Fornits

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

On 2005-08-05 17:21:00, Anonymous wrote:

"Keep on playing games---that would be satire and ridicule---it's amusing, no question, but it gets nowhere in terms of common ground





Some of you posters here are very damaged, that's clear, maybe by bad programs, maybe by programs that just weren't sophisticated enough to deal with your complicated problems



The question remains: who among you will honestly say that there should not be programs to help adolescents who are self-destructive to an extent that is personally dangerous---who could be so cruel?





Say so if that is what you mean---spare us the satire and explain why kids should be allowed to throw away their lives for lack of experience in the world---without adult intervention









"

It depends on the type of program. The programs that are objected to in this forum are those that are coercive. There is only one way to survive these programs, and that is to comply with them. The act of forcing teens through these programs can, in and of itself, be damaging. No one here would say that a struggling teen should be denied help. It is the type of help that is at issue.

These programs are largely non-existent for adults simply because an adult would not tolerate being treated this way and leave. Teens, with no such rights (or perception of such rights) are stuck. This raises the ethical question as to why teens should be denied this right. Some states have laws that prevent forcing teens into therapy against their will. In the UK (where the teens for the first two brat camps came from), a child 16 and older cannot be held anywhere against their will (false imprisonment).

Personally, I find this form of coercion to be unethical. It violates my innate sense of fair play, freedom of thought, and freedom of choice that I always thought this country was all about. A person has the right to fail. To me, a forced thought reform program is a violation of a person's basic human rights.
I also believe that ultimately, a person cannot be forced to change, they have to want to and be committed to the change.

It has frequently been mentioned that there has been no long term research to indicate the success or failure rate of these programs. I disagree. The methods used have been around for at least 40 years and the results in the form of state-run boot camps and the new-age self-improvement movement of the 70s and 80s have demonstrated the results to be disasterous. That is why these programs no longer exist. States closed the camps. The new-age programs were sued out of existence. Some have been labeled 'cults.' Don't be fooled by the wilderness or TBS setting; the technique is the same.

Another objection is to the 'one-size-fits-all' approach. At Brat Camp there are nine teens with different problems. To me, it is obvious from the show that Derrick, at least, should not have gone to this program. He is failing miserably in the show and it is painfully obvious. He should be yanked out and another solution sought. Everything I have ever read about ADHD states that medication and cognative therapy get the best results and that behavior modification gets the worst results.

The coercive nature of these programs is such they refuse to recognize students that should be pulled out. It is as if the program cannot admit failure. Compounding this error is the idea that the student doesn't leave until they comply. How long does it take before someone wakes up and realizes it is not working and never will? Some kids spend years in these programs with nothing to show for it except lost years and poor parents.

Finally, it is just plain stupid to take a student that relapses and send them back into a progam. If someting does not work the first time, repeating the failure makes no sense. Try something else.

On 2005-08-04 11:56:00, Deborah wrote:

"

Did anyone see the trailer for PrimeTime that aired during BC?

Tonight: The Lost Kids Behind Bars

Teens in prison"

I'm going to watch it. I also picked up the newest issue of Time. The cover story is '13.' It purports to examine what it means to be 13 years old these days.  I haven't read it, yet.

On 2005-08-03 19:54:00, Anonymous wrote:

"wilderness is the jump-start to the therapeutic process. much more work is needed after the wilderness program which is why most of the kids (really all) need to go on to a residential school with therapy.  It has taken years for these kids and families to get where they are. At least at wilderness they begin to realize their own role in where they are and how their thinking is flawed.  This is what Nihil says is brainwashing. The kids aren't being beaten, but it does take drastic measures to move them off of where they have been for many years. "

I guess you are the expert, diagnosing all of these kids' needs. Your entire post is nothing more than a marketing tag line. The show gave absolutely no rational justification why Heather needs to go to a boarding school. She seems to have no psychological disorder except that her parents are such idiots that she likes to run away from them.

Heather misses her friends, therefore she should be kept from them. I miss food, I'm hungry, therefore I should not eat? Doesn't anyone study simple logic anymore?

On 2005-08-03 19:13:00, Anonymous wrote:

"they werent brainwashed- some manipulation is part of therapy and so is regression.  look how powerful they all were (except Jada) on the other side of the solos.  it helped them turn the corner.  the therapists did a great job"

Yes, they turned a corner. They all learned that when they use the phrase "...time to reflect..." they score with the program.

They all learned many new cliches and slogans and how to use them to convince idiot counselors and parents that they are growing and changing. They all learned that learning slogans and cliches will help them in life. Wait and see what happens when they grow up and figure out how worthless cliches and slogans are.

On 2005-08-02 18:01:00, Anonymous wrote:

"was the kid on psychoactive drugs?  if so, which one/ones?  kids have more pressures/distractions to deal with now more than ever.  as much as we'd like to deny it, we are still creatures of instinct, and constant bullying can really push a kid over the edge.  i'm not defending him, I think it's a tragedy what happened, and it's really sad, but now he's going to be locked away throughout his high school and college years, some of the most developmental times of his life, only to reemgere to reality 12 years later, pale and unprepared for the world.  Does anyone know where he's going to serve his sentence? "

Was this just a freak accident due to the lack of impulse control a kid might have? It would seem a shame to incarcerate him for so long when a couple years of maturity might calm him down. There is no mention that he had a history of being violent.

On 2005-08-02 04:14:00, Anonymous wrote:

"

Dear Atomic:  Lucky you, who never had a child spinning out of control.  I wish I had your innocence.  I also wish I had the tens of thousands I spent on therapy for my out of control child that insurance never covered.  Wish I didn't have that pesky second mortgage that supports education for all my children.  Can you agree that it's entirely possible that my child had problems, possibly genetically based, that your child does not?





Believe it or not, I agree with you that some parts of Brat Camp are stupid, starting with the name.  Then again, some parts of Survivor and Dancing with the Stars were stupid too.  It's called reality television.      "

I never said I did not have a child 'spinning out of control.' In fact, I have had one. My son was expelled from no less than 12 daycare providers before he even entered first grade! He was very violent. Nurture vs nature? I don't know.

I worked with my son. There were sleepless nights and truckloads of frustration. I felt helpless in that everything we tried did not seem to work. I had a CST (child study team) evaluate him. Over the years, several thereapists were involved. He attended two different kindergardens. In the second, he was placed in an inclusion class despite his high IQ.

We placed him a private school for first grade. That school conducted a second CST. He qualified for state assistance and a woman was assigned to work with him twice each week.

His behavior was so out of control that my ex-wife resorted to handcuffing him to the chair for 'time-outs.' He told his teacher. Family Services became involved. Handcuffing kids is child abuse, you know.

My son was placed with me. I stopped ALL forms of punishment and decided to try only redirection and positive reinforcement. I told my son that there would be no more penalties or punishments. Everyone (ex-wife, teachers, therapists) thought I was crazy...

My son passed second grade with all As and Bs on his report card. There was not a single reported incident in second grade. He is not perfect and will continue to have state assistance next year, but he has improved dramatically. He is now popular and has lots of friends. His self-esteem has improved immensely. He is enjoying summer day camp. He is living with his Mom during the week and spends every weekend with me.

So, I do understand what parents go through.

On 2005-08-01 19:07:00, Deborah wrote:

There is absolutely nothing these 'magical' programs do that a parent couldn't do themselves, if they desired to do it.  

Yes there is. If a parent treated their child at home in the same way these programs do, Family Services would intervene and remove the child. The parent would be arrested.

Another young life thrown away:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/07/29/baseb ... index.html

Youth sentenced to detention center in baseball bat killing
Boy, 13, ordered to stay in facility till age 25

Friday, July 29, 2005; Posted: 12:18 p.m. EDT (16:18 GMT)

Brian Rourke, talks to reporters after the sentencing of a 13-year-old convicted in the killing of his son,

Jeremy Rourke.

 
LOS ANGELES, California (CNN) -- A 13-year-old boy convicted of beating his friend to death with a baseball bat

was sentenced Thursday to a youth detention facility until he is 25 years old, although he could be paroled

before then.

"Watching my son die in front of my face was devastating," the victim's father, Brian Rourke, told the court. "My

son, Jeremy (Rourke), was killed for teasing another kid."

Rourke said he and his son were "best friends."

The convicted teen, whose name is being withheld because he is a juvenile, was found guilty of second-degree

murder after beating Rourke in the knee and head with an aluminum bat after a youth game.

The young teen's feet were shackled during the disposition hearing, and he sat quietly.

Superior Court Judge Richard Naranjo imposed the maximum sentence. Under California law, children under 14 cannot

be tried as adults. The hearing was open to the media.

The attack followed an argument after a Pony League baseball game in Palmdale, California, about 40 miles

northeast of Los Angeles. The suspect was described as a well-liked boy with no criminal record.

Defense attorney William McKinney argued that Rourke was relentlessly bullying the younger boy before the attack,

and said his client had merely taken "the wrong path."

However, prosecutors contended the older boy was merely teasing him.

"We cannot take the chance in the future that he will display that behavior," said prosecutor Lonnie Felk.

Witnesses said the 13-year-old's team had just lost its first game of the season, and he was getting in line at a

snack bar when he and Rourke got into some sort of scuffle. Some witnesses said there was a dispute between the

teens over their place in line; others said Rourke teased the suspect over the loss.

A psychologist described the younger boy as "well-socialized," a good student and "compliant with authority."

Baseball coach Allen McBroom, who has known the convicted teen for five years, fought back tears as he said the

child was the kind of polite boy he liked his son to pal around with.

CNN Producer Sara Weisfeldt contributed to this report.
---------------------------------------------
I post this, because I don't know what to think of it. Murder is serious, but was this an isolated accident due to loss of control? Is the sentence the best thing for the kid and society? I would rather see him graduate from college at 25 than walk out of a prison a hard core ex-con.

Probably off-topic. Sorry.