Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => The Troubled Teen Industry => Topic started by: Kathy on May 04, 2006, 07:45:00 AM
-
Well, I'd love to stay and play with you guys, but I really have other, way more important things to do. My kids are waiting for me. I'm sorry I didn't get to address everyone's post individually, but when I get more time, I'll be back, in the mean time, grown some balls and email me, for some one to one. talk at ya later.
Kathy (aka sue scheff jr.) :wave:
-
grown some balls
You grew some balls? That is kind of gross.
-
Yea, that sure is some fine talk "grow some balls", now isn't it?
S
-
Kathy must have infants. What other children are up at 4 AM?
-
On 2006-05-04 08:04:00, Anonymous wrote:
"grown some balls
You grew some balls? That is kind of gross."
LOL! Now THAT was funny! I sure as hell did write grown instead of what I intended (which of course was grow) OOps. I made way too many typos on my way out the door this morning. And it wasn't 4am. If any of you are familiar with this web site, it clearly statesthat all times posted are in pacific time. And I am NOT on the pacific coast.
I originally was not going to respond to this anymore, but curiousity got the best of me and I did check back to see if there were any further smears of my name.
And then I came across this post and it struck me really, really funny. So being that it kind of put me in a jovial mood, I guess I'll address your accusations and critisicms. Again I only have a short amount of time, so please forgive any typos. (LOL)
Anyway. I've been offering free information on the internet for 6 years nows. I've paid out thousands of dollars getting the message out to people. Never asking for fees or donations. I'm starting to get in hot water from my family about spending money for this. So, I would like to have the site, at a minimum pay for itself, so I can continue to contribute to getting the message out there.
My web site is always under construction and it takes a lot of time to get all the information I have up on the site. I'd say it is about a quarter (25%) of the way done.
In the meantime, I have posted a few specific reports, of which I have already sent out to those who have requested them. Free of charge. I simply have a donation button, because it would be nice to have at least payment for the ink and postage if for nothing else. I have put a suggested donation amount, something that isn't mandatory, but is a fair request.
Next, I do NOT make any recommendations to programs. The research service is simply that,a service I offer (you could say on the side.)
Parents who are looking into programs tend to be either single or double working parents who don't have the time it takes to do indepth research about these programs, so I have offered to do this as service to these people, if they feel they don't have the time to do it themselves. The reason I say email me for a quote, is because if I have much of the information it will be either free or a lower fee, however, if they ask me about a program or person I have never heard of and I have to do research from scratch and/or I have to pay to do some type of background check, they will have to front me that fee.
I get very specific requests, such as have you ever heard about x program? or y program? Do you know if there are any bad reports about the programs, or people who run them? If I already have any information handy, I'll email it to them, otherwise I have to just say no I haven't heard anything about that particular program, which often would be misconstrued as "that program must be ok." So in order to have the opportunity to catch someone like that from simply deducing that no info means the program is ok, I'm willing to do the research for them, (especially if they don't have the time to do it) but I can not be using the little bit of cash I have to PAY THEM not to put their kid in a program. That is just ridiculous!!!. I need my expenses reimbursed.
Why hasn't anyone complained about my offering web site services "FOR A FEE!" I mean gosh, don't you think I should just provide web services to everyone who comes to my site for free as well? No one says anyone who comes to my site HAS to purchase the research service. They can do the research themselves, I actually prefer that they do, however, there are people who would rather pay someone else to do it for them, and what better person, then someone who has been watching this industry for years, and knows where to look and what to look for to get that information in the shortest period of time.
Now there is one last option, if you guys want to help me pay for all my bills regarding the FICA site, then I won't have to charge anyone anything, I can just take for the FICA jar to do these researches for people.
I really don't understand how anyone misconstrued what I offer on my site as being my charging parents to tell them where to put their kids. Nothing could be further from the truth.
I think a lot of hysterical groupthink happens on fornits. Kind of reminds me of being in "group" in the program. Who would have ever thought fornits would one day become "group" all over again.
Well, hope this clears things up for you all, and if not, like I've said before, feel free to email me directly. I'm very approachable. I have no problems dealing with a problem head-on. Of course this wouldn't be nearly as fun or dramatic as fabricating something on fornits. So have it your way. Post away on fornits or else, just email me.
And who ever wrote this email, thanks for the laugh, that was funny!
Kathy :smile:
-
Anyway. I've been offering free information on the internet for 6 years nows. I've paid out thousands of dollars getting the message out to people. Never asking for fees or donations. I'm starting to get in hot water from my family about spending money for this. So, I would like to have the site, at a minimum pay for itself, so I can continue to contribute to getting the message out there.
Honestly, people, what is wrong with this? How are we to compete with a multi-billion dollar industry with no infusion of capital of any kind? Isn't that kind of thinking a bit Pollyanna?
If you have a problem with this, maybe you could approach some wealthy donors to give the needed funds to Kathy. At least you'd be helping.
For me personally, if I were getting paid the same rate as my job for doing "public service" here, I wouldn't need a job. But my overhead is zero, so I don't need to be reimbursed. Kathy does. She has infrastructure to maintain and services to provide.
This seems basically like a cheap way to say "gotcha" to someone who's on the right side of the issue. It makes no sense.
-
On 2006-05-04 08:40:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Yea, that sure is some fine talk "grow some balls", now isn't it?
S"
Fine talk, and fine typos.LOL.
S? What are you scared of? S is the best you can do to identify who you are. So brave behind the anonymous name and the anonymity of the computer keyboard. Carry on! :lol:
-
On 2006-05-04 10:16:00, Dysfunction Junction wrote:
"
Anyway. I've been offering free information on the internet for 6 years nows. I've paid out thousands of dollars getting the message out to people. Never asking for fees or donations. I'm starting to get in hot water from my family about spending money for this. So, I would like to have the site, at a minimum pay for itself, so I can continue to contribute to getting the message out there.
Honestly, people, what is wrong with this? How are we to compete with a multi-billion dollar industry with no infusion of capital of any kind? Isn't that kind of thinking a bit Pollyanna?
If you have a problem with this, maybe you could approach some wealthy donors to give the needed funds to Kathy. At least you'd be helping.
For me personally, if I were getting paid the same rate as my job for doing "public service" here, I wouldn't need a job. But my overhead is zero, so I don't need to be reimbursed. Kathy does. She has infrastructure to maintain and services to provide.
This seems basically like a cheap way to say "gotcha" to someone who's on the right side of the issue. It makes no sense.
"
Thank you so much for understanding, what I'm saying and what I am trying to do. :tup:
-
Personally, I think Kathy should focus on web site design instead of instilling parents with a false sense of security about any given program ... like someone else we know ... and in fact, the same strategy used by most ed cons and parent-run referral services. Read Maia's book which exposes this practice (FEAR MONGERING).
Bottom line is there are other ways to run a profitable website and-or earn money to pay for it's upkeep.
IMO, advocates who are against institutionalized child abuse are to be commended for holding the line -- not crossing over it.
:smokin:
-
Yanno, I'll listen to you, Kathy, but the defensiveness from your postings is just adding to suspicion.
And no, Im not out for victims to attack. I also dont care how annoying I am to you, Im not here for a damned popularity contest.
You know what this is about. You know what happened and for how long in this country for this forum to even exist, and for all these people to have a reason to come here, such as yourself.
Now, if youre truly doing unbiased research, then Im sorry for my kneejerk reaction. I was just flabberghasted that someone would try to make a buck off this, but then again if you cant get advertising money or a donation, and its the average idjit parent with more money to blow than braincells left to kill, then I could see your reasoning.
So you say you wont do referrals? Just research on the program? Now, lets take a hypothetic here... what if they asked for research on a WWASPS program? Im assuming youd tell them about all of their sordid history and the abuse accusations and lawsuits, right?
If so, I have an apology to give you. I just still have a bad taste in my mouth from the PURE fiasco, as Im sure you could understand.
But, this does beg the question... what if you find one of those magical, hidden "good programs" that dont have any bullshit behavior modification, mind control, isolation, coersive, interrogation style 'therapy' and actually has real therapy?
Would you share that with everyone? Im sure TheWho would probably cream his pants, and for the sake of arguement (or an alternative) Ive been trying to find a 'good one' to mention as an example of how to do it right.
But, well, its your business and your actions, you can do what you want. Just please come to terms with why we all flipped we saw what looked like the birth of a new edcon - a lot of people get seduced by the money to be made here.
Again, if I jumped the gun, my apologies - I figured ID get it all clarified from yours truly before I formulated any final opinion on what youre doing.
-
Well, this is certainly more responsible feedback.
I guess my thinking is that if parents can get the unvarnished truth about a program rather than a salespitch and an advertisement, it's a good thing. It's even better if this information is accompanied by the scientific data that show NONE of these programs work as intended.
Kathy, how do you handle this problem? Should you give no investigative report and say "just say no" to all programs, or do you think, as I do, that you should provide a report and even if it reveals no overt abuse, throw in a caveat that the therapeutic model itself is bunk and junk regardless of who's running the program?
-
On 2006-05-04 10:05:00, Kathy wrote:
"
On 2006-05-04 08:04:00, Anonymous wrote:
"grown some balls
You grew some balls? That is kind of gross."
LOL! Now THAT was funny! I sure as hell did write grown instead of what I intended (which of course was grow) OOps. I made way too many typos on my way out the door this morning. And it wasn't 4am. If any of you are familiar with this web site, it clearly statesthat all times posted are in pacific time. And I am NOT on the pacific coast.
I originally was not going to respond to this anymore, but curiousity got the best of me and I did check back to see if there were any further smears of my name.
And then I came across this post and it struck me really, really funny. So being that it kind of put me in a jovial mood, I guess I'll address your accusations and critisicms. Again I only have a short amount of time, so please forgive any typos. (LOL)
Anyway. I've been offering free information on the internet for 6 years nows. I've paid out thousands of dollars getting the message out to people. Never asking for fees or donations. I'm starting to get in hot water from my family about spending money for this. So, I would like to have the site, at a minimum pay for itself, so I can continue to contribute to getting the message out there.
My web site is always under construction and it takes a lot of time to get all the information I have up on the site. I'd say it is about a quarter (25%) of the way done.
In the meantime, I have posted a few specific reports, of which I have already sent out to those who have requested them. Free of charge. I simply have a donation button, because it would be nice to have at least payment for the ink and postage if for nothing else. I have put a suggested donation amount, something that isn't mandatory, but is a fair request.
Next, I do NOT make any recommendations to programs. The research service is simply that,a service I offer (you could say on the side.)
Parents who are looking into programs tend to be either single or double working parents who don't have the time it takes to do indepth research about these programs, so I have offered to do this as service to these people, if they feel they don't have the time to do it themselves. The reason I say email me for a quote, is because if I have much of the information it will be either free or a lower fee, however, if they ask me about a program or person I have never heard of and I have to do research from scratch and/or I have to pay to do some type of background check, they will have to front me that fee.
I get very specific requests, such as have you ever heard about x program? or y program? Do you know if there are any bad reports about the programs, or people who run them? If I already have any information handy, I'll email it to them, otherwise I have to just say no I haven't heard anything about that particular program, which often would be misconstrued as "that program must be ok." So in order to have the opportunity to catch someone like that from simply deducing that no info means the program is ok, I'm willing to do the research for them, (especially if they don't have the time to do it) but I can not be using the little bit of cash I have to PAY THEM not to put their kid in a program. That is just ridiculous!!!. I need my expenses reimbursed.
Why hasn't anyone complained about my offering web site services "FOR A FEE!" I mean gosh, don't you think I should just provide web services to everyone who comes to my site for free as well? No one says anyone who comes to my site HAS to purchase the research service. They can do the research themselves, I actually prefer that they do, however, there are people who would rather pay someone else to do it for them, and what better person, then someone who has been watching this industry for years, and knows where to look and what to look for to get that information in the shortest period of time.
Now there is one last option, if you guys want to help me pay for all my bills regarding the FICA site, then I won't have to charge anyone anything, I can just take for the FICA jar to do these researches for people.
I really don't understand how anyone misconstrued what I offer on my site as being my charging parents to tell them where to put their kids. Nothing could be further from the truth.
I think a lot of hysterical groupthink happens on fornits. Kind of reminds me of being in "group" in the program. Who would have ever thought fornits would one day become "group" all over again.
Well, hope this clears things up for you all, and if not, like I've said before, feel free to email me directly. I'm very approachable. I have no problems dealing with a problem head-on. Of course this wouldn't be nearly as fun or dramatic as fabricating something on fornits. So have it your way. Post away on fornits or else, just email me.
And who ever wrote this email, thanks for the laugh, that was funny!
Kathy :silly:
Hopefully we wont have any further pissyfights like this, and Ill be sure not to react emotionally to something I read again here. Anyway, I got to go take my math finals, hopefully you'll read this. If not, Ill e-mail it.
Later, and good luck with your website.
-
DAMMIT I was sure I was logged in. That was me above.
-
On 2006-05-04 10:56:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Personally, I think Kathy should focus on web site design instead of instilling parents with a false sense of security about any given program ... like someone else we know ... and in fact, the same strategy used by most ed cons and parent-run referral services. Read Maia's book which exposes this practice (FEAR MONGERING).
Bottom line is there are other ways to run a profitable website and-or earn money to pay for it's upkeep.
IMO, advocates who are against institutionalized child abuse are to be commended for holding the line -- not crossing over it.
:smokin:
"
How in the heck do you figure I am instilling parents with a false sense of security about any given program???? That doesn't make any sense? You obviously didn't read what I wrote about how just saying no I don't have information on a program can be misconstrued as the program is ok, which is what I do not want. Your arguments don't make any sense!
And as for your "bottom line" that their are other ways to run a profitable website and/or earn money to pay for it's upkeep, I'd like to hear your suggestions, cause I obviously haven't figured that out yet!!! Kathy
-
What makes Kathy Moya think she is qualified to dispense information to parents either for a fee or a "suggested donation"? Is she an adolescent psychologist? An adolescent behavioral healthcare expert? This is ridiculous. If you really want to help parents and kids, stop enabling the parents to put their child (and their bank account) in the hands of people who think they can tell heaven from hell.
:flame:
-
I think we're all just too damn cynical and hairtriggered here after the troll invasion and just the PURE/Whitmore shitstorm.
Since my post was anon Ill boil it down:
I'm perosnally sorry I didnt read it all the way through before making up my mind about what you're doing, Kathy. Im just too damn pessimistic for my own good.
Im also sorry I annoy you so much :lol:
I hope you do well with the investigations you're doing, and hopefully might turn people away from the bad programs.
-
On 2006-05-04 11:10:00, Kathy wrote:
"
On 2006-05-04 10:56:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Personally, I think Kathy should focus on web site design instead of instilling parents with a false sense of security about any given program ... like someone else we know ... and in fact, the same strategy used by most ed cons and parent-run referral services. Read Maia's book which exposes this practice (FEAR MONGERING).
Bottom line is there are other ways to run a profitable website and-or earn money to pay for it's upkeep.
IMO, advocates who are against institutionalized child abuse are to be commended for holding the line -- not crossing over it.
:smokin:
"
How in the heck do you figure I am instilling parents with a false sense of security about any given program???? That doesn't make any sense? You obviously didn't read what I wrote about how just saying no I don't have information on a program can be misconstrued as the program is ok, which is what I do not want. Your arguments don't make any sense!
And as for your "bottom line" that their are other ways to run a profitable website and/or earn money to pay for it's upkeep, I'd like to hear your suggestions, cause I obviously haven't figured that out yet!!! Kathy"
Good grief, what do you think the purpose is of offering parents "customized" investigative program reports? Think hard now.
As for suggestions on other ways to make a living or just earn enough money to pay for the upkeep of your website, it seems to me you already came up with a good concept (web site consulting and design). You obviously have the talent and potential to be very successful in this specialized field.
-
On 2006-05-04 11:11:00, Anonymous wrote:
"What makes Kathy Moya think she is qualified to dispense information to parents either for a fee or a "suggested donation"? Is she an adolescent psychologist? An adolescent behavioral healthcare expert? This is ridiculous. If you really want to help parents and kids, stop enabling the parents to put their child (and their bank account) in the hands of people who think they can tell heaven from hell.
:flame:
"
You dont need a PhD to dig up facts, who-is-who, look for info, etc. You need a PHD to do diagnoses or pass your own opinions of those facts, though.
Ever wonder how undergrads write papers? They fill them full of cited sources, mostly those from people with their doctorates, until they earn the right to make their own opinion, basically.
Basically, if shes gonna say "well this person worked at such-and-such program, that was closed or investigated" or "they charge this much" or "they use these seminars and a level system and restraints and censored mail, no phonecalls for 3 months" (or whatever) thats not something you need a PhD to do. Anyone can put two and two together and realize any place Randal Hinton works at is going to be an utter hellhole, same for staffers coming out of CEDUs demise or old STRAIGHT people.
Yeah, its guilt by association, but shes not Jane Bond or anything. But, any idiot could look at the facts and make their own opinion. If it makes you feel better Ill go pull out a bunch of names with doctorates in psychology to say that isolation and coersive mind control is abusive and ineffective so any program that uses that can be called 'bad' by someone with the credentials, ok?
-
On 2006-05-04 11:14:00, Nihilanthic wrote:
"I think we're all just too damn cynical and hairtriggered here after the troll invasion and just the PURE/Whitmore shitstorm.
Since my post was anon Ill boil it down:
I'm perosnally sorry I didnt read it all the way through before making up my mind about what you're doing, Kathy. Im just too damn pessimistic for my own good.
Im also sorry I annoy you so much :grin:
-
On 2006-05-04 11:22:00, Nihilanthic wrote:
"
On 2006-05-04 11:11:00, Anonymous wrote:
"What makes Kathy Moya think she is qualified to dispense information to parents either for a fee or a "suggested donation"? Is she an adolescent psychologist? An adolescent behavioral healthcare expert? This is ridiculous. If you really want to help parents and kids, stop enabling the parents to put their child (and their bank account) in the hands of people who think they can tell heaven from hell.
:flame:
"
You dont need a PhD to dig up facts, who-is-who, look for info, etc. You need a PHD to do diagnoses or pass your own opinions of those facts, though.
Ever wonder how undergrads write papers? They fill them full of cited sources, mostly those from people with their doctorates, until they earn the right to make their own opinion, basically.
Basically, if shes gonna say "well this person worked at such-and-such program, that was closed or investigated" or "they charge this much" or "they use these seminars and a level system and restraints and censored mail, no phonecalls for 3 months" (or whatever) thats not something you need a PhD to do. Anyone can put two and two together and realize any place Randal Hinton works at is going to be an utter hellhole, same for staffers coming out of CEDUs demise or old STRAIGHT people.
Yeah, its guilt by association, but shes not Jane Bond or anything. But, any idiot could look at the facts and make their own opinion. If it makes you feel better Ill go pull out a bunch of names with doctorates in psychology to say that isolation and coersive mind control is abusive and ineffective so any program that uses that can be called 'bad' by someone with the credentials, ok?"
I get what you are saying, but respecfully disagree. I'd much rather see children have the right to due process before being "referred" into ANY FUCKING PROGRAM. It's time for people to stop preying upon kids as a cash crop.
:idea:
-
Dude, I try to NOT rely too much on intution and emotions. We all know how that itself is manipulated to get genuinely concerned, but stoopid (or just way too scared) parents to sign off their offspring.
If shes not referring, but rather just answering questions about one specific place, thats not doing any more harm than if someone asked me about a place and I pulled info from Wes's site, ISAC, her site, here (anon anon) and whatever else I found, now is it?
-
I get what you are saying, but respecfully disagree. I'd much rather see children have the right to due process before being "referred" into ANY FUCKING PROGRAM. It's time for people to stop preying upon kids as a cash crop.
Shes not referring!! Shes just digging up the facts she can find an sharing them with the parents, not saying its good or bad.
Now, yes, youre right - telling them that the kid actually has to have something wrong, and has to find a place to actually provide therapy is part of what needs to be done, and Im pretty sure she is. If not, well, ask her.
I also agree that explaining that programs arent therapy, they never said they were (many say theyre not, actually), and that behavior modification is abusive is probably a good idea, but most people dont get how a program could be bad, even without the raps/seminars and pain-compliance-restraint/beatings. Someone should do that.
Its not a therapetuic thing, and it doesnt fix any real issues, it just breaks someone down to make them behave, and it fucks them up in the process. Yeah, someone should be saying that, and we all know this by now. But, again, if shes just digging up the dirt on a program that someones asking about, is that so wrong?
Why not just suggest she do what I stated above along with whatever she digs up? Like, basically, have a program disclaimer?
-
On 2006-05-04 11:33:00, Nihilanthic wrote:
"Dude, I try to NOT rely too much on intution and emotions. We all know how that itself is manipulated to get genuinely concerned, but stoopid (or just way too scared) parents to sign off their offspring.
If shes not referring, but rather just answering questions about one specific place, thats not doing any more harm than if someone asked me about a place and I pulled info from Wes's site, ISAC, her site, here (anon anon) and whatever else I found, now is it?
"
What is so hard to understand here Niles? Go re-visit PURE's (or any other so-called parent awareness website) and read their "mission" then come back and tell me what the difference is.
Thanks!
-
On 2006-05-04 11:37:00, Nihilanthic wrote:
"I get what you are saying, but respecfully disagree. I'd much rather see children have the right to due process before being "referred" into ANY FUCKING PROGRAM. It's time for people to stop preying upon kids as a cash crop.
Shes not referring!! Shes just digging up the facts she can find an sharing them with the parents, not saying its good or bad.
Now, yes, youre right - telling them that the kid actually has to have something wrong, and has to find a place to actually provide therapy is part of what needs to be done, and Im pretty sure she is. If not, well, ask her.
I also agree that explaining that programs arent therapy, they never said they were (many say theyre not, actually), and that behavior modification is abusive is probably a good idea, but most people dont get how a program could be bad, even without the raps/seminars and pain-compliance-restraint/beatings. Someone should do that.
Its not a therapetuic thing, and it doesnt fix any real issues, it just breaks someone down to make them behave, and it fucks them up in the process. Yeah, someone should be saying that, and we all know this by now. But, again, if shes just digging up the dirt on a program that someones asking about, is that so wrong?
Why not just suggest she do what I stated above along with whatever she digs up? Like, basically, have a program disclaimer?"
Disclaimer? You have GOT to be kidding? Disclaimers are designed to protect the seller, not the buyer (the parent and child).
Christ, you really are losing it Niles. Oh well, I guess it was bound to happen. Soon there will be no true advocates left.
:eek:
-
True, it is more responsible feedback, specificity would be even better, I'm open to other ways of making the site pay for itself, just tell me how (directed at the anonymous poster).
Up front I tell parents that they've heard the sales pitches from the programs and that my reports are not with out bias. I look for all the negative aspects I can find, so that the parents have both the positive sides from the programs' sales pitches and then the negative side from my research, and facts and studies and stats to back up that research.
Although I would love to have any parent believe me when I said, "just say NO!" to all programs, I doubt that would work, just as Nancy Reagan's "just say NO!" to drugs, not only didn't work, but perhaps made drugs even more appealing to kids. Why would some parent just take me for my word when I say, "Just Say NO!" We aren't talking about idiots here. We are talking about highly intelligent and educated adults. They want to hear and see hard evidence as to why a particular program may not be as effective as the sales pitch says it is.
Put in short form, Dysfuntion's quote sums it up, "you should provide a report and even if it reveals no overt abuse", debunking the myth of therapy in the "therapeutic model"-- Not to mention the deceitful marketing practices and brainwashing etc., that takes place in all programs. Along with adding that any program that "counsels" a group of live-in kids, is bound to end in abuse. Nobody seems to remember the Stanford Prison Experiment that shows how even the most well intentioned person, put into those types of circumstances can act in an evil manner.
That is why this experiment has been a part of my other sites, but I haven't had the time to get it up on the new server.
Personally, I have not found one program out there that is significantly different from any of the others, they all go against the grain of ethics in any therapy.
Therefore, there is absolutely NO WAY, I'm providing anyone a false sense of security about a program. I don't even understand how you can deduce that from what I have written (unless of course, I typed something wrong with all the typos I've been making today. :wink:
-
On 2006-05-04 11:33:00, Nihilanthic wrote:
"Dude, I try to NOT rely too much on intution and emotions. We all know how that itself is manipulated to get genuinely concerned, but stoopid (or just way too scared) parents to sign off their offspring.
If shes not referring, but rather just answering questions about one specific place, thats not doing any more harm than if someone asked me about a place and I pulled info from Wes's site, ISAC, her site, here (anon anon) and whatever else I found, now is it?
"
Newsflash: PURE doesn't refer either. They just recommend programs based on their "research" and of course, well known bias against a certain organization.
:roll:
-
Its not just grain of ethics in therapy! There have been studies saying its specifically INEFFECTIVE.
Well, that and in 25-30 years of operation the entire industry simply cant prove it actually works at all. Thats very damning in and of itself.
Anywho, sorry for the squabble before. We cool now? :wave:
I really would like to have this resolved before I go take my final so its not on my mind, lol.
-
On 2006-05-04 11:43:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2006-05-04 11:33:00, Nihilanthic wrote:
"Dude, I try to NOT rely too much on intution and emotions. We all know how that itself is manipulated to get genuinely concerned, but stoopid (or just way too scared) parents to sign off their offspring.
If shes not referring, but rather just answering questions about one specific place, thats not doing any more harm than if someone asked me about a place and I pulled info from Wes's site, ISAC, her site, here (anon anon) and whatever else I found, now is it?
"
Newsflash: PURE doesn't refer either. They just recommend programs based on their "research" and of course, well known bias against a certain organization.
:roll:
"
Ok, so you want transparency? Hey Kathy, why not give us some transparency?
-
On 2006-05-04 11:45:00, Nihilanthic wrote:
"
On 2006-05-04 11:43:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2006-05-04 11:33:00, Nihilanthic wrote:
"Dude, I try to NOT rely too much on intution and emotions. We all know how that itself is manipulated to get genuinely concerned, but stoopid (or just way too scared) parents to sign off their offspring.
If shes not referring, but rather just answering questions about one specific place, thats not doing any more harm than if someone asked me about a place and I pulled info from Wes's site, ISAC, her site, here (anon anon) and whatever else I found, now is it?
"
Newsflash: PURE doesn't refer either. They just recommend programs based on their "research" and of course, well known bias against a certain organization.
:nworthy:
-
Niles, you were right the first go-round.
This seling investigative reports to parents is a money-making scheme and it is wrong.
It's exactly what Sue Scheff does: she refers/suggests/leads---CALL IT WHATEVER YOU WANT---parents to "safer, kinder, gentler" programs than those KNOWN TO BE ABUSIVE THAT SHE HATES, and she makes BIG MONEY DOING IT.
There's no difference here.
Kathy is doing the same thing: weeding out the abusive programs, and THEN the parents will enroll their kid in whatever program is not on her LITTLE INVESTIGATIVE LIST rated as "bad."
Give me a break.
-
Kathy, I think you have a site that may work. An alternative to the Ed Cons is sorely needed. You would need to be careful that you provide an honest service and your research is fair and balanced (this applies to any service) or you will lose you customer base overnight and word will get out very quickly. Fornits would be a good source for some of your research but you would also have to balance it out with other sources.
I don?t think you will get many people here to back you unless you agree that the parents get the message that all programs are abusive and your child will not benefit from any of them. It?s very difficult to get a balanced view here.
Niles, for example, made a few good points that would be helpful to you and your cause and showed signs of thinking independently, but the group was quick to point this out to him and he backed off and joined the popular position here.
My point is be careful who you accept money from. If they are individuals that is fine, but if you accept money from a group, you take on their position also, it goes with the funding.
Good luck, sounds like a good venture, we may talk further.
-
Here we go again.
Kathy what programs, as of today, are on your GOOD LIST? The ones you could honestly tell a parent would be a safe program in which to enroll their child?
Better still, which program would you, yourself feel comfortable enrolling your own child in?
Name them.
-
On 2006-05-04 13:06:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Here we go again.
Kathy what programs, as of today, are on your GOOD LIST? The ones you could honestly tell a parent would be a safe program in which to enroll their child?
Better still, which program would you, yourself feel comfortable enrolling your own child in?
Name them."
Excellent question!
:nworthy:
-
Thanks Niles, I'm sorry too for calling you annoying, I just got on the defensive side when I found out I was being ripped apart without any warning. (And in my opinion without good reason. I never have and never will promote programs, regardless of what accusations might be thrown around.)
-
On 2006-05-04 12:56:00, TheWho wrote:
"Kathy, I think you have a site that may work. An alternative to the Ed Cons is sorely needed. You would need to be careful that you provide an honest service and your research is fair and balanced (this applies to any service) or you will lose you customer base overnight and word will get out very quickly. Fornits would be a good source for some of your research but you would also have to balance it out with other sources.
I don?t think you will get many people here to back you unless you agree that the parents get the message that all programs are abusive and your child will not benefit from any of them. It?s very difficult to get a balanced view here.
Niles, for example, made a few good points that would be helpful to you and your cause and showed signs of thinking independently, but the group was quick to point this out to him and he backed off and joined the popular position here.
My point is be careful who you accept money from. If they are individuals that is fine, but if you accept money from a group, you take on their position also, it goes with the funding.
Good luck, sounds like a good venture, we may talk further.
"
LOL - an endorsement from a quasi-program-apologist. That's really rich.
:rofl:
-
On 2006-05-04 11:28:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2006-05-04 11:14:00, Nihilanthic wrote:
"I think we're all just too damn cynical and hairtriggered here after the troll invasion and just the PURE/Whitmore shitstorm.
Since my post was anon Ill boil it down:
I'm perosnally sorry I didnt read it all the way through before making up my mind about what you're doing, Kathy. Im just too damn pessimistic for my own good.
Im also sorry I annoy you so much :grin:
"
And where is it that you are getting that I am in any way, shape or form steering anyone towards any programs? Or are you just to lazy to read before you make these accusations. Or Once again, is it just the sheer drama that you thrive on?
-
[/quote]
I get what you are saying, but respecfully disagree. I'd much rather see children have the right to due process before being "referred" into ANY FUCKING PROGRAM. It's time for people to stop preying upon kids as a cash crop.
:idea: "
[/quote]
Uhh, yaaaaaaah,
-
Disclaimer? You have GOT to be kidding? Disclaimers are designed to protect the seller, not the buyer (the parent and child).
Christ, you really are losing it Niles. Oh well, I guess it was bound to happen. Soon there will be no true advocates left.
[/quotes]
shut up o5.
-
Um Helloo??? What he is saying is absolutely correct. If something on the web site leads you to believe something differently, then please tell me exactly what that is, and what changes should take place in order to make that clear to readers.
And who is this anon anyway, who started up this trouble, and what's this anon's motives? If the motives are p.u.r.e (pun intended) then why remain anonymous? What is it you were trying to do in the first place? Or were you just bored? ::boycott::
-
On 2006-05-04 13:30:00, Kathy wrote:
"
On 2006-05-04 11:28:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2006-05-04 11:14:00, Nihilanthic wrote:
"I think we're all just too damn cynical and hairtriggered here after the troll invasion and just the PURE/Whitmore shitstorm.
Since my post was anon Ill boil it down:
I'm perosnally sorry I didnt read it all the way through before making up my mind about what you're doing, Kathy. Im just too damn pessimistic for my own good.
Im also sorry I annoy you so much :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
-
On 2006-05-04 11:40:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2006-05-04 11:37:00, Nihilanthic wrote:
"I get what you are saying, but respecfully disagree. I'd much rather see children have the right to due process before being "referred" into ANY FUCKING PROGRAM. It's time for people to stop preying upon kids as a cash crop.
Shes not referring!! Shes just digging up the facts she can find an sharing them with the parents, not saying its good or bad.
Now, yes, youre right - telling them that the kid actually has to have something wrong, and has to find a place to actually provide therapy is part of what needs to be done, and Im pretty sure she is. If not, well, ask her.
I also agree that explaining that programs arent therapy, they never said they were (many say theyre not, actually), and that behavior modification is abusive is probably a good idea, but most people dont get how a program could be bad, even without the raps/seminars and pain-compliance-restraint/beatings. Someone should do that.
Its not a therapetuic thing, and it doesnt fix any real issues, it just breaks someone down to make them behave, and it fucks them up in the process. Yeah, someone should be saying that, and we all know this by now. But, again, if shes just digging up the dirt on a program that someones asking about, is that so wrong?
Why not just suggest she do what I stated above along with whatever she digs up? Like, basically, have a program disclaimer?"
Disclaimer? You have GOT to be kidding? Disclaimers are designed to protect the seller, not the buyer (the parent and child).
Christ, you really are losing it Niles. Oh well, I guess it was bound to happen. Soon there will be no true advocates left.
:eek: "
And mr or ms. anonymous, just what is it that you are doing that makes you so holier than thou'? And an anonymous holier than thou no-less. :lol:
-
On 2006-05-04 11:43:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2006-05-04 11:33:00, Nihilanthic wrote:
"Dude, I try to NOT rely too much on intution and emotions. We all know how that itself is manipulated to get genuinely concerned, but stoopid (or just way too scared) parents to sign off their offspring.
If shes not referring, but rather just answering questions about one specific place, thats not doing any more harm than if someone asked me about a place and I pulled info from Wes's site, ISAC, her site, here (anon anon) and whatever else I found, now is it?
"
Newsflash: PURE doesn't refer either. They just recommend programs based on their "research" and of course, well known bias against a certain organization.
:roll:
"
News Flash: I don't refer to or recommend programs. This is obviously becoming a game of semantics. And now, this argument is getting to the point of ridiculous, so I guess, just believe as you wish. Enjoy.
-
On 2006-05-04 13:40:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2006-05-04 13:30:00, Kathy wrote:
"
On 2006-05-04 11:28:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2006-05-04 11:14:00, Nihilanthic wrote:
"I think we're all just too damn cynical and hairtriggered here after the troll invasion and just the PURE/Whitmore shitstorm.
Since my post was anon Ill boil it down:
I'm perosnally sorry I didnt read it all the way through before making up my mind about what you're doing, Kathy. Im just too damn pessimistic for my own good.
Im also sorry I annoy you so much :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
"
Yeah, like purchase 6 reports and the 7th is free?
Works for me!
:wink:
-
On 2006-05-04 13:06:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Here we go again.
Kathy what programs, as of today, are on your GOOD LIST? The ones you could honestly tell a parent would be a safe program in which to enroll their child?
Better still, which program would you, yourself feel comfortable enrolling your own child in?
Name them."
Kathy - can we get an answer today? I know you think this is all about "drama" but some people truly are concerned and would appreciate a response to these specific questions.
Thanks!
:wave:
-
On 2006-05-04 12:56:00, TheWho wrote:
"Kathy, I think you have a site that may work. An alternative to the Ed Cons is sorely needed. You would need to be careful that you provide an honest service and your research is fair and balanced (this applies to any service) or you will lose you customer base overnight and word will get out very quickly. Fornits would be a good source for some of your research but you would also have to balance it out with other sources.
I don?t think you will get many people here to back you unless you agree that the parents get the message that all programs are abusive and your child will not benefit from any of them. It?s very difficult to get a balanced view here.
Niles, for example, made a few good points that would be helpful to you and your cause and showed signs of thinking independently, but the group was quick to point this out to him and he backed off and joined the popular position here.
My point is be careful who you accept money from. If they are individuals that is fine, but if you accept money from a group, you take on their position also, it goes with the funding.
Good luck, sounds like a good venture, we may talk further.
"
Thank you for a sane post. I must say you understand my position now of being an "alternative" to the "pro-program" edu-con.
My research is honest, I don't no how fair and balanced it is, as I try to provide the worst information I can find in order to combat the "testimonies" (of grateful kids and parents) along with the completely false sales pitches.
Why isn't the information fair and balanced? (First, I tell people up front that I am not fair an balanced but trying to prove that "programs" aren't effective therapy and don't work. In other words, trying to be a voice for the kids who WON'T be believed!) I do this because I have been in a program and I know what goes on in the program and the lies the counslors, clients and administrators tell in order to either to get more clients, or simply because they have been brainwashed to truly believe in their "powers." Fornits is never a source of information for me at all. I use many other real and primary sources.
I don't expect to get anyone here to back me, never did expect to or care to. However, I also never expected to be intentionally attacked by "friendly fire."
I haven't accepted money from anyone so far. (Which is what makes this thread even more laughable) I wish these people would get their facts straight before going witch-hunting.... but then again, they wouldn't be hunting witches if they were so inclined to get the facts first, now would they?
-
On 2006-05-04 13:50:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2006-05-04 13:06:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Here we go again.
Kathy what programs, as of today, are on your GOOD LIST? The ones you could honestly tell a parent would be a safe program in which to enroll their child?
Better still, which program would you, yourself feel comfortable enrolling your own child in?
Name them."
Kathy - can we get an answer today? I know you think this is all about "drama" but some people truly are concerned and would appreciate a response to these specific questions.
Thanks!
:wave: "
I think I read in one of her responses that she doesn't recommend any programs and debunks the premise of all programs.
This is a slippery-slope argument saying that if she doesn't condemn every program then she supports some.
I completely understand your reasoning that if there are no offical abuse records for a particular program then parents will take that as a "green light" or an endorsement - They will.
I still think it's better than not counterbalancing the propaganda that programs employ.
And, for the record, I am against any out-of-home placement for any child that is not severely mentally ill (less than one percent of diagnosed psychopathology) unless it involves criminal detention for a serious and violent offense.
-
On 2006-05-04 13:06:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Here we go again.
Kathy what programs, as of today, are on your GOOD LIST? The ones you could honestly tell a parent would be a safe program in which to enroll their child?
Better still, which program would you, yourself feel comfortable enrolling your own child in?
Name them."
I don't have a "GOOD LIST" I could honestly tell a parent that no programs are safe. There isn't a program out there that I would enroll my own children in. And herein lies my point.... I would like this information to be known by many people out there. This coming from someone who has been labeled a "troubled teen" and as someone who is also the parent of teens today.
Why in the hell do I feel like I'm being stood up and confronted by the group? You guys are kinda creepin' me out.
-
On 2006-05-04 13:40:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2006-05-04 13:30:00, Kathy wrote:
"
On 2006-05-04 11:28:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2006-05-04 11:14:00, Nihilanthic wrote:
"I think we're all just too damn cynical and hairtriggered here after the troll invasion and just the PURE/Whitmore shitstorm.
Since my post was anon Ill boil it down:
I'm perosnally sorry I didnt read it all the way through before making up my mind about what you're doing, Kathy. Im just too damn pessimistic for my own good.
Im also sorry I annoy you so much :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
"
You are offering to do "program research" for a fee. Your report on said program comes back either good, bad or ugly .. thereby influencing the parent who purchased (excuse me, commissioned) the report to form a certain opinion and/or conclusion. Then what?
Which leads me to wonder if you have thought about offering a QUANITY DISCOUNT?
**** HUH?**** Wtf does this post mean, please clarify....
-
On 2006-05-04 14:02:00, Kathy wrote:
"
On 2006-05-04 12:56:00, TheWho wrote:
"Kathy, I think you have a site that may work. An alternative to the Ed Cons is sorely needed. You would need to be careful that you provide an honest service and your research is fair and balanced (this applies to any service) or you will lose you customer base overnight and word will get out very quickly. Fornits would be a good source for some of your research but you would also have to balance it out with other sources.
I don?t think you will get many people here to back you unless you agree that the parents get the message that all programs are abusive and your child will not benefit from any of them. It?s very difficult to get a balanced view here.
Niles, for example, made a few good points that would be helpful to you and your cause and showed signs of thinking independently, but the group was quick to point this out to him and he backed off and joined the popular position here.
My point is be careful who you accept money from. If they are individuals that is fine, but if you accept money from a group, you take on their position also, it goes with the funding.
Good luck, sounds like a good venture, we may talk further.
"
Thank you for a sane post. I must say you understand my position now of being an "alternative" to the "pro-program" edu-con.
My research is honest, I don't no how fair and balanced it is, as I try to provide the worst information I can find in order to combat the "testimonies" (of grateful kids and parents) along with the completely false sales pitches.
Why isn't the information fair and balanced? (First, I tell people up front that I am not fair an balanced but trying to prove that "programs" aren't effective therapy and don't work. In other words, trying to be a voice for the kids who WON'T be believed!) I do this because I have been in a program and I know what goes on in the program and the lies the counslors, clients and administrators tell in order to either to get more clients, or simply because they have been brainwashed to truly believe in their "powers." Fornits is never a source of information for me at all. I use many other real and primary sources.
I don't expect to get anyone here to back me, never did expect to or care to. However, I also never expected to be intentionally attacked by "friendly fire."
I haven't accepted money from anyone so far. (Which is what makes this thread even more laughable) I wish these people would get their facts straight before going witch-hunting.... but then again, they wouldn't be hunting witches if they were so inclined to get the facts first, now would they?"
What cracks me up is all the research in the world (free or not) can't protect kids from an industry that thrives on enabling their parents to label their kid a misfit and ship them off somewhere. This fear-mongering as a means of promoting personal agendas is helping the industry, not harming it.
Good luck Kathy, I don't envy you for the road you are about to travel for there truly are better (and far less risky) ways to make a few bucks.
That's not drama, or being mean-spirited either. It's some free, friendly advice. Take it or leave it.
:roll:
-
Kathy, critique and criticism is the way the real world works - in programs, its just accepted, and if you try to counter it, the group criticises YOU, not what youre saying, to humiliate you and pressure you into shutting up, and eventually capitulating to it (if not actually coming to believe it). But, well, you know that.... moving on...
Im not trying to do that, and Im not so sure everyone here is, though those who feel youre in it for bucks will have a personal beef with you accordingly - Hell, wouldnt YOU be pissed at someone masquerading to be an advocate and just getting edcon money ala $ue?
I sure would. But, youre not, so this nothing more than a misunderstanding that got blown totally out of proportion. I dont think anyones trying to single you out, but when a group of people dislikes the actions of another, the group dynamic (prolly instinctually) is to single them out, and humiliation or other negative emotions is the result. Programs take advantage of that as I said above, and you know very, very well - criticism is BAD, and NEGATIVE, so dont do it, just accept what people tell you.
Blah blah blah.
But the, of course, TheWho has to troll, even HERE...
Niles, for example, made a few good points that would be helpful to you and your cause and showed signs of thinking independently, but the group was quick to point this out to him and he backed off and joined the popular position here.
Uh, doofus, as soon as I grasped what she was actually setting out to do, I changed my opinion accordingly. Im NOT a groupthink kind of person, if anything Im a gadfly who gets off on thinking for myself. I do, however, agree with transparency and accountability for all parties with their hands in this - even Kathy. If wanting some good faith, transparency, etc, basically no more than Id ask of anyone else doing this is falling into "group think" in your mind then you have some serious issues.
BTW, what is the 'popular opinion' Im supposed to be adhering to here? That shes gonna be an edcon? Ive clearly stated otherwise. I mis understood and moved on. Youre attacking ME, and not the facts here, programmie. Cut it out.
But, then again, why the hell are YOU telling anyone about the good or bad about groupthink? :roll:
UGH. Well, Kathy, when certain people show up in a thread it does turn into the fuckin program all over again, now doesnt it?
Ill try to find better ways to bring up criticism in the future without making it feel like Im attacking the person who made the points I need to cretique in the future, because Im not trying to set out to put someone on the defensive. You did seem a little defensive yourself, but then again, if it was because of my actions, then its my fault, not yours.
So, lets see if we can MOVE ON already, everyone?
-
What cracks me up is all the research in the world (free or not) can't protect kids from an industry that thrives on enabling their parents to label their kid a misfit and ship them off somewhere. This fear-mongering as a means of promoting personal agendas is helping the industry, not harming it.
Good luck Kathy, I don't envy you for the road you are about to travel for there truly are better (and far less risky) ways to make a few bucks.
That's not drama, or being mean-spirited either. It's some free, friendly advice. Take it or leave it.
We really need to avoid trying to attack eachother when we make these points. I thoguht the point was to AVOID being another fucking interrogation chamber? Havent we had enough of that for those of us who went through a few months of years of hell?
Here... Kathy, why not make a disclaimer that they should read regarding how a lot of programs simply create emotional distress by making up shit the parents should be afraid of, such as slippery slope type nonsense regarding drugs, jailtime, ending up dead, being a whore, or whatever, and that just having a 'misfit' kid isnt grounds to put them in a program, nor is that something a program (or anything) can 'fix', besides simply growing up?
Yanno, basically so they can understand the only thing these places do is just make them conform and do as told using confrontational shit (like this thread, just in person and much more intense!) and other mind crap to maek them submit?
-
Kathy, I think the big question (have you answered it?) is whether or not you are going to make the reports available to everyone after you are paid to do them.
-
Here... Kathy, why not make a disclaimer that they should read regarding how a lot of programs simply create emotional distress by making up shit the parents should be afraid of, such as slippery slope type nonsense regarding drugs, jailtime, ending up dead, being a whore, or whatever, and that just having a 'misfit' kid isnt grounds to put them in a program, nor is that something a program (or anything) can 'fix', besides simply growing up?
I agree, in bold letters just as parent is entering your site !!
Good advice, smile.
-
You guys, I'm typing as fast as I can to respond to all your posts. I'm simply not going to get to all of them. I just finished writing up a huge post to include a response to everyone, and the screen flipped over to the main page, causing me to lose everything I had just typed. So basically I'm going to end my part in this thread like this....
If you have any more TRUE concerns, email me at ficainfo @ kathymoya . com I'll be happy to respond to you if you don't write to me anonymously. Being anonymous and trying to actually make some headway on an issue truly don't go hand in hand. It's been fun. See ya! :smile:
-
Yeah, well I'm going to start a business where parents can pay me to investigate the multi-million dollar teen referral business and the PEOPLE who work in it. Yessiree - now that's what parents really need to know. WHO CAN THEY TRUST? Ed Cons, Program Referral Services, Parents-Helping-Other-Parents, Advocates, Program Survivors, etc.
No need to contact me for a quote either. Each report costs $100.00 and it's the best money a parent will ever spend. Guaranteed, no need for a disclaimer because the truth is the best defense.
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
-
I get the feeling I'm being avoided...
-
On 2006-05-04 14:37:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Yeah, well I'm going to start a business where parents can pay me to investigate the multi-million dollar teen referral business and the PEOPLE who work in it. Yessiree - now that's what parents really need to know. WHO CAN THEY TRUST? Ed Cons, Program Referral Services, Parents-Helping-Other-Parents, Advocates, Program Survivors, etc.
No need to contact me for a quote either. Each report costs $100.00 and it's the best money a parent will ever spend. Guaranteed, no need for a disclaimer because the truth is the best defense.
:silly:
I'm just kidding, this is a spoof. Or is it? Hmmm. 300 bucks x 30? That's some serious gas money and um, well, there are a lot of desperate parents out there in need of my services.
Back later, I need to get myself a domain name.
-
On 2006-05-04 14:44:00, Paul Smith wrote:
"I get the feeling I'm being avoided..."
I hope not, it was a very good question. Maybe I want you to privately email KM?
:smokin:
-
I just did.
This is the critical question- is she really needing to pay for what she does, or is she just out for money?
-
On 2006-05-04 14:54:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2006-05-04 14:44:00, Paul Smith wrote:
"I get the feeling I'm being avoided..."
I hope not, it was a very good question. Maybe I want you to privately email KM?
:smokin: "
LOL, it did it again. Fornits, I mean. Changed my words. I actually (swear to god) typed, maybe "you need to privately" ... and it came out I WANT YOU TO.
:cry2:
-
You need to stop using auto-word changers, Deborah. Not everyone knows you can block it by putting it in a quoteblock, and it might screw up direct quotes.
_________________
"'What do I care?' I live here, asshole!"[ This Message was edited by: Paul Smith on 2006-05-04 15:04 ]
-
On 2006-05-04 15:04:00, Paul Smith wrote:
"You need to stop using auto-word changers, Deborah. Not everyone knows you can block it by putting it in a quoteblock, and it might screw up direct quotes.
_________________
"'What do I care?' I live here, asshole!"[ This Message was edited by: Paul Smith on 2006-05-04 15:04 ]"
What are you refering to? Did you write that or c/p from another thread?
-
I wrote it as a way to get rid of the autochanger.
Here, I'll type The Dreaded Words both in a quote and not in a quote, and also with a special spacer that's useful for getting around these things.
I want you to
You need to
You need to
Auto-changers are one of the worst things you can do to a forum. Especially one that's anonymous/free like this one.
-
I got a much better idea.
Get some bugs and shit, and put them on someone and let them work for a program - they'll hire anyone.
And, also, a very discrete bug on someone who is either under 18 and KNOWS WHAT THEYRE GETTING INTO to go into a program to see whats up, or someone over 18 who looks young.
Unfortunately Im 21 and look it, so Id need someone who might pass for 17 or less. Any takers? :grin:
-
You're giving me some bad memories with that particular suggestion, Nihil.
Considering the strip searching they do, bugs on kids won't work. Bugs on adults will. Hey TSW, think you can get hired again?
-
On 2006-05-04 16:00:00, Deborah wrote:
"
On 2006-05-04 15:04:00, Paul Smith wrote:
"You need to stop using auto-word changers, Deborah. Not everyone knows you can block it by putting it in a quoteblock, and it might screw up direct quotes.
_________________
"'What do I care?' I live here, asshole!"[ This Message was edited by: Paul Smith on 2006-05-04 15:04 ]"
What are you refering to? Did you write that or c/p from another thread?"
No, I wrote about this in the Web Forum Hosting forum a while back. too.
What happens is if you type in "you need to..." it gets replaced with "I want you to..."
It is quite annoying.
-
On 2006-05-04 16:23:00, Paul Smith wrote:
"You're giving me some bad memories with that particular suggestion, Nihil.
Considering the strip searching they do, bugs on kids won't work. Bugs on adults will. Hey TSW, think you can get hired again?"
The thing is, they cant just stripsearch anyone they want for any reason. If they stripsearch a kid without a valid reason and justification and authority to do so, we can bust them for that.
-
For a good cause?
-
You infiltrate one of those shitpits and get it shut down and I'll buy you several God damn cases.
-
I've long fantasized about getting hired as staff--I'd be credible as the naive easily manipulated newbie staff--and planting bugs, recording, and taking notes, video cams etc.... and then letting it all out in a very public way. (Kids' IDs protected of course, staff's not!)
-
THEN QUIT FANTASIZING AND START DOING, CLOWNTARD.
It's not that hard, seriously. All you need is to make the decision to go do it.
-
Filming abuse from the front line is pointless? Reporting first-hand about brainwashing techniques is pointless? You sure about that?
-
Youd know how to act like a programmie.
ID probably leave with a few heads tied to my belt by their bloddy hair :flame:
-
I have a job that takes a considerable portion of my time and I'm not about to leave. I have other, personal reasons why I can't.. but if I got to do it my way, there would be no sneaking involved, just corpses, chaos, and CNN.
Here's why you, TSW- you were there as staff for an extended period of time. You have experience. You've already drank your share of the Kool-Aid. The reason everyone pesters you to do it is because you're the best man for the job, asshole. That is a fact. There is nobody else on this board as qualified as you are for that particular job. Now shut your God damn mouth and go save some kids unless you really do have something better to do.[ This Message was edited by: Paul Smith on 2006-05-04 19:06 ]
-
Chickenshit.
-
Ah, so you're not just being a bitch. At least not in the sense I was thinking of.
We need to post a job on Monster or something.. "Program Infiltrator"
-
If you knew what I did for a living, you'd shut the fuck up so fast, we'd all think we've gone deaf.
I was making a joke.. but it would be interesting to see if that would actually work.
-
whoa...Paul. Now, what do you do?
Couldn't scare me. I teach inner city kids.
-
Yanno, I just might be able to disassociate enough to do it. Ive acutally trained marital arts and know how to restrain without injury or pain.
If I HAD to make the kid squeal Id just use a pressure point, not actual damage, and then probably kick myself later that night.
Anywho, it seems the way through to salvation, is through hell itself... at least for some. I just hope that I dont become the monster Im fighting in all of this. :sad:
In some ways, I already have.
-
Bump for [Slicer]ownaj[/Slicer].
Is there anyone in the audience willing to actually do this?
I'm very serious. If you're unemployed, it's a golden opportunity.
Gimme an email. paulsmith AT duumvirate DOT net.
-
The asumption that all wwasp and other operertors of programs are morons is scary.
This is probably not the best place to openly discuss such plans.
-
On 2006-05-05 09:56:00, Anonymous wrote:
"The asumption that all wwasp and other operertors of programs are morons is scary.
This is probably not the best place to openly discuss such plans. "
They're morons when it comes to therapy and helping kids, but they're shrewd, ruthless, lying dollar hounds when it comes to raking in cash.
WWASPS is basically a crime family. Just look at the abuse perpetrated against helpless kids in the name of money...
-
Actually, the more the programs fear their own employees ("is this guy an infilitrator?"), the happier I am :smile:
If you've been drinking enough Kool-Aid to think that reporting abuse to the cops (who mentioned the media..?) is gonna get you thrown in federal prison, there's no hope for you.
-
The only people that will get hurt are the low man on the totem pole the high up authorities that set up the front line staff in situations that are hard to handle and cause them to act on impulse will still get off with no marks. It will not prove anything and the child will only suffer for this.
-
Wakin' up early and readin' this crap.
All that nonsense about federal prison (Can you imagine anyone, anywhere, getting arrested for reporting something to the police? And NOBODY can prove that you joined it *just* to expose it.) already doesn't make too much sense, but it makes even less after THIS:
I know I could pull it off and manage it quite handily.
I just don't want to.
That was YOU, TSW. Unlike TheWho and the rest of the troll brigade, I have a memory longer than a few posts.
-
It's struck me that your mindless posts might have serious consequences to anyone dumb enough to believe them, so I'll add something else:
ATTENTION ANY AND ALL PROGRAM WORKERS CURRENTLY READING THIS: REPORTING ABUSES TO THE POLICE, OR EVEN TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ITSELF, WILL NOT RESULT IN ANY LEGAL ACTION AGAINST YOU. ANYWHERE. EVER.
-
(Why the FUCK do I keep coming back here?)
Jesus, are you TheWho's alter ego or what? Selective literacy. The CNN was if I got to do it my way, which, unfortunately, I don't. I think the massive pile of bodies would be a bit more illegal than confidentiality rules, don't you?
The way that is actually under discussion is simple: Person gets employed at program. Person works at program, pretends to drink Kool-Aid. Person catches abuses on camera and reports them to the authorities, particularly Child Protective Services.
And if media release is ever decided upon in the future (after, naturally, a careful look at the laws.. cripes, people), it's not hard to digitally edit out the identities of the children.
-
You are misunderstanding the nature of the game Smith. It's no good to nail a couple of counsellors for abuse. They can simply be replaced. chipping away at the walls is a waste of time. We have to attack the foundations.
-
Paul Smith seems to be a program parent troll trying to discredit this entire site. Seems to be a lot of that going around these days.
-
Check out this article
PARENTING
Group rates programs for troubled teens
After her own harrowing experience, a Weston mom formed Parents Universal Resource Experts.
BY YVONNE CAREY
Special to The Miami Herald
After failed attempts at family therapy and private counseling, Weston working mother Sue Scheff decided to send her troubled teen to a therapeutic boarding school to ease the tension for both mother and daughter.
Scheff and daughter Ashlyn, 14 at the time, pored over the literature from the few available facilities and settled on one run by The World Wide Association of Specialty Programs and Schools (WWASPS), a Utah-based organization that claims its programs can correct inappropriate behavior in children 12 and older.
Scheff learned her daughter was being abused only after Ashlyn became gravely ill from food poisoning at the facility.
''Another parent from the program called me and asked how Ashlyn was doing and it was only then I found out because her daughter had managed to leak the information to her,'' Scheff said. "They either told me [Ashlyn] was lying in her letters asking for help or that contact with her was detrimental to the treatment.''
The experience led Scheff to start P.U.R.E., or Parents Universal Resource Experts, an organization that assists parents in finding trustworthy programs for their children struggling with issues like addiction, violence and attention deficit disorder.
''Before P.U.R.E., there was nowhere to go,'' Scheff said. "We do all the research and legwork for them to find what is available, and then they decide where to place their teens. We prescreen these schools and programs by visiting them and interviewing not only the parents and teens who completed the program or attended the school but also those who are currently in the program or school.''
P.U.R.E. also has a suggested reading list for parents and teens. It is financed by several schools and programs as well receiving private donations, Scheff said, so the service is free.
Terri Pardo of Pembroke Pines said the referral list of doctors, psychiatrists, psychologists and group therapy included an out-of-state source that was perfect for her son, Robert.
''She has firsthand experience to know what it's like to need help. You feel all alone,'' Pardo said of Scheff, noting the popular perception that the parent is at fault and that more punishment is the answer. "This gave me an alternate source from someone who went through the same thing and it was a great comfort.''
Scheff's plight, and her solution, have gained the attention of the media. Dr. Phil McGraw, host of the popular psychology TV talk show, Dr. Phil, has recommended P.U.R.E. to parents.
According to a June Miami New Times article, at least six other WWASPS programs around the world have been investigated or closed during the past decade, following allegations of abuse or questionable practices.
''Teen boot camp abuse is widely known and a very serious, hot topic,'' Scheff said. "We don't want to separate the kids from the parent. We want to bring families back together.''
Scheff has written a book based on similar experiences of parents, At My Wit's End, which she hopes to have published by next fall.
-
(Why the FUCK do I keep coming back here?)
Jesus, are you TheWho's alter ego or what? Selective literacy. The CNN was if I got to do it my way, which, unfortunately, I don't. I think the massive pile of bodies would be a bit more illegal than confidentiality rules, don't you?
The way that is actually under discussion is simple: Person gets employed at program. Person works at program, pretends to drink Kool-Aid. Person catches abuses on camera and reports them to the authorities, particularly Child Protective Services.
And if media release is ever decided upon in the future (after, naturally, a careful look at the laws.. cripes, people), it's not hard to digitally edit out the identities of the children.
I think Paul has made it clear where he stands and how he'd do the job.
Unfortunately, the smoking crater, burned-out buildings, charred, bullet-riddled bodies and the vultures circling in the dark cloud of partial cremation smoke may alert the authorities to various wrongdoings.
Can't blame the guy for looking for other effective methods, can ya?
-
OMG, now that woman is writing a book?
That is scary.
-
If you knew what I did for a living, you'd shut the fuck up so fast, we'd all think we've gone deaf.
I was making a joke.. but it would be interesting to see if that would actually work.
I know what you do for a living.
-
you guys are wrong if you beleive that going in with cameras is going to result in anything but alot of media attention to the hidden and pervasice culture of child torture.
No one is going for jail for violating "confidentiality laws".! There have been 1000s of exposes on nursing homes abusive asylums and none have ever resulted in jail time for the exposer either.!
The only people facing jail time will be the program runners. No, not only the abusive staff will face penalty but the people who run the organizations, as not just the staff of concentration camps faced penalty but also the architects the money handlers etc. If you proove a system of torture was set up- which is exactly what you'll proove with images of kids working from morning to night or being denied the right to speak of sleep etc, the guys on top get punished too. ITS HIS SYSTEM! Not that its EASY to do this god knows, you really need to be a crusader
We all have our personal reasons for not taking this step- Im hardly doing it either- but lets not pretend its becasue we'll be shipped off to prison
-
Out of curiosity what do you do for a living?
Actually let me guess- a soldier?
either that, or a pamphleteer for NABMLA
I cant think of anything else that can disqaulify you for undercover work
(actually being a soldier could lend you credibility. But of course the military is a facist evil entit y that it is, and being a part of it creates the only situation possible where you can actually face legal penalty)
-
On 2006-05-04 08:04:00, Anonymous wrote:
"grown some balls
You grew some balls? That is kind of gross."
LOL! Now THAT was funny! I sure as hell did write grown instead of what I intended (which of course was grow) OOps. I made way too many typos on my way out the door this morning. And it wasn't 4am. If any of you are familiar with this web site, it clearly statesthat all times posted are in pacific time. And I am NOT on the pacific coast.
I originally was not going to respond to this anymore, but curiousity got the best of me and I did check back to see if there were any further smears of my name.
And then I came across this post and it struck me really, really funny. So being that it kind of put me in a jovial mood, I guess I'll address your accusations and critisicms. Again I only have a short amount of time, so please forgive any typos. (LOL)
Anyway. I've been offering free information on the internet for 6 years nows. I've paid out thousands of dollars getting the message out to people. Never asking for fees or donations. I'm starting to get in hot water from my family about spending money for this. So, I would like to have the site, at a minimum pay for itself, so I can continue to contribute to getting the message out there.
My web site is always under construction and it takes a lot of time to get all the information I have up on the site. I'd say it is about a quarter (25%) of the way done.
In the meantime, I have posted a few specific reports, of which I have already sent out to those who have requested them. Free of charge. I simply have a donation button, because it would be nice to have at least payment for the ink and postage if for nothing else. I have put a suggested donation amount, something that isn't mandatory, but is a fair request.
Next, I do NOT make any recommendations to programs. The research service is simply that,a service I offer (you could say on the side.)
Parents who are looking into programs tend to be either single or double working parents who don't have the time it takes to do indepth research about these programs, so I have offered to do this as service to these people, if they feel they don't have the time to do it themselves. The reason I say email me for a quote, is because if I have much of the information it will be either free or a lower fee, however, if they ask me about a program or person I have never heard of and I have to do research from scratch and/or I have to pay to do some type of background check, they will have to front me that fee.
I get very specific requests, such as have you ever heard about x program? or y program? Do you know if there are any bad reports about the programs, or people who run them? If I already have any information handy, I'll email it to them, otherwise I have to just say no I haven't heard anything about that particular program, which often would be misconstrued as "that program must be ok." So in order to have the opportunity to catch someone like that from simply deducing that no info means the program is ok, I'm willing to do the research for them, (especially if they don't have the time to do it) but I can not be using the little bit of cash I have to PAY THEM not to put their kid in a program. That is just ridiculous!!!. I need my expenses reimbursed.
Why hasn't anyone complained about my offering web site services "FOR A FEE!" I mean gosh, don't you think I should just provide web services to everyone who comes to my site for free as well? No one says anyone who comes to my site HAS to purchase the research service. They can do the research themselves, I actually prefer that they do, however, there are people who would rather pay someone else to do it for them, and what better person, then someone who has been watching this industry for years, and knows where to look and what to look for to get that information in the shortest period of time.
Now there is one last option, if you guys want to help me pay for all my bills regarding the FICA site, then I won't have to charge anyone anything, I can just take for the FICA jar to do these researches for people.
I really don't understand how anyone misconstrued what I offer on my site as being my charging parents to tell them where to put their kids. Nothing could be further from the truth.
I think a lot of hysterical groupthink happens on fornits. Kind of reminds me of being in "group" in the program. Who would have ever thought fornits would one day become "group" all over again.
Well, hope this clears things up for you all, and if not, like I've said before, feel free to email me directly. I'm very approachable. I have no problems dealing with a problem head-on. Of course this wouldn't be nearly as fun or dramatic as fabricating something on fornits. So have it your way. Post away on fornits or else, just email me.
And who ever wrote this email, thanks for the laugh, that was funny!
Kathy :smile:
I think i have a solution to the controversy. Post the research you have done publicly on your site for all to see.
For those requesting information on some obscure "new" program, make their "purchase" public. Assign each customer a number. Declare what you are working on and post the research publicly as well as "who" you are working for by number.
This should alleviate any suspicion.
However, you should always try and inform parents of the dangers of the industry. Even programs with no abuse allegations can be bad.
-
Why in the hell do I feel like I'm being stood up and confronted by the group?
That probably has something to do with it...
-
This I believe says it all. To bad we ran Kathy off the board. She is a hell of a cool lady.
We did?
Yes, she is.. if we're talking about the same Kathy. Kathy M.
-
I have a job that takes a considerable portion of my time and I'm not about to leave. I have other, personal reasons why I can't.. but if I got to do it my way, there would be no sneaking involved, just corpses, chaos, and CNN.
Here's why you, TSW- you were there as staff for an extended period of time. You have experience. You've already drank your share of the Kool-Aid. The reason everyone pesters you to do it is because you're the best man for the job, asshole. That is a fact. There is nobody else on this board as qualified as you are for that particular job. Now shut your God damn mouth and go save some kids unless you really do have something better to do.[ This Message was edited by: Paul Smith on 2006-05-04 19:06 ]
aren't you a self righteous little guy ...
-
Niles, for example, made a few good points that would be helpful to you and your cause and showed signs of thinking independently, but the group was quick to point this out to him and he backed off and joined the popular position here.
I found that interesting as well.
-
Here we go again.
Kathy what programs, as of today, are on your GOOD LIST? The ones you could honestly tell a parent would be a safe program in which to enroll their child?
Better still, which program would you, yourself feel comfortable enrolling your own child in?
Name them.
Get over yourself.
-
I sense the presence of Harry Houdini, he has finally returned.