Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => The Troubled Teen Industry => Topic started by: Anonymous on April 06, 2004, 05:14:00 PM
-
Does anyone have any hard facts about ALA and its staff? Why is there so much hoopla about this place when no one seems to be shedding any light on what the problem is here or if there truly is a problem. Facts please or shut up.
-
Hi Paige (I bettcha)
It seems to me you don't want to hear anything that doesn?t support your already preconceived notions. Sorry, but they can only be supported by snide remarks and innuendo.
Love them or hate them, These people (ALA) are who they say they are.
They do what they claim to do; and weather you agree or not; you should at least be able to take Some comfort in that.
These folks are not like Some that with hold vital info from the parents and guardians.
-
On 2004-04-06 15:16:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Hi Paige (I bettcha)
It seems to me you don't want to hear anything that doesn?t support your already preconceived notions. Sorry, but they can only be supported by snide remarks and innuendo.
Love them or hate them, These people (ALA) are who they say they are.
They do what they claim to do; and weather you agree or not; you should at least be able to take Some comfort in that.
These folks are not like Some that with hold vital info from the parents and guardians."
Big Whup! I take no comfort in a program that discloses the identity of their owners and staff and doesn't withhold vital info from parents and guardians.
At the VERY LEAST, that's what I would expect from any special-purpose school or program.
What counts is the PURPOSE and whether or not teens have the right to reject forced indoctrination as the answer to keeping 'em on the straight and narrow. In my opinion, nobody should be FORCED by their parents into a faith-based school or program because the parent's own religious doctrine tells them their child is obsessed by the wicked ways of the world. That is an abuse of parental rights.
Wanna try again???
-
Yes, this is Paige, is this Karen or Craig or is it Lise? Apparently you did not read my message. If you can't give any facts about this place shut up and don't waste my time or anyone else's time. I am looking for pertinent information about this program good or bad and I do not have a pre conceived notion of this facility only of her parents who have neglected to give her an education and have systematically kept her from her brother and the rest of her true family. It is a true shame that Amanda has had to suffer and make some very serious decisions due to her parents inability to be parents. There will be a law suit and I will fight for Amanda. To be quite honest with you I truly feel that she is probably much better there than with her adoptive parents. So I will ask again. Do you have any pertinent information or not?
-
You are quite correct in that no child should be forced into a faith based or any other type of program such as this. However it does happen so the only thing that we can hope for is that the facility is legitimate and does not hide any information. It is important to know who is running the show and any quality facility faith based or not will be more than forth coming with the employees and their qualifications and a simple matter of an address which ALA does not supply for its mexico facility. If they had nothing to hide - why do they hide where the kids are in Mexico and move them constantly to different a location.
-
Paige,
Facts are posted on the very informative , easy to navigate, web site.
What else do you want to know? And why ask a bunch of people who have nothing to do with ALA, and refuse to speak with those who do; all the while demanding "facts"?
I have no idea what is behind all the problems you have with other peoples parenting; but I'm 'begining to understand why they don't want to be bothered with you. You seem to be a very hostile lady.
Our anon investigator askes a question -
why do they hide where the kids are in Mexico and move them constantly to different a location.
They don't. The problem lies with your use of the word 'constantly'. They moved one time; just like any one might. The families know where they are; and thats all that need to know. I have lately begun to see the wisdom of Not advertising the actual address.
-
So, you have a fear of being recognized? At least I come out in the open. Is that too much for you to do? May I ask with whom I am speaking? As for this web site no, I do not expect to get viable information but you do have to admit there is quite a bit of chatter about this place and as a concerned family member or one of your charges it would be remiss of me to not look into it. I have been on the ALA web site. It contradicts itself in some cases so I am simply researching to appears any questions I have. And just who is Jim Bomba and what are his credentials since you found it convenient to not post it on the web site even though you say he is the director of the girls dorm?
You call me hostile, I have been called a formidable force but you have judged me with little to no knowledge of me. That doesn't seem to be very Christian like. At least I am offering you the courtesy of showing me who you are and what you do. My curiosity is well founded, my battle is for the rights of Amanda, not with you. I sincerely hope that you can reveal yourself it would be nice to know that you are speaking about ALA with authority.
-
On 2004-04-06 17:03:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Paige,
Facts are posted on the very informative , easy to navigate, web site.
What else do you want to know? And why ask a bunch of people who have nothing to do with ALA, and refuse to speak with those who do; all the while demanding "facts"?
I have no idea what is behind all the problems you have with other peoples parenting; but I'm 'begining to understand why they don't want to be bothered with you. You seem to be a very hostile lady.
Our anon investigator askes a question -
why do they hide where the kids are in Mexico and move them constantly to different a location.
They don't. The problem lies with your use of the word 'constantly'. They moved one time; just like any one might. The families know where they are; and thats all that need to know. I have lately begun to see the wisdom of Not advertising the actual address.
"
By law, these programs are required to register the names of children who reside in foreign-based programs along with other information (including the location of the program) with the appropriate U.S. Embassy. Second, any interested party can contact the U.S. Embassy and ask them to do a "welfare check" on a particular child.
:smokin:
-
Thats true and good advice. Maybe that will set some minds at ease.
-
Paige, How are you a family member? Whats the relationship?
Yes, you have a right to be concerned and its good to take an interest and wise to look into things; But you do *seem* hostile and determined to find stuff to gripe about.
This is not the best way to be listened to or co operated with.
Yes, you are being judged on to little knowledge. Such is the unavoidable nature of open internet boards. I have the same problem; and so does everyone else. Best get used to it.
-
I have never refused to speak to anyone involved with ALA but apparently now someone from ALA is speaking with me and refusing to identify themselves. Some people would find that a little fishy and I do know for a fact that the children have moved more than once. If there is a legitimate reason for this then you should not have a problem declaring it. As for my problem with "other peoples parenting" this child is very dear to my heart and my problem is with this set of parents and this set only. In fact it is not just myself, It is the vast majority of this blended family who is against how these people have raised this child I am merely the spokes person for them and there are quite a few of us - including family members of the "parents". Believe me, many people are talking to me and they are taking the time to be bothered with this situation. If you rely solely on the information that you have received from the parents of Amanda please believe me you should save your judgement until you know the entire story. So are you an employee of ALA or are you still afraid to reveal yourself?
-
On 2004-04-06 19:38:00, Anonymous wrote:
"I have never refused to speak to anyone involved with ALA but apparently now someone from ALA is speaking with me and refusing to identify themselves. Some people would find that a little fishy and I do know for a fact that the children have moved more than once. If there is a legitimate reason for this then you should not have a problem declaring it. As for my problem with "other peoples parenting" this child is very dear to my heart and my problem is with this set of parents and this set only. In fact it is not just myself, It is the vast majority of this blended family who is against how these people have raised this child I am merely the spokes person for them and there are quite a few of us - including family members of the "parents". Believe me, many people are talking to me and they are taking the time to be bothered with this situation. If you rely solely on the information that you have received from the parents of Amanda please believe me you should save your judgement until you know the entire story. So are you an employee of ALA or are you still afraid to reveal yourself?"
Yes, it is odd that this "spokesperson" for ALA is apparently reluctant to reveal their identity. Why?
-
On 2004-04-06 19:23:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Paige, How are you a family member? Whats the relationship?
Yes, you have a right to be concerned and its good to take an interest and wise to look into things; But you do *seem* hostile and determined to find stuff to gripe about.
This is not the best way to be listened to or co operated with.
Yes, you are being judged on to little knowledge. Such is the unavoidable nature of open internet boards. I have the same problem; and so does everyone else. Best get used to it. "
Anon, seems to me this person "Paige" has asked you several times to tell her who you are but all you seemed concerned about is chastising her for coming across as "hostile". Did it ever occur to you that not answering a direct question comes across as EVASIVE?
:???:
-
Thank you for the information about the Embassy. I do appreciate you sharing this information with me. All of the Aunts, Uncles, numerous grandparents (adoptive and otherwise) and her brother who misses her and would like to be able to communicate with her will be most grateful.
Best Wishes
Paige
-
? I have never refused to speak to anyone involved with ALA?
My apologies then. I was given the distinct impression that you had declined my generous offer to speak with you anytime.
?someone from ALA is speaking with me and refusing to identify themselves. Some people would find that a little fishy?
Some might. Others understand the reason for it; the history of which, I am not about to go into yet again.
?I do know for a fact that the children have moved more than once.?
Then you know more than I do about it. I am only aware of one move; but even if their have been two or three, I am confident the reasons are perfectly reasonable. Again, the families know where the kids are; and there maybe good reason to withhold that information from the general public or extended family.
?the vast majority of this blended family who is against how these people have raised this child?
Exactly how many is this vast majority? How many out of how many? And I?d be interested in Why, though I don?t think a Public Internet Board is the place to disscuss it. I assume as concerned as you are for this student; you place Some value on her privacy.
?save your judgment until you know the entire story.?
I do a little doubt, you?ll meet many in your life, more aware than I, that there are two sides to every story. I like what Solomon tells us, every story sounds true, until you hear the other side. However, let me again point out - this is an Open Internet Board. Privacy is an issue. Please take this into consideration.
?So are you an employee of ALA or are you still afraid to reveal yourself??
I am not afraid to revel myself. The regulars know me, and I figured they?d tip you off if you couldn?t figure it out yourself. I no longer post with my name for reasons of my own, that have nothing whatsoever to do with ALA.
I am associated with ALA; but I?m not an employee in the sence you mean it. I?m more like a friend of the family.
I do believe I understand the basis for your concerns. I don?t discount them. If you could just relax a little; Turn down the volume so to speak, I do believe you?d have much more success in being herd; and having your fears very much lessened. You may never agree, but you could be much less worried.
-
On 2004-04-07 07:54:00, Anonymous wrote:
"? I have never refused to speak to anyone involved with ALA?
My apologies then. I was given the distinct impression that you had declined my generous offer to speak with you anytime.
?someone from ALA is speaking with me and refusing to identify themselves. Some people would find that a little fishy?
Some might. Others understand the reason for it; the history of which, I am not about to go into yet again.
?I do know for a fact that the children have moved more than once.?
Then you know more than I do about it. I am only aware of one move; but even if their have been two or three, I am confident the reasons are perfectly reasonable. Again, the families know where the kids are; and there maybe good reason to withhold that information from the general public or extended family.
?the vast majority of this blended family who is against how these people have raised this child?
Exactly how many is this vast majority? How many out of how many? And I?d be interested in Why, though I don?t think a Public Internet Board is the place to disscuss it. I assume as concerned as you are for this student; you place Some value on her privacy.
?save your judgment until you know the entire story.?
I do a little doubt, you?ll meet many in your life, more aware than I, that there are two sides to every story. I like what Solomon tells us, every story sounds true, until you hear the other side. However, let me again point out - this is an Open Internet Board. Privacy is an issue. Please take this into consideration.
?So are you an employee of ALA or are you still afraid to reveal yourself??
I am not afraid to revel myself. The regulars know me, and I figured they?d tip you off if you couldn?t figure it out yourself. I no longer post with my name for reasons of my own, that have nothing whatsoever to do with ALA.
I am associated with ALA; but I?m not an employee in the sence you mean it. I?m more like a friend of the family.
I do believe I understand the basis for your concerns. I don?t discount them. If you could just relax a little; Turn down the volume so to speak, I do believe you?d have much more success in being herd; and having your fears very much lessened. You may never agree, but you could be much less worried. "
Karen, you never did answer the question as to where you stand on Craig's allegations and threats to sue Ginger/Fornits. What gives? Either you agree with Rogers or you don't. Personally, I am sick and tired of you program owners and parents using Fornits to promote yourselves and then when things don't go your way, threatening to sue people. Please, if you are going to act as the official spokesperson for ALA, you really should let people know where you stand and not be afraid to sign your posts as Karen Burnett.
-
Lets be clear on this: I Never at any time brought up the subject. I am not using Fornits to promote anything.
I have areas of agreement, as well as disagreement with Craig as well as everybody else I have even known. Do you have a friend that you agree with on every point of every issue?
I am unaware of any sute being filed; except by PURE.
I am trying to maintain a netrual position; as I know absolutly nothing about the laws (if any) pretaining to the subject.
I do think Ginger could save herself a lot of aggravation by being more sensitive to this problem; and doing a little reasonable moderating. I feel it is the responsable thing to do, if one operates a forum.
She disagrees. Strongly.
It appears it may take a judge to settle the issue; but that dosen't mean I am happy about it.
I wish all invloved could come to a meeting of the minds that would satisfy; but I don't see that happening.
So, it seems, here come da judge; What I think and weather or not I am happy about it, matters not.
-
I wish all invloved could come to a meeting of the minds that would satisfy; but I don't see that happening.
Why do you say you don't see that happening? What do you see happening?
-
Oh brother, you may not know the law, but you sure have an opinion, as evident by the hundreds of posts you've written, many of which you apparently regretted enough to go back later and erase. Personally, I don't blame you for having second thoughts about your role in the I HATE CAREY crusade which was nothing more than a smear campaign, in my opinion, and a low-down dirty one at that (see Fornits Archives).
Have you even bothered to set the record straight on your affiliation (past and/or present) with PURE? Recruiting for direct-action lawsuit clients on the Bridge to Understanding forum? Seems to me you are active on a host of websites, if you don't like the rules, than move on. It's really pretty simple.
:silly:
-
On 2004-04-07 12:58:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Oh brother, you may not know the law, but you sure have an opinion, as evident by the hundreds of posts you've written, many of which you apparently regretted enough to go back later and erase. Personally, I don't blame you for having second thoughts about your role in the I HATE CAREY crusade which was nothing more than a smear campaign, in my opinion, and a low-down dirty one at that (see Fornits Archives).
Have you even bothered to set the record straight on your affiliation (past and/or present) with PURE? Recruiting for direct-action lawsuit clients on the Bridge to Understanding forum? Seems to me you are active on a host of websites, if you don't like the rules, than move on. It's really pretty simple.
:silly: "
Oh yes, let's not forget .... you do have your own forum (ALA Bulletin Board). Perhaps you could spend more time over there pontificating to your heart's content. God knows you have a lot to say, whether it makes any sense or not, is factually correct or even relevant to the topic at hand. Sorry to be so harsh, but enough is enough.
-
Goofy face anon; you are making assumptions based on scant actual knowledge, and as usual in such cases, you are mistaken.
My reasons are my own, and have nothing to do with regretting anything, I assure you.
I have felt badly about calling Carey a wwasp whore; but no to bad. I believe it to the case; but maybe ought not say so.
It is interesting how there is always Someone trying to bring the dialog back to Carey.(Having a little trouble walking away from the lime light?) Anyway, I know it isn't Christian to despise someone so badly, and so I do try and keep it in check. As for forgiveness - as someone is bound to bring up - I find it difficult to forgive someone who refuses to admit they've done wrong. If she would admit she has done a despicable thing and ask forgiveness - I honestly believe I could manage it. But as I believe she'd rather die than admitt she could ever do anything wrong - I don't think I'll be put to the test.
Move on you say (get lost) well, I might. And if and when I do, folks like you will insist I'm evading you.
-
On 2004-04-07 18:02:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Goofy face anon; you are making assumptions based on scant actual knowledge, and as usual in such cases, you are mistaken.
My reasons are my own, and have nothing to do with regretting anything, I assure you.
I have felt badly about calling Carey a wwasp whore; but no to bad. I believe it to the case; but maybe ought not say so.
It is interesting how there is always Someone trying to bring the dialog back to Carey.(Having a little trouble walking away from the lime light?) Anyway, I know it isn't Christian to despise someone so badly, and so I do try and keep it in check. As for forgiveness - as someone is bound to bring up - I find it difficult to forgive someone who refuses to admit they've done wrong. If she would admit she has done a despicable thing and ask forgiveness - I honestly believe I could manage it. But as I believe she'd rather die than admitt she could ever do anything wrong - I don't think I'll be put to the test.
Move on you say (get lost) well, I might. And if and when I do, folks like you will insist I'm evading you.
"
Oh, so you admit calling Ms. Bock a WWASPS Whore? That is quite a confession coming from someone who calls themselves a Christian. What else did you call Ms. Bock in your rush to demonize the lady? As for forgiveness, they say "forgiveness is divine" and I believe it. The fact that you can not (or will not) forgive someone tells me all I need to know.
Baaaaaah, beware of wolves in sheep's clothing.
:wave:
-
Speaking of Carey, I just hope she finds out who posted her SSN#, called her employer, insinuated she was an "unfit" mother and CPS should be called, etc., etc., etc.,
As for the people who engaged ad-nauseum in the name-calling and despictable personal attacks on this lady, I believe YOU are the ones who should be asking for forgiveness, not erasing your posts or insisting you had some kind of moral obligation to crucify her.
Now it seems Carey has been M.I.A. for awhile, but if she is reading, I hope she and her boys are doing well. After all, this was a mom who fearing for their safety and well-being, did something about it. That makes her a winner in my eyes.
:smile:
-
I strongly suspect Mz Bock to be not only reading but posting. She is by no means MIA; she has just gone covert; as she has always done, when it suits her.
If she found herself a target of people's wrath, it is only b/c of the spite and hate she spewed forth and mudslinging she did.
Such stuff boomerangs.
And she is wwasp's whore. She has admitted it though not in those words. Her admission well fits the definition.
I know she is viewed as a heroin for going in and getting her boys. I too, thought that was gutsy and admirable at the time. I now see it differently. I think the lady is addicted to drama and has a deep seated need to keep trauma and turmoil going at all times. I suspect she feels like she will cease to exist without having an emotional storm going on around her. She made sure to do it in as dramatic and public a way possible; which wouldn't have been necessary, if her only motive was removing her sons.
She'll do whatever it takes to keep trouble and discord brewing and there is ample evidence of this. She has picked and hacked and attacked nearly everyone, at one point or another.
Should all these folks forgive her, without her admitting wrong doing and asking for forgiveness?
I don?t think so.
You are free to disagree.
-
I strongly suspect Mz Bock to be not only reading but posting. She is by no means MIA; she has just gone covert; as she has always done, when it suits her.
Can you give examples as to your statement "She is by no means MIA, she has just gone covert; as she has always done, when it suits her."
-
If she found herself a target of people's wrath, it is only b/c of the spite and hate she spewed forth and mudslinging she did.
Mudslinging or disclosing?
I see it more as disclosing information on a very hot topic.
-
On 2004-04-08 08:12:00, Anonymous wrote:
"I strongly suspect Mz Bock to be not only reading but posting. She is by no means MIA; she has just gone covert; as she has always done, when it suits her.
If she found herself a target of people's wrath, it is only b/c of the spite and hate she spewed forth and mudslinging she did.
Such stuff boomerangs.
And she is wwasp's whore. She has admitted it though not in those words. Her admission well fits the definition.
I know she is viewed as a heroin for going in and getting her boys. I too, thought that was gutsy and admirable at the time. I now see it differently. I think the lady is addicted to drama and has a deep seated need to keep trauma and turmoil going at all times. I suspect she feels like she will cease to exist without having an emotional storm going on around her. She made sure to do it in as dramatic and public a way possible; which wouldn't have been necessary, if her only motive was removing her sons.
She'll do whatever it takes to keep trouble and discord brewing and there is ample evidence of this. She has picked and hacked and attacked nearly everyone, at one point or another.
Should all these folks forgive her, without her admitting wrong doing and asking for forgiveness?
I don?t think so.
You are free to disagree. "
Anon, most people have figured out Bock is/was not the boogie-man despite how hard you and your compadres in the I HATE CAREY CLUB tried to make it so. Personally I think the lady was lucky to be kicked out of what sounds like a veritable hornet's nest.
:roll:
-
On 2004-04-08 08:12:00, Anonymous wrote:
"I know she is viewed as a heroin for going in and getting her boys. I too, thought that was gutsy and admirable at the time. I now see it differently. I think the lady is addicted to drama and has a deep seated need to keep trauma and turmoil going at all times. I suspect she feels like she will cease to exist without having an emotional storm going on around her. She made sure to do it in as dramatic and public a way possible; which wouldn't have been necessary, if her only motive was removing her sons."
:nworthy: :nworthy: :nworthy: :nworthy:
-
By the way, that's heroine (not heroin, as in the drug).
:flame:
Lastly, Carey may not be an angel, but she sure is hell ain't some wolf in sheep's clothing.
Baaaaaaaah......
:rofl:
-
On 2004-04-08 08:12:00, Anonymous wrote:
"I strongly suspect Mz Bock to be not only reading but posting. She is by no means MIA; she has just gone covert; as she has always done, when it suits her.
If she found herself a target of people's wrath, it is only b/c of the spite and hate she spewed forth and mudslinging she did.
Such stuff boomerangs.
And she is wwasp's whore. She has admitted it though not in those words. Her admission well fits the definition.
I know she is viewed as a heroin for going in and getting her boys. I too, thought that was gutsy and admirable at the time. I now see it differently. I think the lady is addicted to drama and has a deep seated need to keep trauma and turmoil going at all times. I suspect she feels like she will cease to exist without having an emotional storm going on around her. She made sure to do it in as dramatic and public a way possible; which wouldn't have been necessary, if her only motive was removing her sons.
She'll do whatever it takes to keep trouble and discord brewing and there is ample evidence of this. She has picked and hacked and attacked nearly everyone, at one point or another.
Should all these folks forgive her, without her admitting wrong doing and asking for forgiveness?
I don?t think so.
You are free to disagree. "
My impression from Carey's statements on this subject is that she was "advised" to take bodyguards (escorts?) and I believe, an educational consultant with her to Costa Rica, all at her personal expense. Is this not correct? If so, who advised her that this was appropriate and/or necessary?
-
On 2004-04-07 07:54:00, Anonymous wrote:
I assume as concerned as you are for this student; you place Some value on her privacy.
Oh, puhleeezzzz! Her privacy? Are you pretending that this kid has voluntarily severed all ties w/ her extended family and that's why they can't get in touch w/ her?
Her privacy? Who the hell do you think you're talking to, Anon ALA spokesperson?
Writing about music is like dancing about architecture.
--
-
On 2004-04-07 10:11:00, Anonymous wrote:
Personally, I am sick and tired of you program owners and parents using Fornits to promote yourselves and then when things don't go your way, threatening to sue people.
Might it be more accurate to say trying to use Fornits to promote themselves? I remain firmly convinced that the pitch falls flat reliably unless the salesmen can accomplish some degree of control over the mark's perceptions. I'm not tired of it at all. I started out working from the theory that w/o the ability to control the dialog, the pitch has no legs. And I remain convinced that my theory is correct.
Errors, like straws, upon the surface flow;
He who would search for perls must dive below.
Prolougue (from preface to
the Panther Book)
John Dryden, All for Love, Prolougue
-
Ginger Writes
{/quote}
Might it be more accurate to say trying to use Fornits to promote themselves? I remain firmly convinced that the pitch falls flat reliably unless the salesmen can accomplish some degree of control over the mark's perceptions. I'm not tired of it at all. I started out working from the theory that w/o the ability to control the dialog, the pitch has no legs. And I remain convinced that my theory is correct.
[/quote]
Now that I think about it, I think you're exactly right. It's all in the "packaging" of the product.
:idea:
-
On 2004-04-08 10:16:00, Anonymous wrote:
My impression from Carey's statements on this subject is that she was "advised" to take bodyguards (escorts?) and I believe, an educational consultant with her to Costa Rica, all at her personal expense. Is this not correct? If so, who advised her that this was appropriate and/or necessary?
I don't think you're going to get an answer to your question, except maybe from Carey. In fact, just for shits and giggles, try asking relatively routine questions about any of the organizations discussed in these fora and see if you get anywhere. Not the hard ones, like "do you engage in psychological torture?" Just the really simple stuff. Ask an EdCon how they go about ensuring that the schools and programs they refer to are actually safe and effective.
Here, like this:
To: Anon spokesperson for ALA. Putting aside for the moment the question of whether there really is a girl in ALA who's name is Amanda and who's relative, Paige, would like to contact her, let's examine the question asked earlier about how ALA goes about preventing it's charges from simply walking away. Let's assume this is a real scenario, as I think most Program vets will agree that it's plausible. Most of us found out far too late that we had friends and reletives who were not so pleased w/ our parents' decision wrt Program placement.
I understand ALA is not a lock down facility. I take that to mean that the doors are not locked and the windows are not barred or bolted shut. And yet I've read posts in these fora defending ALA's admitting and holding kids against their will because (to paraphrase) druggies don't know they need help, therefore you have to force it on them.
What would happen if Amanda were able to freely contact anyone she wanted to? What if she could just pick up the phone and call Aunt Paige collect and say "Meet me at the McDonald's in Kanab, UT" or "Wire me $100 for a bus ticket"?
In your opinion, would ALA be able to meet payrole if students were free to contact friends and family in that manner?
Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.
Thomas Jefferson, 1787
-
This is Paige and I know exactly what would happen. Amanda would call me from Mexico and I would drop everything as would her Aunt And Uncle to go get her and bring her home to the people who love her and the people she wants to be with. Including her grandparents, aunts and uncles, her blood brother, her great grandmother, her friends and many other people who know her and love her. Amanda knows that I will find her and she knows I will not give up on her or throw her away as her adoptive parents have. None of us who love her will give up until we have her home where she belongs. We all love her and miss her and her brother who is 14 was promised by the parents in front of the judge at the adoption that they would never be kept from seeing each other. We the family are all Christians and we are apalled by the parents behaviour towards this child. With the help we are receiving from people who are concerned and some government agencies we hope to have her home soon and hopefully in good health. Thank you all for your concern. This has been a very frustrating, fearful and stressfull experience with any luck this will be over soon. PS: The media has become very interested in how this is going. It will be interesting to see who jumps on the bandwagon to help us in our struggle to undo this injustice to this child.
-
Wow, this is really inspirational. God's Speed Paige!
::drummer::
-
Paige, reading over this exchange, I see I was careless in the way I put that. I didn't mean to come accross asif I'm sure you're a troll. I'm actually pretty sure you're not. But it does happen, it often overrides the discussion so I only meant to say "let's not go there, let's just assume one or the other."
I hope I didn't hurt your feelings. [1971 - 2001] the darkest chapter in Federal law enforcement history.
Committee on Government Reform
-
Paige, I don't know if you want to talk about this in more depth or not. But I can't help asking. (Believe me, I tried, and here I am asking it anyway)
How did this happen? What did the girl's parents get into that landed them up here? Or is the friction over how they're raising her a long-term issue in the family? Is it like the Gothards or something? Any Irishman who doubts the reality of selective enforcement ought to take just a moment to comtemplate the etymology of the term "paddy waggon".
--Antigen
-
Actually you were not careless and I must apologize.
I am a bit stressed out and suffering from sleep deprivation while trying to find a solution to this problem...
The history is long. In a shorter version.....
Amanda and her brother(I will call him J) were born to a set of parents that loved them dearly. The father died of cancer 1.5 years after J was born. Amanda is 2.5 years older than J. After their father died the mom who had battled drugs and alcohol since she was a child lost it completely. At one point while they had been living with their mother they were living in abandoned houses and amanda would go beg for food for her little brother and herself. They are truly very, very remarkable children. The Aunt and Uncle took custody and looked after them and finally decided that the children would never be in a safe place with the mom and could not go back there. The great Aunt and Uncle who are in their 70's took care of them very well and through the course of lots of counseling and time we all decided that I would legally adopt J and that Amanda would be legally adopted by the other family. We all knew each other. We set about to blend together all of the families involved with these children. We did the adoptions at the same time and the Judge was adament that the children should always be able to see each other. We ALL agreed to that. It worked very well in the beginning. Amanda was definitely in need of more counseling and did not receive it from her new parents. I believe that in the beginning it was probably OK there. However the new mom to Amanda over the course of time would tell me that she was struggling with the girl and that she realy was having a hard time with her. She refused to go to counseling and refused to send Amanda to counseling. Again over time it got to were Amanda was not allowed to go see her great grandmother or her aunt and uncle. J and I got to see her sometimes but never more than 5 times in a year. This last year we saw her 3 times and she was no longer allowed to spend the night with us anymore. Her mother would call me screaming at me that Amanda was nothing but a scumbucket (this was her favorite term for the child) and she didn't stop there. at one time she demanded that I stop calling my extra bedroom Amanda's room and that I had to call it the quest room. I agreed - but Amanda never got to spend the night with us again anyway. She started telling Amanda that she was going to ship her off about 2 years ago. She also told Amanda that she was sorry they had adopted her. The mom also told me that among other things I went to CPS and they said that due to Amanda's age they would do nothing unless it was sexual abuse or physical abuse. The Parents took her out of school shortly after she went to live with them and has never realy gone to school since then. They used her as a maid and a nanny to the other chldren they have and to the private foster care child they took in who was 2 years old. When Amanda rebelled on Nov. 16 of 2003 and said I am not doing this anymore they said we will send you away and so she ran away. On January 14 of 2004 she contacted me and asked if she could come live with us and go to a real school. I said yes. The parents said no. I said I can go pick her up on Monday and the father said no maybe she just needs to stay away. the father asked me if I would adopt her I said yes. The mother said NO!
Amanda was picked up by the police and to make a long story short the parents shipped her off without telling any of us where they were sending her and knowing that she could live with me or the Aunt and Uncle or numerous other family members. The mother told the Deputy Sheriff that she wanted Amanda punished and in jail. HE SAID NO!!!!!
So here we are - Amanda is in Mexico at the Abundant Life Academy in Mexico for the next 4 to 9 months. The parents got what they wanted - her gone, and Amanda punished for wanting a normal life.
There is so much more to the story it is insane.
The parents are big in their church. Sunday School teachers and in church 3 days a week and for 3 or 4 hours on Sunday. You know GOOD CHRISTIANS.
Amanda needed help and she needed to be loved. After talking at length to the parents I think the Deputy Sheriff put it best. When I got to the police station 2 hours before the parents did he said:
"There is a problem here. I have been doing this for a long time and I have 6 children of my own and I know when a child is not loved, She is not loved by her parents. She is not a bad kid. Thank you for coming, I will let you see her."
Amanda will be 17 in July. In the state of Texas at 17 you can choose to live where ever you so choose without legal ramifications. But she won't be here in July she will still be in Mexico and won't be able to get back across the border without any papers which she does not have in her possession.
got any suggestions????????????? I am open to listening, except to that guy who posts all of that obscene stuff I just don't need that right now.
So again pleae forgive me if I ever sound a bit frazzled or hostile or angry. I am all of that and very sad and heartbroken for Amanda, her brother, the rest of the family and everyone who misses her.
I don't know what or who the Gothards are.
Thanks for listening.
Paige
-
Ginger says:
"
Oh, puhleeezzzz! Her privacy? Are you pretending that this kid has voluntarily severed all ties w/ her extended family and that's why they can't get in touch w/ her? "
What has one thing got to do with the other?
Weather or not she is happy to be were she is, she may not want her life story told on a internet forum. I happen to think thats worth taking into consideration.
Seems her parents might also object; and weather or not you agree with their parenting; this is also something that ought to be taken into account.
Paige, for the sake of these two kids; try and find a means to get along with the other family.
-
Karen, this is exactly why I am doing this. For the sake of these two children who have had their rights to be brother and sister taken away by two adults who should be gracious enough and Christian enough to understand that these 2 children should be able to be in touch with each other no matter what the parents want or where they have sent her. We all have stories to tell. Right now Amanda is not capable of telling her story because she is basically incarcerated.
I have known and loved these children since they were 5 and 7 yrs old and I do know them well enough to know how they want this handled and this story will be told. If you choose not to listen so be it and you are entitled to your opinions. So best wishes to you.
-
On 2004-04-08 17:59:00, Paige wrote:
got any suggestions????????????? I am open to listening, except to that guy who posts all of that obscene stuff I just don't need that right now.
I think she means you, Butcher. You can only call it playing if everybody's having fun. You know I won't censor you because that would damage trust. But please, just as a fellow user of these fora, please let up. Everything that people say to you is personal. Whether it is constructive criticism or not will determine whether it cam from and asshole or not.
----Bill Warbis
-
Paige, I think you're holding it together admirably! You haven't said a think to offend me.
I don't know what advice I can give you that you're not already following. I'd give my eye teeth to have had just one relative or friend go to the effort for me that you have for Amanda.
What is the judge doing? Judges don't usually like for their orders to be disregarded. Maybe you can get an order from the court to return her to Texas and place her in your custody. See if that sheriff will give you an affidavit.
Have you tried to get a writ of habeas corpus? I'm not a lawyer and I can't even begin to judge whether or not that would be legally practical or effective in your situation and jurisdiction. But I know that some kids have gotten their day in court because some concerned relative or friend has insisted on their presence in the court and they've used that particular instrument to do it.
Now, here's the scary part. I don't know how your relationship w/ this girl has been or her personality, but you ask "What would Amanda say?" I want to warn you that she might surprise you. If my own father had shown up at Straight after a certain point and asked me, point blank, if I wanted to walk out the door with him and never come back, I would have said no. I would have been lying through my teeth, but I would have been too scared that it was just another test. After awhile of seeing and hearing from only Program people, you get pretty well convinced that, if the Program allows any contact, it must be someone who they've already gotten to.
How about this. Find someone in Mexico willing to post "Have you seen me" flyers w/ the girls' picture and your phone number. Maybe if she makes it out again, someone will put her up and keep her hidden till you can arrange to get her back in the country. Maybe she'll even catch sight of a flyer and know you're looking to get her out. Right now, she doesn't have any proof of that and you can bet they're probably telling her that no one cares.
If you decide to go down there, w/ or w/o a court order, and you feel you need some hired muscle to protect you, hire your own damned body guard, PI or bondsman. Do NOT take advice from someone in the industry who says they can arrange it for you for just a couple three tens of thousands of dollars!
Marijuana clearly has medicinal value.
Thousands of seriously ill Americans have
been able to determine that for themselves,
albeit illegally. Like my own family, these
individuals did not wish to break the law but
they had no choice.
--Lyn Nofziger, former deputy chairman of the Republican National Committee
-
Thank you for you support, I am very grateful to everyone who has listened and offered advice.
Amanda and her brother are such amazing people and I have been so blessed to have them in my life. I have also been blessed with the extended family that I received when these children came into my life. I have also been blessed with many people including yourself who have taken the time to read listen and offer help. I can not thank you enough. Best Wishes to you.
Paige
-
Paige, have you heard about the relative who went to court to get a young relative of hers out of a program? Don't know if it is relevant to your situation, (she did win the custody case) but thought I would bring it to your attention with the hope that it could be helpful.
Secound, what about ISAC? I can't personally vouch for them but they appear to have some experience in this area. Have you contacted them?
Re: Gini Farmer
http://fornits.com/anonanon/docs/wwasp/mvm/ (http://fornits.com/anonanon/docs/wwasp/mvm/)
ISAC
http://www.isaccorp.com (http://www.isaccorp.com)
Keep your chin up, God is with you.
-
After thoroughly reading all the entries and the comments regarding this situation, it would appear that Paige is creating another drama like in South Florida with the Elian Gonzalez case, the little boy who washed up on the shore from Cuba. His father wanted him back and his cousins here in the states took it to court to try and have Elian taken away from his father because the cousins thought they knew what was best for their cousin, regardless of the father's wishes.
As an outsider to this situation (as is everyone who has responded to Paige)we only know the one side of the story. No one, not Paige, not anyone who is showing her support, knows what the parents have gone through. It is always very easy to sit back and judge someone else's parenting skills and parenting decisions.
God as our parent, our most loving father, at times puts us in situations that we don't like, that we don't understand, FOR OUR OWN GOOD!!
Paige, you say you are a Christian. I do not know you. I do know, that you know, that as a Christian, we are to pray about situations and let God handle them. As a Christian, we are subjected to the authority over us.
I am confident that you were not in the room the many times the parents were brought to tears, the result of the bad choices this young girl has made, that lead to their decision to try to get her help by placing her where she is now. While you think you may know what has gone on with the family, I am willing to bet that you are an outsider to the problems, and as such, really not in a position to make judgement on what is best for her.
Paige, if you want to help the child, than pray for the child to make wise choices. Pray for her parents to make wise choices. Pray for God's will, not Paige's will, to be done.
The minor child in question is subjected to the authority over her, namely her parents. You are out of line, just as Elian's relatives were out of line, in trying to interfere with his father's wishes to have his son back.
The Bible has a great deal to say concerning raising children, and punishment for inappropriate actions. Could it be that her parents actually love their daughter more than you can comprehend because they are demonstrating tough love?
I have not read anything in any of your entries about the minor child being physically abused, made to sleep on hard floors, being without clothes, not being fed, being refused basic necessities. The issues you are having with her parents seem to be parenting style issues. It is so easy to sit back and judge, critisize, and condemn the parenting decisions of others.
What I have seen, with my own eyes, is that YOU PAIGE have endangered the minor child. You have listed her by name. Juvenile delinquents who commit various crimes have their names protected. You haven't even bothered to do do that. So, who is caring for the minor child and who isn't? You've pasted your family's story on the web to seek support from strangers. You have now draged your son and his sister out into the open. Yet, you sit back and condemn her parents for their decision, and make comments about them not loving her. Who is showing more love Paige, them for protecting her, or you for pasting it out in the open for the whole world to see?
Paige, as a parent myself, I will pray for her parents to make wise choices. Unlike the others who have shown you support, who have not lived through the problems that brought the minor child to the place she is now, I will not jump on your bandwagon and help you undermine the parents of this girl. One Elian story in the states is enough. Paige, if you truly do care for the girl, as you want others to believe, than stop dragging her through the mud and pray for God's will to be done, not yours.
The news is full of stories of parents who have starved their children, tied them with duct tape, beat them, had sex with them, locked them in cages, not clothed them, and other horrible things. The personal conflict you are having with her parents does not seem to fall into any of these catagories.
I feel sorry for you to be so blind.
-
Hi Craig,I was wondering when you would show up.
You are entitled to your opinion and again it is strictly your opinion making your nor I either right or wrong. And may I ask you - how long have you known the parents and the children??? You don't. I also know that God gave us a brain and the ability to act. If not then places like your school would not be in existence. God did not send Amanda to the Abundant Life Academy, her parents did. Again, I have no problem with your business I expect you and your staff to take good care of her and believe that you will. So thank you for your opinion.
-
I forgot something - this is not just my battle the rest of the family is opposed to this situation and if you choose to slamdunk me for it - go for it. The people who are important here are the family and the child. This is not my personal campaign I am the spokesperson for the rest of the family. So again thank you for your opinion and I will inform the rest of the family that we are all blind and the only ones who are not are the parents.
-
Hey, nutbar---even though he lived in a commie country, the Gonzalez dad wanted his son *home to live with him*---not to ship him away to Miss Minchin's Select Seminary for Young Ladies.
Anybody who wants to ship their kid off somewhere against the kid's will has *no* leg to stand on when a fit adult, be it friend or relative, wants to offer that kid a place in the adult's wholesome, stable home.
Shipping your kid, unwilling, off to some institution to live is the next thing to child abandonment. I think the courts should give custody to any responsible adult who knows the kid, and can offer a stable home environment, that the kid will accept.
Unless, of course, the kid is a candidate for involuntary commitment based on being an immediate danger to himself or others, and is placed in a *real* mental institution to be stabilized on medication and then released back home.
There are real grounds for involuntary commitment. There are also spurious grounds. There are a lot more pain in the ass teens than there are teens who would meet the adult criteria for involuntary commitment.
-
Another Christian program advocate who thinks they know what 'god' wants and expects others to do....
"Paige, you say you are a Christian. I do not know you. I do know, that you know, that as a Christian, we are to pray about situations and let God handle them. As a Christian, we are subjected to the authority over us."
In other words, don't interfer with 'god's' (read: program/parent) authority in this situation. Pray and be quiet. What a crock of stinky stuff. Apparently Paige has prayed and 'god' told her to intervene for a child whose real needs aren't being met.
As for the conditions that this child was living in- no there was no mention of physical abuse, but go back and read Paige's message on page 4. Her needs were not being met and it sounds like she was being used, then punished when she rebeled.
This child had other family members who were willing to take her. Like all good program supporters, the parents prefer to punish her.
Would your 'god' prefer the teen to be with family or with strangers, isolated from her family?
Your post anon sounds like a holier-than-thou, religious mind-*uck, guilt-trip to get Paige to leave the situation alone- 'god's' will is being done. Malarkey.
What this sounds like is a covert attempt to silence Paige by someone who has a vested interest in Amanda staying in the program. And to plant the suggestion in the mind's of the general public that 'god' is a program supporter. :lol:
As to airing the situation on the internet. In her attempt to be honest and forcoming about the situation, she may not have thought to leave the child's name anonymous- some of you posting obviously already knew the teen and the story. I think it gives her more credibility. A story seems less real when the characters have no names. So much easier to disregard what's happening to the real, live people involved. She can always go back and edit the names in her posts if she feels it's appropriate or necessary. That's really none of your business. And no, the name's of minors who commit crimes are not always withheld.
You say, "God as our parent, our most loving father, at times puts us in situations that we don't like, that we don't understand, FOR OUR OWN GOOD!!"
And 'god' may put these 'parents' in a courtroom where they have to defend their lame choices for this child, for their own good.
As for your example of the Elian ordeal- I see Paige as the parent in this situation, attempting to get a child released from the grips of a program that thinks they have the answers that will give this child a 'better' life, and misguided parents who have bought into it or get off on punishment.
-
Paige; I'm not trying to be a smart ass; I really would like to know; where and how you got the idea I wasn''t willing to listen to you?
I have tried to be clear that I would.
I don't think that is Craig your responding to, altho I don't know who it is.
Still, they have made a point or two you should think about.
Formost in my mind, again, is the girl's privacy.
Consider what your doing. . .
You've posted a lot of identifying information about her and her family on a board with the likes of Turd and Butcher. . .
Who knows how many others, as demented or worse, are just lurking. . .
This is very foolhardy and thoughtless.
I was also a bit taken aback by the slur you used to discribe her family, "GOOD CHRISTAINS". I wouldn't have been at all surprised, except you said a bit eariler you were Christan. . .
If so, then how can you be so comfortable mocking this family's faith?
It makes me wonder if their faith isn't your only real problem.
As for Ginger's advice, Its for the most part good advice. My only disscent would be that such advice may feed your concerns that the girl is being mistreated. If so, then she has done you a disservice, as that isn't something you need to worry about.
Ginger is a survivor of the most horrid and abusive situation I have ever herd tell of, apart from true prisoner of war stories.
It colors her world, as it naturally would for anyone. Its understandable.
However, the situation at ALA is very different and not at all what Ginger remembers or knows of other programs.
This is not a heavy handed punitive style program. No doubt they have students who would rather be somewere else - but the same can be said of most every kid in school on a nice spring day; or adult at work.
She is not being made to feel badly about herself; she is not being kept hungery or going without sleep or being threatened with violence.
She may in fact be a very unhappy young lady; but not b/c of ALA; rather b/c of the hard knocks life has delt her; and ALA is a very good place to come to terms with all this and find her strengths and develope some goals and find some true measure of Peace.
Once you are able to determine she is safe; you should leave her alone. Thats my opinion, for what ever little bit its worth.
As for her brother - I wonder if there is an impartial third party whom he could have contact threw? Would you consint to that?
It *seems* as if her family's concern revolves around you - if the boy could call from somewhere else; or even visit with someone else maybe. . .
Would you consint to that?
-
On 2004-04-09 02:08:00, Anonymous wrote:
I do know, that you know, that as a Christian, we are to pray about situations and let God handle them.
Then send those kids back to their homes and just pray for them, ok?Moralizing, with the force of law or coercion, is a
far greater crime against the constitutional principles of our nation than unauthorized euphoria, regardless of the substance involved, be it chocolate or heroin.
--James
-
On 2004-04-09 08:14:00, Anonymous wrote:
Formost in my mind, again, is the girl's privacy.
I think you should take it up with Craig, then, for putting Amanda's name out on the web on the pretense of a prayer request.
As far as I can tell, this family's privacy has not been compromised here. Having read these threads, all I know is that there's a girl named Amanda who lives in Texas and has a relative named Paige. That could be damned near anyone.
For three days after death, hair and fingernails continue to grow but phone calls taper off.
-- Johnny Carson
-
If so, then how can you be so comfortable mocking this family's faith?
The owner of the school is a hypocrit. If anyone is mocking anyones faith, it would be he.
It makes me wonder if their faith isn't your only real problem.
If their faith is anything like Craigs faith, then yeah it should be a problem...he is a hypocrit.
As for Ginger's advice, Its for the most part good advice. My only disscent would be that such advice may feed your concerns that the girl is being mistreated. If so, then she has done you a disservice, as that isn't something you need to worry about
Yeah sure, just "trust" the program.
-
"This is not a heavy handed punitive style program. No doubt they have students who would rather be somewere else - but the same can be said of most every kid in school on a nice spring day; or adult at work. She is not being made to feel badly about herself; she is not being kept hungery or going without sleep or being threatened with violence."
She is being held incommunicado. She can not speak to members of her family, not even her parents or brother.
The pertinent question is: Who conducted the psych evaluation which determined that this extreme intervention was in her best interest?
If Paige's account is accurate, and depending on the judge's perception, s/he just might find it in the teen's best interest to be with family that WANT her. Rational judges prefer "the least restricted environment" that will keep families together. That, in no way describes a program.
If I were Paige, that's the path I would pursue. Hire an attorney that will make issue with the fact that no evaluation was conducted. The mother was neglegent in seeking counseling and resorted to incarcerating her. There are family members who want the teen and who will provide her needs.
Get over the privacy issue. How is it that everyone here knows your and your son's name? Real people have names and aren't afraid to use them. Can you not get it that you are not in control? You might need to pray the Serenity Prayer and contemplate why "lack of privacy" in this matter is more an issue for YOU than the actual people involved. She absolutely has no privacy where she is... but then that's different in you mind.
As the story was told, it appears the girl had "goal"- to go to regular school and not be a maid and nanny- which didn't sit well with the parents.
As for contact with the brother- are you attempting to negotiate an agreement between Paige and ALA? Are you privy to what ALA would allow in this situation, or simply speculating or saying whatever comes to mind to quiet Paige or trying to soften the rigid reality around the program?
If you are attempting to broker an agreement, when and how often might she be allowed to speak to her brother- IF Paige was willing to follow the dictates of the program- the brother calling from a third party residence? How often would she see her brother and for how long? How long in the "warehouse" before any of this would even be possible? And what position do you hold that qualifies you to negotiate?
And how might Paige ascertain that the teen is "safe"? Take your word for it? Trust the program's word? :lol:
I could be wrong, but I didn't get that Paige's main concern is for Amanda's "safety"- being killed or maimed? THAT is not the issue. Her eyes are open to the injustice and she has set out to try to do something about. She may not be successful due to the ignorant people that make final decisions. But, I appreciate and admire her efforts. And as much as you program supporters want to believe otherwise, isolating someone from family, friends, society is more HURTFUL than useful and should be a last resort for seriously deranged people who have lost their grip on reality, and then only until their rationale has been restored.
[ This Message was edited by: Deborah on 2004-04-09 10:09 ]
-
As to privacy - I made the decision when I wanted my name out; and I asked my son's permission to use his.
The situation we are debating here is different. Maybe the kid wouldn't mind; but what if she does? And I expect her parents are none to pleased.
"I think you should take it up with Craig, then, for putting Amanda's name out on the web on the pretense of a prayer request."
Point noted; however, there is a difference - this is believed to be a private board and so is not populated by people the likes of your Butcher and Turd; who BTW are shinning examples of why you ought to moderate a little Ginger. And its also not as if the kids whole life story has been plastered up for all to see. Can you not see that she might object to this, and with good reason? It was wrong of you to encourage Paige to tell it all on an open board. If you wanted details, you could have discussed it privately. Paige being new at Board Games, may not understand this, but you do. I think you just like the shits and giggles you get out of yanking people's chains.
"If Paige's account is accurate, . . ."
Do keep the big If in mind.
I don't know what's behind all the trouble between these people, and neither do you guys.
Its possible the parents have very good reason to not want Paige in contact with their daughter; and they do have the right to make this decision.
I am not attempting to broker anything; nor am I privy to any extra knowledge about the possibility. I would like to help if I can - that's all. I need a starting point.
I do know family , brothers and sisters included can and do visit, anytime. Its not earned, as Paige says she believes. Anytime from day one, and family often does visit. This leads me to speculate (and it IS speculation at this point, b/c I am not privy to the family's details) that the brother would be welcome. As I said, the problem *seems* to be with Paige.
"She can not speak to members of her family, not even her parents or brother."
This is just not true. I don't know where you got this idea. I know of know problem except with Paige and possibly one other family member.
"And how might Paige ascertain that the teen is "safe"? Take your word for it? Trust the program's word?"
She has been given good advice on this by Ginger and others. I assume she intends to follow up on some or all of it.
It would be better if these folks could agree to disagree and get along for the sake of the siblings. I wish such were the case. But as its not, I personally feel, as a result of what I've seen hear; as well as her badgering others who have tried to help; its quite likely Paige has only herself to blame for being denied contact with Amanda.
And Paige is hardly society, family and friends all rolled into one.
The ALA kids are not cut off that way; and this I do know for a fact.
This kid is not to have contact with this person; and I can imagine plenty of scenarios where that would be understandable and in the girl's best interest.
If anyone is being rigid and unreasonable in this, it is Paige.
And your interest in a psyc eval is misplace Deb. ALA is not a psychiatric facility and doesn't pretend to be.
-
could your child be exasperated??
-
***The situation we are debating here is different. Maybe the kid wouldn't mind; but what if she does? Can you not see that she might object to this, and with good reason?
Since when are program supporters concerned with what children want? What if she WANTS to live with Paige? That's between the two of them. Further, no one has "encouraged" Paige to "tell it all" on a public board. I didn't ask questions. Ginger invited her share details, IF it was appropriate. Paige is an adult and perfectly capable of making decisions for herself.
You're not attempting to broker, but you need a "starting point". Contradictory. Either you're brokering an agreement or not. I think you would like to convince Paige to back off. Why are you negotiating on a public forum? Particularly if you are not in a position to make decisions.
***I wish such were the case. But as its not, I personally feel, as a result of what I've seen hear; as well as her badgering others who have tried to help; its quite likely Paige has only herself to blame for being denied contact with Amanda. This kid is not to have contact with this person; and I can imagine plenty of scenarios where that would be understandable and in the girl's best interest.
Did a judge make this decision, or some program idiot who thinks they know what's best and who is more likely just following the dictates of the parent? Who at ALA is qualified and unbiased enough to determine what is in the child's best interest? There should be a third-party, independent evaluation.
***And your interest in a psyc eval is misplace Deb. ALA is not a psychiatric facility and doesn't pretend to be.
I am under no illusion that ALA is a psych facility, even more reason to have an evaluation to determine if it's in her best interest, the least restrictive environment, and meeting her needs.
-
Karen, I didn't see you complaining about F-13 when he was posting his filthy comments about Carey Bock, but then again, you have admitted calling her names yourself (e.g. WWASPS WHORE),
so I guess exeptions can be made, is that it?
:smokin:
-
On 2004-04-07 18:02:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Goofy face anon; you are making assumptions based on scant actual knowledge, and as usual in such cases, you are mistaken.
My reasons are my own, and have nothing to do with regretting anything, I assure you.
I have felt badly about calling Carey a wwasp whore; but no to bad. I believe it to the case; but maybe ought not say so.
It is interesting how there is always Someone trying to bring the dialog back to Carey.(Having a little trouble walking away from the lime light?) Anyway, I know it isn't Christian to despise someone so badly, and so I do try and keep it in check. As for forgiveness - as someone is bound to bring up - I find it difficult to forgive someone who refuses to admit they've done wrong. If she would admit she has done a despicable thing and ask forgiveness - I honestly believe I could manage it. But as I believe she'd rather die than admitt she could ever do anything wrong - I don't think I'll be put to the test.
Move on you say (get lost) well, I might. And if and when I do, folks like you will insist I'm evading you.
"
Karen, this is unbelievable! You can not forgive somebody because they didn't ask YOU for forgiveness? I give you an F for your failure to be faithful to the teachings of Jesus Christ and the Word of God.
:evil:
-
On 2004-04-09 08:14:00, Anonymous wrote:
As for Ginger's advice, Its for the most part good advice. My only disscent would be that such advice may feed your concerns that the girl is being mistreated. If so, then she has done you a disservice, as that isn't something you need to worry about.
Ginger is a survivor of the most horrid and abusive situation I have ever herd tell of, apart from true prisoner of war stories.
It colors her world, as it naturally would for anyone. Its understandable.
Karen, you are far from qualified to psychoanalyse me.
When I was in Straight, I got sat on exactly once in two years and that wasn't anywhere near my worst day. I stepped in time, inside the lines consistently from day one and avoided getting abused, aside from the lack of sleep.
The next day, when my dad apparently bought the line that I'd violently attacked someone and that had been how I got a black eye; the day I finally accepted that none of my brothers or sisters were going to write or visit me (they could have, all but one were Seed graduates); the day I finally gave in and decided to "get honest" and denounce myself at open meeting as a druggie in need of treatment, knowing full well it was a lie. Those were the bad days. Those were they days I cried real tears and had to come up with something real quick to explain it. No way was I about to trust those people w/ anyting as personal as the real reasons for my sadness.
Once you are able to determine she is safe; you should leave her alone. Thats my opinion, for what ever little bit its worth.
Ya' know, Karen, you could clear this up right quick. Just put a phone in Amanda's hand, make sure she's got the phone number and let her call her aunt and brother and tell them, without anyone listening in, how much she wants them to leave her alone.
As for her brother - I wonder if there is an impartial third party whom he could have contact threw? Would you consint to that?
It *seems* as if her family's concern revolves around you - if the boy could call from somewhere else; or even visit with someone else maybe. . .
Would you consint to that?"
Karen, Karen, Karen! Are you trolling for a new intake? I may be mistaken, but I think this one's just a little to smart for that schtick.
Oh, and btw, in case no one else noticed, it was the anon poster who may or may not be Karen who brought Paige's name into this and it was Craig Rogers who put Amanda's name out on the net.
So Karen, will you answer any of the questions about the ALA search team? What happened to what you and Craig were saying not long ago about kids being able to just walk away? Was that a lie?
Necessity never made a good bargain
--Benjamin Franklin Apr. 1734
_________________
Ginger Warbis ~ Antigen
American drug war P.O.W.
Seed sibling `71 - `80
Straight South (Sarasota, FL)
10/80 - 10/82
Anonymity Anonymous
-
On 2004-04-09 10:00:00, Deborah wrote:
I could be wrong, but I didn't get that Paige's main concern is for Amanda's "safety"- being killed or maimed? THAT is not the issue.
Some have suggested that I'm a bit too generous or gullible in my assessment on the topic of motive, but I maintain that the most compelling motive for Program proponants is not money or legal liability, it's religious zealotry. This holds true for my opinion of Art Barker, who was an avowed atheist, and for the Straight, Inc. ppl, who were not advocating a Christian type religion so much as a rather radical philosophy wrt drugs.
I think that Karen and Craig and all these other people litterally believe, as much as they believe the sky is blue, that they are saving these kids from certain eternal damnation in a litteral Hell that is geographically located somewhere under the crust of the Earth. Believing that (as failure to do so results in damnation), they also believe that their cause places them above the law and reason of mere mortals.
What they can't explain, though, is why God has chosen them to deliver a message to Paige to stay away. Doesn't God have Paige's email address? :roll:
She may not be successful due to the ignorant people that make final decisions. But, I appreciate and admire her efforts. And as much as you program supporters want to believe otherwise, isolating someone from family, friends, society is more HURTFUL than useful and should be a last resort for seriously deranged people who have lost their grip on reality, and then only until their rationale has been restored.
The opra ain't over till the fat lady sings! I don't know much about ALA except for what they state in their website, what proponants say about themselves and how they go about saying it. I honestly don't have any reason to believe that this kid is going to sustain long-term damage (like the nerve damage many former Straight clients attribute to prolonged sleep deprivation) I sincerely hope not, anyway.
But the girl is almost 17. She'll be an adult or make an escape or be granted a favorable court ruling or just play along and graduate. I have a feeling her brother and aunt are in it for the long haul and will be there for her. I'm not so worried about Amanda as I am about some other kids.
BTW, anybody know if PURE refers to ALA? Anybody?
The most important bill in our whole code is that for the diffusion of
knowledge among the people. No other sure foundation can be devised, for the preservation of freedom and happiness.
--Thomas Jefferson
_________________
Ginger Warbis ~ Antigen
American drug war P.O.W.
Seed sibling `71 - `80
Straight South (Sarasota, FL)
10/80 - 10/82
Anonymity Anonymous
-
I know for a fact that Amanda is not allowed to contact anyone except her parents. Recently I was told by one of the grandmothers that she was given the go ahead to be able to email Amanda and that Amanda's brother could send an email through the grandmother but that is the only contact that any of the family will have. the Great Grandmother can not contact her, The Great Aunt and Uncle may not contact her. Amanda's fathers own parents are not allowed to contact her and none of her friends are allowed to contact her. The Student Manual on the ALA website is very specific that the child will have to earn the privilege to have contact with the parents and only the parents and that is only with approval from ALA. I will state again for those at
ALA who do not seem to understand that I have no fight with you. I am sorry if you are offended that I want to know where my sons sister is and how she. I am sorry if you do not understand that her extended family and friends are worried about her.
Yes, I am in this for the long haul.
I would be more than happy to take a trip to Mexico to see where she is and take her brother to see her. They can be visits in full view of an attendant of ALA. There is nothing to fear from me. We won't leave the facility. I find it amusing that they would be so afraid of myself and a 14 year old boy.
I am not afraid that she is in danger of abuse. She has been removed from her family against her will by parents who are supposed to love her. And this is for her own good?? Explain how keeping her from her Great Grandmother or her brother(who is an honour student and a boy scout)or any other family members - is good for her?
-
Karen, you are far from qualified to psychoanalyse me.
I wasn't trying to. Sorry if it came across that way. I was only trying to explain the History behind the prevailing point of view. Would you disagree that your experience in Straight inc colors your point of view?
I've been trying to think of an analogy that might fit. I think its kinda like this: Say you have been bitten by a Chow Chow. You know many others who have also been bitten and even mauled by Chow Chows. You would tend to view all Chow Chows as dangerous dogs; altho you know there are some good ones. The problem is further complicated by the fact Chow Chows are so hard to read. None of the familiar signels are available; so you must assume they are all dangerous.
There are a lot of dangerous programs. A lot of people here have found this out first hand. Even if you know there are some good programs; your going to tend to view them all as dangerous; And especially so, as its so hard to tell from the outside which is which.
Paige writes:
"I would be more than happy to take a trip to Mexico to see where she is and take her brother to see her. They can be visits in full view of an attendant of ALA. There is nothing to fear from me. We won't leave the facility. I find it amusing that they would be so afraid of myself and a 14 year old boy. "
I expected you'd say something along these lines, b/c you know this won't fly. For whatever reason, Amanda's parents don't want you anywhere near their daughter, and more and more I'm beginning to understand. If you are really so concerned for the siblings, then you should be able to set your own ego aside and let the boy enjoy a visit with his sister separate and apart from you. What I asked was, can you do that? Your answer is no. So, as far as I'm concerned, you have proven yourself more interested in stirring up turmoil and strife, than in the welfare of the two kids. I am coming to feel you have no genuine concern for Amanda; but rather are enjoying the opportunity to cause trouble for this family.
Back to Ginger:
"I think that Karen and Craig and all these other people litterally believe, as much as they believe the sky is blue, that they are saving these kids from certain eternal damnation in a litteral Hell that is geographically located somewhere under the crust of the Earth. Believing that (as failure to do so results in damnation), they also believe that their cause places them above the law and reason of mere mortals.
What they can't explain, though, is why God has chosen them to deliver a message to Paige to stay away. Doesn't God have Paige's email address?"
You enjoy poking fun, don't you? None of this is part of my creed. I do believe in Hell; but my notion of Hell comes from the Bible rather than comic books; and so I don't think we are all walking around on it's roof. And BTW - failing to believe any of the things you mention have nothing to do with Salvation. There are many area's of debate and disagrement that have nothing what so ever to do with salvation.
And, I never said or implied I thought God sent me to give Paige or anyone any kind of message. That would be claiming the gift of Prophecy; and I have not been so blessed. I do have an opinion of my own, and that?s exactly how I put it. As for God having her email address; oh yes, I'm sure He does. He knows how many hairs are on her head and the deepest secrets of her heart. He may well be trying to tell her something - but will she listen?
"BTW, anybody know if PURE refers to ALA? Anybody?"
No, they don't. There is a difference of opinion on certain ethical questions.
"Ya' know, Karen, you could clear this up right quick."
No I can't. I have no say in this matter at all, and remember, her parents don't want her talking to Paige, and that is, for now, their right to deicide.
Right or wrong, for what ever reason (which I maintain *might* be very good) they don't want her messing with their daughter.
I do hope she and her brother can get together soon, somehow. I empathize with these kids on this issue. At Amanda's age, I lost my brother who was her brothers age. That was a very long time ago, and I still miss him. He would have been 42 this week if he hadn't been killed. I often wonder how different my life might be, had he not died; What kind of wife might he have married; would I have nieces and nephews? Would we still be close, or seeing each other once a year? Any way, For this reason, I think I am more sensitive to sibling issues than average; and the present situation does distress me.
"Karen, Karen, Karen! Are you trolling for a new intake? I may be mistaken, but I think this one's just a little to smart for that schtick."
No Ginger - hadn't entered my mind. I am frankly surprised you would so accuse me. I have never thought or behaved like that and don't deserve such an accuasation.
Paige, as the boy's Mom, could allow him to visit with someone else, with no fear of his being , what? Held? I mean, is that what you think? No one but Paige could send him to ALA as a student - do you really think I am trying to advocate that? No Ginger, I'm not quit that dence even if I can't spell.
-
Angry face anon, I do indeed feel if they want Me to forgive them; they should ask Me; otherwise, I'm under no obligation to do so; tho I may, if I want, I am not obligated to.
If they want God's forgivness, then they need to ask Him. I have nothing to do with this, and neither does anyone else. Its a private matter between an indivigual and God.
I believe I could back this up with scripture; but I don't want to go thumping on The Book again.
Might stir up Turd and Butcher.
-
Hmmmm ... this is getting interesting.
:smokin:
-----------------------------------------------
Critical examination of the lives and beliefs of gurus demonstrates that our psychiatric labels and our conceptions of what is or is not mental illness are woefully inadequate. How, for example, does one distinguish an unorthodox or bizarre faith from delusion? ...
Gurus are isolated people, dependent upon their disciples, with no possibility of being disciplined by a Church or criticized by contemporaries. They are above the law. The guru usurps the place of God. Whether gurus have suffered from manic-depressive illness, schizophrenia, or any other form of recognized, diagnosable mental illness is interesting but ultimately unimportant. What distinguishes gurus from more orthodox teachers is not their manic-depressive mood swings, not their thought disorders, not their delusional beliefs, not their hallucinatory visions, not their mystical states of ectasy; it is their narcissism.
- Anthony Storr,
Feet of Clay
-
All of you seem to be so focussed on me.
We would be satisfied for the time being if her aunt and uncle or her grandparents the C's could go visit with her. If my son goes to Mexico to visit with his sister I am going to be the one to take him there because I am his parent and I would not put my son through that by himself. Apparently you did not read my statement - I don't have to visit with her but I do want to be within eye sight of the two of them. I don't have to speak to her but her brother does. Is that too much to ask for both of the children's sake? Compromise? One ALA attendant present and me present while the children visit. Neither of the viewers to talk to the children? You would be surprised at how this one action may calm the waters.
-
On 2004-04-09 12:39:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Karen, I didn't see you complaining about F-13 when he was posting his filthy comments about Carey Bock, but then again, you have admitted calling her names yourself (e.g. WWASPS WHORE),
so I guess exceptions can be made, is that it?
:smokin: "
Karen, where is your response to this question, I must have missed it.
:smokin:
-
Ginger Writes:
"BTW, anybody know if PURE refers to ALA? Anybody?"
Karen Replies:
"No, they don't. There is a difference of opinion on certain ethical questions"
-----------------
Ethical? Like what?
-
Paige, I am an old-timer here, and I have had a similar experience to what you are now going through. FWIW, we now have our grandaughter living with us, after 10 months of desperate attempts to wrest her from WWASPS in Mexico, which her mother thought was just dandy, and then 3 months at her home, being a virtual prisoner on lockdown in her bedroom out back.
Anyway, I certainly know how you feel, probably more so than the parents who now recognize their wrong-ness in sending their kids off or the survivors who came through battered and now have a decent life. The tremendous feeling of helplessness...moved me to go to therapy in the midst of our struggle (and Fornits was a good therapy for me also).
This whole thing with Karen's ranting about Amanda's "privacy" is a lot of what I fought when Carey Bock kept moving the discussion from "Don't send your kids to WWASPS" to "this ed consultant is worse than any behavioral modification facility you can imagine"...which is ludicrous and just diluted efforts to expose the truth behind the marketing of this Evil Empire.
I am positive that isolation from her *greater* world is a very bad thing. Somehow it seems politically correct to dance around this thing about "her parents know what is right for her", severely limiting her family relationships, without coming right out and saying "bullshit, they don't know what is right and just being parents obviously hasn't given them that inate ability."
PARENTS DON'T ALWAYS DO THE RIGHT THING, AND THE LAW SHOULD STEP IN IF THEY ARE DOING THE WRONG THING FOR THEIR CHILDREN. TALK TO YOUR ADOPTING JUDGE AND SEE IF HE DOESN'T AGREE THAT THESE PEOPLE HAVE IGNORED HIS SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS UPON WHICH HE BASED HIS GRANTING OF ADOPTION FOR AMANDA.
-
Hi Spots, Thanks for your post - I have a meeting with the Judges assistant next week. He already knows some of the situation but needs to be brought up to speed. I have a feeling he will not be happy with this. The biggest problem is that we did not have any visitation written into the papers but it is documented in the notes of the court. So we shall see. However it could take quite awhile to get it into the court system, but certainly something worth pursuing.
-
Spots makes some good points, but I think it is worth noting the contribution Bock made to showing a side of the industry few parents know much about: the sales and marketing of programs and schools for so-called struggling teens. It's a virtual free-for-all, no checks and balances in place. Buyers should definitly beware.
Second, Amanda is 17, she could petition the court for emancipation or just wait until she turns 18 and check herself out the program and go live with her brother and Paige.
In the meantime, I see no harm in allowing her brother or any other family member to keep in touch with this girl, assuming such communication is not monitored or censored, except for contraband material which does not seem to be an issue here. However, it appears gaining the trust and confidence of the parents is an issue and I would strongly urge all parties involved to seek a reasonable compromise.
Think of what Amanda has to gain, not lose, by knowing people love and care about her and want to keep in touch with her. I would imagine any kid would have a tough time with abandonment issues (real or imagined) but it has to be even harder for adopted kids. Why is nobody talking about THIS issue????
Bottom line is what's best for Amanda is to let her have some input (big gasp) on this issue instead of treating her like she "isn't even in the room". She is not an infant still in diapers, for pete's sake.
-
Deb writes:
"You're not attempting to broker, but you need a "starting point". Contradictory. Either you're brokering an agreement or not. I think you would like to convince Paige to back off. Why are you negotiating on a public forum? Particularly if you are not in a position to make decisions."
I know it sounds contridictory; and in fact is; but my thinking was, maybe, if I had a place to start, something to work with; I could bring up the possibilty of brokering enough of a truce to let the kids visit.
Why a public forum? B/c Paige refusses to call and talk with me as has been offered. When she turned up here, I thought maybe if we had some dialog, she might dicide to call. No skin off my nose if she'd rather not.
-
On 2004-04-09 21:18:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2004-04-09 12:39:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Karen, I didn't see you complaining about F-13 when he was posting his filthy comments about Carey Bock, but then again, you have admitted calling her names yourself (e.g. WWASPS WHORE),
so I guess exceptions can be made, is that it?
:smokin: "
Karen, where is your response to this question, I must have missed it.
:smokin:
"
I did miss it.
F-13 didn't threaten to slice her up or hack her to peices; nor did he make obscene comments involving God.
Makes all the difference to me.
-
Karen,
I have not refused to talk with you. I am doing so now. and I have chosen the public forum for one very good reason. Witnesses. I'm not sayin that you are not trustworthy but I have found it safest in highly stressed situations such as this to make sure there are witnesses.
So as to your most gracious offer of speaking with me at any time - we are doing so and I appreciate it. Though I find it interesting that you still won't sign on with your name and we all know who you are!
By the way you were the one who put my name up on this forum first but I don't mind, I have nothing to hide.
Is your son Nate working at the Mexico facility?
-
Anon writes:
"Bottom line is what's best for Amanda is to let her have some input (big gasp) on this issue instead of treating her like she "isn't even in the room". She is not an infant still in diapers, for pete's sake."
Your right she is not an infant she is a teenager with all of the typical teenage angst. However "she isn't in the room" she is in Mexico and no one will let her opinion be heard!
You make some very good points. Thanks
-
Spots, as always, has made many good points. Maybe things will work out nicely for Paige and Amanda as they have for Spots and her grandaughter; however, there are differences that *might* make a big difference in the likelyhood of as happy an outcome here.
You all need to keep in mind, your only getting one side to the story. Paige *might* be praticing a good deal of data drop out. This droped out data may change the focus quite a bit.
Its also *possible* Paige is a liar.
We, none of us, know the Truth of this situation.
And I still think I have a valid point about the girl's privacy. I still think Paige was thoughtless and foolhardy in this regard.
-
By the way you were the one who put my name up on this forum first but I don't mind, I have nothing to hide.
Is your son Nate working at the Mexico facility?
Well, I'm glad you didn't mind. I didn't know how else to begin a meaningful dialog while dancing around whoz who. I figured you could very easily ignore it if you didn't want your name up and out.
Obveousily, I have no objection to wittnesses; tho I do smile to myself thinking of the witness list you've chosen. You could call and tape it you know. That way,if I lie to you, you could hang my ass.
And No, Nate isn't still in MX. I have told Craig he needs to update his web site. Nate's home now; and working; so it is a little bit unlikely he'll be back. When he gets to the point where he has some vacation, he may well return for visits.
I did ask about Amanda this AM and was told she is doing real well. I know the sorce is 'tainted' in your view; but still, its something. Before ya'll blast me with 'Yeah, Sure, Trust the Program' and all that; consider, would it really be better to not mention it?
-
Karen writes:
Well, I'm glad you didn't mind. I didn't know how else to begin a meaningful dialog while dancing around whoz who. I figured you could very easily ignore it if you didn't want your name up and out.
Obveousily, I have no objection to wittnesses; tho I do smile to myself thinking of the witness list you've chosen. You could call and tape it you know. That way,if I lie to you, you could hang my ass.
And No, Nate isn't still in MX. I have told Craig he needs to update his web site. Nate's home now; and working; so it is a little bit unlikely he'll be back. When he gets to the point where he has some vacation, he may well return for visits.
I did ask about Amanda this AM and was told she is doing real well. I know the sorce is 'tainted' in your view; but still, its something. Before ya'll blast me with 'Yeah, Sure, Trust the Program' and all that; consider, would it really be better to not mention it?
Paige responds:
Karen thank you for asking about Amanda, I am happy to know she is fine. That was kind of you and I will pass that on tho the rest of the family.
If you look back you will find that I have never blasted you with "yeah sure!" or "trust the program" I have no battle with you. However until I hear directly from Amanda or from a family member (other than her parents) who have had direct contact with Amanda - I'm afraid that I will not be satisfied. Again thank you for asking about her and passing this along.
I do have one question? If by chance she wasn't Ok and say- just has an illness or has been in some trouble would you have told me or would you have just given the standard answer of "she's fine." Just a thought no need to answer.
One more question - If you are not employed by ALA maybe you should be removed from the website as the family coordinator, for this would fall under the category of false advertising and you would not be in a position to broker any visitations. If you are employed by them any brokering you can do is appreciated. Thank you for your efforts.
-
Karen, what is your kickback for referring kids to ALA?
-
Who knows maybe Nate will be a program director some day. I think he is learning a lot and this could be a future investment for the family.
-
On 2004-04-09 21:23:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Ginger Writes:
"BTW, anybody know if PURE refers to ALA? Anybody?"
Karen Replies:
"No, they don't. There is a difference of opinion on certain ethical questions"
-----------------
Ethical? Like what?"
Is that to say that, while Karen was listed as a PURE volunteer, they were working together but now something has changed?
To laugh often and much; to win the respect of intelligent people and the affection of children; to earn the appreciation of honest critics and endure the betrayal of false friends; to appreciate beauty, to find the best in others; to leave the world a little better; whether by a healthy child, a garden patch or a redeemed social condition; to know even one life has breathed easier because you have lived. This is the meaning of success.
--Ralph Waldo Emerson
-
Paige, it was the "others" whom I expect to blast me with with 'Trust the Program'; And I'd be right there with them, in some circumstances.
I expect this is why they are a little hard on me. I see a difference in ALA and the problem programs that they don't. I've tried to explain this, but its a hostile audence, and I've not had much luck. Sometimes they and I are in full agreement; others times not. Such is Life.
As for your questions; if I had been told, she's fine but has a cold, or something like that, I would have told you. I would prefer not do so on Fornits; but I would have told you. If, on the other hand, I had been told she's fine but got cought cheeting on her English test; The cheeting part I would have kept to myself - on here anyway. But this is absolutly hypothetical! No such thing has happened to my knowledge.
You misunderstand my roll with ALA. I am a volenteer. I'm not paid; and so I'm not an employee. (and to the smart ass anon, I don't make referals, and I don't get 'kick backs' and I do believe you probably know this) What I try to do is help parents when they have a concern or complaint; answer what questions I'm able or get an answer for them if I'm not; provide feed back to ALA staff as to what people are happy or unhappy about. Sometimes, people have a gripe, but would rather make it anonomusly; and I am who they can call in that case. Sometimes I'm able to get threw to MX for a parent who is having trouble for whatever reason; and let the staff know someone wants to talk with them. Just stuff like that. Sometimes, its just a matter of being willing to sit and listen. I'm on the web site so people can have some idea who I am and who there talking to. I don't think there is anything misleading or false about it.
-
I have been to ALA. It is a warm, loving, and safe place. The girls are very well cared for. It is evident by watching them interact with one another that they are happy and well adjusted. Listening to the testimonies of these girls is awesome. They have come there troubled and rebellious, with an assortment of problems that would lead to grave heartache in the future. They are turning into loving, caring, peaceful young women. The people running the program genuinely care for the girls. The only problem with ALA would seem to be the negative comments coming from people who have not been there and who do not have children there (and therefore are really not in a position to make judgement). It is located in a quiet, beautiful residential area. The facility itself is beautiful. I wouldn't mind my dwelling place being as beautiful as where the girls live. The girls are there for a reason. God will do a good work in their lives. The girls are there because their parents are showing tough love.
-
Is that to say that, while Karen was listed as a PURE volunteer, they were working together but now something has changed?
No Ginger. It has Nothing to do with Me - and please don't make us hash over all the PURE stuff again.
You know full well the truth of the situation and its less than honest of you to pretend otherwise.
-
On 2004-04-10 08:01:00, Anonymous wrote:
I did miss it.
F-13 didn't threaten to slice her up or hack her to peices; nor did he make obscene comments involving God.
Makes all the difference to me.
You have got to be kidding!
Come to think of it, that rant of yours about Paige being in this for the drama seems awfully reminiscent of your own characher assasinations of Carey just a few months ago. Do you find that you run into a lot of people in your life who are just trying to make drama for you? If this happens a lot, maybe it's not the other people. Maybe it's something you're doing and you should consider getting over your victim mindset and take responsibility for your own choices.
Just a thought.
Necessity never made a good bargain
--Benjamin Franklin Apr. 1734
-
I'll do that Ginger. Think about it, I mean.
-
On 2004-04-10 10:34:00, Anonymous wrote:
Sometimes, people have a gripe, but would rather make it anonomusly; and I am who they can call in that case.
But Karen, the very first thing you did when Paige started posting anonymously here was to bust out her anonymity! I sure hope people understand that and don't give away any important, private info to you in thos "confidential" conversations!
My opinions may have changed, but not the fact that I am right.
-- Ashleigh Brilliant
-
On 2004-04-10 10:38:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Is that to say that, while Karen was listed as a PURE volunteer, they were working together but now something has changed?
No Ginger. It has Nothing to do with Me - and please don't make us hash over all the PURE stuff again.
You know full well the truth of the situation and its less than honest of you to pretend otherwise.
"
No, I actually don't know a lot. I've asked over and over again which schools PURE refered to. The closest to an answer I ever got was a copy of the court dockett from Utah that listed a bunch of schools WWASP had served w/ subpoenas. The assumption is that those are the schools to which PURE refered. Nobody challenged that assumption. But I still haven't ever gotten a straight answer from any of the volunteers, employees or anyone else affiliated w/ PURE to that or any other question I've asked.
So, I still don't know.
If we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them but to inform their discretion by education
--Thomas Jefferson
-
If the female teenager in question would not act like an infant, than she would not be in Mexico right now. She is where she is because she has made some really bad choices. Paige, pray for God's will to be done, not Paige's will to be done. Maybe her parents should petition the courts to have the brother removed from you because you are obviously unstable. Paige, you are not the mom. As long as the girl is not being starved, abused, forced to sleep on a concrete floor, or not given clothes to wear, then, you are out of line. She is not your daughter. ALA is a safe place that is warm and loving. I know, because I have been there. If you really do have the girl's best interest at heart, than you will stop trying to interfer with her and her parents.
-
No Ginger. It has Nothing to do with Me - and please don't make us hash over all the PURE stuff again.
You know full well the truth of the situation and its less than honest of you to pretend otherwise.
Karen, what is the "truth of the situation?"
-
Ginger, I suspect the reason no one has answered you is b/c no one who bothers with Fornits knows. I persoanlly have no idea. As I have often said: I am not assocted with PURE. Never have been. If my name was on a volenteer list it was a misunderstanding that has long sence been cleared up - this is what I mean by you knowing - as you do know this.
And you point out:
But Karen, the very first thing you did when Paige started posting anonymously here was to bust out her anonymity!
She could very easily have ignored it if she wanted to. If that had not been the case, I wouldn't have asked as I did.
(I did miss it.
F-13 didn't threaten to slice her up or hack her to peices; nor did he make obscene comments involving God.
Makes all the difference to me. )
"You have got to be kidding!"
Not at all.
-
The girl in question is not prohibited from speaking with her parents. Who ever said that she is, is very misinformed. Contact with the parents is encouraged. ALA is an awesome place. I know as I have been there. It appears from reading all the notes from Paige, Ginger, and Deborah, and others who do not have children there, that, you are all caught up in a self-created drama. The girls are in a safe, caring, loving, and clean environment. The community is quiet. There is a lot of comradarie between the girls. It is not a prison. It is a beautiful facility. The girls are there because of bad choices they have made in life. They are there as a result of tough love. Those who critisize the program, without having any real information, are way off base. If any of you truly care about the girls, then you will pray for them, and stop doing the devil's work.
-
Comradarie? Then how come Amber and the other girl had to wait for a distraction, sneak over a wall and then evade the ALA search team? And how come ALA proponants later said the two girls walked back all of their own accord, while the prayer request clearly says they were spotted by other girls and brought back?
Look, whoever you are, I assume you believe what you're saying. But I'm not at all sure that what you're saying is entirely true.
In war, the stronger overcomes the weaker. In business, the stronger imparts strength to the weaker.
--Frederic Bastiat
-
Ginger, you are obviously not a parent of any of the children who are there. It is really not any of your concern. You obviously are into drama, because you keep stirring things up with your comments and off-base input to Paige. Yes, what I say is true. I know for a fact. I am a relative of one of the children there. I have heard the voice of the girl in question in the background (I know, because I have asked who that was in the background). There is no yelling, no screaming, not negative anything. The girls are happy. They are positive. They hold each other accountable for negative behavior. The girls are well cared for. And, while on the phone, the girl in question has made numerous positive comments about her mom! You have allowed yourself to get sucked up into a drama. The girl is healthy and she is happy. I have seen pictures. They are not being hidden. They are living in a clean, beautiful house, in a safe community. I am truly sorry that the woman who adopted the brother is having such a hard time coming to grips with this, but the girl is doing great! Ginger, are you a parent? How would you feel about someone trying to stick their nose in and tell you how to raise your children? The girl is being well fed, has a clean bed with clean bedding to sleep on. The woman who adopted the brother has not been there. She has, unfortunately, worked herself up into a frenzy about something she doesn't know. Life is like that. We are afraid of the unknown. She doesn't know and she is afraid. The girl is fine. What teenage girl has ever wanted to do something she hasn't wanted to do? This is not something unique to this girl. Thank God her parents love her enough to show tough love to get her help before she is out on her own. At least now, they can help her with the bad choices she makes. When she is 21 and out on her own, they will not be in a position to help. Our criminal court system is over run with rebellious individuals who were not shown tough love as teens. As a parent, I know, my choices are not always popular with my kids. However, my son, who now lives across the country from me, calls me frequently just to say, "I love you mom, have a great day" and "I love you, you're a great mom." I assure you Ginger, he did not always feel that way. I made many decisions that did not please him when he was the age of the girl in question. But, as his parent, I did what I felt was best for his development, even when relatives who did not live with us to see the day to day problems, critisized my decisions. The child in question is not, and has not lead a sweet innocent life. This isn't about Paige, this isn't about the girl's mom. It is about helping this girl to learn to make appropriate choices, and understanding that there are consequenses to her actions. You know that. For example, if you choose to not pay your bills, you choose to have your electricity turned off. That is how all of life is. The girl is making bad choices without looking at the consequences down the road. It would have had to been a heart breaking choice to make, to send her there, but it was what her parents thought best. And, her parents are the ones who live with her day to day. I wish more parents would admit when they need help (as her parents did) and then get it, rather than just tolerate their children's bad behavior, eventually leading to a life in prison.
-
On 2004-04-10 11:31:00, Antigen wrote:
"Comradarie? Then how come Amber and the other girl had to wait for a distraction, sneak over a wall and then evade the ALA search team? And how come ALA proponants later said the two girls walked back all of their own accord, while the prayer request clearly says they were spotted by other girls and brought back?
Look, whoever you are, I assume you believe what you're saying. But I'm not at all sure that what you're saying is entirely true.
I am sure. I have first hand facts on the matter, not fifth and sixth hand rumors. What is important is that the girls are back safe. Teens do dumb things. This was a dumb thing. Dumb things is why the teens are there in the first place.
-
On 2004-04-06 14:14:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Does anyone have any hard facts about ALA and its staff? Why is there so much hoopla about this place when no one seems to be shedding any light on what the problem is here or if there truly is a problem. Facts please or shut up."
So where are the facts? Didn't this start sith this person looking for facts? Other than the Student Manual contradicting the actual website of ALA I haven't seen many facts mainly oppinions on this place.
-
On 2004-04-11 09:23:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2004-04-06 14:14:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Does anyone have any hard facts about ALA and its staff? Why is there so much hoopla about this place when no one seems to be shedding any light on what the problem is here or if there truly is a problem. Facts please or shut up."
So where are the facts? Didn't this start sith this person looking for facts? Other than the Student Manual contradicting the actual website of ALA I haven't seen many facts mainly oppinions on this place."
If you are considering sending your wayward teen there, by all means call them. They have nothing to hide. If not, what difference does it make to you?
ALA is a good thing.
-
Karen wrote this: I assume Amanda's parents feel they are following God's direction; and I would not second guess them. If they've made a mistake, I trust God will somehow let them know.
Anon writes this: Maybe God has, by sending Paige.
-
On 2004-04-06 16:01:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2004-04-06 15:16:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
What counts is the PURPOSE and whether or not teens have the right to reject forced indoctrination as the answer to keeping 'em on the straight and narrow. In my opinion, nobody should be FORCED by their parents into a faith-based school or program because the parent's own religious doctrine tells them their child is obsessed by the wicked ways of the world. That is an abuse of parental rights.
Wanna try again???
"
Your opinion concerning what other parents do with their children is exactly that, your opinion. It has no bearing on the parents.
-
On 2004-04-09 07:01:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Hey, nutbar---even though he lived in a commie country, the Gonzalez dad wanted his son *home to live with him*---not to ship him away to Miss Minchin's Select Seminary for Young Ladies.
Anybody who wants to ship their kid off somewhere against the kid's will has *no* leg to stand on when a fit adult, be it friend or relative, wants to offer that kid a place in the adult's wholesome, stable home.
Shipping your kid, unwilling, off to some institution to live is the next thing to child abandonment. I think the courts should give custody to any responsible adult who knows the kid, and can offer a stable home environment, that the kid will accept.
Unless, of course, the kid is a candidate for involuntary commitment based on being an immediate danger to himself or others, and is placed in a *real* mental institution to be stabilized on medication and then released back home.
There are real grounds for involuntary commitment. There are also spurious grounds. There are a lot more pain in the ass teens than there are teens who would meet the adult criteria for involuntary commitment. "
Proverbs 26:12
-
On 2004-04-09 07:05:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
As for your example of the Elian ordeal- I see Paige as the parent in this situation, attempting to get a child released from the grips of a program that thinks they have the answers that will give this child a 'better' life, and misguided parents who have bought into it or get off on punishment."
And you opinion is exactly that, an opinion, not based upon any facts.
-
On 2004-04-09 16:38:00, Paige wrote:
"I know for a fact that Amanda is not allowed to contact anyone except her parents. Recently I was told by one of the grandmothers that she was given the go ahead to be able to email Amanda and that Amanda's brother could send an email through the grandmother but that is the only contact that any of the family will have. the Great Grandmother can not contact her, The Great Aunt and Uncle may not contact her. Amanda's fathers own parents are not allowed to contact her and none of her friends are allowed to contact her. The Student Manual on the ALA website is very specific that the child will have to earn the privilege to have contact with the parents and only the parents and that is only with approval from ALA. I will state again for those at
ALA who do not seem to understand that I have no fight with you. I am sorry if you are offended that I want to know where my sons sister is and how she. I am sorry if you do not understand that her extended family and friends are worried about her.
Yes, I am in this for the long haul.
I would be more than happy to take a trip to Mexico to see where she is and take her brother to see her. They can be visits in full view of an attendant of ALA. There is nothing to fear from me. We won't leave the facility. I find it amusing that they would be so afraid of myself and a 14 year old boy.
I am not afraid that she is in danger of abuse. She has been removed from her family against her will by parents who are supposed to love her. And this is for her own good?? Explain how keeping her from her Great Grandmother or her brother(who is an honour student and a boy scout)or any other family members - is good for her?"
The numerous other postings indicates that your big beef with the situation is that the brother is not allowed to contact his sister. Here it is clearly written by you, that he is allowed. A deal has been brokered. This was posted by you on Friday. It is now three days later on Monday. Has the brother sent an email? Your main contention has been removed. He is allowed to contact her.
His being an honor student has nothing to do with anything in this situation.
As far as being "afraid" of you or a 14 year old boy, it wouldn't seem that "afraid"is a good word choice. You seem to be unstable. I can understand the concern.
-
On 2004-04-09 20:16:00, Paige wrote:
"All of you seem to be so focussed on me.
We would be satisfied for the time being if her aunt and uncle or her grandparents the C's could go visit with her. If my son goes to Mexico to visit with his sister I am going to be the one to take him there because I am his parent and I would not put my son through that by himself. "
Here we see a concerned parent looking out for what she feels is in the best interest of her child. Why is not this same consideration being given to the parents of the girl who made a decision regarding her?
-
Sheesh, the God Squad really needs to take a lesson from the Book of Reality. I mean, how stupid can you be to think people would not have an unfavorable opinion about non-compliant children being demonized, for Christ's sake?
Jesus is not the Prince of Programs. He is the Prince of Peace. Restrictive, faith-based schools are spiritually corrupting and as such, most definitly NOT endorsed by Jesus and Company.
:razz:
-
Her brother has sent 2 e mails and there has been no response and no one has aknowledged that they have been received, so as far as I am concerned
until her brother gets a response and knows that he can actually communicate with her - nothing has changed.
-
Has it occured to anyone that the parents are unstable??
-
On 2004-04-12 13:46:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Sheesh, the God Squad really needs to take a lesson from the Book of Reality.
Impossible, they don't believe in reality. They believe in flash floods that can cover the earth and boats big enough to hold 2 of every species and people being able to split the ocean in two by holding a stick in their hands.The overwhelming majority of people have more than the average (mean) number of legs.
-- E. Grebenik
-
On 2004-04-12 13:20:00, Anonymous wrote:
As far as being "afraid" of you or a 14 year old boy, it wouldn't seem that "afraid"is a good word choice. You seem to be unstable. I can understand the concern.
Unstable how? Can you point to anything to substantiate your assesment?
Any policy that has Ted Byfield on the same side as many Rastafarians can fairly be said to have generated a consensus.
-- Ottawa Citizen August 28, 1997
-
On 2004-04-12 14:34:00, Paige wrote:
"Has it occured to anyone that the parents are unstable?? "
Yes. And it has occured to lawmakers and the public since time out of mind. That is why it takes more than just a parent's opinion to force a kid into any kind of psyche treatment. It takes a qualified diagnosis.
Now, what's the difference between ALA's program and psyche treatment. I'm not asking rhetorically if there is a difference. I'm asking any takers to describe what the difference is.
...to disarm the people (is) the best and most effective way to enslave them...
-- George Mason
-
I'll take a stab at it...
Both view victim as having a mental illness or disorder.
Both incarcerate people against their will- based on the observations of another.
Psych Hospitals on the decline. Teen Warehouses taking up the slack.
One subjects inmates to isolation chambers, psych meds, straight jackets, physical and chemical restraints, labotomies, ECT.
The other subjects inmates to BM techniques- the lessor of the evils.
The former ran by degreed professionals, the latter by zealots.
This came today. Thought it was relevant:
Conditioning refers to the shaping of our attitudes, tendencies and behaviors
so that we become willing to go along with the program. It is malevolent when it reflects
a profound distrust of human nature, systematically disconnecting us from our natural
knowing and from the ability to think and act independently. A conditioned individual is
incapable of thinking for themselves, of questioning authority, of following his or her
own heart. Accurate information is crucial to conscious living, and I hope that this
information will help shake up and loosen ignorance related to our mental health system.
"The Dawning of all great truths on the consciousness of humanity has usually
to pass -- says Tolstoy -- through three characteristic stages. The first is: "This is so
foolish that it is not worth thinking about." The second: "This is immoral and contrary to
religion." The third: "Oh! This is so well known that it is not worth talking about." (6)
I am not sure about the dawning of great untruths, but the tenets of biopsychiatry are all too solidified into Tolstoy's third phase. Challenges and critiques tend to be met with the first and second reactions, condemned as foolish or immoral. I envision a time when our society will say things like, "It is well accepted that caring for our children is not primarily a medical problem, and so obviously wrong to give them toxic drugs to control their behavior."
DISOBEYING AUTHORITY -> TERROR.
An act against conditioned patterning evokes a feeling memory that "something bad is going to happen." As a child, your survival quite literally depended on the goodwill of your parents. On an emotional level, the feeling remains that your life (job, money, status, worth) depends on obedience to authority. A key tenet of mental health liberation is that psychiatric oppression is about suppression of individual differences, that uniqueness is punished, sacrificed on the altar of conformity. While it is true that differences are not tolerated, there is a deeper dynamic. What really cannot be tolerated is anxiety, the feeling associated with memory of terror.
-
Um...point.
There is a huge difference between "help" you seek out as a consumer and want (as the helpee), or that a child asks for and wants...
versus
"help" that the helpee doesn't want and doesn't personally find helpful.
And, of course, if I go, unasked, into Mary, Lisa, and Jane's kitchens and clean their kitchen and reorganize where everything is stored---over their individual protests, saying "You'll thank me later," if Jane finds that "help" unhelpful and is hacked off at me, it's no defense to say that Mary and Lisa liked it and really did thank me later.
My behavior towards Jane would still be arrogant, outrageous, and inexcusable.
It's like a serial rapist trying to justify his crimes by putting on the stand the occasional pathological masochist he found that actually *liked* it.
"Help" the recipient didn't ask for and doesn't want generally isn't.
Program advocates will counter this by reference to two year olds and five year olds and their need for discipline. Personally, *I* wouldn't want anybody teaching my child mathematics who couldn't tell the difference between two and seventeen.Republican n. A liberty despising, money worshiping, control freak. Democrat n. A liberty despising, social engineering, control freak.
-- Anonymous
-
On 2004-04-12 13:23:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2004-04-09 20:16:00, Paige wrote:
"All of you seem to be so focussed on me.
We would be satisfied for the time being if her aunt and uncle or her grandparents the C's could go visit with her. If my son goes to Mexico to visit with his sister I am going to be the one to take him there because I am his parent and I would not put my son through that by himself. "
Here we see a concerned parent looking out for what she feels is in the best interest of her child. Why is not this same consideration being given to the parents of the girl who made a decision regarding her?"
Please keep in mind this is not her child. She is sticking her nose in where it doesn't belong. There are countless children who are really REALLY abused by their parents. If she wants to do somethign about child abuse, she can take up a cause for them. The girl in question has not been abused. She is just interfering with the parental decisions that are not what she would choose, if she were the parent, and she is not.
-
On 2004-04-12 14:34:00, Paige wrote:
"Has it occured to anyone that the parents are unstable?? "
No, but it has occured to me that YOU are unstable. Are you currently counseling with anyone or taking any medication?
-
You haven't been paying attention.
The parents of this adopted teen apparently do not want her. There is a court order stating that she and her biological brother are to have contact. The two families are bound by that court order. You, nor I, nor anyone knows if the girl has been abused. Several accounts that have been shared are questionable and will depend ultimately on the judge's mood or persuation. She is being held incommunicado without so much as an evaluation to determine if this extreme placement is in her best interest. It could very well be true that the parents ditched the girl as punishment and to thwart others who are intimately involved in her life.
Has it occured to you that you might be sticking your nose where it doesn't belong? BTW, How are you involved in the drama? What makes you an expert on the situation, anon?
-
On 2004-04-13 16:44:00, Deborah wrote:
"
You haven't been paying attention.
The parents of this adopted teen apparently do not want her. There is a court order stating that she and her biological brother are to have contact. "
And yhou know there is a court order because...??? you have seen it yourself or you believe the rantings of an apparently unstable person. I am sure she is sincere in her desire to remove the girl from the parents, but, even to think to do such a thing is the thinking of an unstable person. There is no indication of any physical abuse. There is no mention of the girl not being fed. There is no mention of the girl having to sleep on the concrete floor. What we do see, however, is a differnece between standards and parenting styles.
Just because the parents don't live by the same standards, doesn't make them unfit or any other accusations that may be presented to the court.
By the way, this week is "next week" from last week when the boy's mom said she was going to file papers. Anybody heard anything?
-
Damn, you sound like the social worker on the case. You didn't answer the question- how are you involved? They're not keeping you in the loop? Then you probably don't need to know. There's black and there's white, and then there's this area called grey. It sometimes happens that things are resolved without dragging kids through court hearings. That IS the prefered method. I'm sure we'll get an update if/when it's appropriate.
-
On 2004-04-13 17:00:00, Deborah wrote:
"
Damn, you sound like the social worker on the case. You didn't answer the question- how are you involved? They're not keeping you in the loop? Then you probably don't need to know. There's black and there's white, and then there's this area called grey. It sometimes happens that things are resolved without dragging kids through court hearings. That IS the prefered method. I'm sure we'll get an update if/when it's appropriate. "
This is a great thing. We can all have our opinions. Unforutunately, some have forgotten that it is just that, their opinions.
You are correct, however, that things should be solved without dragging the kids through it. Unfortunately, the other woman, not the girl's mom, has choosen to post personal family information, as well as the girl's name, all over the web. This alone indicates that the woman is not thinking of the girl, but rather of herself.
As far as an update, doesn't really matter. It was never appropriate to post it in the first place.
-
Great, then you'll stop haranging her for an answer and flooding the board?
-
:question: :question: :question: :question: :question: :question: :question:
-
Anon writes:You are correct, however, that things should be solved without dragging the kids through it. Unfortunately, the other woman, not the girl's mom, has choosen to post personal family information, as well as the girl's name, all over the web. This alone indicates that the woman is not thinking of the girl, but rather of herself.
Paige writes: What you do not know is that the children where being dragged through it long before I got involved. The parents systematically removed the girl from the rest of the family including Grandparents and Aunts and Uncles at the same time that they were removing her from being able to see or have contact with her brother. the fact that the two children were adopted by different people was an issue in the beginning but does not change the fact that ehy are brother and sister.We all made an agreement in front of the judge that we would abide by his statements that they would always be able to be in touch with each other. Unfortunately the parents have chosen to go a different road against all of the family not just me and I did not get involved until She was sequestered from everyone in the family and the family started calling me to help them with this. So you can pick on me all you want too it makes no difference to me. Bottom line is that her brother still has not heard from her and still cannot communicate with her due to the parents and again I will say how Christian of them and how selfish of them that they cannot see the damage they are doing to a 14 year old boy who has lost his sister due to their actions. Is this supposed to be a punishement to her and to him? what purpose does this serve? Has it occured to you that she does deserve to be able to speak and communicate with her brother regardless of where she is? Do they not have any compassion for this child or is it strictly for themselves and their own selfishness. It also weems that they are behaving a bit childish on this.
The biggest mistake we all made was believeing the parents and not having the agreement written in a decree with a court order. But then again WE ALL believed them and trusted them only to be dismayed by their behaviour.
By the way I asked for a compromise that her brother would be able to communicate with her and I would not. That he could visit her but I would not since they do not want her in touch with me. There has been no response at all. Again how Christian of them. Oh yes - it isn't just me who cannot communicate with her. it is the grandparents the great grandmother, her brother, the Aunts and Uncles and many others. Why is that? Sounds to me like ISOLATION. what do you call it?
-
what do you call it?
Up to her parents.
For now, for whatever reason, this is how it is.
-
HER PARENTS MUST BE MONSTERS
WHAT ARE THEY HIDING :flame:
-
Everyone has an opinon prior to a child going into a program. They all say "you've gotta do something, and have all kinds of advice. Once you DO something, they are all over you for doing it. I suspect her parents are doing what they feel is best. If it turns out it's not, then they are free to make another choice. They are the parents, they have the right to make this choice until the girl is 18. Legally, the girl can leave and do whatever she wants. You can either spend your energy on something that isn't going to happen prior to that, or wait and see what she decides to do, and be with, once she of legal age. It is what it is.
-
On 2004-04-18 16:03:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Everyone has an opinon prior to a child going into a program. They all say "you've gotta do something, and have all kinds of advice. Once you DO something, they are all over you for doing it. I suspect her parents are doing what they feel is best. If it turns out it's not, then they are free to make another choice. They are the parents, they have the right to make this choice until the girl is 18. Legally, the girl can leave and do whatever she wants. You can either spend your energy on something that isn't going to happen prior to that, or wait and see what she decides to do, and be with, once she of legal age. It is what it is. "
Anon, surely you are aware that just like troubled teens, there are troubled adults? Second, just because a parent has the right to make decisions in the best interests of their child, doesn't mean their child needed to be sent away or that sending them away was the "right" choice. That is a matter of opinion and one that should be determined by an independent adolescent behavior healthcare specialist, not someone who works (or volunteers) for a program, or one of these dime-a-dozen ed cons and/or independent referral agents who make a living recommending programs for so-called troubled teens.
-
On 2004-04-18 08:17:00, Paige wrote:
"Bottom line is that her brother still has not heard from her and still cannot communicate with her due to the parents .
"
To refresh the memories of one and all, you yourself posted on a discussion thread that arrangements had been made for the brother to contact the sister through the grandparents.
Which is it? Were arrangements made or not? A false witness will not go unpunished, and he who pours out lies will not go free. Proverbs 19:5
Do you really think favor will be gained with anyone involved in the situation by continuing to bad mouth the parents? Like it or not, they are her parents. What has gone on here is nothing short of slander. He who guards his lips guards his life, but he who speaks rashly will come to ruin - Proverbs 13:3.
As far as the comment on the Christianity of the parents, only God almighty has the ability and the right to judge them. All a man's ways seem right to him, but the Lord weighs the heart. To do what is right and just is more acceptable to the Lord than sacrifice. Proverbs 21:2,3.
I really can't decide which is worse, the blantant attempts to interfere with the parental choices (how did the meeting go with the attorney?) or the ungodly support that has been shown to you. He who walks with the wise grows wise, but a companion of fools suffers harm. Proverbs 13:20.
-
Could you please come up with an intelligent response instead of throwing bible verses at us? :roll:
-
Anon writes:
To refresh the memories of one and all, you yourself posted on a discussion thread that arrangements had been made for the brother to contact the sister through the grandparents.
Paige writes:
The arrangement was made and we have sent emails with no response and no knowledge of the girl actually receiving them. They have not fulfilled their word.
-
Anon writes:All a man's ways seem right to him, but the Lord weighs the heart. To do what is right and just is more acceptable to the Lord than sacrifice. Proverbs 21:2,3.
Paige Writes;
I am doing what is right sorry if oyu don't like it.
-
Don't worry Paige......the God Squad always thinks that it knows what God's will is. Who's to say you're NOT doing God's will? Maybe this is God's way of helping out this girl......by sending Angel Paige. :grin:
-
On 2004-04-19 06:42:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Don't worry Paige......the God Squad always thinks that it knows what God's will is. Who's to say you're NOT doing God's will? Maybe this is God's way of helping out this girl......by sending Angel Paige. :grin: "
Thank you. My faith in God, my love for these two children, and the support of the family are what keeps me going. Thank you for your support it helps and I appreciate it.
-
On 2004-04-19 03:13:00, Anonymous wrote:
As far as the comment on the Christianity of the parents, only God almighty has the ability and the right to judge them.
Not too long ago, someone made the argument that it's OK for the parents to trick and/or force these kids into the Program and to keep them incommunicado because "these are Christian kids" who have just lost their way (or something to that effect).
I rarely get into the nitty-gritty debates on issues of religious dogma because there's usually no end to it. Everyone usually believes that their argument is right from the Bible and, therefore, inviolate.
But when I was a kid attending Christian school and Bible study, this was a frequent point of discussion. The above sentiment is prety much the way I learned it. No one but God, including the parents, has the right or ability to judge whether or not these kids are Christian. That is a sacred, private issue that can only exist between the individual and God. The parents' belief that the kids are Christian does not justify force or fraud against them.
The trouble with practical jokes is that very often they get elected.
Will Rogers, American humorist, political commentator and cowboy philosopher
-
I am reading through this site and find it very strange. Those of you who question ALA's integrity, have you been involved with them? Just wondering? Has ALA done something to you personally that is bad? Have you any evidence that ALA has harmed any of the young people that have been involved in the program? I need to know because I am considering ALA for my child.
-
Well, just look through the posts here. They give very, very little information. Talk w/ Paige. She'll probably answer a PM if you send one. Look over the student manual and run it past a qualified professional who deals w/ adolescants.
I ask questions, I rarely get a straight answer. Don't know why the ALA people take offense at the questions. I have yet to ask Craig if he's still beating his wife (so to speak) I just want to know whether or not they take kids against their will. Karen and Craig alternately tell me "no, of course not!" or "Well, some kids NEED to be held against their will."
In case you missed it, here's a thread Craig started:
http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?to ... orum=9&264 (http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?topic=4819&forum=9&264)
There's another one or two under the names "Words of Wisdom" and "Word of Wisdom"
But, if you're still considering placing your kid w/ these people AFTER reading over some of the school director's rants, none of this probably matters to you.
The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. ... All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.
--Hermann Goering, Luftwaffe commander, sentenced to death at Nuremberg
_________________
Ginger Warbis ~ Antigen
Seed sibling `71 - `80
Straight South (Sarasota, FL)
10/80 - 10/82
Anonymity Anonymous
It is wrong to leave a stumbling block in the road once it has tripped you.
-
TO PAIGE. NOT A REGULAR READER BUT WHY CAN NO ONE TALK TO OR VISIT THE CHILDREN ? WILL THEY TELL THE FACTS ABOUT ALA OR THEIR PARENTS.WHY DOES THE US EMBASY NOT CHECK THIS OUT ?
-
Pay-oh-la.
-
What happens if a kid does not want to attend a Christian or any other kind of compulsory faith-based program? Do they have the right to contact an organization like the ACLU who could help enforce their "freedom of religion" rights? Where does it say in the constitution or bill of rights that minor children do not have the same rights as adults?
:idea:
-
That is a good question. I can't give you a direct answer, but I Can tell you from my own personal experience, I do not believe that minors have any rights regarding their placement. When I was sent to my "program", I wondered "What about my freedom of speech?, "What about my civil rights?" I was taught in school about the Bill of Rights, and it's tremendous impact on American life and freedom. I quickly realized that it did not apply to me because I was under the age of 18. I admire the ACLU and their mission to protect peoples' civil and human rights, but can they help our children? Can any legal body help them? If so, then why are these thousands of children still isolated for months and years without a trace of legal representation until after the fact? That is a very good question. Are a minors rights, if they have any, translated into the responsibility of their guardian?
-
Sure wouldn't hurt to contact the ACLU, or one of the top cult experts for advice, Rick Ross.
Meantime, check out this case of a child suing their parent for corporal punishment in the name of the Lord.
http://www.rickross.com/reference/upci/upci5.html (http://www.rickross.com/reference/upci/upci5.html)
-
It seems that many of these programs force children to change values, beliefs and behavior by inflicting various abuses as forms of punishment. THIS IS NOT CHRISTIANITY. Jesus Christ did not come to force people to believe in him. He said I stand at the door and knock. Those who wish to let Christ into their lives must open the door. His message was that of love, tolerance, peace and kindness. He encouraged those who believed in him to follow him and to treat others as they would desire to be treated. "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you" is known as the golden rule. I doubt that this is applied in faith based specialty programs. I learned a long time ago that one can not force someone to heaven. Accepting Christianity is a choice - even Christ himself knew this. People followed him because he was kind and loving to all. Instead of inflicting punishments on "sinners" he healed them and protected them. When Mary was going to stoned for adultery he gently admonished, "He who is without sin, let him cast the first stone." That's all he said. One by one the pious men dropped their stones to the ground and walked away. He then went to Mary and said, "where are your accusers?" He simply said, Go and sin no more. As many of you know - this sinner became one of Christ's followers. In fact, she was the first to view Christ after he was resurected. These faith based specialty programs that abuse and humiliate youth are not using Christian principles.
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
-- Benjamin Franklin
-
Cherish is correct.
Here is an artical on the subject of choice as it relates to Heaven & Hell.
Its not full of verses to look up; just the authors thoughts on the subject.
Jack Kinsella - http://www.omegaletter.com (http://www.omegaletter.com)
Generally speaking, that is the first objection the world raises when introduced to the God of the Bible as He reveals Himself to man. If God TRULY 'so loved the world that He sent His only begotton Son' to save us from hell, then why did He create Hell in the first place? And having created it, why did He create man and then allow him to sin?
To the atheist or the skeptic, these seem to be logical, valid questions, but the questions are based on false assumptions about the God of Scripture. For example, "could God create a rock so big He can't lift it?" It seems logical at first glance. But what the question is really asking is, "if God is so all powerful that He is powerful enough to fail?"
The first false assumption about God is that, because God loves us so much, He ought to let us do what we want. But the permissive kind of love they ascribe to a 'loving' God, when applied to children, doesn't produce loving children. It produces spoiled brats.
In addition, God's moral laws have a purpose, as evidenced by the precision with which He put together the universe. The laws that govern the physical universe are so precise that we can calculate the positions of planets, stars, and galaxies thousands to millions of years into the future.
Would a God of this kind of precision design moral laws that are random or changing? God's moral laws keep order in society the way the physical laws keep order in the universe. But the main purpose of God's moral laws are to teach us what God requires for us to enter into His kingdom.
It is our obvious failure to keep these moral laws that leads humans to seek redemption and salvation in the first place. We can't help it. Even an atheist, if he is honest, will admit that at some time in his life, he did or said something he was sorry for. Humans are built that way.
So why doesn't God make everyone into perfect beings and allow them all into heaven? It would actually be more cruel if God were to do this, since many people prefer hell to the alternative (complete submission to God).
All the people who end up going to hell will have done so because they actually prefer hell to being forced into the presence of God for all eternity. It is their choice to make, and many make it with eyes wide open. People like to live in their favorite sins and answer to no one else.
They know that if they accept Jesus as Lord and Savior that God will want them to change their lives and they might have to give up some of their autonomy. We've all witnessed to somebody at some time who said something like, "I've a window seat reserved in hell" or, "I don't mind going to hell. All my friends will be there."
Clearly, God isn't SENDING them to hell. On the contrary, He provided a way for man to avoid hell, but He also gave man free will to choose. Being compelled to worship God isn't worship. Since God created spiritual beings for the purpose of expressing love, those beings must have complete free will in order to express that love.
Of course, free will allows for the possibility of those beings rejecting God and His plans. The skeptic and atheist argue that God will just let them into heaven because they have behaved about as good, and maybe even better, compared to the rest of the people on earth.
But to God, any sin excludes entrance into heaven. The next argument the skeptic will present is that God isn't fair. It isn't fair that only some people will get to go to heaven, while the rest will go to hell.
The answer to this one is easy. They are right. If God were fair, EVERYBODY would go to hell. Nobody can live a sinless life, even after they are saved and their sins are washed away.
Therefore, God has made a provision to erase all sins that we have committed in this life and to perfect us so that we cannot sin in the next life. That provision for sin is through the sacrifice of God's Son, Jesus Christ. Jesus took the punishment that we deserve and gives us the reward that we do not deserve - eternal life. That is mercy, not fairness.
In accepting Jesus as Lord and Savior, all our sins are erased, and Jesus works to change us into His image. On the other hand, 'fairness' demands all who have sinned and come short of the glory of God be judged according to their works. Instead of fairness, God extends mercy to those who ask for it.
It is the atheist and the skeptic who will experience God's 'fairness' when they stand before Him. I'd rather stand before a merciful Judge than a 'fair' one, anytime.
The skeptic and the atheist scoff at the nature of salvation, saying anything that is 'free' is worth what you pay for it. While salvation is a gift of grace and not of works, one can't exactly say that salvation is free. There is a cost.
It will cost you your sin. It will cost you your pride. It will cost you your sense of self, or your selfishness. None of these character traits exist in heaven.
But the skeptic or atheist who prefers to hang onto these traits can choose to go to where these traits DO exist. Every human was created in God's Image, with an eternal, spiritual component. We will all spend eternity somewhere. If not heaven, there is only one choice remaining. That is hell.
Does a loving God send people to hell? No. People CHOOSE hell. What a loving God does is provide a choice. The atheist or skeptic can choose to stand before a fair God, or a merciful One. In either case, they can't blame God then for the consequences of choices that they make now.
God allows each of us to choose, but as to the question at hand, "Does a loving God send people to hell?", God answers it directly:
"Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live." (Ezekiel 18:32)
-
"These faith based specialty programs that abuse and humiliate youth are not using Christian principles."
-------------------------
So, what does this say about PARENTS who choose these kinds of schools to abuse and humiliate their own children?
:scared:
-
"So, what does this say about PARENTS who choose these kinds of schools to abuse and humiliate their own children? "
It most likely says they have been lied to and manipulated; and I don't mean by the kid.
Haveing said that;
they are not all Mt Park; and Some are very good.
-
How about an update on Paige? Did she ever get this situation with ALA resolved to her satisfaction?
-
WANT YOUR KID TO DISAPPEAR?
For $1,800, former Atlanta police officer Rick Strawn will make that problem child someone else's problem. He even makes house calls.
By Nadya Labi
Louis Boussard has hired a professional to abduct his son.
On a late evening in early March, Rick Strawn of Strawn Support Services flew from Atlanta to Tampa, Fla. He rented a Ford Taurus with child-safety locks from Avis and set off for the coastal town of St. Petersburg with his assistant, Joshua Dalton, and me. An hour later, we were driving down a street filled with one-story homes. We slowed down outside a house with an American flag hanging from the eaves and a Jaguar and a Grand Cherokee in the semicircular driveway. It was 1:55 a.m., which meant we were early. Strawn parked in a nearby lot to kill time. He went over the plan, emphasizing, "We've got to leave by 3:15."
Flicking on the lights to look for Boussard's number, Strawn dialed his cellphone. "Um, Louis. Hi. Does your house have a circle driveway with a Jag in it?" he said. "If you're ready, we'll come on in. Is he asleep?" The connection broke up. Moments later, Strawn's phone rang. "Much better, yes. No, don't wake him up. We're going to talk to you for about an hour," he said. "I'm going to help you through all that. Okay. Bye-bye."
We drove back to the house at a crawl and got out of the car, easing the doors shut. Both men wore khaki pants and dark blue shirts embossed with a globe logo and the website address of Strawn's company. Strawn walked up the stone pathway, peered in the window of the front door, and lightly rapped. No one answered. "Maybe he said go around the back," Strawn said. "Wait here for a second." He began to walk toward the back of the house when a light came on inside.
A Haitian-American man in his late 40s opened the front door and beckoned us inside. Boussard (his name and the names of his wife and son have been changed) guided us to a dining-room table covered by a white tablecloth. It held a white vase filled with artificial pink flowers and two fat red candles in wrought iron stands. The matching white cushions of the dining-room chairs were covered in plastic. Boussard sat at the head of the table, flanked by his wife, Sandra. In spite of the late hour, they were impeccably dressed?he wore a beige linen suit and she wore a scoop-necked sweater set off by a gold necklace and bracelets. The couple's formality, however, soon gave way to the urgency of the task at hand. Two rooms away on the other side of the kitchen, their 16-year-old son, Louis, Jr., lay asleep in his bedroom.
The Boussards had hired Strawn Support Services to transport Louis, Jr. to Casa by the Sea, a school near Ensenada, Mexico that seeks to "modify" the behavior of troublemaking teens. Casa takes kids who parents have decided are out of control, usually because the teens are talking back, getting poor grades, staying out late, drinking, having sex too soon, or taking drugs.
Louis, Jr.'s parents had not told him that he was going to Mexico?nor how he would be taken there. They thought he would run if he knew what was about to happen. Now they kept glancing in the direction of the kitchen. "Louis is very suspicious," Sandra whispered about her son as her husband began a hurried account of the teen's misbehavior.
The troubles had begun a year earlier when Louis, Jr. was in 10th grade. His grades fell from A's and B's to C's and below. He stopped playing basketball with his father. He started talking back when his mother wouldn't let him go out to clubs with his friends. He broke his curfew, which was 7:30 p.m. during the week and 9 p.m. on the weekends. Often he left the house by his bedroom window. The Boussards thought Louis, Jr. might be smoking pot. Then all of a sudden, his report cards improved dramatically. "I thought, something is not right," said Boussard, squinting at the memory. He discovered a bad report card in his son's backpack, and Louis admitted that he had faked the good ones.
The Boussards enrolled their son in counseling; the counselor said he was doing fine. They sent him to boot camp for a day, where he got anger-management and drug counseling. He behaved better for about a week. At around the same time, Louis was told that he had to repeat 10th grade. His parents transferred him to a vocational program in carpentry at his high school with the hope that he would find the schoolwork easier. Louis hated it.
Strawn listened to this litany of frustrations, nodding sympathetically. Then, he took a breath and started the spiel that he has honed over the course of six years and some 300 transports. "Behavior is as addictive as any drug or alcohol," he told the Boussards. Like all troubled kids, Louis, Jr. needed to recover from his bad behavior. "The way I look at it," Strawn continued, "any good recovery has three components: breaking down old habits, building a strong foundation, and building new habits." But Boussard père was not paying attention. He was still steamed about the fake report cards. "I said 'Something is not right,' " he repeated.
There was a slight noise, and he and his wife jumped.
"Do we need to have Josh go outside?" Strawn asked, referring to his assistant.
"He's very suspicious," Sandra whispered, glancing over her shoulder toward her son's room.
Strawn went outside to make sure that Louis had not climbed out of his bedroom window. The teen seemed to be asleep, but Strawn left Dalton outside to stand guard. On the air conditioner outside the window was a bottle of cologne, which Strawn guessed Louis used to freshen up before his nights out.
Strawn squeaked back into his chair and rushed through his usual script. Now was not the moment to dwell on his own recovery from alcoholism, or to lead the prayer circle that he often suggests before a trip. He ran through what his clients should expect when he entered Louis's room. Strawn advised them to introduce him to Louis, to give their son a hug if Louis let them, and then to walk away. "The hardest thing I ask a parent to do is to turn around and walk out," he said. "Don't come back, no matter what you see or hear."
The mother and father nodded, shifting in their seats. Boussard got a black overnight bag from a closet and handed it to Strawn, along with a check for $1,800. In return, Strawn asked him to sign a notarized power-of-attorney that authorized his company to take "any act or action" on the parents' behalf during the transport to Casa. The document also promised that the couple would not sue for any injuries caused by "reasonable restraint." Strawn warned them that he would take Louis away in handcuffs. The father signed the release, then seemed to have a moment of buyer's remorse. He said he'd been obsessively reading the catalogue for Casa. "All of a sudden, the intensity just takes off," Boussard said about sending his son away. "We feel like we failed."
"Let me help you out there," Strawn reassured him. "I go to families all the time with four or five siblings. Only one of them decided to take this path. If it had anything to do with your parenting skills . . . " His voice trailed off. "It isn't because of that."
"We don't want to see him go to prison or jail," said Boussard, rubbing his hands over his face again and again. "Will he understand what we're trying to do for him?"
Boussard got up from the table with a sigh. The rest of us followed close behind. He walked into the kitchen and took a dinner knife out of a drawer, explaining that he would use it to pry open his son's locked door. Sliding the knife into the crack between the door and the wall, he prepared to enter.
RICK STRAWN IS AN EX-COP WHO STARTED HIS COMPANY in 1988 to help police officers find off-duty work guarding construction sites. Ten years later, he was asked by a member of his United Methodist church to transport the churchgoer's son to Tranquility Bay in Jamaica. The school is run by the World Wide Association of Specialty Programs, a company headquartered in Utah that owns eight schools in the United States and abroad, including Louis, Jr.'s destination.
Strawn said no to that first inquiry because he knew the boy involved. But he had stumbled upon what he now believes is his calling. In his first year of business, he escorted eight teens to behavior modification schools. Since then, his company has transported more than 700 kids between the ages of 8 and 17. Strawn has gone on about half of the trips himself; on the others he has sent agents. Either way, the company generally uses two escorts for the part of a trip that's on the road. Girls are escorted by coed teams; in the early years, Strawn relied on his wife, mother, or older daughter to help him on these trips. Now his wife, Susan, runs the company's office from the family home in the Atlanta suburb of Suwanee. After every trip, she sends the client a card with the message: "Just a note to say thank you for allowing us to assist your family."
Balding and slightly soft in the gut, Strawn is a reassuring 52-year-old. He speaks with a light drawl?he was born in Lubbock, Tex.?and he seems to mean it when he drops endearments like "hon." Strawn's easy manner has won over many parents and school administrators. "He's one of the few escorts who takes the time and effort to talk to the kids," said Karina Zurita, the admissions coordinator at Casa. "He lets kids know that they'll be in good hands."
But if Strawn is decent and likable, he will also go to almost any length to get his charges to do what their parents want. He has chased kids down. He has dragged teens to the car in their underwear. He has used a choke hold, learned as a cop, to render a few others unconscious. He has taken suicidal kids from hospital treatment to reform school.
Most of Strawn's clients are genuinely concerned about their children's welfare. They believe their children are at risk and want to save them. But these parents also revel in forcing their kids to sit up, pay attention, and do what they're told. Glenda Spaulding, who took out four loans to send her 14-year-old daughter to a WWASP school in South Carolina last November, had three words for Strawn before he took the girl away: "Go get her."
Strawn's willingness to use force differentiates him from other escorts. While no one tracks the teen transport industry, those in the business estimate that more than 20 companies nationwide take kids to behavior modification schools, residential treatment centers, and boot camps. Some of the bigger companies are more selective than Strawn about what they'll do. The Center for Safe Youth in Atlanta, for example, doesn't use restraints to force a child to go anywhere. And the center won't transport kids to WWASP schools because educational consultants with whom the company works don't recommend them. Its owner, John Villines, would like to create a professional association to oversee the transport industry. The standards he proposes are rudimentary: no agents with felony convictions or histories of irresponsible driving or drug and alcohol abuse. But they set the bar higher than almost any state does.
Instead of operating by rules, the escort industry runs on trust?the trust that parents won't put their kids in harm's way. But there is no trust between parents and kids in the households that Strawn enters. It has broken down so completely that parents think it's okay, and even courageous, to send a stranger into their child's bedroom. Strawn makes his living from that judgment and he is willing to mislead a child for what he sees as the greater goal of reform.
Once parents put their kids at Strawn's mercy, for a short time he is in loco parentis?in the place of the parent?in the fullest sense of the term. He has the authority to tell a kid what to do and to punish him for failing to obey. At the same time, he is the only person left to cling to when a kid is on the threshold of a scary, unknown world.
Three years ago, Strawn escorted Valerie Ann Heron, a 17-year-old from Montgomery, Ala., to Tranquility Bay. The school is the most hardcore in the WWASP system, the one to which students are sent when they repeatedly cause trouble at other schools. The trip went smoothly, according to Heron's mother, Nell Orange, and Strawn played his role well. "He made her feel comfortable with him. She trusted him. He talked to her about what to expect, where she was going," Orange said. "She gave him a hug when she left him."
The day after that hug, Valerie rushed out of a second-floor classroom and jumped to her death off a 35-foot-high balcony.
The suicide didn't faze Strawn. He didn't ask himself whether he should have taken Valerie to Tranquility Bay and left her there, or whether she needed more help and tenderness than the tough-love school provides. He doesn't even acknowledge that she might have been upset or unhinged enough to kill herself. "We had a really good trip. We were laughing and cutting it up," Strawn recalled. "Was she suicidal? Till the day I die, I won't believe that." Without any evidence, Strawn says that Valerie must have jumped in an effort to run away or in hopes of hurting herself so that she would be sent home. She landed on her head instead of her feet, he thinks, because one foot got caught in the balcony. "My feeling is that the majority of kids who talk about suicide, they're not suicidal," Strawn said. "What they are is manipulative."
LOUIS, JR. SAT STRAIGHT UP IN HIS BED. He was surrounded by three strangers and his parents. His chest was bare, and white acne medicine stood out against the dark skin of his forehead. He grabbed his wire-rimmed glasses from the bedside table and blinked a few times. The basketball posters of Tracy McGrady and Kobe Bryant were still there. His childhood teddy bear sat in a low-slung armchair by the door.
"Do you have some underwear on?" Louis's father said. "They're here to help us. They're here to take you to a school."
Louis shook his head to clear it.
"The only thing we want you to know is that we love you very much," Boussard continued. He and his wife stepped forward to hug Louis, but the gesture was forced and none of them seemed to want the contact.
"Where am I going? When am I coming home?"
Louis's parents walked out the door.
Strawn broke the silence that followed their exit. He launched into what he calls "the scenario," a three-minute script that he instructs his employees to memorize and deliver, right down to a required chuckle. "Personally, I feel like I do it better than anyone else because I designed it," Strawn had explained earlier. The scenario is the key to a smooth escort, he believes. It gives teens time to cool off, weigh their options, and realize that their best course of action is to follow orders.
"I want you to know that we are not here to be bad guys and bullies. We are not here to lecture you, or right-or-wrong you to death," Strawn told Louis. "We are here to get you safely to the school and we are going to do that. But we'll absolutely give you as much respect as you allow us to give you."
Louis stared at him and drummed his leg against the bed.
"Quite frankly, cuffs do not embarrass us," Strawn continued. "But if it goes there, it will be 100 percent your choice." He concluded with the question that the scenario is designed to set up. "I have an important question for you. If you walk out of here cuffed, do you understand that it's 100 percent your choice?"
"Uh-huh," Louis said. He looked around the room. His mind was working but coming up empty. He asked if he could grab his clothes. The answer was no. Instead he was allowed to direct Dalton to hand him a gray t-shirt, a black-and-gray Fubu jersey, and black mesh gym shorts.
"Am I coming home today?" Louis was trying not to cry. He blinked rapidly behind the smudged lenses of his glasses.
"I will not lie to you," Strawn hedged. "I might not answer your questions . . . "
"So when am I coming home?"
"I mean no disrespect, but I learned a long time ago that I don't want to chase you," Strawn plowed on, ignoring Louis's question. He explained that he would handcuff Louis to Dalton. "And son, if you can drag this ugly sucker far and fast enough to get away, well, God bless you, you weren't meant to go." Strawn gave the scripted chuckle.
Louis was still trying to buy time and find a way out. "Can I brush my teeth?" he asked.
Strawn shook his head, and cuffed Louis to Dalton. Strawn wrote his script to give his charges the illusion of control, but he often cuffs the kids, especially boys, no matter what they say. He hustled Louis to the car, guiding him into the back seat along with Dalton, to whom he was still cuffed. Taking the wheel, Strawn explained to his passenger that he would stop talking?"I consider it disrespectful to talk to you in the rearview mirror," he said?until he reached the airport.
At the mention of an airport, Louis said, "Oh, God."
When we arrived at the Tampa airport half an hour later, Strawn took off Louis's handcuffs. As we walked to catch our connecting flight to Atlanta, Dalton grabbed the waistband of the boy's shorts, which rode low on his hips and might have fallen off if Dalton hadn't held fast. The teen rolled his eyes and cracked a piece of gum that Dalton had given him. He was auditioning for the part of bad boy, but the role didn't fit. He was too quick to say "Thank you" and too eager to talk. He had spent the past year bottling those impulses around his parents and chafing at the limits they had set for him. His abduction struck him as the latest outrage. "I don't listen to them, I don't like what they say," he said. "I don't listen to the curfew. I'm not doing that. It's too early."
When his parents bore down, Louis pushed back. He hung out with a crowd they didn't like and he drank and smoked pot. "I came home high once. My father said, 'I know you're high,' " Louis remembered. "Then I went to a one-day boot camp last August. You exercise and they talk to you. I came home high again and he sent me to this juvenile rehab thing that lasted two and a half days. It was pointless."
THERE COMES A POINT IN JUST ABOUT EVERY ONE OF STRAWN'S TRANSPORTS, whether he's soothing a nervous parent or bonding with an upset teen, when he will mention his six-month stint in 1997 at a halfway house for alcoholics. "Seven years ago, I entered recovery. My drug of choice was alcohol. You know far more about where you're going than I knew about myself," he told the 14-year-old girl he escorted last November to a WWASP school in South Carolina. "In my mind, I was kicking and screaming. But the loveliest day of my life was when my wife and mom dropped me off at that halfway house. I can tell you now that it's the best thing that ever happened to me."
That's Strawn's version of the story, which starts a generation earlier. Strawn joined the Atlanta police force in 1973. He'd previously been in sales, but he knew that being a cop would suit him better. "In sales, the customer is always right," he explained. "But as a cop, I'm always right." Strawn relished that authority. "It seems at times he has to have the last word," one of his supervisors noted in an evaluation early in his police career. That's a good thing in a cop, and the reviews Strawn received during this period were uniformly favorable.
Strawn worked many different beats, including patrol, drug enforcement, and homicide. He earned the respect of his colleagues for calming down troublemakers. "They have to think that you might be the toughest guy," he said of the suspects he arrested. "I was able to talk people into doing what we wanted them to do."
Strawn was losing control of his own life, however. He was drinking heavily and in 1992 he was briefly suspended for disappearing from work without explanation. Strawn said that he stayed sober on the job, but the smell of alcohol seeped from his pores. His colleagues complained. Internal Affairs investigated. Strawn tested clean.
Four years earlier, Strawn had married Susan Kyzer, a single mother with a young daughter. Strawn didn't get along with the girl. She had attention-deficit disorder and the Ritalin she took wore off by the time she got home from school. "Her behavior was like a needle point with Rick," Susan said. "He was of the view that kids should be seen but not heard, and this kid was always heard."
In 1996, the stepdaughter told a counselor that Strawn had molested her two years earlier, when she was 12. She'd just gotten home from a school football game, and she was still wearing her green-and-white cheerleader's outfit. She fell asleep on the living-room floor while watching TV with her stepfather. She said that she woke to the feel of something hard against her vagina and ran out of the room. Strawn was arrested for molestation. During the police investigation, he claimed that he'd fallen asleep after drinking, and in his dreams had confused his stepdaughter with his wife. But Susan told the investigators that just after the incident, Strawn had told her that "'it was just a weak moment.' . . . He got turned on by her laying there with a short skirt on and all, and lay down beside her and unzipped his pants against her." Strawn grew depressed and began taking medication. He also admitted to detectives that a year earlier he had fondled the breasts of his niece on two separate occasions, when she was 12 or 13.
The Atlanta police department suspended him for several months. But Strawn's stepdaughter recanted her accusation, leaving prosecutors little choice but to drop the molestation charge. Strawn was taken out of the field, however, and assigned to do desk work. He was no longer the go-to officer. "I was being tolerated," he said. "And for someone with my personality, being tolerated is enough to make you want to get drunk."
One night in January 1997, Strawn went home drunk. After arguing with Susan, he said he was going to shoot himself and he got his .38 revolver out of the garage. "I've had all I can take," he told Susan, his stepdaughter, and the couple's 8-year-old son, Jared. But his threat was, to use his word, manipulation. He fired into the air and left. When he returned home later that evening, he passed out.
The next day, Susan confronted Strawn about his alcoholism, as she had many times in the past. His stepdaughter chimed in that she had snapped a picture of Strawn in his stupor the previous night so that he could see what he'd looked like drunk. Strawn wanted to destroy the roll of film but Susan and her daughter wouldn't let him, because it included a photo of the family cat, which had since died. A struggle ensued, and Strawn kicked the girl in the groin. He then grabbed his wife by the throat, choking her while his stepdaughter called 911.
Strawn left the house and drove to a nearby park, where he continued drinking. Susan and her daughter found him there. Susan tried to calm her husband down. Her daughter called the police. Strawn was arrested and charged with family violence, reckless conduct, and four counts of simple battery?misdemeanor charges that in Georgia together carry a maximum sentence of six years. Less than a month later, he was arrested again when he was found drunk and nearly passed out in his car. He avoided jail by pleading guilty to reckless conduct and a DUI charge.
Strawn likes to say that his wife made him go to the Hickey House Recovery Community. But a judge sent him there, as a condition of his probation. He spent six months at the halfway house while his family stayed away. Strawn hadn't prayed for some time, but he started going to a small church nearby. The defensive stance that he'd adopted slipped away. "Things started loosening up," Strawn said. He felt closer to God. When he got home, Strawn set to work on mending his family. While he was drinking, Susan had considered leaving him. Jared had withdrawn into video games. Now Strawn reached out to them, and they responded. Jared gave his father a cloth bracelet stenciled with the letters WWJD, for "What Would Jesus Do?" Strawn never takes it off.
The Atlanta police department was not as forgiving. In May 1998, it determined that Strawn had "brought discredit" on himself as a police officer, on 11 different counts. His superiors decided to fire him. Strawn opted to retire instead. He left the day before he was due to lose his job after 25 years on the force.
Strawn doesn't try to reconcile his past and his present, perhaps because he is afraid to find that traces of his old self remain. It is safer for him to credit God as the way he "got from there to here." The story of redemption that Strawn spins persuades parents who don't know where to turn that they can rely on him. Strawn was lost, just like the kids he escorts, and it is both his reward and his punishment to tell how he was found. "Working with these kids is like working a 12-step," he said before a recent transport. "Behavior is as addictive as any drugs or alcohol. I plant the seed of recovery."
But Strawn knows that if he is to be trusted to plant that seed, there is no room in his history for criminal lapses of judgment. I spent hours talking to Strawn, and he never mentioned the accusations involving his stepdaughter and niece. Instead he told me about a 15-year-old girl who was apparently discredited when she insinuated that he'd molested her during a 26-hour drive from Indianapolis to a WWASP school in Montana. Strawn said that an assistant was with him and the girl for the entire transport, and that the assistant backed Strawn up when he said he'd done nothing wrong. The school believed them. "That was God watching over me," Strawn said. Otherwise, he continued, "I would not be working in this profession. The cloud of suspicion would have been there." As for his stepdaughter, when I asked Strawn about her accusation, he said that she'd made up the charge to get him help for his alcoholism. She is now 21 and, along with Strawn's niece, works as an escort for Strawn Support Services. But she will not team up with her stepfather.
"WE'VE GOT SOMETHING DIFFERENT HERE," Strawn told the ticketing agent at the checkout counter of Delta Airlines. "We've got someone here we're escorting?not a prisoner, but he doesn't want to go with us." Louis sat with Dalton off to the side, rummaging through the overnight bag that his parents had packed for him. The agent didn't pause. "That's fine," he said with a smile.
Strawn won't board a plane with a kid who puts up too much of a fight?that's why he ended up on that 26-hour drive. But when escorts do fly with protesting kids, airport officials rarely ask questions. Amanda Krassin was taken by plane from Washington to Oregon when she was 16. The escorts, who were from the California company Guiding Hands, asked that she be detained in an airport security area and handcuffed her on the plane. "Everyone ignored me at the airport," Krassin recalled. "I think they just thought I was a prisoner."
On the way to the gate for our flight to Atlanta, Strawn skipped a long line by flashing an auxiliary Coast Guard badge. (He's a member of the group's volunteer squad.) Dalton took Louis to the bathroom. The assistant, who is 25, is fairly new to the job. But Strawn likes to show off Dalton to clients because he attended a WWASP school in Western Samoa called Paradise Cove. The school shut down in 1998 after a State Department investigation into what it determined to be "credible allegations" of abuse, but Strawn doesn't mention that.
"I'm going to make two suggestions," he told Louis when the teen emerged from the bathroom. "First, try to have an open mind. I know it's hard to have an open mind when two ugly guys come and take you from your bedroom at night to a school that you don't want to be at. Second, you've got to be gut-level honest with yourself. The bad part of that is it's a 100 percent inside job."
The world according to Strawn is based on choices and consequences. The world according to WWASP is designed to reinforce the same principle. Students enter Casa by the Sea at the first of six levels. To advance, they have to earn points through good behavior and schoolwork. Until they reach level three, which takes an average of three months, they can communicate with the outside world only through letters to their parents, which the school monitors. After that, they can talk on the phone to their parents but no one else.
Casa costs nearly $30,000 for a year?as much as a year's tuition at Harvard?but offers no traditional academic instruction. Instead the schoolwork is self-paced; the students sit at tables with a workbook and take a test on a section when they decide they're ready. They can retake the same test as many times as necessary to achieve an 80 percent passing grade. According to the Casa parent handbook, the school does not ensure that "the student will even receive any credits" or that the teachers who monitor the study sessions will have U.S. credentials. The school does not track how many of its students go on to high school or college. "You're not going to have a teacher riding your back," Dalton told Louis. "It's all independent study. I just read the module, and did the test. I finished class in a week. That's how easy it is."
Students spend more time studying themselves than any other subject. They write daily reflections in response to self-help tapes and videos such as Tony Robbins's Personal Power, You Can Choose, and Price Tag of Sex. They answer questions like "What feelings/emotions did I experience today and how did I choose to respond?"
Students also attend, and eventually staff, self-help seminars. The entry-level seminar, called Discovery, encourages participants to "learn to interrupt unconscious mental and emotional cycles which tend to sabotage results." Kelly Lauritsen participated in Discovery at Casa in 2000 and said she was encouraged to hit the walls with rolled towels to release her anger. The price of tuition includes versions of these seminars for parents. Like Oprah on speed, sessions run nonstop from morning until midnight. Many parents and kids say they benefit from the self-analysis. "I didn't realize that I had so much anger inside," the 14-year-old girl whom Strawn transported in November wrote to her mother.
WWASP also pays for Strawn and his employees to attend the seminars, and Strawn has done Discovery. He enrolled in the seminar so that he could better sell parents on hiring him, but its talk-until-you're-cured approach forced him to confront buried wounds, such as his father's death a decade earlier. "God had a reason to put me there and it had nothing to do with the business," he said of the experience.
Strawn told Louis that the hardest thing about Casa would be abiding by the school's intricate system of discipline. "It's not the big rules that get you. It's all the little rules," Strawn said. Casa docks students, according to its handbook, for telling "war stories" about inappropriate experiences, for being unkind to each other, and for making "negative statements about the School, the staff, the country, or other students."
"There's a whole page of rules," said Shannon Eierman, who attended Casa last year. "That page is divided into sections of categories, into different codes, and a million subcategories. You could be there forever and the next day and learn a new rule."
Students at Casa who commit "Category 5 infractions" can be punished with an "intervention," for example, which is defined as being left alone in a room. Students say that the punishment can last for weeks, though Casa insists that the maximum penalty is three days. "I had to sit with crossed legs in a closet for three days," said Kaori Gutierrez, who left Casa in 2001. Interventions may be used to punish out-of-control behavior, drug use, and escape attempts. But they're also the way the school handles "self-inflicted injuries," which can range from cracked knuckles to self-mutilation with pens or paper clips to an attempted suicide.
At the root of this long list of punishable violations is "manipulation," which includes lying or exaggerating. Strawn repeatedly uses the word to dismiss a kid's behavior?it's the way he said Valerie Heron acted the day before her suicide. In the WWASP universe that he inhabits, manipulation is a term of art that refers to just about anything a teen does or says that the staff doesn't like.
Still, the schools' intensive monitoring has helped some students turn their lives around. Richard King of Atlanta believes that going to Tranquility Bay in 1997, when he was 17, taught him to be accountable for his actions. The experience saved him from ending up "either dead or in jail," he said. Before he went to the school, King drank, smoked pot, and battled with his parents. When he returned, he could sit down and talk to them.
CALIFORNIA IS THE ONLY STATE WITH A SEMBLANCE OF OVERSIGHT FOR ESCORTS. In response to news accounts in 1997 of a teenage boy from Oakland, Calif., who was transported against his will to Tranquility Bay, the state's legislature developed a bill to protect kids like him. The legislation would have barred escorts from using restraints that interfere with a child's "ability to see, hear, or move freely." By the time it passed, however, the bill had been amended into a toothless licensing scheme.
Nor are there federal controls. In 1923, the Supreme Court announced that parents have a "right of control" that allows them to direct their children's upbringing and education. The court has not budged from this stance since, and, for obvious reasons, it is not listening to the voices of kids who rebel against their parents' dictates. Few people want children?or, for that matter, anyone else?to have veto power over the decisions that parents make. Even the states that permit teenagers to be emancipated from their parents, allowing them to be treated legally as adults, ordinarily mandate that the parents must agree.
As many a frustrated teen knows, the legal framework means that parents get to call the shots. While teenagers can't be jailed by the state without a judge's approval, parents can confine minors against their will for reasons including their mental health. (It's harder to take away the freedom of mentally ill adults.) The Constitution has been interpreted to allow teens effectively to be imprisoned by private companies like Strawn's and private schools like Casa by the Sea?as long as their parents sign off. "If these were state schools or state police, the children would have constitutional protections," said Barbara Bennett Woodhouse, the director of the Center on Children & the Law at the University of Florida. "But because it is parents who are delegating their own authority, it has been very difficult to open the door to protection of the child."
It's even more difficult to open that door once kids have been taken to foreign schools like Casa by the Sea that lie beyond the reach of U.S. courts. "The problem is that when Americans are in another country, they are subject to the laws of that country," said Stewart Patt, a spokesman for the Bureau of Consular Affairs at the State Department. "Whether it's a violation of American law is not going to matter to local authorities."
There is one limit on parents: They cannot harm their children. Every state allows the government to intervene if a child or teenager is at risk. The agencies charged with protecting kids get involved if someone reports that a child is being abused. Yet by the time friends and relatives learn of a teen's disappearance and think to make a report, the escort is gone. What matters is getting the kid back from the school that's holding him. It's a nearly impossible task.
A few determined do-gooders have managed it, however. In 1998, 17-year-old Justin Goen was able to call his girlfriend before being taken by escorts to Tranquility Bay. The girlfriend's parents then called the child welfare agency in Justin's hometown of Worthington, Ohio. That set a local judge named Yvette Brown in motion. She heard evidence in juvenile court about spartan conditions, sleep deprivation, and emotional abuse at the school?and ordered Justin home.
The Goens ignored Brown's order, though, and the community cheered them on. "I hope parents are horrified that a public agency can be so intrusive into family life," one reader wrote in a letter to The Columbus Dispatch. After weeks of negotiations, the parents agreed to transfer their son to a WWASP school in Utah. Justin did not thank the state for its troubles. He insisted that his most severe punishment at Tranquility Bay was being told to write two 1,000-word essays.
Jonathan Tyler Mitchell was also sprung from Tranquility Bay. Tyler (he goes by his middle name) had lost his mother when he was young and had never gotten along with his father, Bill Mitchell. In February 2002, Mitchell married his girlfriend of eight months and Tyler moved in with his brother. Mitchell soon asked Tyler to come over for dinner. When the 12-year-old arrived, there were two strangers at the table. They worked for Strawn. Later, they roused Tyler from bed and took him to Jamaica.
What had Tyler done to deserve this wake-up call? According to his father, he had been disrespectful in class, kicked a school locker, talked about suicide, and refused to go to counseling. Tyler's account was different. "I suffer a lot of beatings from my dad," he told a psychologist who evaluated him. "The future is not looking good for me."
Tyler had several relatives, however, who were not willing to leave the boy's future in his father's hands. Gini Farmer Remines, an adult cousin on his mother's side, petitioned a local juvenile court to order his return. When the judge refused, Remines appealed her decision to a circuit court.
At a hearing that followed, three former Tranquility Bay students testified on Tyler's behalf, and what they described was a Caribbean purgatory. The food, they claimed, sometimes contained pubic hair and bugs. Raw sewage spilled over into the boys' shower area and "visible layers of dirt, grime, filth, mildew on the sides of the shower stalls" led to outbreaks of scabies. Students who broke a rule against looking out the window were placed in "observation placement"?forced to lie on the floor, sometimes for weeks at a time, and allowed to sit up only for food or a punitive round of 5,000 jumping jacks.
One of the witnesses, Aaron Kravig, reported that he was at Tranquility Bay in August 2001, the month Valerie Heron died, and that he'd been forced to use a towel that had been used to clean up her remains. The unwashed towel "had a spot of blood about, somewhere about the size of a dinner plate," Kravig testified. "There was some of her hair on it. They used it to pick her head up; I'm pretty sure. I told the staff about it and nothing was done. . . . I had to dry off with that towel for about three weeks."
Mitchell visited the school with his wife after he sent Tyler there and testified that he'd seen kids playing tennis and shooting hoops. But the judge ordered Tyler home. Shortly after his return, the boys' relatives heard that Mitchell had threatened to send Tyler back. Seven of them filed for custody. Gini Remines said that Mitchell gave up and turned Tyler over to her. "Tyler doesn't talk about what happened at Tranquility Bay," Remines said recently. "All he'll say was that it was a hellhole and he might have died in it."
"THE SCHOOL IS IN MEXICO?" Louis said when he noticed the highway signs on our drive south from San Diego. "I thought it was in California."
"I said we were coming to California, not that the school was there," Strawn said. "I was spoon-feeding you until we got here."
Louis fell silent.
Ten minutes later, Strawn drove past a sign that looked like a middle-school art project, with "Mexico" written in green, red, and white. It was now nearly noon. A Mexican flag flapped over a ramshackle collection of buildings, and a film of dust and grit seemed to cloud the bright blue day. Like a tour guide on autopilot, Strawn kept up a running commentary about the sights while his passenger stewed in the back seat. "That's a serious fence," Strawn said, pointing to a 14-foot-high barrier of sheet metal topped with electrical wires which marked the border. "The school is just north of a town called Ensenada. That's your primary cruise destination."
On the dashboard of the Buick LeSabre he had rented for this leg of the journey, Strawn had installed a portable GPS system that Susan had given him for Christmas. But it wasn't working. About a mile past the Mexican border, Strawn missed the Scenic Road exit to Ensenada and drove through Tijuana instead. We passed palm trees and squat bushes with fire-red flowers. Strawn braked at a stop sign that read "Alto," muttering to himself as he tried to find his way back to the highway.
We were back on course and heading through a purple and yellow tollbooth by the time Louis spoke.
"What's the name of the school I'm going to?" he asked as the ocean crashed against the shore near the passenger side of the car.
"Casa. Casa by the Sea," Strawn answered, and hummed the lyrics "down by the sea," from the song "Under the Boardwalk."
"Mi casa es su casa," Dalton ad-libbed.
Strawn told Louis that the Casa grounds used to house a resort. "The nice thing about resorts," he mused, "they usually have walls around them. They keep you from getting involved with the nuts around here, and keep them from you."
A huge half-finished bust of Jesus loomed on a mountain outside the car. Dalton began reminiscing about his time at Paradise Cove. He mentioned that he used to hunt for octopus in the ocean. Strawn pointed to the beach and said that students at Casa hung out there. Louis asked why it was empty.
Strawn answered by changing the subject. "You ought to get there about lunchtime," he said with determined cheer. "And I can tell you, those chubby Mexican women can do a number on some Mexican food."
When a trip is winding down and a kid has been scared into compliance, there is a moment when Strawn likes to wax philosophical. He cribs liberally from Stephen Covey, the author of the bestselling business guide Seven Habits of Highly Effective People. He begins with a question: "Have you heard of counting from one to ten if you're mad? Did that ever make sense to you?" Whatever the teen's answer, Strawn says that it didn't make sense to him?until he came across Covey's idea that there is a "space" between stimulus and reaction. To Strawn, that space is the difference between lashing out and maintaining control. "I've learned to spend time in that space when I get mad," Strawn told Louis. "And in the last seven years, I haven't slapped one person upside the head."
The talk works best when Strawn has something tangible to move to?like the letters that parents often give him for their children. The kids used to tear up the letters. But they haven't since Strawn started telling them to spend more time in Covey's "space" before doing anything rash.
The Boussards hadn't written their son a letter, so Strawn did his best on his own to bring Louis around to their way of seeing things. He told the boy not to be angry with his folks. "It's absolutely a sign of love for them to take the chance on what they believe will be the best for you," said Strawn. "When you grow up and have your own family?you have to excuse me?I hope you have the balls to do what your parents are doing for you."
The off-white stucco walls and red shutters of Casa came into view, and a Mexican guard opened a red iron gate. A line of teenagers wearing khaki pants and navy blue jackets walked across the courtyard in single file. A few girls carried baskets full of laundry. The smell of fried chicken wafted through the air. A man in a white turtleneck pointed to Louis and said to Strawn, "This is the kid?" The man directed Louis to grab his bag.
Strawn handed a woman Louis's paperwork?his birth certificate, passport, and the contract with Casa that his parents had signed. When Louis turned and walked away with the man in the white turtleneck, Strawn didn't say goodbye. Then I asked if it was time for us to go and he rushed to catch up with the boy and gave him a hug. Louis looked taken aback by the embrace and there was a moment of awkwardness. Then he hugged back, hard. Strawn collects those hugs. They help him believe that he is saving, not savaging, the kids he steals away with in the night.
When we were back in the car, Strawn put on his sunglasses and lit a cigar, as he likes to do at the end of a trip. He leaned forward in anticipation of the next stops along his journey?a Cuban cigar shop in Tijuana and then a Mexican restaurant in San Diego. He blew out a ring of smoke, and it was as if Louis had never been with us.
-
This is absolutely revolting but hopefully parents will get the message and not be so easily lulled by program recruiters (or some parent volunteer) into hiring transports to force their kids into programs!
::bangin::
-
Great Story. I was taken back by the molestations of his Step Daughter and Niece. How people can trust these escorts is beyond comprehension.
-
Another thread about this subject with comments and opinions from Karen Burnett, who apparently used Strawn to transport her son to a program.
http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?topic=5421&forum=9 (http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?topic=5421&forum=9)
-
"Let me help you out there," Strawn reassured him. "I go to families all the time with four or five siblings. Only one of them decided to take this path. If it had anything to do with your parenting skills . . . " His voice trailed off. "It isn't because of that."
How profound.
-
I am puzzled at the posting of the Strawn account on this thread. It has its own thread; as well as one other also devoted to the subject.
I suppose your slinging mud at ALA due to the occassional use of escorts? (thats all of Tara you'll ever get!!)
Do you have info on ALA ever using Strawn?
I do a little doubt it.
I think wwasp keeps him busy.
I don't understand this narrow minded view that if one is 'bad' all must be; weather we're talking about escorts or programs or dogs - whatever.
I understand the emotions behind the inclination; but surely your intellect suggests otherwise?
-
If you hire a hit man to come kill me, please hire a good one. I wouldn't want some unprofessional slack to do a half assed job nor some sadistic sob who will torture me before finishing the job.
There are good ones and there are bad ones. But they're all in the same business, aren't they?Thought that is silenced is always rebellious. Majorities, of course, are often mistaken. This is why the silencing of minorities is necessarily dangerous. Criticism and dissent are the indispensable antidote to major delusions.
-- ALAN BARTH, The Loyalty of Free Men, 1951.
-
But be fair -
the situation is not as dire as all that!
I have given this a lot of thought and I still maitain -
There are kids who do really need some kind of long term type of intervention. Some of them need to be escorted. In fact, if they don't need some kind of pressure applied to get them there; I'd guestion the need to send them.
However, as you so elliquently point out; abuse can and does take place; and this is appalling in the extream.
So - for me the question has become -
Can programs and escorts be regulated and legislated in an effective mannor to make this far less likely?
That is my present hope.
-
I am puzzled at the posting of the Strawn account on this thread. It has its own thread; as well as one other also devoted to the subject.
I suppose your slinging mud at ALA due to the occassional use of escorts? (thats all of Tara you'll ever get!!)
Do you have info on ALA ever using Strawn?
I do a little doubt it.
I think wwasp keeps him busy.
I don't understand this narrow minded view that if one is 'bad' all must be; weather we're talking about escorts or programs or dogs - whatever.
I understand the emotions behind the inclination; but surely your intellect suggests otherwise?
Posting about Strawn under this link is very appropriate. Karen who supports and advocates "ALA" and "help your teens" used Strawn and his services. Those who want to know about ALA and those who may have relied on the "wisdom" of Karen and her experience should know that she does not really have very good judgement when it comes to the care of their teens, much less her own teen.
And by the way, all programs are bad. Why? They are far to risky. Why are they too riskiy?There are many reasons. Two name only two, two that are reason enough, because they are unregulated and because they imprision minors without due process. Many parents claim to put there kids in these programs because the child is engaging in risky behavior. They see and read in the media about other teens who overdose or who are killed in car accidents as a result of their risky behavior. So they tell themselves they are saving their child from that risk. Well any parent who puts their child in a program is putting their child at risk. We read about children in programs being hurt and dying as well. Parents who risk their childs life to save their child life is a hypocrit at the very least.
One more thing, that article on Strawn, it blew me away when I read the childs curfew hours. His parents were wacko. The kid did not have a problem, his parents did. And look who is paying the price.
-
Karen, when are you going to figure out that you are part of the problem, not the solution? Please, find another "higher purpose", one that does not merge the gospel with tormenting kids.
:roll:
-
On 2004-06-26 05:46:00, Anonymous wrote:
"I am puzzled at the posting of the Strawn account on this thread. It has its own thread; as well as one other also devoted to the subject.
I suppose your slinging mud at ALA due to the occassional use of escorts? (thats all of Tara you'll ever get!!)
Do you have info on ALA ever using Strawn?
I do a little doubt it.
I think wwasp keeps him busy.
I don't understand this narrow minded view that if one is 'bad' all must be; weather we're talking about escorts or programs or dogs - whatever.
I understand the emotions behind the inclination; but surely your intellect suggests otherwise? "
OMG, the RED EARTH OF TARA? Karen, have you completely lost your mind? We're talking about an industry where kids are at risk of being manipulated, brainwashed, abducted, physically restrained, raped, beaten, sleep deprived, drugged, starved, and other horrible forms of maltreatment (including being exploited by greedy program recruiters) while you talk in riddles and shamelessly promote programs and escorts as being God's gift to humanity.
-
On 2004-06-26 09:54:00, Anonymous wrote:
There are kids who do really need some kind of long term type of intervention.
...
So - for me the question has become -
Can programs and escorts be regulated and legislated in an effective mannor to make this far less likely?
That is my present hope.
You're asking the wrong question. Are there kids who need what you describe as long term intervention? What, exactly, is this intervention? How does it work? Why does it work? Does it really work? Are there side effects?
What, exactly, are the risks and do they outweigh the risks of letting the kid grow up w/o the forced behavior mod? Do you know any of this? Have you any more reson to recomend forced behavior modification than Washington's doctors had for administering leaches?
The most fundamental fact about the ideas of the political left is that they do not work. Therefore we should not be surprised to find the left concentrated in institutions where ideas do not have to work in order to survive.
--Thomas Sowell
-
Its not a riddle my friend. Its meant to convey a message to one person and one person only and I feel confident they will understand the message.
I know Ginger. I know.
But what then is a parent with a kid who is really in trouble with drugs or whatever supposed to do?
I can't go along with you on "Nothing", and the short term out patient options are well known to be useless. . .
So what's a parent who feels it is their responsibility to do something, supposed to do?
And please save me the platitudes about "talk with them; spend time with them". Parents in this situation have been there and done that. It isn't working.
You, you other anon, know full well I have herd all that before ( How you do go on )and I couldn't care less. Your opinion is worse than useless as far as I'm concerned.
-
But what then is a parent with a kid who is really in trouble with drugs or whatever supposed to do?
If you are a parent who advocates putting children in risky programs, then I doubt your ability to judge whether or not a kid truely is in trouble with drugs. Obviously your judgement sucks.
-
Yes, Anon, sometimes my judgement sucks.
I have made grave mistakes.
I have regrets.
I do what I'm able to rectify the situation.
How 'bout yourself?
-
Are there any programs this guy Strawn won't transport kids to? If so, which ones?
-
If you hire a hit man to come kill me, please hire a good one. I wouldn't want some unprofessional slack to do a half assed job nor some sadistic sob who will torture me before finishing the job. There are good ones and there are bad ones. But they're all in the same business, aren't they?
Ain't that the truth! Personally, I think every teenager in America should hand-cuff themselves to their beds at night. At least that way, the abductors-for-hire would have to actually work to earn their $2k salary and the parents would be so stressed out by all the chaos that they might have a heart attack.
:smokin:
-
I do what I'm able to rectify the situation.
Are you still putting your stamp of approval on some programs? Even given your mistakes and your bad choices? Are you still claiming to be an expert on which programs are "good" and which programs are "bad"?
How 'bout yourself?
What are you talking about with that remark? Could you please clarify what 'bout" myself your are getting at?
-
and the parents would be so stressed out by all the chaos that they might have a heart attack.
:lol: :lol:
-
Ginger, be fair - I don't claim to be an expert on anything. I have had various experainces; some good and some bad; which I hope I have learned from. I try to make dicisions based on this.
I'm sure I will continue to make mistakes; and I hope continue to learn from them.
How 'bout yourself?
:wink:
-
On 2004-06-26 16:31:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
I know Ginger. I know.
But what then is a parent with a kid who is really in trouble with drugs or whatever supposed to do?
Grow up and realize that there simply isn't any magical mystery cure for a difficult adolescence. Shipping a kid off to some expensive program may make some parents feel really good. It's a form of martyrdome. But you're not doing your kid any good.
-
On 2004-06-26 19:08:00, Anonymous wrote:
"I do what I'm able to rectify the situation.
Are you still putting your stamp of approval on some programs? Even given your mistakes and your bad choices? Are you still claiming to be an expert on which programs are "good" and which programs are "bad"?
Here's how the land lays on that one. From http://www.abundantlifeacademy.us/phpbb2/ (http://www.abundantlifeacademy.us/phpbb2/)
Dear Karen (parental counsel)
Karen Burnett, Abundant Life Academy's Family Representative will take your questions and concerns and turn them into "teachable" moments. Karen, the parent of a "troubled teen" who has been restored, will share her wealth of experience, powerful testimony, and love for Christ. Karen is a minister to the parents of Abundant Life Academy. We suggest that when you need advice, counsel, or an open ear, "talk to Karen".
But if you press her for details on exactly what's going on at the campuses in Mexico, Chech Republic (rumored) or Utah, she'll confess that she never actually goes to any of those places, and so she doesn't really know squat about what goes on there. But she hopes her son will one day grow up to be a Program guru in his own right, after the model of Craig Rogers.
As de dawg chases his tail...Sacred cows make the best hamburger.
Mark Twain
-
Ginger - you really are out of line.
You never needed to "press" me for an admission of anything. I was always up front with you and who ever else cared to know. I always made it very clear I had not been to any of these places, except Utah.
As regards my son, I never said anything like that. I don't know what he'll do "for a liven" but as long as its legal and he is happy doing it, I'll be very pleased for him.
As for weather or not a rehab program can help: So you were in a bad one and were done more harm than good; that does not translate into all are bad and do more harm than good. There are ligit rehab programs and There are kids who are helped and there are kids who overcome life destroying addictions. Your quite right there is no magical mystery cure - And it is always hard work and there are always set backs - but it can and does make a difference for some kids. Would you really want to deny them the opportunity to get sober, get educated and get their life back on track?
-
On 2004-06-27 11:09:00, Anonymous wrote:
I always made it very clear I had not been to any of these places, except Utah.
Then how in the world can you advise Program parents; strangers who've placed their kids in ALA's care? The truth is, you've never even laid eyes on their kids, let alone have any clue what Craig and his hirlings are doing to them while they're in Mexico, isn't it?
As for weather or not a rehab program can help: So you were in a bad one and were done more harm than good; that does not translate into all are bad and do more harm than good.
No, Karen, ad hominems will get you nowhere. You (as an agent of ALA) are asking parents to pay to have this highly invasive, drastic cure worked on their children. The onus is on you to show evidence to support your claim that the Program is safe and effective. Can you do that?
Once again, here's the standard of evidence I'm requesting. Do you have any more reson to believe that what you're hawking is beneficial and not harmful than George Washington's doctors had for bleeding him to death w/ leaches? Anything at all? That's not really asking too much, is it?
Would you really want to deny them the opportunity to get sober, get educated and get their life back on track?"
That's nothing but self serving blather. Timoclea nailed it whe she said "The Program" and two years will get you a vastly improved kid in *EXACTLY* the same way that "The Program" and four bucks will get you a cup of espresso at Starbucks."
There's no rational reason to think that the kids who wind up in these programs (some for issues as triffling as breaking a 7:30 cerfew!) would not grow up to become responsible, competent adults just like the the vast majority of their peers who are left to normal lives. Not alone or abandoned or neglected, mind you. Just raised in their parents' homes, in their home towns, taking their lumps along w/ their peers. You should understand that most of us who go through the Program lose our place in those important childhood friendship circles. You can drop in on old friends, but you can never go back.
From the bottom of any large organization looking up through the ranks, human greed and stupidity look a lot like a conspiracy.
--S. Gilbert
_________________
Ginger Warbis ~ Antigen
Seed sibling `71 - `80
Straight South (Sarasota, FL)
10/80 - 10/82
Anonymity Anonymous
It is wrong to leave a stumbling block in the road once it has tripped you.
-
Well, I don't know if your intentionally misunderstanding what my limited roll was; or if its more a case of true misunderstanding. . .
But I was not an agent; I didn't recruit. I have not ask parents to pay for anything.
Actually, you have got to know this - I have explained it too many times.
The only evidence I have is my own experience - and if you wish to ignore it, and my account of it, then that's your privilege; but it's all I have to offer. Everyone I have spoken with knows this. I have never claimed otherwise.
As for the two year statement - that is some *other* program. ALA does not send some kind of Stepford kid home - I can assure you of that.
I agree with you on the trifling curfew. I agree that some times its the parents who need help. I think there are some cases when a good program can help a kid just by getting them out of their kooky home environment for a while and showing them there is a wider world with unlimited opportunities. But most of the kids are kids with behavior far above and beyond missing even lenient curfews. You know this. You know we're not talking about the casual pot head or a few late nights out.
I have given a lot of thought to the friend ship problem. I noticed in that *other* program how often the parents commented how lonely the kid was. I never wanted that. I kept in touch with the closest friends and made sure he stayed in touch with them. I have at times regretted it - but might in time find myself glad again. Time will tell.
But as too 'old friends' in general; don't you find that for the most part, High School friends drift away in the natural corse of life? Making new friends being something that is also natural?
I really don't mean to seem as if I'm trying to change your mind on this issue Ginger. As I have often said, you make many good points and I have spent a lot of time contemplating your arguments. But there are areas where we disagree and that will probably always be the case. I don't mind debating the issues at hand; but I do ask that you try and refrain from intentionally misunderstanding me; or misrepresenting my point of view.
-
Well Karen I see you are still taking a bashing. I really have to question if you are a glutton for punishment or just what exactly is it that you get out of this. You obviously truly believe in what you are doing. Why do you feel the need to try to convince the people on this site that you and the program are right. Whether you are or not is a matter of opinion and I truly do not think that you are going to change anyones opinion who is logged on here. I hope you have been doing well since our last visit and while your here can you comment on the changes at ALA with the Nielsens leaving the fold to start their own school. Do the students go with the Nielsens or stay with ALA and whoever is in charge now??? So this is the second uprising with ALA - first with Josue and now with the Nielsens??? HMMMMM makes one think that maybe the constant in these problems is Craig and how he wants the place run???? Just a question no accusations but any comments or expalnations would be welcome.
-
Hi Paige.
I don't feel I've taken a bashing - exactly.
Nor do I feel I'm a glutton for punishment; Altho I don't enjoy being intentionally misunderstood.
As for what I get out of this - Well I guess, really, the same as you or anyone - the chance to speak my mind on various subjects of interest - And, occasionally, to learn something.
My interest in this board has nothing to do with ALA. It just happens to come up now and again; And when it does, I am usually asked for some kind of comment. I don't mind; but it IS frustrating when I am accused of being evasive when I don't know or lack details - And this is going to be one of those times.
I can make educated guesses - but thats all - And no one much wants the benefit of my educated guesses - So whats the point?
You say:
"Why do you feel the need to try to convince the people on this site that you and the program are right. "
I feel no such need.
As I said before:
//there are areas where we disagree and that will probably always be the case. I don't mind debating the issues at hand; but I do ask that you try and refrain from intentionally misunderstanding me; or misrepresenting my point of view. //
I suppose this will seem odd - But I tend to think of many here (even *some* of those who sometimes 'bash' me ) as friends. I feel I have gotten to 'know' them, after a fashion; I am comfortable exchanging ideas with them and sharing info with them - at least to the degree one can on an internet forum.
-
I can make educated guesses
Karen, will you share with this board how you are educated. You say you are making "educated guesses." First, how, when and where were you educated in general. Then second, how, when and where were you educated on this industry.
-
"Altho I don't enjoy being intentionally misunderstood."
How have you been "intentionally" misunderstood?
-
Karen, I do understand when you talk about using this site to speak your mind on various experiences and to learn things. It has been many difficult months with Amanda being gone and I have learned quite a bit from people on this site and other venues. I can appreciate your concern for being misunderstood. We all share that to some degree and have all been misunderstood at one time or another.
I have recently received emails from Amanda and she seems to be doing well and geting some sort of education which is more than what she got when she was with her parents. Unfortunately I have not found a legal way to bring Amanda home to us and we will just have to bide our time and see what happens. Though the rest of the family and myself do not agree with how this has been handled there is unfortunately nothing that we can do except pray that she will return to us safe and in better shape than she was when living with her parents. At least hopefully she is in a place where she can get an education and be respected for who she is and hopefully feel loved.
We miss her, her brother misses her. We still cannot communicate with her or see her. The emails were an exception that we recieved for a couple of days. It is a sad statement on our society that the children have to be sent away because of the parents lack of emotional stability and maturity but then again the best thing for her was to be away from them. It would have been better if she could have been with her brother or other family members who love her but again that comes down to lagalities and the law does not protect the child or the rights of relatives. All it does is point out the lack of rights. Amanda hopefully will be home within the next year and will go on to have a wonderful life. We have let her know that we will always have a room ready for her and she is dearly missed. Maybe there can be some sort of peace between her and her adoptive mother we can only hope so that Amanda cna get on with her life. I do continue to monitor the situation and will until she is home.
I do have to say though, Craig Rogers does sound a bit off kilter in his writings. Bottom line he sounds like an emotional wreck what is up with that or are we all misinterperting what he is writing? Just a question not an accusation of any sort. You have to admit some of his ramblings are a bit creepy and I think that is probably why he elicits such a strong response from people, but any way. I hear he was in the Czech republic with some "students" as of the 4 of July and likes it there more so than Mexico. I also see that John and Stasia have been removed from the website so I guess that they are gone from the Mexico facility to open thier own school. I have a feeling that no matter how opposed many of us are to this type of program
I am afraid they are here to stay and flourish in our take no responsibility society. How heart breaking. Please pray for Amanda to come home safe. Thanks.
-
Paige, it has been a while since you have checked in. So, how did your meeting with the attorney go? The last you reported was that you had a meeting with an attorney regarding the girl at ALA and your efforts to interfere with her parents decisions concerning her. What advice did your attorney give you regarding your efforts to remove her? Did you have any family members go with you? What was their response? Have you received any communications from the girl? If so, what did she have to say? Be honest Paige. You have once again opened this drama for the whole world to see. How sad for the girl that you continue to insist on using her name. Even the juvenile punks who commit crimes are given more consideration than you are giving to this girl who you claim to love. If you really loved her, you would stop naming her on the web, and you would pray for her parents instead of bad mouthing them. Does the girl support your bad mouthing of her parents? I am inclined to think you are still mad that you did not get your way and your tantrum continues. YOU ARE OUT OF LINE. If you don't think so, why don't you ask your attorney? I would think based on all postings from the past, the parents have sufficient grounds to file for slander. Paige, the Bible has a lot to say about what you are doing.
-
What kind of idiot (or sadistic motherfucker) would send their kid outside of the country to one of these places?
-
Apparently you are not knowlegeable in this area. There are no grounds for filing any types of suits, slander or otherwise. Thank you for your opinion. There are sufficient grounds for a person to file for custody of "AMANDA" However it takes money, alot of money that I do not have so that is the end of that story. Also I was advised that she would probably be home before it ever got into the court system. A sad statement on our society. Also if you have such opinions in matters that do not concern you, you have the right as anyone to post them. Until you come on with a name though I will disregard anything you have to say. Again thank you for your opinion. By the way how do you know that Amanda is her real name. You don't. And I do pray for her parents as well as for the "GIRL" and for all of those who love her and have been robbed of her wonderful presence. You are out of line and the bible has alot to say about people like them and like you, go look in the mirror.
-
On 2004-07-13 15:31:00, Paige wrote:
"Apparently you are not knowlegeable in this area. There are no grounds for filing any types of suits, slander or otherwise. Thank you for your opinion. There are sufficient grounds for a person to file for custody of "AMANDA" However it takes money, alot of money that I do not have so that is the end of that story. Also I was advised that she would probably be home before it ever got into the court system. A sad statement on our society. Also if you have such opinions in matters that do not concern you, you have the right as anyone to post them. Until you come on with a name though I will disregard anything you have to say. Again thank you for your opinion. By the way how do you know that Amanda is her real name. You don't. And I do pray for her parents as well as for the "GIRL" and for all of those who love her and have been robbed of her wonderful presence. You are out of line and the bible has alot to say about people like them and like you, go look in the mirror."
Actually, no one ever said anything about filing any lawsuit. However, you yourself write about seeing an attorney with regard to getting the girl. As far as the girl's name, do you now deny that the name you have been posting is not her name? You were very careful to hide the identity of the brother by refering to him only by "J". As far as being out of line, I am not the one trying to interfere with the parental decisions concerning the girl. Back to the original question, you posted before that you were going to see an attorney, how did the meeting go? Or do you have something to hide? You brought it out in the open, looking for support. The time frame has come and gone. Simple question, what did your attorney tell you with regard to pursuing this?
-
Dumb ASS Anon, you asked, for the second time:
Back to the original question, you posted before that you were going to see an attorney, how did the meeting go? Or do you have something to hide? You brought it out in the open, looking for support. The time frame has come and gone. Simple question, what did your attorney tell you with regard to pursuing this?
Did you not read Paige's post? She answered your question. Here let me post her answer for you all by itself so that maybe your simple mind will get it and you won't have to ask it :wave: yet again.
Paige said:
Also I was advised that she would probably be home before it ever got into the court system.
-
On 2004-07-13 18:06:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Dumb ASS Anon, you asked, for the second time:
Back to the original question, you posted before that you were going to see an attorney, how did the meeting go? Or do you have something to hide? You brought it out in the open, looking for support. The time frame has come and gone. Simple question, what did your attorney tell you with regard to pursuing this?
Did you not read Paige's post? She answered your question. Here let me post her answer for you all by itself so that maybe your simple mind will get it and you won't have to ask it :wave: yet again.
Paige said:
Also I was advised that she would probably be home before it ever got into the court system.
"
Thank you!!!!
-
Neither one of you appear to be able to read and comprehend a simple question, yet Paige has repeatedly bashed the girl's parents for the girl not getting an education. Let me type real slow so you can get it: What did your attorney tell you about your efforts to get the girl?
Also, as far as the name calling and the lack of intelligence as demonstrated by the profanities, it is apparent that you have some deep rooted anger and emmotional problems.
-
What did your attorney tell you about your efforts to get the girl?
Here is your answer you Dumv ASS Simpleton.
I was advised that she would probably be home before it ever got into the court system.
Now let me paraphrase for you. Paige's attorney advised (this is what her attorney told her) that she (the child) would probably be home (out of ALA) before it (her case, Paige's case against the placement of the child in ALA, if she were to file one) ever got into the court system.
If you still don't get it Craigonian, you probably never will.
-
On 2004-07-14 03:09:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Neither one of you appear to be able to read and comprehend a simple question, yet Paige has repeatedly bashed the girl's parents for the girl not getting an education. Let me type real slow so you can get it: What did your attorney tell you about your efforts to get the girl?
Also, as far as the name calling and the lack of intelligence as demonstrated by the profanities, it is apparent that you have some deep rooted anger and emmotional problems."
I don't know if you've ever known a kid who was committed for truly trivial reasons or not, but when I knew one, I found out that it's very common that even when there's a fairly good case for another family member to pursue custody, it takes so long for the legal process to work that in many cases even if the kid were in the equivalent of Bergen Belsen or Ravensbruck it would take more than six months to a year to get the custody case through the court process.
I'm *not* saying any particular school is anywhere near that bad, I'm just saying that even in the absolute worst case imaginable, the legal system moves slowly.
And, of course, custody fights are expensive.
So it can come down to a choice of do you spend tens of thousands of dollars so that the kid only goes through six months of trauma instead of seven, and still come out with PTSD (presuming for the sake of argument your fears are justified), or do you wait that extra month and spend the same money on the kid's after-care therapy and college?
In most cases, it's more cost effective in caring for the kid to spend the money on after-care rather than a custody battle.
My point is that even in cases where a custody suit has 100% legal merit, the best interests of the child may be to spend the same amount of money a custody case would cost in fixing the damage to the child afterwards.
Which is sad.
I'm not jumping to conclusions about whether a particular case has merit or not, I'm just saying that just that the fact that a legal action wasn't pursued doesn't tell us anything about whether it has merit or not.
Timoclea
-
from what i have read it wasn't pursued due to the lack of money, not the lack of heart or want, but simply the lack of money.
-
I am a mother of a 16 year old boy in Ajicjic Mexico, at ALA. I know without a doubt that Craig Rogers is a spirit-filled Christian pastor, who is driven by the Holy Ghost to help kids. It is a hard road, and I admire his devotion to it. My son is coming home tomorrow. He has been there for 8 months. He was on a path of death and destruction. It had little to do with parenting. Kids from ALL types of homes do terrible things to themselves and others. My son was drinking, smoking pot and cigarettes, and skipping. He was also into crime, I didn't know about it. The day before his intervention, he told me later on the phone from Mexico, that the day before he left, he had a gun held to his head. He was 15! See what I mean? I haven't been down there, but my ex-husband has, and he is a pastor himself. And having good discernment as a gift of the Holy Spirit, he told me that the place was awesome. My son will always have as a point of refernce in his heart, that he can go to God. He has had the opportunity to learn who God is. It is something that God says a child will never depart from when he is
old. So, I say to you, why don't you go down there yourself if you're worried. It's always a hard thing to do something so drastic to another persons' life, especially a child of your own.It was the hardest day of my life, but I knew it was right, I'd been praying about it for 3 months. I am so happy that he went, it saved him. Tell me if you'd like what you are upset about. By the way, they did move twice, but it was on account of acquiring property, and moving them in to more suitable living conditions.(space, etc.)
-
garshdarnit I been tellin yew peeps t' send them kids t' ME cuz NOBODY knows how t' git kids strate like me! NOBODY!!! Yew dumb sunsabitches keep fukkin' around w/ this Mr. Rogers fella n' I'm about sick of it!!! I got a fine shack down in VA and I'll WHIP 'em!! I'll whip their fukkin' little asses RED until those dumb mutherfukkers git STRATE!!!! :flame:
Send 'em to me! T' hell w/ this Craig guy. He's a phony bastard w/ alla his book larned bullshit! Send 'em to me, DAMMIT!!! Yew bunch o' cairds!!!
[email protected]
-
On 2004-07-14 13:38:00, Anonymous wrote:
I know without a doubt that Craig Rogers is a spirit-filled Christian pastor, who is driven by the Holy Ghost to help kids...
My son was drinking, smoking pot and cigarettes, and skipping. He was also into crime, I didn't know about it...
I haven't been down there, but my ex-husband has, and he is a pastor himself. And having good discernment as a gift of the Holy Spirit, he told me that the place was awesome."
I cannot argue with, nor dissuade, this mother from her conviction, because that conviction is based 100% of a belief in blind faith (which I do not share). However, some points may be impressive to other readers more gifted with critical thinking and analytical skills.
-Mr. Rogers appears to be no more capable of loving persuasion than anyone else, and many would consider his methods and "gifts" of The Holy Ghost to be more like The Holy Terror.
-This boy was removed from his home for a pivotal year of his life for smoking cigarettes, skipping class, some unnamed "criminal" behavior that never even made it to the noticeable stage from his parents nor the judicial community in his hometown. These actions are called "growing up" where I come from, not crimes worthy of prison or banishment from his family.
-The conclusion that ALA is an "awesome place" is from a pastor who, in spite of his alleged Holy Spirit of discernment, was unable to stay married to his wife, keep his son within the family unit, work with the Chrisitan ethic himself to teach the child about God's love. What on earth does he tell his congregation regarding his dismal failure to even secure his own family as a unit, mentor his son with his own values in a home environment, instill the love of God in this boy so that he doesn't have to be shipped off for someone else to do it?
-And the mother says all these "shortcomings"
>>had little to do with parenting.<< Gimme a break! Parents are the example by which their children learn how to live as an adult in society. To any young woman who may want to marry this kid in a few years, look to the father to see how the son will behave. This kid has learned that God's Love can quickly be pulled like a velvet curtain around fear, isolation, abandonment, and despair...for this is the way this boy has "learned" how to treat his own children of the future.
-
On 2004-07-14 04:22:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Now let me paraphrase for you. Paige's attorney advised (this is what her attorney told her) that she (the child) would probably be home (out of ALA) before it (her case, Paige's case against the placement of the child in ALA, if she were to file one) ever got into the court system.
You obviously do not understand the question. The question is not about the girl being out, the question is, what did the attorney tell Paige - was Paige told she had a good case, or was Paige told to drop it because she did not have a case?
This is not rocket science. Either the attorney said she had a case or told her she did not have a case.
Name calling is demonstrative of lack of intelligence. It would also appear, you have an anger problem. Profanity is also a sign of lack of intelligence. Maybe that is why the question is not being answered. You are not able to comprehend a simple question.
So, again, did the attorney say (A) You have a good case or (B) you do not have a good case.
Also, were any other family members present when the attorney was met with (A) Yes (B) No
If so, what did the family members say?
(A) We agree with you for your trying to interfere or (B) We do not agree with you.
These are very simple, concise questions. Profanities, name calling, and deflecting the issue does not answer the questions. It does, however, lead one to believe that there is something to hide. Paige had no problem airing her dirty laundry on the web when she thought she was going to get what she wanted. Now, by the very fact that a straight answer to the questions is being avoided, any person of reasonable intelligence would be able to conclude that the attorney told her she did not have a case.
Also, is she now denying the name she has been plastering over the web is indeed the name of the girl? It would appear we are dealing an honesty issue, an integrity issue, and an anger problem.
Paige, you have stated in other postings that you are a Christian. Then you are aware of the Biblical admonition to go to your brother in private if there is an offense. If that doesn't work, then you are admonished to take a witness. If that doesn't work, then you take it to the church. This venue you have chosen (Fornits) is out of line with the Biblical admonition of how to deal with those in the body of Christ who have offended you. You are very obviously offended by the choices the parents have made with the girl. However, bad mouthing them to the unsaved via the internet is not the way to handle it. Is your Pastor aware of what you have been doing, how you have been bearing false witness where your brothers and sisters in Christ are concerned?
-
So, again, did the attorney say (A) You have a good case or (B) you do not have a good case.
Also, were any other family members present when the attorney was met with (A) Yes (B) No
If so, what did the family members say?
(A) We agree with you for your trying to interfere or (B) We do not agree with you.
The attorney answered with (C)none of the above. The attorney told her:
attorney advised that she would probably be home before it ever got into the court system.
(C) is the final answer.
-
There was not (C) choice. And, since you were not there, you really do not know. Paige is the only one who can answer this.
-
On 2004-07-13 15:31:00, Paige wrote:
"Apparently you are not knowlegeable in this area. There are no grounds for filing any types of suits, slander or otherwise. Thank you for your opinion. There are sufficient grounds for a person to file for custody of "AMANDA" However it takes money, alot of money that I do not have so that is the end of that story. Also I was advised that she would probably be home before it ever got into the court system. A sad statement on our society. Also if you have such opinions in matters that do not concern you, you have the right as anyone to post them. Until you come on with a name though I will disregard anything you have to say. Again thank you for your opinion. By the way how do you know that Amanda is her real name. You don't. And I do pray for her parents as well as for the "GIRL" and for all of those who love her and have been robbed of her wonderful presence. You are out of line and the bible has alot to say about people like them and like you, go look in the mirror."
2004-04-10 19:53:00
Ginger, thank you so very much for your help and your input. I would like to thank all of you for information and opinions that you have contributed and I would like to thank Butcher and Turd for not being offensive. I appreciate it. I will be signing off. We have received some very valid and helpful information. The family will be meeting in the next few days and will be proceeding with our plans to file a custody suit and other suits that I will not name on this site because I am sure that Karen is telling the parents.
(No offense Karen)The filing date will be at a future date at the advice of our attorney.
Ginger, thanks for offering the verification it may come in handy. Keep up the good work and best wishes to all of you. I will let you all now the outcome. Of course court battles can be somewhat lengthy but I will log back on when the results are in.
Posted: 2004-04-10 10:31:00
But again thank you for your concern and by the way. If I was going to abandon Amanda why would I be consulting with attorneys and getting ready to take this into a court room. I am committed to this family and to this child and I am not going away though I believe that once the law suit is filed there will be no more conversing on this site.
Well Paige, these are cuts from two previous postings you have done.
"...proceeding with our plans to file a custody suit and other suits..."
"...I believe that once the law suit is filed..."
These are your own words. You posted about law suits (more than one), and now you say "Apparently you are not knowlegeable in this area. There are no grounds for filing any types of suits, slander or otherwise."
Apparently, you are the one who does not know of what she speaks.
It is obvious you did think you had grounds, or else you would not have posted that you were seeing an attorney to do just that. Again, this flip flop only serves to confirm the logical conclusion that your attorney told you that you did not have a case.
Also, to help you save money and aggrivation, there is no grounds for custody dispute. Not today, not tomorrow. There never has been and there never will be. Even if there was, what makes you think that the girl would ever want to have anything to do with you, after she reads for herself how you have bad mouthed her family and plastered her name on the web?
-
Hey knit wit, read the posts. I believe it says that there are no grounds for her to be sued for slander. There was for the custody case but it would cost alot of money that she didn't have and the kid would probably be home before it got in the courtroom. You just showed how stupid you are.
-
On 2004-07-14 16:57:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Hey knit wit, read the posts. I believe it says that there are no grounds for her to be sued for slander. There was for the custody case but it would cost alot of money that she didn't have and the kid would probably be home before it got in the courtroom. You just showed how stupid you are."
I have read them. They say that people who call names are demonstrating a lack of intelligence. The more you call names, the less intelligent you prove you are.
Are you getting help for your anger problem?
-
Dear Anonymous,
You seem awfully interested, almost tooo interested in this situation. In fact it almost appears that you are very emotionally involved in this and are very close to the players. HMMMM!! Gee, I wonder who that could be?
You know you have stated that I am throwing a tantrum because I didn't get my way. It almost appears to me that you are the one in the throws of a tantrum. You are every emotional about this and vey venemous about this. Interesting for someone who is not involved.
Apparently I am really upsetting you. Sorry.
You seem to be much more upset about things than I am. Hope you have a good evening oh and by the way, read the posts again, you got everything wrong as usual.
-
On 2004-07-14 15:30:00, Anonymous wrote:
Also, to help you save money and aggrivation, there is no grounds for custody dispute. Not today, not tomorrow. There never has been and there never will be. Even if there was, what makes you think that the girl would ever want to have anything to do with you, after she reads for herself how you have bad mouthed her family and plastered her name on the web?
"
OK, can't stand it anymore. Gotta reply.
Been there, done that. We tried to gain custody of our grandaughter, in strikingly similar circumstances as Paige and family is facing. Attorneys gave us the same advice/answer as they did Paige. Also, same advice as several people have capsulized in trying to get through to this thick Anonymous' head.
CUSTODY MAY BE GRANTED TO RELATIVE. STOP. THERE **ARE** GROUNDS FOR LEGAL CUSTODY BEING PLACED WITH RELATIVES OTHER THAN PARENTS. PRECENDENCE OF ABUSIVE ATMOSPHERE HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED. STOP. CUSTODY FIGHT WILL BE EXPENSIVE. WE WERE ADVISED TO SET UP A $25,000 INITIAL FUND TO GET A GUARDIAN AD LITEM APPOINTED BY THE COURT TO REPRESENT CHILD, EVEN BEFORE CASE IS ACCEPTED. EVENTUAL COSTS WERE ESTIMATED TO BE IN EXCESS OF $125,000. RELATIVE IN FAMOUS TRANQUILITY BAY COURT CASE LOST HER HOUSE PAYING FOR THE COURT COSTS. STOP. COURT BATTLE WILL TAKE LOOOTTTSSS OF TIME...LIKE A YEAR+, MORE TIME THAN THIS CHILD MAY BE IN ALA. STOP. IT CAN BE DONE. WHETHER IT IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO IS UP TO THE PLAINTIFF, AND NOT UP TO ANY ANONYMOUS POSTER ON AN INTERNET FORUM. STOP.
As to whether this child (whose name may or may not be Amanda...who cares?) will forever hate the relative trying to wrest her from a world of hurt and hate, I can speak from our experience and say that she will never hate you. You love her, and you are showing it by your distress for her. What you say about her parents is a tiny ripple in a large pool of misery her parents are largely responsible for. She is separated from her brother, her aunts, her friends, her teachers, her community, her world, because of her parents. If you are trying to reconnect her with this world, she will not hate you. Only a small mind would give all credit/rights to the biology of a non-loving, non-involved parent over a relative who loves this girl.
Trust me, she will come home eventually, and when she learns of your efforts and anguish, she will not hate you. She will forever wish for a more loving parent and probably forever distrust her biological parents, but she will not hate you. Been there, done that.
-
On 2004-07-14 16:57:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Hey knit wit, read the posts. I believe it says that there are no grounds for her to be sued for slander. There was for the custody case but it would cost alot of money that she didn't have and the kid would probably be home before it got in the courtroom. You just showed how stupid you are."
Actually "knit wit" is a device for knitting. Nit wit would be the term you were looking for.
-
On 2004-07-14 17:06:00, Paige wrote:
"Dear Anonymous,
You seem awfully interested, almost tooo interested in this situation. In fact it almost appears that you are very emotionally involved in this and are very close to the players. HMMMM!! Gee, I wonder who that could be?
You know you have stated that I am throwing a tantrum because I didn't get my way. It almost appears to me that you are the one in the throws of a tantrum. You are every emotional about this and vey venemous about this. Interesting for someone who is not involved.
Apparently I am really upsetting you. Sorry.
You seem to be much more upset about things than I am. Hope you have a good evening oh and by the way, read the posts again, you got everything wrong as usual."
Are you kidding me?! I am not upset. This is like a great soap opera. Nope. No emotions. Just asking direct questions looking for direct answers. I just think it is really interesting how you changed your tune. Venemous? Please. Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. I believe you have me mixed up with the other person who is swearing and name calling. Players? There is you, and there is the name caller. I do not believe I have ever met either of you. As far as getting things wrong, I pulled my informaiton directly from your postings, so I guess it is safe to say, consider the source.
-
On 2004-07-14 17:11:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2004-07-14 16:57:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Hey knit wit, read the posts. I believe it says that there are no grounds for her to be sued for slander. There was for the custody case but it would cost alot of money that she didn't have and the kid would probably be home before it got in the courtroom. You just showed how stupid you are."
Actually "knit wit" is a device for knitting. Nit wit would be the term you were looking for."
OOOOPPPSSSS thanks. Ya learn somethin new everyday.
-
On 2004-07-14 17:18:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2004-07-14 17:11:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2004-07-14 16:57:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Hey knit wit, read the posts. I believe it says that there are no grounds for her to be sued for slander. There was for the custody case but it would cost alot of money that she didn't have and the kid would probably be home before it got in the courtroom. You just showed how stupid you are."
Actually "knit wit" is a device for knitting. Nit wit would be the term you were looking for."
OOOOPPPSSSS thanks. Ya learn somethin new everyday."
Is that in the Bible somewhere? :question:
-
As to whether this child (whose name may or may not be Amanda...who cares?) will forever hate the relative trying to wrest her from a world of hurt and hate, I can speak from our experience and say that she will never hate you. You love her, and you are showing it by your distress for her. What you say about her parents is a tiny ripple in a large pool of misery her parents are largely responsible for. She is separated from her brother, her aunts, her friends, her teachers, her community, her world, because of her parents. If you are trying to reconnect her with this world, she will not hate you. Only a small mind would give all credit/rights to the biology of a non-loving, non-involved parent over a relative who loves this girl.
I missed the part about this person being a relative. I only saw that she had adopted the girl's brother. That does not make her a relative to the girl.
-
If I remember correctly she is not a blood realtive. she adopted the brother and the family in question adopted the girl under the guise of one big happy family. The kids were supposed to be able to see each other and stay in touch with each other so they could remain brother and sister. The blood relatives and the adoptive relatives of the girl asked her to take the girl. The girl also asked to go live with this woman and her brother. Seems like a mess to me but bottom line is that she says that she cannot gain custody because of lack of funds and cannot remove the child from the facility so it appears to be over until the girl is of age. This is a sad situation indeed.
-
AMANDA IS HOME ( FT. WORTH ) SHE IS ABLE TO SEE EVERYONE SHE LOVES. AMANDA IS ATTENDING COLLEGE
AND WORKING AT VARIOUS JOBS TO PAY HER ON WAY TO COLLEGE. NO HELP FROM HER ADOPTIVE PARENTS, NO MEDICIAL, OR DENTIAL. AT LAST THEY CAN NOT HARM HER EVER AGAIN.
-
On 2005-05-02 08:50:00, Anonymous wrote:
"AMANDA IS HOME ( FT. WORTH ) SHE IS ABLE TO SEE EVERYONE SHE LOVES. AMANDA IS ATTENDING COLLEGE
AND WORKING AT VARIOUS JOBS TO PAY HER ON WAY TO COLLEGE. NO HELP FROM HER ADOPTIVE PARENTS, NO MEDICIAL, OR DENTIAL. AT LAST THEY CAN NOT HARM HER EVER AGAIN."
Here we go again. Presenting only a partial picture. Has she bothered to contact her parents and ask them for any help? Do you know for a fact that they are not carrying any insurance on her - have you asked them yourself? It is obvious you are once again only trying to get sympathy from those you can fool into thinking that her parents are the bad guys. They are not. They love her very much, so much, in fact, that they are willing to let her go if that is what she thinks will make her happy. Why are you so bent on trying to make them look bad? Just because you don't agree with their decisions on how they should raise their daughter, it doesn't mean their decisions are wrong. Incidently, as she is their daughter and not your's, you opinions really have no bearing.
Great. The girl is going to college. Bully for her. Why is it necessary to try and present this "good" news, with slander about her parents at the same time. It truly shows an insecurity on your part. If you yourself were truly happy for the girl and proud of her, you wouldn't detract from her accomplishment (going to college) with negative nonsense about someone else. When it all boils down, once again we see that the only one with a problem is you. Get over it. Get a life.
-
The all caps comments didn't say Amanda's adopted parents had been asked for help and refused. It just said they weren't providing that help.
It doesn't matter if they (allegedly) have insurance coverage on her if she isn't getting the use of it.
If my child had had a serious falling out with me, and I knew she was in contact with another adult, and I knew she was going to college and trying to work her way through, I would send that adult a letter and ask if my child would mind if I contacted the school, found out the amount of tuition and fees per term, and sent it directly to the school as an advance check for each term, to be applied to the next term she actually enrolled.
Then, presuming I *didn't* get a "go to hell I won't take your money on a silver platter" letter, I'd contact the school, explain the situation, and put the money in an account for her. I'd also explain that I did not want to know anything about her that would violate FERPA, that all I'd want to know when I called each term is if I needed to send more money for there to be a sufficient credit balance in her account to fund another term. If I had to, I'd coordinate through the office of financial aid and run it as one of those narrowly defined scholarships that are written so narrowly they effectively only apply to one person.
What I *wouldn't* do is wait to be asked.
I'm more concerned with my kid getting a good education and having a good life than whether she thanks or praises or hugs me for it.
Of course I want my child's love. But *first*, I love my child.
But I don't think of it as "slanderous" against her parents that they apparently aren't providing that to her.
The fact is, they've all had a falling out, family relationships are very intensely emotional, and the only information *I* took from them not providing help was that she was apparently handling the situation well on her own.
Did the all-caps commentary sound grumpy about them? Sure. But I just took that with a grain of "family relationships are intensely emotional" salt.
Geez, you'd think you had never had a fight with members of *your* family. Haven't you ever heard your family members talk when one or two of them are having a squabble with one or two others? Haven't you ever learned to "weed out" that extra emotional content when you talk to some of the people *in* the squabble?
You must either have the most placid family relationships known to mankind or horribly acerbic ones if you can't just take a little grumpiness in stride.
And *please* don't give me anymore of the song and dance about who is and who isn't family. We've heard it. (Lord, have we heard it! :smile: ) You're all extended family (in however convoluted a way)---you wouldn't grump at each other so much if you weren't.
Timoclea
-
no, the slsnderous part is stating that her parents ever harmed her
-
OKAY!
1st I thought we were all past all the B.S.!!guess not .... who ever is writing is obviously someone close.Some one who knows details in my life.
2nd I wasnt paying for my Colledge classes. My aunt and uncle were.I got an appartment.Yes I worked a few jobs to pay for it and my food clothes and what I wanted.
3rd When I got back to Fort Worth we asked for a legal document saying that Paige could sign for my medical needs! you know what we got ....
We got a HELL NO ! ! if we cant do it no one can attitude. Do you think that is "love"?
"my kid gets sick or breaks a bone F^@* it! she dont live with me just screw her" THAT IS LOVE MAN!
4th How do you "know" if they love her? You have to be a close one to the situation! Such as THE PARENTS, "FAMILY" ECT... EVEN so just by you saying your opinion makes you a hipacrit!!If they have no right to judge nither do you...... so YOU GET A LIFE!!
5th and MOST IMPORTANT ...
Stop calling me "THE GIRL "
Gosh I have a name and i think you know all of it !
- AMANDA
-
OH YA
PS
my parents never harmed me they just sent me to a place that was bad and harmed me.. So THEY didnt harm me they just sent me to harm.Make sence?
hope so
Amanda
-
Amanda--I'm glad to see you're obviously still doing okay enough to have computer access now and again. :smile:
Hang in there.
I saw a lot of people my same age have bumpy roads, I had a few myself---the ones who just hung on and kept working at it all eventually caught a break. Keep at it with school. When I finally caught my first decent break, it was the night school that made the difference.
Timoclea
-
Good to know the god-squad finally shut the hell up.
Go Amanda! The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.
--John Adams, U.S. President
-
Thanks for the good words!
Im doing good.
Talk to you guys soon,
Amanda
:wave:
-
Girl - (1) the reason I do not use your name, is you are still a minor. It was not appropriate for your name to be used to start with. Just because someone else chose to throw your name out in the open, does not mean others have to do the same.
(2) Your parents have not used profanity as described by you in response to the insurance issue.
Since you are almost 18 and a legal (though not emmotional) adult, this will no longer matter.
Your parents love you very much, in spite of how hateful you have been to them. Just as the Lord loves us, even though we don't appreciate all He has done for us.
The Soap Opera only began as a result of the direct actions of someone who claims to have your best interest at heart. Had that person not aired the "dirty laundry", there would be no soap opera, so give credit where credit is due.
When your parents placed you in Mexico, I am sure they acted upon what they felt was in your best interest and the best information they had available to them at the time.
In your eyes, and the eyes of the other hateful people, they made a mistake in a choice concerning your upbringing. News flash: There is not a parent, other than God the Father, who has not made a mistake in raising their children. Life is all about making mistakes and hopefully learning from the mistakes of others so you don't have to make them yourself.
The question is, since you obviously feel they made a mistake, are you mature enough to forgive them, or will you carry and nurture a grudge? Your response and your heart will show the depth (or lack thereof) of your maturity. You want to be an adult, well then start acting like one. It is not hard to tell from your postings, you are very very immature. You have been playing with fire and you will get burned if you don't make some serious changes in your life style and the choices you make.
I truly feel sorry for you. You are a very angry young woman. You have the world ahead of you. You are bright. You could be or do anything you want, but instead of choosing to live a positive life, you are bitter and hateful. You can blame it on your parents all you want, but when it all comes down to it, and you are standing one on one with the Lord to give an accounting of your life, He is not going to listen to you make excuses and blame them.
You want out of life what everyone wants, to love and to be loved. But you will not find what you are looking for, as long as you look in the wrong places. Until your life is right with the Lord, your life will not work. You were raised to know the truth, whether you like it or not, you know the truth.
God is not mocked. He is not fooled. You have fooled many people through this forum. It doesn't matter. The only one that matters is Him.
-
Wow! You get all that out of ...
"Thanks for the good words!
Im doing good.
Talk to you guys soon,
Amanda
:question: :exclaim:
Amazing! You must be psychic or have some very special gift! :rofl: Nothing of value to the individual happens by coercion.
--Plato
-
Or a psycho religious freak.
-
On 2005-06-11 08:37:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Girl - (1) the reason I do not use your name, is you are still a minor. It was not appropriate for your name to be used to start with. Just because someone else chose to throw your name out in the open, does not mean others have to do the same.
(2) Your parents have not used profanity as described by you in response to the insurance issue.
Since you are almost 18 and a legal (though not emmotional) adult, this will no longer matter.
Your parents love you very much, in spite of how hateful you have been to them. Just as the Lord loves us, even though we don't appreciate all He has done for us.
The Soap Opera only began as a result of the direct actions of someone who claims to have your best interest at heart. Had that person not aired the "dirty laundry", there would be no soap opera, so give credit where credit is due.
When your parents placed you in Mexico, I am sure they acted upon what they felt was in your best interest and the best information they had available to them at the time.
In your eyes, and the eyes of the other hateful people, they made a mistake in a choice concerning your upbringing. News flash: There is not a parent, other than God the Father, who has not made a mistake in raising their children. Life is all about making mistakes and hopefully learning from the mistakes of others so you don't have to make them yourself.
The question is, since you obviously feel they made a mistake, are you mature enough to forgive them, or will you carry and nurture a grudge? Your response and your heart will show the depth (or lack thereof) of your maturity. You want to be an adult, well then start acting like one. It is not hard to tell from your postings, you are very very immature. You have been playing with fire and you will get burned if you don't make some serious changes in your life style and the choices you make.
I truly feel sorry for you. You are a very angry young woman. You have the world ahead of you. You are bright. You could be or do anything you want, but instead of choosing to live a positive life, you are bitter and hateful. You can blame it on your parents all you want, but when it all comes down to it, and you are standing one on one with the Lord to give an accounting of your life, He is not going to listen to you make excuses and blame them.
You want out of life what everyone wants, to love and to be loved. But you will not find what you are looking for, as long as you look in the wrong places. Until your life is right with the Lord, your life will not work. You were raised to know the truth, whether you like it or not, you know the truth.
God is not mocked. He is not fooled. You have fooled many people through this forum. It doesn't matter. The only one that matters is Him."
Oh Please ... quit preaching to the choir ... the universe is unfolding as it should. Let the children be heard ... God is listening.
JMHO
FED UP WITH SELF-RIGHTEOUS GOD-SPEAK
-
On 2005-06-11 08:37:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Girl - (1) the reason I do not use your name, is you are still a minor. It was not appropriate for your name to be used to start with. Just because someone else chose to throw your name out in the open, does not mean others have to do the same.
You're a fucking moron. Amanda *is* 18. She is no longer a minor, and the people who adopted her no longer have any legal control over her.
She turned 18 early this year.
She's a legal adult, get over your personal issues with your own life, whatever they are, that you're projecting on to her and leave Amanda alone.
Free Clue--People do not stay the same age, they get older. We've been talking about all this for a long time and in that time Amanda reached her majority.
Which you should have asked about, instead of just ASSuming.
I don't know what your major childhood damage is, but go fix your own life.
If you truly want to get biblical:
"Remove the log from your own eye before you seek to remove the mote from your brother's eye."
This young woman's life is no longer anyone else's business but her own.
Jesus would be appalled at you.
What you're doing is basically saying:
(Luke 9:11-12)
11The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican.
12I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.
You ARE the Pharisee in the parable of the Pharisee and the publican.
What would Jesus do?
Jesus would have simply said, "You're grown now. Go and sin no more."
That's *it*---he wouldn't have kept harranguing her, he would have just left it to her to follow the advice or not, and he would have only given it once.
The *only* specific people Jesus harangued in his entire life were, "Scribes, Pharisees, hypocrites."
That's you, in case you missed it.
Other than that, he preached against sins, not specific people.
But you've been told this before.
You refuse to do what Jesus would have done, you refuse to follow the precepts of your own religion.
Why should Amanda listen to you, when you're so blatantly a hypocrite?
I'm not a Christian---my family is, which is why I know your book (Better than you, apparently--or, at least, I know following the spirit of Jesus for what you do is more important than searching through all the versus until you find a couple that say you can get away with being cruel and hateful *instead* of Christlike).
You look in your religion for excuses to tell you it's "right" to be as hateful as you want to be, in the darkness of your own heart.
But you *know* what Jesus would do---and it isn't what you are doing.
You have, unwittingly, demonstrated my biggest problem with Christianity. It's too easy to abuse the religion by cherry-picking verses so that you can draw the inference that it's not only *okay* to be hateful to people, but is what you *must* do to be a Good Christian.
Your holy book is too long---and it gives people driven by malice and spite and self-righteousness in their deepest hearts too much wiggle-room to say they're really only being *true* to their religion when they're hateful to others, and that God *expects* it of them.
But Jesus didn't follow the Samarian woman around haranguing her for her ongoing behavior after he moved on. He didn't send his followers to go follow her around and harrangue her and either check up on her or just *assume* that she was behaving wickedly.
He told her *once* what he disapproved of---which you've already done over and over ad nauseum---and he didn't read her a catalogue of *all* the sins in her life. He told her to go and sin no more. And then he left her alone.
That's what *you* could do if you weren't getting such personal satisfaction off of being hateful to Amanda.
If God didn't think Jesus was sinning to say it *once* and leave it, he wouldn't find it sinful in *you* either.
You are hateful to Amanda because you *LIKE* being hateful. You wouldn't do it if you weren't getting a charge out of it--because your religion *clearly* doesn't require it, and Jesus disapproves of being hateful to people.
It wasn't hateful to say it *once*.
Harping on it *is* hateful. And it's not what Jesus would do.
*YOU* repent.
And I'm telling *you* this more than once for the very same reason Jesus told the Pharisees more than once---because what they were doing to others in using their supposed piety to beat on others was a more serious sin, being more harmful to others, than the Samarian woman's.
Get the log out of your own eye, Lady.
Timoclea
-
On 2005-06-12 10:15:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2005-06-11 08:37:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Girl - (1) the reason I do not use your name, is you are still a minor. It was not appropriate for your name to be used to start with. Just because someone else chose to throw your name out in the open, does not mean others have to do the same.
You're a fucking moron. Amanda *is* 18. She is no longer a minor, and the people who adopted her no longer have any legal control over her.
She turned 18 early this year.
She's a legal adult, get over your personal issues with your own life, whatever they are, that you're projecting on to her and leave Amanda alone.
Free Clue--People do not stay the same age, they get older. We've been talking about all this for a long time and in that time Amanda reached her majority.
Which you should have asked about, instead of just ASSuming.
I don't know what your major childhood damage is, but go fix your own life.
If you truly want to get biblical:
"Remove the log from your own eye before you seek to remove the mote from your brother's eye."
This young woman's life is no longer anyone else's business but her own.
Jesus would be appalled at you.
What you're doing is basically saying:
(Luke 9:11-12)
11The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican.
12I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.
You ARE the Pharisee in the parable of the Pharisee and the publican.
What would Jesus do?
Jesus would have simply said, "You're grown now. Go and sin no more."
That's *it*---he wouldn't have kept harranguing her, he would have just left it to her to follow the advice or not, and he would have only given it once.
The *only* specific people Jesus harangued in his entire life were, "Scribes, Pharisees, hypocrites."
That's you, in case you missed it.
Other than that, he preached against sins, not specific people.
But you've been told this before.
You refuse to do what Jesus would have done, you refuse to follow the precepts of your own religion.
Why should Amanda listen to you, when you're so blatantly a hypocrite?
I'm not a Christian---my family is, which is why I know your book (Better than you, apparently--or, at least, I know following the spirit of Jesus for what you do is more important than searching through all the versus until you find a couple that say you can get away with being cruel and hateful *instead* of Christlike).
You look in your religion for excuses to tell you it's "right" to be as hateful as you want to be, in the darkness of your own heart.
But you *know* what Jesus would do---and it isn't what you are doing.
You have, unwittingly, demonstrated my biggest problem with Christianity. It's too easy to abuse the religion by cherry-picking verses so that you can draw the inference that it's not only *okay* to be hateful to people, but is what you *must* do to be a Good Christian.
Your holy book is too long---and it gives people driven by malice and spite and self-righteousness in their deepest hearts too much wiggle-room to say they're really only being *true* to their religion when they're hateful to others, and that God *expects* it of them.
But Jesus didn't follow the Samarian woman around haranguing her for her ongoing behavior after he moved on. He didn't send his followers to go follow her around and harrangue her and either check up on her or just *assume* that she was behaving wickedly.
He told her *once* what he disapproved of---which you've already done over and over ad nauseum---and he didn't read her a catalogue of *all* the sins in her life. He told her to go and sin no more. And then he left her alone.
That's what *you* could do if you weren't getting such personal satisfaction off of being hateful to Amanda.
If God didn't think Jesus was sinning to say it *once* and leave it, he wouldn't find it sinful in *you* either.
You are hateful to Amanda because you *LIKE* being hateful. You wouldn't do it if you weren't getting a charge out of it--because your religion *clearly* doesn't require it, and Jesus disapproves of being hateful to people.
It wasn't hateful to say it *once*.
Harping on it *is* hateful. And it's not what Jesus would do.
*YOU* repent.
And I'm telling *you* this more than once for the very same reason Jesus told the Pharisees more than once---because what they were doing to others in using their supposed piety to beat on others was a more serious sin, being more harmful to others, than the Samarian woman's.
Get the log out of your own eye, Lady.
Timoclea"
Wow, that was an awesome post.
Well said!
:tup:
-
Amanda is NOT 18, but will be soon.
-
In Tehas, 17 is the default age of imancipation for most purposes. Go Tehas!!!
That which does not kill you can make you stronger, but I really never needed to be this strong.
Scott Wagner
-
On 2005-06-12 17:52:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Amanda is NOT 18, but will be soon."
Well, last I heard she *is* 18, and I don't know you from Jack.
Regardless, there comes a point at which harping on another woman's life is unconscionable and just hateful, because one's gotten long past the time for shutting up.
Anyone still harping on Amanda's life is past that point, long since.
I can walk up to a woman at a party and say, "Oh, I love your dress, it's so *slimming*!" in the sweetest voice you please, and it's still being hateful as hell.
I can say, "Oh, Judy can't stick to a diet to save her life, bless her heart, the poor thing's gained 10 pounds, looks like." And it's hateful gossip---I just covered it in saccharine.
There comes a point in talking about another woman's life when the only thing polite and non-hateful to do is to finally shut up about it.
Y'all are way past that point. Way past.
Timoclea
-
How middle schoolish to think that everyone has to share your beliefs. Based on your lack of education, as demonstrated by the constant use of profanities, you were most likely the school yard bully.
The girl will not be 18 for several weeks.
News flash: I am as entitled to my opinion of the girl and the situation as you are to your's.
You have a deffinate anger issue. There are professionals out there that can help you with that.
Is this how you deal with your children? When they say something that differs from your opinion, you lash out and swear at them? Based on the anger outbursts you have displayed, hitting is probably not far behind, if behind at all.
Real mature.
At least the girl has somewhat of an excuse. She is only 17. What is the excuse for the rest of you?
-
Children! Now I ask ya' Can't ya' just feel the love of the Lord...
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing
--Edmund Burke
-
On 2005-06-15 18:50:00, Anonymous wrote:
"How middle schoolish to think that everyone has to share your beliefs. Based on your lack of education, as demonstrated by the constant use of profanities, you were most likely the school yard bully.
The girl will not be 18 for several weeks.
News flash: I am as entitled to my opinion of the girl and the situation as you are to your's.
You have a deffinate anger issue. There are professionals out there that can help you with that.
Is this how you deal with your children? When they say something that differs from your opinion, you lash out and swear at them? Based on the anger outbursts you have displayed, hitting is probably not far behind, if behind at all.
Real mature.
At least the girl has somewhat of an excuse. She is only 17. What is the excuse for the rest of you?"
Actually, I was the schoolyard victim. And like a lot of them, I was usually pretty nice to other people.
I'm a professional writer, with a bachelor's degree from a top ten post-secondary institution (in its category, as rated by US News).
I don't use profanity towards my child, or others' children, because they're children. I use it towards *you* because you are an obnoxious idiot.
Anger issues? Yes, I get angry at obnoxious idiots like you. So I tell you off. And then I don't have to feel angry anymore. That's *healthy* anger. If you don't know the difference between healthy anger and pathological anger, then you're the one who needs help. I've *got* help---I've got a doctor's report to *prove* I'm stable and functional. How 'bout you?
No, I don't hit my child, or anyone. Well, except in referreed sparring matches at my dojo. And I have a great reputation for keeping my cool in the ring. We tend to use grounding from television, on the rare occasions we have to discipline beyond a stern look or a good talking-to.
Your willingness to jump to outrageous conclusions about me, just like your willingness to jump to outrageous conclusions about Amanda, is a *lovely* feature of your sweet personality.
The only excuse I need is that you are obnoxious.
And you shouldn't be patting yourself on the back over your own supposed maturity. Didn't your mother ever teach you that if you don't have something nice to say about somebody you shouldn't say anything?
Everybody here is entirely ready to leave *you* alone if you would just leave Amanda alone---but you for some reason think you have to keep coming back and being nasty to or about her.
That makes it okay to make you an exception to the "if you don't have anything nice to say" rule and tell you off.
You're bullying Amanda, even though you don't see it. The rest of us are just standing up to you.
No, you *don't* have the right to come on here and bully Amanda. You have the ability to do it, because Ginger doesn't censor people, but that doesn't make it right.
It's not wrong for you to *privately* have your own opinion of her, but coming on here and stating it over and over again is *not* something you "have the right" to do. It's just plain wrong.
I'm not swearing at you and telling you off for having a different opinion from me about Amanda. I'm telling you off for having a nasty opinion of someone and not just saying it once and dropping it (or keeping it to yourself), but instead bringing it up over and over and over again every time she posts to let us know she's doing alright.
I'm telling you off for "throwing the first punch" in being rude, obnoxious, and nasty over and over and over again.
I'm telling you off because you deserve it, and if nobody makes it just as painful for *you* as you make it for Amanda, you've demonstrated that you just won't quit.
You avoiding "dirty words" doesn't make up for your being a nasty person.
Timoclea
-
Tell you what. You obviously think very little of me.
So why don't you start following *me* around on Fornits and saying nasty things to or about *me* and leave Amanda alone.
I invite you to. I'm 38, I've got a middle-aged mom's level of experience in this world, and I can handle you just fine.
I absolutely promise not to try to find out who you are or take it beyond words. Strictly verbal exchange, just on Fornits.
I'm somebody who, verbally, is "your own size."
Then again, that's exactly why you *won't* transfer your need to say nasty things about someone to me, even though you probably think even less of me than you do of Amanda.
Because I am "your own size."
Animal rights fanatics don't throw paint on leather-clad bikers because it's safer to harass rich women in furs. In that, they're just like you.
So you're not just nasty, you're a coward, too.
Timoclea
-
BRAVO! :nworthy: :nworthy: :nworthy:
I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religion than it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.
--Albert Einstein, German-born American physicist
-
I agree with Tim. This needs to stop, but those of us who know Amanda and know her parents know the truth of how this soap opera got started and how it continued. Continuing this thread does nothing but rub salt in the wounds of the parents as well. It is my hope that they have quit reading this thread all together. They are good decent people that have always opened their home to anyone who wanted help. Amanda chose to leave. She has made her choice. Let everyone heal. You talk about Amanda's pain and want to discount the parents, okay, but there are other children that were harmed by Amanda's choices. They are still trying to resolve that pain. They too, truly love Amanda. The family's friends should rally around the family and Amanda's supporters should encourage her. Just let the sides separate and heal. Basically...drop it. Tim. with all the love you and Ginger have for the girl....have you ever tried to bring her into your home and truly provide for her love and the other neccessiities of life? Until you have, or have watched that in action...you really don't know the whole story. Amanda's parents have never rejected anyone or closed the door in anyone's face that was seeking help. They never did that to Amanda. Amanda left. Let her leave and let the family heal.
-
AMEN! I Can **feel** it..... And ive been feeling it for way too long!
-Viva-
-
No, I kinda get the feeling that Amanda has figured this out for herself
On 2005-06-17 05:17:00, Anonymous wrote:
have you ever tried to bring her into your home and truly provide for her love and the other neccessiities of life?
Nope. I came to a point where I realized I had to do that for myself. My father applauded my efforts, my mother scorned me for it. I came out ok. Enlighten the people generally, and tyranny and oppression of both mind and body will vanish like evil spirits at the dawn of day
Thomas Jefferson