuse and neglect" by the state of OR
Youth Care - killed a boy through neglect and was cited by state authorities
Anyone have further info on the other programs behrens concluded were "effective"?
:flame: ::unhappy::
-
There were not many kids at ASR that had serious drug problems. The staff that I had met (and my daughter knew) cared for the kids in their group and many kept in touch long after they graduated. I think the point was that many of the kids would try real hard to get a day in the nurses office to avoid the rigid schedule of program life. So if a kid said he had a stomach ache in a program it may be met with a little more skepticism as compared to a kid in your local high-school saying the same thing and therefore the process to validate the problem may require a few more steps or a longer process.
Whooter, you spell out -- oh so well -- one of the inherent dangers of programs, namely, that kids' complaints and "stories" are simply not taken seriously. If I were a parent considering a program, this would be a huge red flag for me.
I'd rather have my kid be a slacker or malcontent who is at least still alive, than a kid who had been coerced to "confront his bad attitude" to the point of death.
(http://http://www.deseretnews.com/photos/midres/4687311.jpg)
Brendan James Blum
August 7, 1992 – June 28, 2007[/list][/list]
-
There were not many kids at ASR that had serious drug problems. The staff that I had met (and my daughter knew) cared for the kids in their group and many kept in touch long after they graduated. I think the point was that many of the kids would try real hard to get a day in the nurses office to avoid the rigid schedule of program life. So if a kid said he had a stomach ache in a program it may be met with a little more skepticism as compared to a kid in your local high-school saying the same thing and therefore the process to validate the problem may require a few more steps or a longer process.
Whooter, you spell out -- oh so well -- one of the inherent dangers of programs, namely, that kids' complaints and "stories" are simply not taken seriously. If I were a parent considering a program, this would be a huge red flag for me.
I'd rather have my kid be a slacker or malcontent who is at least still alive, than a kid who had been coerced to "confront his bad attitude" to the point of death.
(http://http://www.deseretnews.com/photos/midres/4687311.jpg)
Brendan James Blum
August 7, 1992 – June 28, 2007[/list][/list]
THE WHOLE SYSTEM IS CORRUPT I HOPE THERE IS A GOOD JUDGE ALIVE.....SOMEWHERE.... :on phone:
-
There were not many kids at ASR that had serious drug problems. The staff that I had met (and my daughter knew) cared for the kids in their group and many kept in touch long after they graduated. I think the point was that many of the kids would try real hard to get a day in the nurses office to avoid the rigid schedule of program life. So if a kid said he had a stomach ache in a program it may be met with a little more skepticism as compared to a kid in your local high-school saying the same thing and therefore the process to validate the problem may require a few more steps or a longer process.
Whooter, you spell out -- oh so well -- one of the inherent dangers of programs, namely, that kids' complaints and "stories" are simply not taken seriously. If I were a parent considering a program, this would be a huge red flag for me.
I'd rather have my kid be a slacker or malcontent who is at least still alive, than a kid who had been coerced to "confront his bad attitude" to the point of death.
(http://http://www.deseretnews.com/photos/midres/4687311.jpg)
Brendan James Blum
August 7, 1992 – June 28, 2007[/list][/list]
There goes, "Mr. Extremist Extraordinare" on his :soapbox: again.
Ursus were you bored today. Not much action in the last few days, is this your way of getting the juices flowing.
-
There were not many kids at ASR that had serious drug problems. The staff that I had met (and my daughter knew) cared for the kids in their group and many kept in touch long after they graduated. I think the point was that many of the kids would try real hard to get a day in the nurses office to avoid the rigid schedule of program life. So if a kid said he had a stomach ache in a program it may be met with a little more skepticism as compared to a kid in your local high-school saying the same thing and therefore the process to validate the problem may require a few more steps or a longer process.
Whooter, you spell out -- oh so well -- one of the inherent dangers of programs, namely, that kids' complaints and "stories" are simply not taken seriously. If I were a parent considering a program, this would be a huge red flag for me.
I'd rather have my kid be a slacker or malcontent who is at least still alive, than a kid who had been coerced to "confront his bad attitude" to the point of death.
(http://http://www.deseretnews.com/photos/midres/4687311.jpg)
Brendan James Blum
August 7, 1992 – June 28, 2007[/list][/list]
There goes, "Mr. Extremist Extraordinare" on his :soapbox: again.
Ursus were you bored today. Not much action in the last few days, is this your way of getting the juices flowing.
DANNY IS JUST UPSET BECAUSE EVEN A $5.00 CRACK WHORE WILL NOT TOUCH HIS ASS!!!!
-
DANNY IS JUST UPSET BECAUSE EVEN A $5.00 CRACK WHORE WILL NOT TOUCH HIS ASS!!!!
WHOOOTER WON'T
:jawdrop:
-
Whooter, you spell out -- oh so well -- one of the inherent dangers of programs, namely, that kids' complaints and "stories" are simply not taken seriously. If I were a parent considering a program, this would be a huge red flag for me.
I'd rather have my kid be a slacker or malcontent who is at least still alive, than a kid who had been coerced to "confront his bad attitude" to the point of death.
We could say the same thing about all the kids who are raped by their teachers in public schools. But you have avoided the fact that kids who are in Residential Treatment are there for a reason. Some of them have manipulated everyone they came in contact with their whole life. When they say the have a stomach ache there needs to be a little bit more information to verify it and the reaction time is different than if a kid which didnt have a history of manipulation were to say he had a stomach ache in public high school.
These are the facts that staff have to deal with. Whether we like it or not.
I know that everyone who has been involved in a program and knows the kids know that I am telling the truth, but it will not be admitted to because it swings some of the responsibility away from the industry which goes against the grain here on fornits. But I am willing to be the one to say it openly and take the heat.
...
-
Just to be clear, kids at Aspen programs are not in treatment of any kind:
Aspen Education Group does not provide a therapeutic milieu that is conformative to standards, provide medically recognized therapy, medically accredited personnel, or a treatment centers for mental disorder or drug abuse, Aspen's own lawyers successfully argued in Pence v. Aspen Education Group.
Can't be in "residential treatment" without the treatment, right? It's more of just a lockup for kids.
-
Programs involved in Ellen Behren's study (http://http://www.scribd.com/doc/503084/Residential-Treatment-Outcomes-Study), as noted in the OP:
Academy at Swift River,
Aspen Ranch,
Copper Canyon Academy,
Mount Bachelor Academy,
Stone Mountain School,
Pine Ridge Academy,
SunHawk Academy,
Turnabout Ranch, and
Youth Care Inc.[/list]
Pine Ridge Academy was at one point, and perhaps still is, run by the same director et al who oversaw/oversees Youth Care Inc. After all, they are both in Draper, Utah. If you go back to the previously posted articles on the first page of this thread, you'll see that Pine Ridge Academy is also mentioned in most of them.
As an historical aside, here's an ad for Pine Ridge Academy which appears to be from around the time they first opened:
-------------- • -------------- • --------------
Deseret News
Sunday, October 31, 1993
[li]Are you child's grades not up to par?[/li]
[li]Has your child been cutting classes?[/li]
[li]Are you getting calls from school about your child's behavior?[/li]
[li]Is your child hanging around with a bad crowd?[/b][/li][/list]
Find Solutions at
PINE RIDGE ACADEMY (http://http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=DR8PAAAAIBAJ&sjid=3oQDAAAAIBAJ&dq=pine-ridge-academy&pg=1887%2C7285951)
Pine Ridge Academy is a special needs school with boarding and day school capabilities. Our specialty school is for adolescent boys and girls between the ages of 11 and 18 who are not achieving success in a regular school setting and need educational assistance, couple with minor therapeutic support. Pine Ridge Academy gives students an individualized education that focuses on all facets necessary to become a well-rounded individual.
The academic program is designed to identify each individual's strengths and weaknesses, allowing adolescents to earn lost credits and ensuring that each is on track towards high school graduation. All teachers are certified by the State of Utah. Pine Ridge Academy is fully accredited by the Northwestern Association of Schools and Colleges. School credits are transferable to high schools and colleges across the country.
If you know of any adolescent who isn't reaching his or her potential, who could use some expert guidance, a helping hand from our team of professionals...
CALL 572-6989 of 1-800-786-4924
...let us help you help them!
Pine Ridge Academy • P.O. Box 909 • Draper, UT 84020
-
Just to be clear, kids at Aspen programs are not in treatment of any kind:
Aspen Education Group does not provide a therapeutic milieu that is conformative to standards, provide medically recognized therapy, medically accredited personnel, or a treatment centers for mental disorder or drug abuse, Aspen's own lawyers successfully argued in Pence v. Aspen Education Group.
Can't be in "residential treatment" without the treatment, right? It's more of just a lockup for kids.
Wow, 80% success rate without providing any treatment!!! Think of the profits! lol
...
-
Whooter, you spell out -- oh so well -- one of the inherent dangers of programs, namely, that kids' complaints and "stories" are simply not taken seriously. If I were a parent considering a program, this would be a huge red flag for me.
I'd rather have my kid be a slacker or malcontent who is at least still alive, than a kid who had been coerced to "confront his bad attitude" to the point of death.
We could say the same thing about all the kids who are raped by their teachers in public schools. But you have avoided the fact that kids who are in Residential Treatment are there for a reason. Some of them have manipulated everyone they came in contact with their whole life. When they say the have a stomach ache there needs to be a little bit more information to verify it and the reaction time is different than if a kid which didnt have a history of manipulation were to say he had a stomach ache in public high school.
These are the facts that staff have to deal with. Whether we like it or not.
I know that everyone who has been involved in a program and knows the kids know that I am telling the truth, but it will not be admitted to because it swings some of the responsibility away from the industry which goes against the grain here on fornits. But I am willing to be the one to say it openly and take the heat.
Perhaps you speak for yourself or your experience with your own kid.
You do not, however, speak for me.
-
Profits, yes. Success, no. Aspen doesn't treat anyone or anything according to their attorneys. Behrens is probably a bit humiliated that they completely discredited her and her work.
More on the profits aspect here. (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=41&t=23299&p=283976&hilit=+fiduciary#p283976) No wonder he's giddy with laughter that Aspen can make money by just locking up the kids. Less effort, less expense, more profit for his masters.
-
Profits, yes. Success, no.
We are halfway there, Lets take a look at the success part:
We have come a long way. A few weeks ago many people had never heard of the Residential Treatment Outcome Study performed by Canyon Research. They looked at close to 1,000 children and families and found that the programs studied where up to 80% effective.
Dysfunction junction and myself managed to put the spot light on this study over the past day or two and were able to nail down that the study was indeed independent and was overseen by an independent third party in the form of a Review Board (WIRB). From WIRB’s documents:
The IRB also reviews the consent form (which they did for the Aspen Study) for the research to make sure that it is accurate. If it approves the research, the IRB continues to review the ongoing research after it starts. (This is called oversight).
WIRB reviewed the consent forms and approved the study and issued “Certificates of approval” as was pointed out in the study itself and presented to the APA.
Here are some supportive links and information as we stand today:
Residential Treatment Outcome-Study (http://http://www.scribd.com/doc/503084/Residential-Treatment-Outcomes-Study)
Canyon Research & Consulting (http://http://canyonrc.com/home.html): Independent research company that conducted the study.
Western Institutional Review Board (http://http://www.wirb.com/): Independent board that approved research and audited the study.
The Western Institutional Review Board approved consent/assent forms and issued Certificates of Approval for the study.
Here are copies of their "Certificate of Approval" forms
Sample 1 (http://http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:SJ436FlS-UwJ:molyneaux.us/Global_SUIE/IRB/Molyneaux_CertificateofApprovalforStudy1095420,PanelMeeting50369,WO14797321.PDF+wirb+certificate+of+approval+form&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEEShpURqHUvjacM32lv8YRLav1O46MVidLLeYkoKcUS-jxsOFqB5szt1UtVUEngO8WsxhZGVamNX420U_0NRuxxcKjuR1PIu0LYRdnudeAzaql_WAJZALLKzLRT4WLjxUkhxd7-l8&sig=AHIEtbRwui-be51KikeuSb7i4alS80Pbpw)
Sample 2 (http://http://www.cmagtracker.org/WIRB/Approval.PDF)
at the bottom of page 2 it states:
Federal regulations require that WIRB conduct continuing review of approved research. You will receive Continuing
Review Report forms from WIRB. These reports must be returned even though your study may not have started.
The above study was presented at the American Psychological Association (APA) conference 2006.
...
-
Just to be clear, kids at Aspen programs are not in treatment of any kind:
Aspen Education Group does not provide a therapeutic milieu that is conformative to standards, provide medically recognized therapy, medically accredited personnel, or a treatment centers for mental disorder or drug abuse, Aspen's own lawyers successfully argued in Pence v. Aspen Education Group.
Can't be in "residential treatment" without the treatment, right? It's more of just a lockup for kids.
How did Behrens study something that doesn't exist? Did she find Bigfoot there, too? Or the Chupacabra? She might be on to something...
-
Just to be clear, kids at Aspen programs are not in treatment of any kind:
Aspen Education Group does not provide a therapeutic milieu that is conformative to standards, provide medically recognized therapy, medically accredited personnel, or a treatment centers for mental disorder or drug abuse, Aspen's own lawyers successfully argued in Pence v. Aspen Education Group.
Can't be in "residential treatment" without the treatment, right? It's more of just a lockup for kids.
How did Behrens study something that doesn't exist? Did she find Bigfoot there, too? Or the Chupacabra? She might be on to something...
DJs address to the annual APA Convention: Dear APA members, I am here to let you know that all 1,000 kids and parents lied during the study and they actually did very poorly. Ms. Behrens was mistaken. I hope you believe me over this Study and the international Review Board which over saw the study. I dont have any data but you just need to take my word on it. Nothing I am telling you is peer reviewed or published but If you look at my next slide there is a link to fornits which lists my degrees.
...
...
-
Just to be clear, kids at Aspen programs are not in treatment of any kind:
Aspen Education Group does not provide a therapeutic milieu that is conformative to standards, provide medically recognized therapy, medically accredited personnel, or a treatment centers for mental disorder or drug abuse, Aspen's own lawyers successfully argued in Pence v. Aspen Education Group.
Can't be in "residential treatment" without the treatment, right? It's more of just a lockup for kids.
How did Behrens study something that doesn't exist? Did she find Bigfoot there, too? Or the Chupacabra? She might be on to something...
I guess you can take it up with your legal department. They say Aspen provides no treatment. This must have been embarassing and humiliating for Behrens. Maybe that's why she never did "phase 2" - to save herself the humiliation.
-
DJs address to the annual APA Convention: Dear APA members, I am here to let you know that all 1,000 kids and parents lied during the study and they actually did very poorly. Ms. Behrens was mistaken. I hope you believe me over this Study and the international Review Board which over saw the study. I dont have any data but you just need to take my word on it. Nothing I am telling you is peer reviewed or published but If you look at my next slide there is a link to fornits which lists my degrees.
...
-
Just to be clear, kids at Aspen programs are not in treatment of any kind:
Aspen Education Group does not provide a therapeutic milieu that is conformative to standards, provide medically recognized therapy, medically accredited personnel, or a treatment centers for mental disorder or drug abuse, Aspen's own lawyers successfully argued in Pence v. Aspen Education Group.
Can't be in "residential treatment" without the treatment, right? It's more of just a lockup for kids.
And Aspen is abusing these poor kids daily. MBA, ASR, Youth Care...all abused kids and even killed some, too. Aspen is shameful.
-
Just to be clear, kids at Aspen programs are not in treatment of any kind:
Aspen Education Group does not provide a therapeutic milieu that is conformative to standards, provide medically recognized therapy, medically accredited personnel, or a treatment centers for mental disorder or drug abuse, Aspen's own lawyers successfully argued in Pence v. Aspen Education Group.
Can't be in "residential treatment" without the treatment, right? It's more of just a lockup for kids.
And Aspen is abusing these poor kids daily. MBA, ASR, Youth Care...all abused kids and even killed some, too. Aspen is shameful.
Oh No!!!! They are killing kids too? You need to put that into your speech to the APA. Wait until they hear about the blood bath at Aspen. Be sure to let us know how they all react when you tell them.
...
-
Oh No!!!! They are killing kids too? You need to put that into your speech to the APA. Wait until they hear about the blood bath at Aspen. Be sure to let us know how they all react when you tell them.
DJ, Whooter is right. I am looking out for you. I do not want you to look foolish. Please do not put that in your report. They only kill the dickheads!
and that is justified. They deserve it.
Some people are closed-minded about such practices... You know the type. They can t have their world view threatened. Ya know what I mean..
But surely, we know how it is.. For example, let's say somebody is always breathing all over the walls, clearly he does not deserve to breathe anymore..
So it is only the dickheads that get murdered. The assholes usually get the different forms of deprivation. We are in the beginning stages of creating a treatment for cocksuckers.. not sure what yet.. maybe water-boarding.
Just lookin' out for ya DJ!
Paul
-
Thanks, Paul. I appreciate your looking out for me. Sadly, Whooter believes in the "window of loss" philosophy that most program supporters believe. That is, if some kids die from what the programs do to them...so be it. We're bound to lose a few along the way. Unfortunately, these deaths are 100% avoidable, but the program staff is usually uneducated, untrained and has no business working with kids and they ignore the kids' symptoms and just say they are "manipulating." When the kid dies, they try to blame the kid. It's sad.
Aspen programs have on eof the worst track records in this regard. Over just the past few months several kids have died in their programs from completely preventable maladies. Aspen programs are extremely dangerous and sometimes deadly.
-
Oh No!!!! They are killing kids too? You need to put that into your speech to the APA. Wait until they hear about the blood bath at Aspen. Be sure to let us know how they all react when you tell them.
DJ, Whooter is right. I am looking out for you. I do not want you to look foolish. Please do not put that in your report. They only kill the dickheads!
lol... Then throw around lots of terms like Brainwashing, gulag. Tell them that all 1,000 kids in the survey were kidnapped. Use the word rape and abuse many times and maim.
Then compare her study to bigfoot... that was a beauty. Wave your arms around and scream "cult bastards", when addressing the APA people.
...
-
Oh No!!!! They are killing kids too? You need to put that into your speech to the APA. Wait until they hear about the blood bath at Aspen. Be sure to let us know how they all react when you tell them.
DJ, Whooter is right. I am looking out for you. I do not want you to look foolish. Please do not put that in your report. They only kill the dickheads!
lol... Then throw around lots of terms like Brainwashing, gulag. Tell them that all 1,000 kids in the survey were kidnapped. Use the word rape and abuse many times and maim.
Then compare her study to bigfoot... that was a beauty. Wave your arms around and scream "cult bastards", when addressing the APA people.
...
LOL, Whooter... You re one of them cult bastards!
-
1-800-KILL-A-CHILD http://www.savingteens.org/ (http://www.savingteens.org/)
:jawdrop: :jawdrop: :suicide: :suicide: :suicide: :twofinger: :twofinger: :twofinger: :on phone: :on phone: :on phone:
-
Classic. I never thought people would be this upset over a study being done of the industry. I thought you guys would try to down play it, but WOW!! this has really rocked your boat.
all that "Show me a study"!!! lol
ooops, now what do I do? Hmmmm... maybe try to discredit the study? Only thing left to do.
...
-
I don't think anyone really has to try to do that. Dr. Friedman, a PhD psychologist from USF who studies TTI programs, has already said that there have been no independent, valid studies, only marketing materials, which includes the Behrens work.
Also, Aspen Ed lawyers argued in court that Aspen provides no treatment of any sort to anyone, so I can't really understand how Behrens studied "Aspen treatment programs" when there's no such thing. I heard she also studies Bigfoot and Champ, too.
Her work is kinda silly in light of Aspen's admission that they don't have any treatment centers, don't you think?
-
I don't think anyone really has to try to do that. Dr. Friedman, a PhD psychologist from USF who studies TTI programs, has already said that there have been no independent, valid studies, only marketing materials, which includes the Behrens work.
Also, Aspen Ed lawyers argued in court that Aspen provides no treatment of any sort to anyone, so I can't really understand how Behrens studied "Aspen treatment programs" when there's no such thing. I heard she also studies Bigfoot and Champ, too.
Her work is kinda silly in light of Aspen's admission that they don't have any treatment centers, don't you think?
Its funny to watch you fall apart over this study being released. Your friend is going to have to talk to the American Psychological Association (APA). He should join that org. and maybe get invited to the next meeting lol.
Whoops you didnt think of that?
...
-
Whoops. I guess you don't understand APA policy on presenters. Let me help you:
APA does not necessarily endorse or validate these speakers or the content of their talks. The speakers do not necessarily represent the views of APA.
Whooter seems to think that if someone speaks in front of a group the group endorses the speaker and their words become the policy position of the group. Whooter is pretty dumb. And too lazy to check his facts.
-
DJ. The horse is not only dead, it's a paper-thin slime of hoof, bone, and horse guts on the killing floor.
Seriously, we've been over this. He's not really arguing with you, he's arguing with the demons in his own head. And no matter how many times you do it, proving him wrong isn't going to fix that.
-
OK, so what we have so far is that the Behrens study concluded that abusing children is effective in biasing them to self-report improvement in order to be allowed to leave the program.
Programs Included in Behrens' Work:
ASR - cited for child abuse by the state of MA
MBA - forcibly closed for "systematic child abuse and neglect" by the state of OR
Youth Care - killed a boy through neglect and was cited by state authorities
Anyone have further info on the other programs behrens concluded were "effective"?
Let's stick to the topic, folks. We're talking abusive Aspen facilities and their inclusion in the Behrens work.
-
Whoops. I guess you don't understand APA policy on presenters. Let me help you:
APA does not necessarily endorse or validate these speakers or the content of their talks. The speakers do not necessarily represent the views of APA.
Whooter seems to think that if someone speaks in front of a group the group endorses the speaker and their words become the policy position of the group. Whooter is pretty dumb. And too lazy to check his facts.
Like I said it is fun to watch you try to discredit it. You failed to provide a link because it only applies to Secondary School Teachers (TOPSS) lol
whoops....
Link (http://http://www.apa.org/ed/precollege/topss/speakers.aspx)
See you have now reduced your self to deception and lying. You didnt have to lie because we both know that presenting at the APA convention doesn't mean they all agree with what is being presented. It just adds another level of validity to the study. Gets it out to the professional community.
Residential Treatment Outcome-Study (http://http://www.scribd.com/doc/503084/Residential-Treatment-Outcomes-Study)
...
-
So, because you saw the disclaimer in one place, it must be nowhere else. Great logic there. "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" the saying goes. I thought you knew how to use a search engine? :rofl:
Whooter also neglects to mention that speakers at the APA convention pay the APA to be allowed to present. They aren't chosen by the APA to present. Funny how he forgot to mention that.
-
So, because you saw the disclaimer in one place, it must be nowhere else. Great logic there. "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" the saying goes. I thought you knew how to use a search engine? :rofl:
Whooter also neglects to mention that speakers at the APA convention pay the APA to be allowed to present. They aren't chosen by the APA to present. Funny how he forgot to mention that.
Well throw the link up then of where it says that. (It was your quote) wow!! 3 lies in a row, DJ.... tsk tsk. Caught red handed!!
Hmmm..
How about this link:
Residential Treatment Outcome-Study (http://http://www.scribd.com/doc/503084/Residential-Treatment-Outcomes-Study)
...
-
Thanks, Paul. I appreciate your looking out for me. Sadly, Whooter believes in the "window of loss" philosophy that most program supporters believe. That is, if some kids die from what the programs do to them...so be it. We're bound to lose a few along the way. Unfortunately, these deaths are 100% avoidable, but the program staff is usually uneducated, untrained and has no business working with kids and they ignore the kids' symptoms and just say they are "manipulating." When the kid dies, they try to blame the kid. It's sad.
Aspen programs have on eof the worst track records in this regard. Over just the past few months several kids have died in their programs from completely preventable maladies. Aspen programs are extremely dangerous and sometimes deadly.
DJ, stop acting like you are disconnected from this, you were part of this system that as you say, "committed these crimes". Yet we never hear about you in this anywhere. Ya know when Joel and Che speak they usually share their experiences as staff, not you.
DJ, you were staff and you were educated, so stop overcompensating here with this I'm all for Bla Bla Bla. It comes across phony.
Your buddy Paul thinks he has a hot case here, well, I will found out once and for all who is Danny and Whooter. I'll expose them if it is the last thing I do. Problem is, what is there to expose.
My purpose here is, to have balanced conversation.
-
Thanks, Paul. I appreciate your looking out for me. Sadly, Whooter believes in the "window of loss" philosophy that most program supporters believe. That is, if some kids die from what the programs do to them...so be it. We're bound to lose a few along the way. Unfortunately, these deaths are 100% avoidable, but the program staff is usually uneducated, untrained and has no business working with kids and they ignore the kids' symptoms and just say they are "manipulating." When the kid dies, they try to blame the kid. It's sad.
Aspen programs have on eof the worst track records in this regard. Over just the past few months several kids have died in their programs from completely preventable maladies. Aspen programs are extremely dangerous and sometimes deadly.
DJ, stop acting like you are disconnected from this, you were part of this system that as you say, "committed these crimes". Yet we never hear about you in this anywhere. Ya know when Joel and Che speak they usually share their experiences as staff, not you.
DJ, you were staff and you were educated, so stop overcompensating here with this I'm all for Bla Bla Bla. It comes across phony.
Your buddy Paul thinks he has a hot case here, well, I will found out once and for all who is Danny and Whooter. I'll expose them if it is the last thing I do. Problem is, what is there to expose.
My purpose here is, to have balanced conversation.
Danny, how many of the "several people who post here under [your] user name (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=30841&start=15#p370929)" actually went to Elan or have any clue about this industry to begin with?
"Balanced conversation?" Lol. More like mayhem for the hell of it, eh?
-
So, the converstaion is about abuse at the Aspen programs in the Behrens study.
So far we learned several were charged with abuse, one was shut down for abuse and at least one killed a child. Please, converse on the topic. We're trying to understand why Behrens concluded that child abuse helps children.
For the record, I never worked at an Aspen facility, so I'm not sure why you would say that.
-
Nice try Ursus, OOOOOoooohhhhhh DJ,
DJ, stop acting like you are disconnected from this, you were part of this system that as you say, "committed these crimes". Yet we never hear about you in this anywhere. Ya know when Joel and Che speak they usually share their experiences as staff, not you.
DJ, you were staff and you were educated, so stop overcompensating here with this I'm all for Bla Bla Bla. It comes across phony.
Your buddy Paul thinks he has a hot case here, well, I will found out once and for all who is Danny and Whooter. I'll expose them if it is the last thing I do. Problem is, what is there to expose.
My purpose here is, to have balanced conversation.
-
So, the converstaion is about abuse at the Aspen programs in the Behrens study.
So far we learned several were charged with abuse, one was shut down for abuse and at least one killed a child. Please, converse on the topic. We're trying to understand why Behrens concluded that child abuse helps children.
For the record, I never worked at an Aspen facility, so I'm not sure why you would say that.
Just for clarity's sake, once more, I have never been associated with Aspen Education in any way, shape or form. Still not sure why you're saying that.
Anything to add to the topic, Danny? Or just doing some trolling tonight?
-
Danny wrote:
DJ, stop acting like you are disconnected from this, you were part of this system that as you say, "committed these crimes". Yet we never hear about you in this anywhere. Ya know when Joel and Che speak they usually share their experiences as staff, not you.
DJ, you were staff and you were educated, so stop overcompensating here with this I'm all for Bla Bla Bla. It comes across phony.
Your buddy Paul thinks he has a hot case here, well, I will found out once and for all who is Danny and Whooter. I'll expose them if it is the last thing I do. Problem is, what is there to expose.
My purpose here is, to have balanced conversation.
Ursus wrote
Danny, how many of the "several people who post here under [your] user name (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=30841&start=15#p370929)" actually went to Elan or have any clue about this industry to begin with?
"Balanced conversation?" Lol. More like mayhem for the hell of it, eh?
Danny wrote:
Well Mr.Ursus we all have been to a Treatment Center but as "Suck It" has shown us it is not that important to reveal the centers. No we are not here for "mayhem" or "for hell of it".
We are gradually moving away from our attack mode and moving into a congenial behavior.
You have to admit, upon first getting here 8-9 months ago we had it pretty rough here from folks. We are just now starting to get our feet under us and truly beginning to grasp a concept of what we want to do here.
Our objective is to communicate with everyone in a respectful manner, (at least try, we will not be Inculcated) and have a aura of openness not to be taken spiritually, only.
We are done fighting, it is stupid and accomplishes nothing. Our goals will never be met if we continue to go down the road we were going. Does this mean we are perfect, no, there are many who will not want to stop fighting with us but we have to be strong and show that we are serious. Play time is over, time to get down to business.
What is our business, honestly it is simple. To post our experiences and opinions truthfully. Simple, right. Well, it should be but that is not always the case.
Ursus try to not condescend to much and think your carrying the "mantle" here. As it states on the front of the Web Site here, "An open discussion about the troubled parent industry". I did not see where the founders wrote a "members only" clause in here. Though I do believe there are many here who believe there are "unwritten rules" here as far as posting goes, just my opinion. Enough said about that. I accept the conditions here, hey, I voted for O'bama in Georgia, in Woodstock Ga.(just outside of Kennesaw) 100% Republican and 98% white, so I know a little about going against the tide.
So as I have been saying, lets y'all move on, let bygones be bygones (or not) but in either case we will try very hard to show a respect for our fellows we had been lacking somewhat previous. Don't know exactly how this plays out but were going to give it a shot. Guys and gals of fornits go easy on us folks also.
-
Danny wrote:
DJ, stop acting like you are disconnected from this, you were part of this system that as you say, "committed these crimes". Yet we never hear about you in this anywhere. Ya know when Joel and Che speak they usually share their experiences as staff, not you.
DJ, you were staff and you were educated, so stop overcompensating here with this I'm all for Bla Bla Bla. It comes across phony.
Your buddy Paul thinks he has a hot case here, well, I will found out once and for all who is Danny and Whooter. I'll expose them if it is the last thing I do. Problem is, what is there to expose.
My purpose here is, to have balanced conversation.
Ursus wrote
Danny, how many of the "several people who post here under [your] user name (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=30841&start=15#p370929)" actually went to Elan or have any clue about this industry to begin with?
"Balanced conversation?" Lol. More like mayhem for the hell of it, eh?
Danny wrote:
Well Mr.Ursus we all have been to a Treatment Center but as "Suck It" has shown us it is not that important to reveal the centers. No we are not here for "mayhem" or "for hell of it".
We are gradually moving away from our attack mode and moving into a congenial behavior.
You have to admit, upon first getting here 8-9 months ago we had it pretty rough here from folks. We are just now starting to get our feet under us and truly beginning to grasp a concept of what we want to do here.
Our objective is to communicate with everyone in a respectful manner, (at least try, we will not be Inculcated) and have a aura of openness not to be taken spiritually, only.
We are done fighting, it is stupid and accomplishes nothing. Our goals will never be met if we continue to go down the road we were going. Does this mean we are perfect, no, there are many who will not want to stop fighting with us but we have to be strong and show that we are serious. Play time is over, time to get down to business.
What is our business, honestly it is simple. To post our experiences and opinions truthfully. Simple, right. Well, it should be but that is not always the case.
Ursus try to not condescend to much and think your carrying the "mantle" here. As it states on the front of the Web Site here, "An open discussion about the troubled parent industry". I did not see where the founders wrote a "members only" clause in here. Though I do believe there are many here who believe there are "unwritten rules" here as far as posting goes, just my opinion.
Enough said about that.
I accept the conditions here, hey, I voted for O'bama in Georgia, in Woodstock Ga.(just outside of Kennesaw) 100% Republican and 98% white, so I know a little about going against the tide.
So as I have been saying, lets y'all move on, let bygones be bygones (or not) but in either case we will try very hard to show a respect for our fellows we had been lacking somewhat previous.
Don't know exactly how this plays out but were going to give it a shot. Guys and gals of fornits go easy on us folks also.
-
OK, so what we have so far is that the Behrens study concluded that abusing children is effective in biasing them to self-report improvement in order to be allowed to leave the program.
Programs Included in Behrens' Work:
ASR - cited for child abuse by the state of MA
MBA - forcibly closed for "systematic child abuse and neglect" by the state of OR
Youth Care - killed a boy through neglect and was cited by state authorities
Anyone have further info on the other programs behrens concluded were "effective"?
Let's stick to the topic, folks. We're talking abusive Aspen facilities and their inclusion in the Behrens work.
Back to the topic, people.
-
Not only have these programs abused and even killed children, the Behrens study shows a "success rate" of less than forty percent of the rate of traditional treatment:
Let's have a look at Behrens' numbers from her report:
31% reported improvement that exceeded the 2 standard deviation cut-off for reliable change (>28 raw score points) and 50% reported improvement below the cut-off for reliable change.
So, after up to two years of being at Aspen programs, the reliable change data rate for participants is a mere 31% compared to 60-80% for traditional inpatient treatment. And this is self-report data that Behrens admits is biased to make the kids look better than they actually are to justify their being discharged. Unbiased data would show a much lower number.
No wonder Whooter doesn't want to talk about Behrens! He only wants to talk about the other researchers who studied traditional treatment and try to conflate the two.
Aspen - up to 2 years and up to $175K for a 31% positive change self-report with no follow up to assess permanency of change
Traditional - up to 90 days, covered by insurance, 60-80% improvement in longitudinal clinical trials
-
A gunman allegedly shot dead three people after a drunken argument in the queue at a McDonald's all-night drive-through in Finland turned deadly, police say.
Why does McDonalds conduct studies on their food and not revel the fact that people are dying at their restaurants? Why wasnt this picked up? Wasnt death part of their study? Who oversaw all these studies? If this study was peer reviewed by Burger King then it would never have been released!!
Charges Filed in Death of Brendan Blum
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Caretakers at Draper youth care center charged with child abuse in death of 14-year-old
By Jason Bergreen
The Salt Lake Tribune Article
Last Updated: 10/11/2007 05:22:00 PM MDT
Two caretakers at a Draper assisted-living facility were charged Thursday with failing to provide medical aid to a 14-year-old resident who died under their supervision in June. Jorge Ramirez and Deborah Cole were both on duty at Youth Care Inc. on June 27 when 14-year-old Brendan Blum of Santa Barbara, Calif., died.
An autopsy concluded that Blum died from an inadequate blood supply to his small bowel, according to a criminal complaint filed in 3rd District Court. On the night of his death, Blum had a loss of bowel control, vomited and complained of stomach pain, but Ramirez and Cole did not provide or seek medical help for him, the complaint states.
Blum was found dead on the morning of June 28. A state medical examiner concluded that Blum's death could have been prevented if he had been given medical attention.
"Secure treatment facilities are responsible for providing appropriate medical treatment and care for the children entrusted to their supervision," Salt Lake County District Attorney Lohra Miller said in a news release. "In this case, it is alleged that a young boy's need for emergency medical treatment was ignored and that this negligence resulted in the boy's death." Miller also said that state law requires that treatment facilities and their employees be held to a "heightened standard of care."
Blum was at the facility because he had Asperger's Syndrome, a disorder related to autism.
Cole and Ramirez are each charged with one third-degree felony count of abuse or neglect of a child. The crime is punishable by up to five years in jail.
--> LINK (http://http://brendanblum.blogspot.com/2007/10/charges-filed-in-death-of-brendan-blum.html) for the above two articles.
-
Classic. I never thought people would be this upset over a study being done of the industry. I thought you guys would try to down play it, but WOW!! this has really rocked your boat.
all that "Show me a study"!!! lol
ooops, now what do I do? Hmmmm... maybe try to discredit the study? Only thing left to do.
Actually, we've always asked for longitudinal, clinical, peer reviewed studies. At least that's what I've always been asking for and not one program supporter has ever been able to deliver on it. You just keep throwing up Aspen's exit surveys and try and pass them off as something substantial. They're not. They're a marketing ploy. But you already knew that.
-
DJ, stop acting like you are disconnected from this, you were part of this system that as you say, "committed these crimes". Yet we never hear about you in this anywhere. Ya know when Joel and Che speak they usually share their experiences as staff, not you.
Nor do you. We keep asking about the girl that you supposedly dragged around behind a van as a therapeutic tool, but you never do answer.
Your buddy Paul thinks he has a hot case here, well, I will found out once and for all who is Danny and Whooter. I'll expose them if it is the last thing I do.
:beat: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
My purpose here is, to have balanced conversation.
:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:
-
Classic. I never thought people would be this upset over a study being done of the industry. I thought you guys would try to down play it, but WOW!! this has really rocked your boat.
all that "Show me a study"!!! lol
ooops, now what do I do? Hmmmm... maybe try to discredit the study? Only thing left to do.
Actually, we've always asked for longitudinal, clinical, peer reviewed studies. At least that's what I've always been asking for and not one program supporter has ever been able to deliver on it. You just keep throwing up Aspen's exit surveys and try and pass them off as something substantial. They're not. They're a marketing ploy. But you already knew that.
Anne, Whooter no longer even mentions the Behrens study now that he can't deny their whopping 31% success rate versus 60-80% at non-Aspen facilities. He has dropped his claims after a couple weeks of lying about what's in the study.
Now he only cites Curry, 1991; Curtis et al., 2001; Epstein, 2004; Hair, 2005; Wells, 1991 who studied non-Aspen facilities. He shitcanned Behrens after holding her out as a modern-day messiah for the last four years. Even he abondoned Aspen's FUBARed "study" marketing program.
-
This thread is now the #1 Google return if you enter "Behrens study" in the engine.
Thanks to Whooter's obsessive/compulsive replying, now anyone searching for Behrens gets the first hit on "Programs in Behrens Study Charged with Abuse." Somehow I don't think this POV was the one he intended to present. :notworthy: :nods: :cheers: :roflmao:
But it's good news anyway.
-
did not see where the founders wrote a "members only" clause in here. Though I do believe there are many here who believe there are "unwritten rules" here as far as posting goes, just my opinion. Enough said about that. I accept the conditions here, hey, I voted for O'bama in Georgia, in Woodstock Ga.(just outside of Kennesaw) 100% Republican and 98% white, so I know a little about going against the tide.
No shit... Most of my family lives in Woodstock, GA. Maybe it's a coincidence, that you chose to write that, but probably not. You have been frequenting my facebook page, so you would know that.
You have tried friending me in the past couple of days, and even sent me a message offering to take me and my friends out on your friend's boat, fishing. And you thought it would be a great opportunity for me to meet your son. I never responded, because I knew that you were just trying to buy my support on Fornits.
In regards to the Woodstock reference, I'm not gonna say anything Danny. If you know anything about me, you already know.
Paul St. John
-
We all know about Mount Bachelor Academy's recent closure due to child abuse and neglect (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=30803) and that Aspen Education has claimed in court that it provides no therapy. (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=28735)
MBA was one of the programs that was studied in Behrens' work. The fact that MBA was closed for abusing children and that Behrens concluded MBA was "effective" despite offering no therapy and abusing hundreds of children is terribly troubling to say the least.
Here's a list of the all of the programs she looked at:
Academy at Swift River, Aspen Ranch, Copper Canyon Academy, Mount Bachelor Academy, Stone Mountain School, Pine Ridge Academy, SunHawk Academy,Turnabout Ranch, and Youth Care, Inc.
Academy at Swift River has been cited by state authorities for child abuse.
How many of the others have been as well? Are there any untainted entities in this study?
Here's a sworn statement from a Copper Canyon staff member:
* Many of the staff members were very rude to the girls. They seemed to think the girls were the "enemy" and that you must treat them with hostility in order to make them obedient. They saw how I spoke to the girls respectfully, and I know this was not okay with them. They treated me badly as a result, worse than I have ever been treated at any job.
* Girls were expected to learn all the rules within 3 days, and after that point they were responsible (and could be given "work hours" etc. if they broke rules). But there were so many rules, and not all of them were listed in the book. I brought this up to some of the staff (including supervisors), and they said the girls should be able to learn the rules from word of mouth. But I couldn't even learn all the rules! And I had trouble enforcing them when I didn't know them because they weren't all written down. The staff members seemed to think I should just somehow know them. But my opinion is that in a system like theirs (in any authoritarian kind of system), they like to keep the rules somewhat a mystery so that people will break them. The people who run these kinds of systems want to punish others!
* Girls were occasionally put on silence, meaning no speaking except for things like "I need to use the bathroom". Sometimes the silencing lasted for several days.
* I heard at least one staff member make fun of a lesbian girl about her sexuality.
* I read in the handbook that girls could be sent to the school for problems such as depression, drug addiction, difficulty in school, and quite an assortment of other things. We staff members were never told what problems each girl had when she arrived (unless other staff members knew, but nobody ever told me). So one day I asked a staff supervisor about one particular girl. I wasn't sure if anyone was willing to tell me anything or not, but I figured it was worth a try. But the staff supervisor seemed very angry at my question, and went off for a while about how all the girls deserved to be there. She spoke of it as if this boarding school was a punishment for naughty behavior. So I wondered, does this woman think that suffering with depression deserves punishment? Did she realize that some girls were there simply because they were depressed? Of course, I don't think any of the girls deserved what they got in that place, no matter what they had done in order to end up there.
* A girl who attempted to run away was made to sleep on a mattress on the bathroom floor for a few days. She was also dropped to a negative level, which meant she could have only one shirt, one pair of pants, one bra, one pair of socks, and one pair of underwear. The poor girl was on her period at the time, which must have made it even more uncomfortable, and I remember wondering if they would give her new clothes if she happened to bleed through them. I figured they wouldn't, and I already knew at that point that they didn't appreciate questions or suggestions from me.
* One day when all the girls were running the track (as a punishment for being too noisy at a mealtime), one of the girls asked me if I could go and get her inhaler (she obviously needed it). I said yes, of course, and went to go get it. Then the staff supervisor stepped in to tell me not to give her inhaler to her (she was quite rude to me, too, I might add). So I asked her at what point we should give a girl her inhaler, and the woman replied something like "when she's huffing and puffing and her lips are turning blue". She said it with such malice, too.
* The girls all had to read "Ten Stupid Things Women Do to Mess Up Their Lives", by Dr. Laura Schlessinger, and write a report on it. I wanted to give the girls another viewpoint, so I brought in an article critiquing Dr. Laura. The staff supervisors found out about this, and they brought me into the office to tell me I was not permitted to do such a thing. It was obvious that they didn't want the girls to be exposed to viewpoints other than those held by the school. No, they wanted them to swallow whatever they taught them, no questions asked, no independent thinking whatsoever!
Sounds like an abusive quack factory to me. Every time we look into these programs in the Behrens study, we find this type problem.
Are there any at all that haven't been exposed for abuse? What the hell was Behrens thinking when she studied these programs? No wonder she doesn't talk about progrram methodology in her report.
-
This thread is now the #1 Google return if you enter "Behrens study" in the engine.
Thanks to Whooter's obsessive/compulsive replying, now anyone searching for Behrens gets the first hit on "Programs in Behrens Study Charged with Abuse." Somehow I don't think this POV was the one he intended to present. :notworthy: :nods: :cheers: :roflmao:
But it's good news anyway.
One of the few times we can all agree....Its great to get the viability isnt it.... Lets take another look for those first time readers:
Residential Treatment Outcome-Study (http://http://www.scribd.com/doc/503084/Residential-Treatment-Outcomes-Study)
Just getting more people to read the study, gain more knowledge about the industry, is a big step for all of us.
...
-
One of the few times we can all agree....Its great to get the viability isnt it....
Little slip of the lip there, eh? #1 on Google (http://http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&aq=0h&oq=behrens&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGLG_enUS312US312&q=behrens+study) - Aspen programs studied by Behrens charged with abuse!
-
I fixed it an a repost:
This thread is now the #1 Google return if you enter "Behrens study" in the engine.
Thanks to Whooter's obsessive/compulsive replying, now anyone searching for Behrens gets the first hit on "Programs in Behrens Study Charged with Abuse." Somehow I don't think this POV was the one he intended to present. :notworthy: :nods: :cheers: :roflmao:
But it's good news anyway.
One of the few times we can all agree....Its great to get the visibility isn't it.... Lets take another look for those first time readers:
Residential Treatment Outcome-Study (http://http://www.scribd.com/doc/503084/Residential-Treatment-Outcomes-Study)
Just getting more people to read the study, gain more knowledge about the industry, is a big step for all of us.
...
-
Whooter,
just wanted to say, we think your doing a great job.
danny
-
Whooter,
just wanted to say, we think your doing a great job.
danny
Thanks, It took a long time to get to this point where we could finally discuss the details of the study instead of denying it exists.
...
-
One of the few times we can all agree....Its great to get the viability isnt it....
Little slip of the lip there, eh? #1 on Google (http://http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&aq=0h&oq=behrens&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGLG_enUS312US312&q=behrens+study) - Aspen programs studied by Behrens charged with abuse!
It's important that when parents see this marketing material on Aspen's website and do a Google search to check it out for themselves they see right away that the programs studied are actually a bunch of organized, for-profit child abusers that rape, maim, kill, abuse and neglect children entrusted to them, like Mount Bachelor Academy.
Even Ed Cons are stopping referrals to Aspen because Aspen is more concerned with money than keeping kids safe.
-
They never published the follow up on this work that was completed in 2007. Some programs would be excluded from the follow up because they were shut down for abuse.
Even though Behrens scrubbed the data of all negative reporting, the phase two results didn't support Aspen's marketing, so they deep-sixed it in 2007 so the public wouldn't see the damaging data that the kids who went to Aspen programs failed to maintain changes:
"In Phase One, we collected data surrounding admission, discharge, how the children functioned and how they changed during and immediately after treatment," Ellen explained. "In Phase Two, we are looking at the student's progress for up to a year after leaving the program and how it differs from their functioning at the time of discharge. The first Phase explores whether residential treatment works in both the kids and parent's opinion. The next question in Phase Two, which will be released in the first quarter of 2007, is does it last? In other words, do the changes during treatment get better, stay the same, get worse or lose their power after discharge?"
I think people would be hard pressed to show a study of people's opinions is scientifically valid or clinical. This is why this study was never peer reviewed or published.
Interestingly, "phase 2" was said to be completed in 2007. It has never been released. It was supposed to measure if the changes reported in parents' and kids' opinion surveys were lasting or not. It looks like they didn't get the results they were looking for and decided just to dump the project and never mention it again.
This silence about a highly touted, widely hyped follow up speaks volumes about what they found. It has been over three years since the research was complete, but they didn't publish a word of it. Hmmmm...Must not have been supportive of their predrawn conclusions, even after they scrubbed the data of anything that might make the outcome look worse:
"We also tried to eliminate all students discharged from the programs before graduation because the clinical staff thought it was actually an inappropriate placement, or when they felt the program couldn't be helpful to the child."
Even though the data was rigged, it still didn't look good for Aspen, so they shitcanned the second phase that woud show the changes reported didn't last even a year.
This isn't how studies are supposed to work. They're not supposed to have conclusions before they begin. This was a marketing tool that backfired.
First phase - opinion survey with scrubbed data.
Second phase - "no comment."
-
We have come a long way. A few weeks ago many people had never heard of the Residential Treatment Outcome Study performed by Canyon Research. They looked at close to 1,000 children and families and found that the programs studied where up to 80% effective.
Dysfunction junction and myself managed to put the spot light on this study over the past day or two and were able to nail down that the study was indeed independent and was overseen by an independent third party in the form of a Review Board (WIRB). From WIRB’s documents:
The IRB also reviews the consent form (which they did for the Aspen Study) for the research to make sure that it is accurate. If it approves the research, the IRB continues to review the ongoing research after it starts. (This is called oversight).
WIRB reviewed the consent forms and approved the study and issued “Certificates of approval” as was pointed out in the study itself and presented to the APA.
Here are some supportive links and information as we stand today:
Residential Treatment Outcome-Study (http://http://www.scribd.com/doc/503084/Residential-Treatment-Outcomes-Study)
Canyon Research & Consulting (http://http://canyonrc.com/home.html): Independent research company that conducted the study.
** Western Institutional Review Board (http://http://www.wirb.com/): Independent board that approved research and audited the study.
The Western Institutional Review Board approved consent/assent forms and issued Certificates of Approval for the study.
Here are copies of their "Certificate of Approval" forms
Sample 1 (http://http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:SJ436FlS-UwJ:molyneaux.us/Global_SUIE/IRB/Molyneaux_CertificateofApprovalforStudy1095420,PanelMeeting50369,WO14797321.PDF+wirb+certificate+of+approval+form&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEEShpURqHUvjacM32lv8YRLav1O46MVidLLeYkoKcUS-jxsOFqB5szt1UtVUEngO8WsxhZGVamNX420U_0NRuxxcKjuR1PIu0LYRdnudeAzaql_WAJZALLKzLRT4WLjxUkhxd7-l8&sig=AHIEtbRwui-be51KikeuSb7i4alS80Pbpw)
Sample 2 (http://http://www.cmagtracker.org/WIRB/Approval.PDF)
at the bottom of page 2 it states:
Federal regulations require that WIRB conduct continuing review of approved research. You will receive Continuing
Review Report forms from WIRB. These reports must be returned even though your study may not have started.
The above study was presented at the American Psychological Association (APA) conference 2006. ** As a disclaimer Dysfunction Junction of fornits was mistaken the first time when he said WIRB never heard of the study. What he meant was he called WIRB and they did hear of the study but said they only approved the Questionnaire. So we need to consider DJs' input/opinion against the published facts.
-
They never published the follow up on this work that was completed in 2007. Some programs would be excluded from the follow up because they were shut down for abuse.
Even though Behrens scrubbed the data of all negative reporting, the phase two results didn't support Aspen's marketing, so they deep-sixed it in 2007 so the public wouldn't see the damaging data that the kids who went to Aspen programs failed to maintain changes:
"In Phase One, we collected data surrounding admission, discharge, how the children functioned and how they changed during and immediately after treatment," Ellen explained. "In Phase Two, we are looking at the student's progress for up to a year after leaving the program and how it differs from their functioning at the time of discharge. The first Phase explores whether residential treatment works in both the kids and parent's opinion. The next question in Phase Two, which will be released in the first quarter of 2007, is does it last? In other words, do the changes during treatment get better, stay the same, get worse or lose their power after discharge?"
I think people would be hard pressed to show a study of people's opinions is scientifically valid or clinical. This is why this study was never peer reviewed or published.
Interestingly, "phase 2" was said to be completed in 2007. It has never been released. It was supposed to measure if the changes reported in parents' and kids' opinion surveys were lasting or not. It looks like they didn't get the results they were looking for and decided just to dump the project and never mention it again.
This silence about a highly touted, widely hyped follow up speaks volumes about what they found. It has been over three years since the research was complete, but they didn't publish a word of it. Hmmmm...Must not have been supportive of their predrawn conclusions, even after they scrubbed the data of anything that might make the outcome look worse:
"We also tried to eliminate all students discharged from the programs before graduation because the clinical staff thought it was actually an inappropriate placement, or when they felt the program couldn't be helpful to the child."
Even though the data was rigged, it still didn't look good for Aspen, so they shitcanned the second phase that woud show the changes reported didn't last even a year.
This isn't how studies are supposed to work. They're not supposed to have conclusions before they begin. This was a marketing tool that backfired.
First phase - opinion survey with scrubbed data.
Second phase - "no comment."
Still no comment on phase two? How did these kids do one year out I wonder? Aspen has had the data since 2007. Why didn't they release it? Aren't they interested in the scientific validity of this study? Or just marketing?
-
Phase two, Whooter? How did all that abuse effect change a year out of the program? Was abusing these kids in Aspen programs effective at making them change for the long haul? Why won't you answer this question?
-
Still no comment on phase two? How did these kids do one year out I wonder? Aspen has had the data since 2007. Why didn't they release it? Aren't they interested in the scientific validity of this study? Or just marketing?
I dont think any of us know why they have not completed phase II. Maybe because it was disappointing, maybe they are still working on it, maybe they are trying to leverage a specific time to release the data for a marketing strategy to increase sales, Maybe waiting to get a slot in the next Annual APA convention to kick it off... etc.
We will just have to wait and see.
...
-
Behrens said it was complete in 2007. Where the heck is it? They spit out phase one in a massive marketing campaign before the ink was dry. Phase two must have showed something pretty bad...
I guess they'd also have to expalin that these programs charged for abuse/shut down during the study or right after. It's hard to explain how you're helping kids by abusing them I suppose. But they can't deny the abuse, so I guess they just deep-six the study instead.
-
Behrens said it was complete in 2007. Where the heck is it? They spit out phase one in a massive marketing campaign before the ink was dry. Phase two must have showed something pretty bad...
I guess they'd also have to expalin that these programs charged for abuse/shut down during the study or right after. It's hard to explain how you're helping kids by abusing them I suppose. But they can't deny the abuse, so I guess they just deep-six the study instead.
No you are wrong, DJ, the abuse does not have to be part of the extended study. They would be looking at how the kids did "After" they left the program. The boundary conditions and scope of the study would not touch upon any abuse that occurs (unless it occurred at home and was part of the survey).
Do you see what I mean? If there was abuse to be reported that would have came in phase one while the kids where still under the care of the program.
...
-
They would have to name the programs from whence the data were derived. It would be embarassing for them because several programs were charged with abuse, killed kids and/or were shut down for abuse and neglect. Then they'd have to explain those facts and how abusing these kids was "successful."
This is one reason why phase two will never be released. I think we all get that by now. It was complete three years ago. It also probably doesn't show any effectiveness either. So they don't put it out there.
-
They would have to name the programs from whence the data were derived. It would be embarassing for them because several programs were charged with abuse, killed kids and/or were shut down for abuse and neglect. Then they'd have to explain those facts and how abusing these kids was "successful."
This is one reason why phase two will never be released. I think we all get that by now. It was complete three years ago. It also probably doesn't show any effectiveness either. So they don't put it out there.
I disagree, the scope of the Phase II study would only include how the kids fared at home. It wouldn't include their time in the program at all.
...
-
But the programs are already named. They've been shuttered for abuse or killing children. The cat's out of the bag so Aspen doesn't want to draw attention to it. That's why they punted on phase two.
But, regardless, this thread is now the #1 hit on Google when you search for this study. It can't be hidden any longer.
-
But, regardless, this thread is now the #1 hit on Google when you search for this study. It can't be hidden any longer.
This is where we do agree, DJ....
I try to get the link into most posts so that new readers can see it. It is important to get as much info as possible out there:
Residential Treatment Outcome-Study (http://http://www.scribd.com/doc/503084/Residential-Treatment-Outcomes-Study)
...
-
But only this thread shows up in Google. Not a link to the paper. First thing they read is page one of this thread which is simply devastating to the content of your link. By the time they get to it, their stomach is turning and then they see you pimping proven child abusers. Not so good for your masters...
-
We all know about Mount Bachelor Academy's recent closure due to child abuse and neglect (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=30803) and that Aspen Education has claimed in court that it provides no therapy. (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=28735)
MBA was one of the programs that was studied in Behrens' work. The fact that MBA was closed for abusing children and that Behrens concluded MBA was "effective" despite offering no therapy and abusing hundreds of children is terribly troubling to say the least.
Here's a list of the all of the programs she looked at:
Academy at Swift River, Aspen Ranch, Copper Canyon Academy, Mount Bachelor Academy, Stone Mountain School, Pine Ridge Academy, SunHawk Academy,Turnabout Ranch, and Youth Care, Inc.
Academy at Swift River has been cited by state authorities for child abuse.
How many of the others have been as well? Are there any untainted entities in this study?
Just a reminder of the topic...
-
But only this thread shows up in Google. Not a link to the paper. First thing they read is page one of this thread which is simply devastating to the content of your link. By the time they get to it, their stomach is turning and then they see you pimping proven child abusers. Not so good for your masters...
Doesnt matter what is good or not. The main thing is that the reader becomes interested and searches for a link to the study. 99% of all the parents I have met would want to take a peek at the study itself to see what all the hoopla is about. You would yourself.
We both know the study speaks for itself and its good to keep the threads up at the top so that people can have access to them and read them. Information is the key and its important to get as much out there as we can.
I think we can both agree with this.
...
-
I wouldn't say it speaks for itself. It's actually quite misleading in light of thse facts:
Aspen Education Group does not provide a therapeutic milieu that is conformative to standards set by any medical body for their "patients," medically recognized therapy, or medically accredited personnel, Aspen's own lawyers successfully argued in Pence v. Aspen Education Group.
http://www.websupp.org/data/DOR/6:05-cv ... 80-DOR.pdf (http://www.websupp.org/data/DOR/6:05-cv-06199-80-DOR.pdf)
Hard to pitch therapuetuc success and argue in court you provide no therapy, isn't it?
So it's best that parents understand Aspen provides no therapy and several of the programs in the study abused or even killed children, some during the study itself. Now they're getting shut down left and right for the same. This information shows the study for what it is...bunk-o.
-
I wouldn't say it speaks for itself. It's actually quite misleading in light of thse facts:
Aspen Education Group does not provide a therapeutic milieu that is conformative to standards set by any medical body for their "patients," medically recognized therapy, or medically accredited personnel, Aspen's own lawyers successfully argued in Pence v. Aspen Education Group.
http://www.websupp.org/data/DOR/6:05-cv ... 80-DOR.pdf (http://www.websupp.org/data/DOR/6:05-cv-06199-80-DOR.pdf)
Hard to pitch therapuetuc success and argue in court you provide no therapy, isn't it?
So it's best that parents understand Aspen provides no therapy and several of the programs in the study abused or even killed children, some during the study itself. Now they're getting shut down left and right for the same. This information shows the study for what it is...bunk-o.
Exactly, the parents and readers have the right to see all the facts and opinions so that they can make a balanced decision for their family.
-
Actually, I'd just be worried about the facts. Even you can make up an opinion.
-
Especially the facts. Like several programs in the study abusing and killing children and Aspen providing no "conventionally recognized treatment." Those are some messed up facts about Aspen that just can't be denied (http://http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGLG_enUS312US312&q=behrens+study).
-
Especially the facts. Like several programs in the study abusing and killing children and Aspen providing no "conventionally recognized treatment." Those are some messed up facts about Aspen that just can't be denied (http://http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGLG_enUS312US312&q=behrens+study).
All of it, even the studies. Think of it as a person trying to understand public schools. You wouldnt want to mask the fact that kids get raped by their teachers or that they put in security to avoid weapon from entering the campus. You would also want to provide them with the studies which shows how kids do academically. You should provide them with the whole picture and let them decide for themselves.
...
-
Another Thought...
Lets say you were talking to parents who were raising a child and the subject of discipline came up. You would want them have all the information they could on what other people do and feel is acceptable. You would just limit them to your opinion you would give them all the information about parenting options. I would even include the “No Spank” fringe group (not sure if you ever heard of them) which are obviously against spanking but also feel they should be able to tell people how to discipline their child inside their own homes, so that they are aware of it along with those who feel spanking is a must for all parents.
By exposing them to all the various options gives them a better sense on what is best for their family. A good example is Morgan and her parents. They came here for information and they received all sides. Exposing them to the bad side of programs isn’t going to necessarily sway them. They take it all in, consider the sources and make a balanced decision.
One of the mistakes many posters do here is withhold facts and the readers see right through it, like Morgans parents did. I think that is a good example.
-
How would you know what they did?
-
Let's say you were being pressed by a marketing person from Aspen Education to place your child into one of their programs. They tell you "Our programs are safe and effective. There was s study done. Look it up on our website - the Behrens study."
But you're looking for more trustworthy sources than Aspen's marketing group because you saw online (http://http://www.familylight.com/link3/3.03/3.031/aspenmarket.html) that even Ed Cons stopped referring to Aspen because of their deceptive marketing of dangerous programs.
So you go to good ol' Google and put in "Behrens study" in the search box. Then you learn the truth about Aspen programs and the Behrens study (http://http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGLG_enUS312US312&q=behrens+study).
Now that's a great story...
-
Let's say you were being pressed by a marketing person from Aspen Education to place your child into one of their programs. They tell you "Our programs are safe and effective. There was s study done. Look it up on our website - the Behrens study."
But you're looking for more trustworthy sources than Aspen's marketing group because you saw online (http://http://www.familylight.com/link3/3.03/3.031/aspenmarket.html) that even Ed Cons stopped referring to Aspen because of their deceptive marketing of dangerous programs.
So you go to good ol' Google and put in "Behrens study" in the search box. Then you learn the truth about Aspen programs and the Behrens study (http://http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGLG_enUS312US312&q=behrens+study).
Now that's a great story...
Exactly!! The person gets to see multiple facets. Now if and when a program is determined then the parents can discard the studies and focus on speaking with other parents and kids who have been through the program to further determine if it is a good fit for their family. The studies are just there to give them initial information on the industry and what they can provide.
...
-
The studY (you said "studIES" but there's only one - don't want to mislead people, do you?) is there for marketing purposes. When it came time to publish the results of phase two, which was data collected on kids up to a year out of the program back in 2007, Aspen self-censored it. They punted.
Ever notice that the only place this work is even shown on the internet is Aspen's troubled-teen funneling sites? No scientific journals, no peer review, no follow up...no NOTHING. Just the Aspen marketing page. Very telling, huh?
-
The studY (you said "studIES" but there's only one - don't want to mislead people, do you?) is there for marketing purposes. When it came time to publish the results of phase two, which was data collected on kids up to a year out of the program back in 2007, Aspen self-censored it. They punted.
Ever notice that the only place this work is even shown on the internet is Aspen's troubled-teen funneling sites? No scientific journals, no peer review, no follow up...no NOTHING. Just the Aspen marketing page. Very telling, huh?
You forgot the APA convention. They do use it for marketing and to show off to their competitors how good they are, as they should. Anyone who has great study results on their product would be crazy not to leverage the information and get it out there. I cant think of one study which wouldn't.
...
-
Anyone who has great study results on their product would be crazy not to leverage the information and get it out there. I cant think of one study which wouldn't.
And thusly you have proven my point.
Phase two of Behrens was completed in 2007 and never published or presented anywhere. Therefore, either Aspen marketing is crazy, or they have a study with bad results.
They ain't crazy. They have a study that they'd be crazy to release.
Finally the truth comes to the surface of all of your BS spam-trolling.
-
Anyone who has great study results on their product would be crazy not to leverage the information and get it out there. I cant think of one study which wouldn't.
And thusly you have proven my point.
Phase two of Behrens was completed in 2007 and never published or presented anywhere. Therefore, either Aspen marketing is crazy, or they have a study with bad results.
They ain't crazy. They have a study that they'd be crazy to release.
Finally the truth comes to the surface of all of your BS spam-trolling.
Well, you need to consider who they are trying to get to read the study. They presented it to the professional community and now they are presenting it to the people who will benefit most from it.. parents with troubled kids. I never referred to journals when I was considering placement. If publishing it in journals would benefit them then I am sure they would do it. If they felt it wasnt any good then they would not have it on their web sites or have presented it at the APA Convention.
I think you need to step back and look at what is in everyone's best interest.
...
-
Anyone who has great study results on their product would be crazy not to leverage the information and get it out there. I cant think of one study which wouldn't.
And thusly you have proven my point.
Phase two of Behrens was completed in 2007 and never published or presented anywhere. Therefore, either Aspen marketing is crazy, or they have a study with bad results.
They ain't crazy. They have a study that they'd be crazy to release.
Finally the truth comes to the surface of all of your BS spam-trolling.
Oh yeah, they considered the audience alright. They concluded it would hurt the bottom line, so they punted it.
-
Anyone who has great study results on their product would be crazy not to leverage the information and get it out there. I cant think of one study which wouldn't.
And thusly you have proven my point.
Phase two of Behrens was completed in 2007 and never published or presented anywhere. Therefore, either Aspen marketing is crazy, or they have a study with bad results.
They ain't crazy. They have a study that they'd be crazy to release.
Finally the truth comes to the surface of all of your BS spam-trolling.
Oh yeah, they considered the audience alright. They concluded it would hurt the bottom line, so they punted it.
Anything is possible business is business. But right now we just dont know.
...
-
Yeppers. Business is business and business is utilitarian. If doing something will yield profit, they will do it. If it will hurt profits, they won't.
This study was complete three years ago. Do you really want us to believe, for a nanosecond, that if Aspen thought they could use it to make money they wouldn't do it? That's crazytalk.
-
Yeppers. Business is business and business is utilitarian. If doing something will yield profit, they will do it. If it will hurt profits, they won't.
This study was complete three years ago. Do you really want us to believe, for a nanosecond, that if Aspen thought they could use it to make money they wouldn't do it? That's crazytalk.
Anybody locate the "long lost phase two" of the Behrens study on abusive Aspen Education facilities? That research was completed over three years ago, but Aspen never released it.
I wonder what could have been in it that was so bad even the shameless marketers at Aspen couldn't spin it to their favor...?
-
Honestly? Odds are a shitload of Aspen victims wouldn't even talk to them. When a large chunk of your supposed survey base ceases contact with a "Fuck you" when you try to do a follow-up, and some of the remainder intentionally score low just because they fucking hate you, it's not going to come out well no matter how you spin it.
-
Whooter,
just wanted to say, we think your doing a great job.
danny
Thanks, It took a long time to get to this point where we could finally discuss the details of the study instead of denying it exists.
We don't deny it exists.....we just know it's biased and paid for by Aspen - the very program it's evaluating, has no follow up, is not a clinical study and is not longitidinal. So, in other words....it's useless.
-
Whooter,
just wanted to say, we think your doing a great job.
danny
Thanks, It took a long time to get to this point where we could finally discuss the details of the study instead of denying it exists.
We don't deny it exists.....we just know it's biased and paid for by Aspen - the very program it's evaluating, has no follow up, is not a clinical study and is not longitidinal. So, in other words....it's useless.
If you want to call feedback from a 1,000 fellow survivors useless (not 6 or 7 opinions from fornits), rather a 1,000 kids. No matter how hard you try you cannot silence their voices. They have a right to be heard. Here take a look at what they said:
Residential Treatment Outcome-Study (http://http://www.scribd.com/doc/503084/Residential-Treatment-Outcomes-Study)
...
-
If you want to call feedback from a 1,000 fellow survivors (Freudian slip) useless (not 6 or 7 opinions from fornits), rather a 1,000 kids. No matter how hard you try you cannot silence their voices. They have a right to be heard.
Yes, they do and so do we. But you give so much credibility to them filing out an exit survey, which is nothing more than anecdotal stories, but you give zero credibility to us when do the same. AND....we provide you with true clinical studies and you refuse to accept them.
Here take a look at what they said:
Residential Treatment Outcome-Study (http://http://www.scribd.com/doc/503084/Residential-Treatment-Outcomes-Study)
Yes, that's an exit survey with zero follow up. How does that even remotely qualify as "proof"? I remember after "graduating" Straight, I was asked by the 'exit staff' about my experience there. I lied my ass off for months, even years, for fear that if I told the truth, I'd be sent right back.
-
And let's not forget.....
Programs In Behrens Study Charged with Abuse
We all know about Mount Bachelor Academy's recent closure due to child abuse and neglect (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=30803) and that Aspen Education has claimed in court that it provides no therapy. (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=28735)
MBA was one of the programs that was studied in Behrens' work. The fact that MBA was closed for abusing children and that Behrens concluded MBA was "effective" despite offering no therapy and abusing hundreds of children is terribly troubling to say the least.
Here's a list of the all of the programs she looked at:
Academy at Swift River, Aspen Ranch, Copper Canyon Academy, Mount Bachelor Academy, Stone Mountain School, Pine Ridge Academy, SunHawk Academy,Turnabout Ranch, and Youth Care, Inc.
Academy at Swift River has been cited by state authorities for child abuse.
How many of the others have been as well? Are there any untainted entities in this study?
-
Yes, that's an exit survey with zero follow up. How does that even remotely qualify as "proof"? I remember after "graduating" Straight, I was asked by the 'exit staff' about my experience there. I lied my ass off for months, even years, for fear that if I told the truth, I'd be sent right back.
Not everyone lies like you Anne. There are many people who tell the truth everyday, all day. You need to listen to fellow survivors without assuming they are lying and here are 1,000 of them:
Residential Treatment Outcome-Study (http://http://www.scribd.com/doc/503084/Residential-Treatment-Outcomes-Study)
...
-
Yes, that's an exit survey with zero follow up. How does that even remotely qualify as "proof"? I remember after "graduating" Straight, I was asked by the 'exit staff' about my experience there. I lied my ass off for months, even years, for fear that if I told the truth, I'd be sent right back.
Not everyone lies like you Anne. There are many people who tell the truth everyday, all day. You need to listen to fellow survivors without assuming they are lying and here are 1,000 of them:
Residential Treatment Outcome-Study (http://http://www.scribd.com/doc/503084/Residential-Treatment-Outcomes-Study)
Prove one thing I've lied about.
Just as you need to listen to all of us saying how abusive it is/was without assuming we're lying. There have been plenty of us who've had almost identical stories, coming out of different facilities because most of them use the same basic techniques that Straight did, although the programs now are much better at dressing it up for the marks....er, parents.
-
Prove one thing I've lied about.
I lied my ass off for months, even years.
Need I say more?
...
-
Prove one thing I've lied about.
Just as you need to listen to all of us saying how abusive it is/was without assuming we're lying. There have been plenty of us who've had almost identical stories, coming out of different facilities because most of them use the same basic techniques that Straight did, although the programs now are much better at dressing it up for the marks....er, parents.
I dont assume all the stories are lies, Anne. There are some that I dont believe, but most of them I believe. Where we differ is the thinking that a few stories here on fornits represent all the kids who attend programs. I showed you a 1,000 kids who told their story... did any lie? Maybe... Do people lie on fornits? Maybe. We dont know for sure. What we need to do is keep collecting stories and data and eventually the truth will rise to the top.
right now there are a 1,000 kids who had an opportunity to express how they felt and we should not try to silence their stories. It wouldnt be right.
...
-
Prove one thing I've lied about.
I lied my ass off for months, even years.
Need I say more?
This is one reason why people think you're such an asshole. You took what I said completely out of context. I lied to and about Straight for fear that I'd be sent back.
Just knock it off.
-
right now there are a 1,000 kids who had an opportunity to express how they felt and we should not try to silence their stories. It wouldnt be right.
I'm not trying to suppress them and I never said anything of the kind, so again....please stop putting words in my mouth or taking them out of context in your vain attempts to prove your point.....I'm simply questioning them because I knew I had to lie when I got out in order to avoid being sent back. I suspect these kids are doing the same with their "exit surveys". They're probably just as scared as I was.
-
Actually, Anne, if you look at the study, Behrens says right in it that there is strong bias toward reporting improvement for that very reason - so the kids could leave. Whooter doesn't mention that part.
It doesn't take a genius to realize saying "I'm better now" will get a kid out of program faster than saying "This is bullshit."
-
right now there are a 1,000 kids who had an opportunity to express how they felt and we should not try to silence their stories. It wouldnt be right.
I'm not trying to suppress them and I never said anything of the kind, so again....please stop putting words in my mouth or taking them out of context in your vain attempts to prove your point.....I'm simply questioning them because I knew I had to lie when I got out in order to avoid being sent back. I suspect these kids are doing the same with their "exit surveys". They're probably just as scared as I was.
My daughter and all the kids were far from scared, I can tell you first hand. The program was a place where everyone could speak openly. If anything most of them would have feared going back to their old world and leaving their comfort zone.
...
-
Actually, Anne, if you look at the study, Behrens says right in it that there is strong bias toward reporting improvement for that very reason - so the kids could leave. Whooter doesn't mention that part.
It doesn't take a genius to realize saying "I'm better now" will get a kid out of program faster than saying "This is bullshit."
Lols. Anne, he doesn't want you to look at that study now. You might quote Behrens admitting this bias, like I did and there goes his "study." It's laughable, really.
-
Actually, Anne, if you look at the study, Behrens says right in it that there is strong bias toward reporting improvement for that very reason - so the kids could leave. Whooter doesn't mention that part.
It doesn't take a genius to realize saying "I'm better now" will get a kid out of program faster than saying "This is bullshit."
Lols. Anne, he doesn't want you to look at that study now. You might quote Behrens admitting this bias, like I did and there goes his "study." It's laughable, really.
Which study is that?
Oh this one?
Residential Treatment Outcome-Study (http://http://www.scribd.com/doc/503084/Residential-Treatment-Outcomes-Study)
...
-
You do know what you keep linking to is not actually a study, right? It's a synopsis report. Just so we're clear. Studies don't look like this. Anyway, let's have a look, shall we?
On page 13 it clearly states that discharge status does not predict the degree of change; that is kids who dropped out did just as well as those who didn't. This means the program was not the change driver or there was extreme bias.
Also, the researcher points out this strong bias by the reporters in the same paragraph. Take a look:
The finding that discharge status does not predict the degree of
change is harder to understand. One possibility is that because parents are often confronted by
clinical staff if they discharge an adolescent against program advice, they, along with their
adolescent, may have a conscious or unconscious motivation to underreport problems. Perhaps
existing differences between those who discharged with and without program advice were
masked by a desire to “look good” in the group who discharged against program advice.
So either the program didn't drive any change and the study is worthless or there is strong bias and the study is worthless. Take your pick.
-
it goes on to say:
Another
possibility is suggested by the length of stay for those who discharge against program advice.
...
-
So, basically, the results were that it made no difference when the kid split - a week, a month,six months or the average stay of 8.6 months. The length of stay had nothing whatsoever to do with outcomes, suggesting that no stay would produce similar results. The researcher, unable to explain this phenomenon, speculated on a couple of reasons. Either of which, if they explain the results, mean that one, the program was no change agent or two, the study is simply too biased to draw any conclusions. Either way, the program did not help any kids and/or the data were bad based on bias. The researcher herself admits this.
Which brings me to a second point. With no control group, the fact that kids who stayed one day did just as well as those that completed the program cannot be explained other than the basic inference that the program itself did not induce any change and was not measured to have done so.
Which brings me to a third point. With no follow up done, there can be no suggestion that any change that was self-reported lasted even one day after discharge.
So what does this study tell us? Not much, really. Only that it is self-admittedly biased and that kids who stayed one day did as well as kids who completed the program. Both of which tell us the program doesn't actually do anything and that the study is deeply flawed based on the admitted bias.
These are the basic reasons why this study could never have passed peer review or withstood scrutiny to be published. And "phase two" was never released even though it was completed several years ago because the results weren't to Aspen's liking. They spun phase one into a marketing tool and phase two wouldn't aid sales so they punted it without ever even making the results public. Anyone with a modicum of intelligence can see this quite easily.
-
Good points, DJ, Many times parents see the results of the childs improvement (in earlier phases) and want to remove the child from the program early. The final phase of the program is focused on getting the child ready for transition home and solidifying the changes that were made. So the child that leaves early may report the same results as those who complete the program (because the results are the same)… or the child and parents may under-report problems to reinforce their feelings that the child has improved enough to leave, if they are taking their child out against the programs advice.
These are the biases that can exist in studies of this kind and was pointed out by Behrens. This also shows that Behren was being open and honest with the data results and reporting and not just a puppet of Aspen Education for marketing purposes.
This is also why many studies will focus only on those students who complete the program and discarding the data of those who leave early.
I tried to point out to you that the study wasn't just a polished marketing tool for Aspen Education. Once you get into it you will see that there are pitfalls and downs sides to Residential Treatment along with the benefits. This is the strength of doing studies. As more studies are done we can begin to better solidify the results found here with Behrens Study and start to see the mean leangth of time it takes for a child to improve and solidify the improvement. Maybe the studies will show that the program length should be shortened from 14 months to 8 months.
Good discussion.
...
-
Really, if you by Behrens' results, your kid doesn't need to spend more than a single day in a program to have the same results as a kid who finishes it. My question then becomes why send your kid at all? If they get full benefit in one day then they surely shouldn't spend any more than that.
This study may have been believable if there were a control group and a follow up, but, unfortunately, it has neither. Also unfortunately, Aspen presented it as "proof Aspen programs work," when in fact, no such thing is proven at all. That is shameless lying to promote its programs, an issue that even Ed Cons openly admit and discuss on their own websites while advising parents to simply "avoid Aspen Education programs."
Bottom line? This study has no weight, is biased, unreviewed, unpublished, no control group and no follow up. Despite these massive failures, Aspen holds it out as proof the programs in it "help kids," even though those same programs have been formally charged with abuse, killed children via abuse/neglect and were shut down by authorities for systemic child abuse.
All these facts add up and are reflected in Aspen Education's sliding income and worsening care standards, according to those in the business of referring kids to programs. Parents would do well to simply avoid Aspen programs as many are now suggesting - even people who make fees for sending kids to Aspen.
-
Really, if you by Behrens' results, your kid doesn't need to spend more than a single day in a program to have the same results as a kid who finishes it. My question then becomes why send your kid at all? If they get full benefit in one day then they surely shouldn't spend any more than that.
I agree if a child spends one day there and has the same results as a child who spends 14 months then the length of time should be shortened to 24 hours. But I didnt see this in the study. What I read was that the kids reported similar results whether they were released early or completed the program. Like I mentioned most of the work is completed in earlier phases and the final phase is used to prepare the child for release and solidify the work that has been done.
...
-
Really, if you by Behrens' results, your kid doesn't need to spend more than a single day in a program to have the same results as a kid who finishes it. My question then becomes why send your kid at all? If they get full benefit in one day then they surely shouldn't spend any more than that.
I agree if a child spends one day there and has the same results as a child who spends 14 months then the length of time should be shortened to 24 hours. But I didnt see this in the study. What I read was that the kids reported similar results whether they were released early or completed the program. Like I mentioned most of the work is completed in earlier phases and the final phase is used to prepare the child for release and solidify the work that has been done.
...
Right, no matter how early they left the results were similar. Why stay more than a day then?
The final phase isn't assessed in this work because there was no follow up to check the results at any time after the day of discharge. However, no matter how long they stayed, they didn't do any better than any other kids, so why stay? There's no data in this work to suggest any benefit whatsover from staying longer than a day. Let's face the facts. This work is hokey at best.
-
Really, if you by Behrens' results, your kid doesn't need to spend more than a single day in a program to have the same results as a kid who finishes it. My question then becomes why send your kid at all? If they get full benefit in one day then they surely shouldn't spend any more than that.
I agree if a child spends one day there and has the same results as a child who spends 14 months then the length of time should be shortened to 24 hours. But I didnt see this in the study. What I read was that the kids reported similar results whether they were released early or completed the program. Like I mentioned most of the work is completed in earlier phases and the final phase is used to prepare the child for release and solidify the work that has been done.
...
Right, no matter how early they left the results were similar. Why stay more than a day then?
The final phase isn't assessed in this work because there was no follow up to check the results at any time after the day of discharge. However, no matter how long they stayed, they didn't do any better than any other kids, so why stay? There's no data in this work to suggest any benefit whatsover from staying longer than a day. Let's face the facts. This work is hokey at best.
By final phase, I meant the last phase of the child stay at the program. If you read the study and conclude that a child who spends a day receives the same benefit as those who spent months then that is your choice.
I think the main thing is that people start reading the study and getting out what they will on an individual basis. Its a big step for you to read the study and to start discussing the results. So I take this as a plus (even though we disagree on the findings).
I think we can both agree that if this were just a polished marketing campaign then the study would not reflect anything negative as you have pointed out.
...
-
The marketing campaign is polished, it just lies about the study results.
And the study clearly states that the length of stay has no effect on the outcome. The obvious conclusion is if the results are the same, keep the stay as short as possible and the cost as low as possible. It's a stunning find by Behrens that there's no diference in outcome for kids who left early against program advice and kids who stayed for the full program. Kinda blows holes in the whole "kids who don't finish the program fail" theory, huh? You've said that many times.
-
The marketing campaign is polished, it just lies about the study results.
And the study clearly states that the length of stay has no effect on the outcome. The obvious conclusion is if the results are the same, keep the stay as short as possible and the cost as low as possible. It's a stunning find by Behrens that there's no diference in outcome for kids who left early against program advice and kids who stayed for the full program. Kinda blows holes in the whole "kids who don't finish the program fail" theory, huh? You've said that many times.
I see it a little differently. The kids who leave early (say 6 months) may report the same results as the kids who stay the entire time. This is due to that the majority of the change has occurred by then and the child appears to be better. The time in the final phase of the programs is used to solidify the childs changes and prepare the child for the transition home.
Great discussion, DJ, I found this finding interesting myself. I would like to see the kids fill these out at 3 month intervals to see if there is any variance from the onset to the 3 month mark and then again from the 6 month mark to the end of the program (just purely from a reporting perspective to see how the kids feel they are benefiting and at what time along the time-line they wee this effect).
However, in this case, those who left against program advice left, on average, during
the last stage of treatment. Clinical staff in private residential care often devote the last few
weeks or months to consolidation of gains and transfer of skills. In essence, this last phase is
typically designed to solidify change. Parents and adolescents who discharge against program
advice during this last phase may not appreciate the need for continued care because problems
appear resolved.
p.14
Residential Treatment Outcome-Study (http://http://www.scribd.com/doc/503084/Residential-Treatment-Outcomes-Study)
...
-
You miss the point. A properly designed research project would have answered these questions by use of proper methods including a contol group and a follow up. You are just posting the researcher's guesses as to why kids who left early had the same results as kids who finished the program. You toss out "6 months" but that isn't quantified in the work. Only kids who "left early." This could mean as little as one day.
So what we're left with is a project with deeply flawed methodology, strong bias in sampling and reporting, and conclusions that are merely guesses which are unsupported by any data.
Not to mention the very same programs studied have been charged with abuse and neglect, killed children and were shut down by state authorities for systemic abuse. That is a fact. The researcher is left guessing whether or not abusive methods help kids. On its face it's a non-starter.
-
I see it a little differently.
Well, of course you do. You're one of he marks that buys into the bullshit.
The kids who leave early (say 6 months) may report the same results as the kids who stay the entire time. This is due to that the majority of the change has occurred by then and the child appears to be better. The time in the final phase of the programs is used to solidify the childs changes and prepare the child for the transition home.
That's pretty much what they told us (and our parents) in Straight, just dressed up a little prettier. Virgil MIller Newton was goddamned proud of his sadistic acts. Now, since the media (and yes, Fornits) has picked up on this, they've just repackaged it (this is where your marketing skills come in quite handy, Who) and sell the same old snake-oil.
Great discussion, DJ, I found this finding interesting myself. I would like to see the kids fill these out at 3 month intervals to see if there is any variance from the onset to the 3 month mark and then again from the 6 month mark to the end of the program (just purely from a reporting perspective to see how the kids feel they are benefiting and at what time along the time-line they wee this effect).
How 'bout a 5 - 10 year follow-up to see how the kids feel about what happened to them back then. We tend to see things through different eyes as an adult and are able to recognize abuse when we see it instead of just trusting our parents or worse yet, "trust the process". Edited to add: That 5 - 10 year period is also when the PTSD tends to manifest itself. It takes a while for the brainwashing to clear out of your soul.
-
I'd settle for seeing the results of the one-year follow up they already conducted but refused to make public. It stands to reason they didn't make it public because even a year out these kids were saying "the program was bullshit and I said what I needed to say to get out of there." That is a very, very typical response to the "program experience."
-
What I want to know is how much blood money Dysfunction Junction took home in exchange for abusing kids and being their prison guard. Did you keep all the money you made?
-
I'd settle for seeing the results of the one-year follow up they already conducted but refused to make public. It stands to reason they didn't make it public because even a year out these kids were saying "the program was bullshit and I said what I needed to say to get out of there." That is a very, very typical response to the "program experience."
Anyone find "phase two" in a garbage dumpster somewhere yet?
-
How much was it? $50k? 100K? 200k? That's a lot of blood money to pocket. I think you should add up everything you made while abusing children, and give this money back to the parents you fleeced and the children you abused. You know it's the right thing to do.
-
Yes, counselors at programs make an average of $200,000 per year. Most are millionaires.
-
How much was it? How much blood money to you take home in exchange for abusing other people's children? It takes a big man to abuse other people's kids for money, you should be proud of yourself.
-
We all know about Mount Bachelor Academy's recent closure due to child abuse and neglect (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=30803) and that Aspen Education has claimed in court that it provides no therapy. (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=28735)
MBA was one of the programs that was studied in Behrens' work. The fact that MBA was closed for abusing children and that Behrens concluded MBA was "effective" despite offering no therapy and abusing hundreds of children is terribly troubling to say the least.
Here's a list of the all of the programs she looked at:
Academy at Swift River, Aspen Ranch, Copper Canyon Academy, Mount Bachelor Academy, Stone Mountain School, Pine Ridge Academy, SunHawk Academy,Turnabout Ranch, and Youth Care, Inc.
Academy at Swift River has been cited by state authorities for child abuse.
How many of the others have been as well? Are there any untainted entities in this study?
-
The marketing campaign is polished, it just lies about the study results.
And the study clearly states that the length of stay has no effect on the outcome. The obvious conclusion is if the results are the same, keep the stay as short as possible and the cost as low as possible. It's a stunning find by Behrens that there's no diference in outcome for kids who left early against program advice and kids who stayed for the full program. Kinda blows holes in the whole "kids who don't finish the program fail" theory, huh? You've said that many times.
Aspen didn't like the results of "phase two" showing marked and rapid deterioration of ex-attendees, so they never published it.
Not to mention that several of the "schools" studied were closed for abusing kids. Aspen's marketing team suggests that abusing kids is "helpful" and it "improves" the children.
Google "Behrens study" and see what comes up.
-
:bump:
Just a reminder that this "study" has been debunked already.
-
Yes, it has......quite handily.
-
I dont believe people outside fornits agree with you. The study still stands and has been accepted by the APA.
Lets take another look for those first time readers:
Residential Treatment Outcome-Study (http://http://www.scribd.com/doc/503084/Residential-Treatment-Outcomes-Study)
Just getting more people to read the study, gain more knowledge about the industry, is a big step for all of us.
...
-
Lols. "Accepted by the APA." Source? Documentation? Behrens PAID the APA to be a presenter (this is how you get the right to present at an APA conference - you pay) and the APA specifically states in its presentation policy that it does not endorse any presenters nor take positions on their presentations. Another whopper from a huge liar. Already debunked this fallacy several times.
-
Lols. "Accepted by the APA." Source? Documentation? Behrens PAID the APA to be a presenter (this is how you get the right to present at an APA conference - you pay) and the APA specifically states in its presentation policy that it does not endorse any presenters nor take positions on their presentations. Another whopper from a huge liar. Already debunked this fallacy several times.
lol
Report of Findings from a Multi-Center Study of Youth Outcomes in Private Residential Treatment
Ellen Behrens, Ph.D.
Kristin Satterfield, B.S.
Canyon Research & Consulting, Inc.
Salt Lake City, UT
(801) 205-2330
[email protected]
Presented at the 114th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association
at New Orleans, Louisiana, August, 2006
August 12, Saturday, 2:00-2:50 PM
Residential Treatment Outcome-Study (http://http://www.scribd.com/doc/503084/Residential-Treatment-Outcomes-Study)
...
-
This is so ridiculous. Right at the bottom of this "study" it says that Aspen Education paid for it. Why would Aspen pay to have anything other than a promotional study done?
And I find it very interesting that all results are based on behavior upon entrance and discharge of the program. Not one word about a year down the road or farther. Of course the majority of kids are going to change their behavior and are going to follow the rules in the program, the alternative is to be horribly abused. This Doctor may have her skewed research bought, but at least she isn't a flat out liar.
This study is a complete croc of shit, and this Dr. ought to be ashamed of herself.
Whooter, seriously. Is this the best you can come up with? A study that Aspen itself paid for?
Name one company that pays for research that is detrimental to that companies existence.
-
This is so ridiculous. Right at the bottom of this "study" it says that Aspen Education paid for it. Why would Aspen pay to have anything other than a promotional study done?
And I find it very interesting that all results are based on behavior upon entrance and discharge of the program. Not one word about a year down the road or farther. Of course the majority of kids are going to change their behavior and are going to follow the rules in the program, the alternative is to be horribly abused. This Doctor may have her skewed research bought, but at least she isn't a flat out liar.
This study is a complete croc of shit, and this Dr. ought to be ashamed of herself.
Whooter, seriously. Is this the best you can come up with? A study that Aspen itself paid for?
Name one company that pays for research that is detrimental to that companies existence.
Who else is going to pay for it? Who would do it for free? They hired WWIB which is a review board which is there to oversee the study and determine that there is no conflict of interest before they approve the study.
Look, Gonzo, if this doesnt live up to your expectations then toss it aside. You are not going to convince the American Psychiatric association by posting your dismay here on fornits. Do you really think anyone on fornits is going to accept a positive outcome study? lol
Think about it.
Everyone here (including yourself) knows this is a solid study, independent, with third party oversight and was presented at the annual meeting of the APA. I fully understand that no one here on fornits will come out and say it. I have been here long enough to know that. But people realize that not all of these 1,000 people from around the country can be lying. But to be accepted here on fornits you need to keep in lock step and keep pounding your fist and saying: "The study is a fake!! It cant possibly be true" lol
We are looking at a study that shows these programs to be up to 85% effective up to a year after graduation. This is consistent with some of the smaller internal studies which ranged from 65 to 90%.
...
-
I said nothing about it being fake. In fact I clearly said she did not flat out lie. The study is skewed, it does not address the long lasting effects of the abuse in the programs. It says on discharge kids have better behavior than admittance.
So if I take a kid who throws tantrums and lock him in a closet, and every time he makes a noise I pull him out and beat him with a stick. After a few weeks of this that kid never makes another noise again and never throws another tantrum again, than his treatment is ok and beneficial? I could do a study with a hundred kids and I gaurantee you with these methods their behavior would change. It doesn't make it right and it doesn't make it an ok way to treat someone.
And I restate my previous question, when has any company ever in the history of time paid for something that was detrimental to itself? The only study a company would pay for is one that profits that company.
If you can find one instance of a company that paid for a study that caused said company to go out of business, I will rethink my position.
Until then, stop being stupid. Or at least make an effort. :ftard:
-
I said nothing about it being fake. In fact I clearly said she did not flat out lie. The study is skewed, it does not address the long lasting effects of the abuse in the programs. It says on discharge kids have better behavior than admittance.
So if I take a kid who throws tantrums and lock him in a closet, and every time he makes a noise I pull him out and beat him with a stick. After a few weeks of this that kid never makes another noise again and never throws another tantrum again, than his treatment is ok and beneficial? I could do a study with a hundred kids and I gaurantee you with these methods their behavior would change. It doesn't make it right and it doesn't make it an ok way to treat someone.
And I restate my previous question, when has any company ever in the history of time paid for something that was detrimental to itself? The only study a company would pay for is one that profits that company.
If you can find one instance of a company that paid for a study that caused said company to go out of business, I will rethink my position.
Until then, stop being stupid. Or at least make an effort. :ftard:
Research firms get paid for what they do. Everyone pays unless you can get the government to pay for it. Even the pharmaceutical industry has to pony up their share for research studies and they get a ton of grant money from Uncle Sam.
We all know that if the study came out unfavorably then it would not have been released. They wont release a study that would put them out of business, like you said. The study wasnt skewed because they hired a review board to oversee the study. The study was presented at the annual APA convention in 2006 and no one came forward to challenge the findings. The study stands Gonzo. You can toss it aside but I think it is important to allow the readers to make up their own mind.
...
-
We all know about Mount Bachelor Academy's recent closure due to child abuse and neglect (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=30803) and that Aspen Education has claimed in court that it provides no therapy. (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=28735)
MBA was one of the programs that was studied in Behrens' work. The fact that MBA was closed for abusing children and that Behrens concluded MBA was "effective" despite offering no therapy and abusing hundreds of children is terribly troubling to say the least.
Here's a list of the all of the programs she looked at:
Academy at Swift River, Aspen Ranch, Copper Canyon Academy, Mount Bachelor Academy, Stone Mountain School, Pine Ridge Academy, SunHawk Academy,Turnabout Ranch, and Youth Care, Inc.
Academy at Swift River has been cited by state authorities for child abuse.
How many of the others have been as well? Are there any untainted entities in this study?
:bump:
-
Some other opinions on the Behrens study...
This is so ridiculous. Right at the bottom of this "study" it says that Aspen Education paid for it. Why would Aspen pay to have anything other than a promotional study done?
And I find it very interesting that all results are based on behavior upon entrance and discharge of the program. Not one word about a year down the road or farther. Of course the majority of kids are going to change their behavior and are going to follow the rules in the program, the alternative is to be horribly abused. This Doctor may have her skewed research bought, but at least she isn't a flat out liar.
This study is a complete croc of shit, and this Dr. ought to be ashamed of herself.
Whooter, seriously. Is this the best you can come up with? A study that Aspen itself paid for?
Name one company that pays for research that is detrimental to that companies existence.
-
This pretty much sums it up.
So, basically, the results were that it made no difference when the kid split - a week, a month,six months or the average stay of 8.6 months. The length of stay had nothing whatsoever to do with outcomes, suggesting that no stay would produce similar results. The researcher, unable to explain this phenomenon, speculated on a couple of reasons. Either of which, if they explain the results, mean that one, the program was no change agent or two, the study is simply too biased to draw any conclusions. Either way, the program did not help any kids and/or the data were bad based on bias. The researcher herself admits this.
Which brings me to a second point. With no control group, the fact that kids who stayed one day did just as well as those that completed the program cannot be explained other than the basic inference that the program itself did not induce any change and was not measured to have done so.
Which brings me to a third point. With no follow up done, there can be no suggestion that any change that was self-reported lasted even one day after discharge.
So what does this study tell us? Not much, really. Only that it is self-admittedly biased and that kids who stayed one day did as well as kids who completed the program. Both of which tell us the program doesn't actually do anything and that the study is deeply flawed based on the admitted bias.
These are the basic reasons why this study could never have passed peer review or withstood scrutiny to be published. And "phase two" was never released even though it was completed several years ago because the results weren't to Aspen's liking. They spun phase one into a marketing tool and phase two wouldn't aid sales so they punted it without ever even making the results public. Anyone with a modicum of intelligence can see this quite easily.
-
Some other opinions on the Behrens study...
This is so ridiculous. Right at the bottom of this "study" it says that Aspen Education paid for it. Why would Aspen pay to have anything other than a promotional study done?
And I find it very interesting that all results are based on behavior upon entrance and discharge of the program. Not one word about a year down the road or farther. Of course the majority of kids are going to change their behavior and are going to follow the rules in the program, the alternative is to be horribly abused. This Doctor may have her skewed research bought, but at least she isn't a flat out liar.
This study is a complete croc of shit, and this Dr. ought to be ashamed of herself.
Whooter, seriously. Is this the best you can come up with? A study that Aspen itself paid for?
Name one company that pays for research that is detrimental to that companies existence.
:bump:
-
Here's yet another thread on Behren's Study, fwiw:
- "Multi-Center Study of Youth Outcomes" (Behrens, 2006)
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=30684 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=30684)