Fornits

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

Quote from: "Shadyacres"

One of the most notorious abusive programs, Straight Inc., never had any shortage of glowing reviews from parents and their brainwashed kids; http://survivingstraightinc.com/StPeter ... sement.pdf .  I think, in light of this, positive program testimonials should be read with suspicion.

But businesses should not discontinue asking people for testimonials because of one place.  Some places will reflect accurately what the business out put is while others will not.  We need to all understand that the businesses are putting their best foot forward and they will never post the negative responses.  But we can always look at fornits for the negative feedback. Looking at all the data gives us all a balanced view of the industry.

...

Not really, we have no monetary motive, unlike the programs.  We really have nothing to gain by posting our opinions here, except for the hope that we may prevent this from happening to one more kid.  The programs, on the other hand, have MILLIONS of dollars at stake.  Their corporate survival requires a benign public image.

The instances of abuse in these places is extremely rare, but they are highlighted here on fornits.  I think we could agree that people with positive experiences dont hang around here very long.  I have visited many alumni sites which allowed people to sit in and read and their stories are vastly different from those here on fornits.  They are also more up to date and reflect the current views of recent graduates for these programs.  I have read parents and kids testimonials on various program sites.  (I do understand that they only post the most positive ones.)

So there is a lot of information on program graduates if you look around hard enough and keep in mind the source and motivation for posting the information as you read it.  You can get a general sense on how the industry is doing and if people are benefiting from it or not.

...

One of the most notorious abusive programs, Straight Inc., never had any shortage of glowing reviews from parents and their brainwashed kids; http://survivingstraightinc.com/StPeter ... sement.pdf .  I think, in light of this, positive program testimonials should be read with suspicion.

Quote from: "Shadyacres"

Like the red flag that comes up for me every time you post, it says "program toady" on it.

I have no idea what that means, Shady.  I am guessing that you see me as jumping around from one thread to another posting about programs?  I enjoy discussing different facets of the industry.  There are many posters who like to just stick to the "HLA" forum or "Straight" forum but I have a more diverse interest so it may seem that I hop around more but it doesnt mean my posts are any less sincere.

...

toady |?t?d?|
noun ( pl. toadies)
a person who behaves obsequiously to someone important.
verb ( toadies, toadied) [ intrans. ]
act in an obsequious way : she imagined him toadying to his rich clients.
DERIVATIVES
toadyish adjective
toadyism |-?iz?m| noun
ORIGIN early 19th cent.: said to be a contraction of toad-eater, a charlatan's assistant who ate toads; toads were regarded as poisonous, and the assistant's survival was thought to be due to the efficacy of the charlatan's remedy.

Reading stories that paint the entire experience negative from the color of the walls to every staff member just losses all credibility in my opinion and shows that there is an obvious agenda present, so we, as readers, are left not knowing what to believe within that account except the kid is angry and probably abused, but the details are not credible.
I have pointed out posts which show a high level of credibility which outlined the abuse that occurred along with the positive aspects of the program.  Why are people afraid to say they met a good friend or enjoyed pizza when it was served or a helpful staff member?  Why try to lay the negative paint on so thick that their story losses credibility?  Do survivors just not see this in each others stories?  

...

Your problem, Whooter, is that you simply will not believe how abusive these places were, and still are.  I have no good memories at all, it was non-stop misery from the moment I opened my eyes in the morning to the moment I closed them to try to sleep at night.  I was being held captive by insane fascist zealots bent on destroying my very personality.  So they could install a "better" one.  The pizza would have to be the best ever made to stand out in the middle of THAT.  All my memories of that place really are bad.  No good ones.  Just bad.  And you know where you can stick your "credibility".

This miscreant deserves a thread of his own, he is the "founding director of three substance abuse programs for teenagers. A liscensed psychologist, certified chemical dependency counselor,and an ordained minister" ( from his website ); http://www.georgerross.com/TASA_BOOK_PDF.pdf.  As far as I can tell, those three programs were; Straight Inc., LIFE ( Life Is For Everyone! ), and Kids of Hebron, KY.  He is still practicing and is apparently much better than Newton at abusing kids LEGALLY.  His approach to so called teenage chemical dependency "necessarily includes parents (or their surrogates) throughout the treatment process".  My mother still believes that she was helping me by forcing me to sit and stare at the wall ( between verbal assaults by the whole group ) for 12 or more hours a day for months and months, every day.

Quote from: "Shadyacres"

Quote from: "Whooter"

My daughter didnt go to CEDU or a mind rape mill as you call it.  She was having a tough time before she entered a program also, but it is clear that you blindly buy into the hype here on fornits and have never been to a program yourself or you would know that it is hard work and not necessarily the best memory of your life but it wasnt horrible either.  Many of the kids look back on the program they were in and it reminds them of a tough patch in their life.

...

Imagine;
150 kids sitting in church pews, about 90 boys on one side of the room and about 60 girls on the other side.  They sit there for 12 to 16 hours a day, not allowed to move or talk or look in any direction but straight ahead.  If they start to doze off, someone digs knuckles into their back or licks their finger and sticks it in the kids ear (eeww!)
   Imagine being hungry all day every day.  Imagine being terrified, all day every day.  Imagine spending all day praying that one or the other of your parents will come to their senses and come rescue you, only to have those prayers go unanswered every day.  Imagine being “restrained” by a half dozen over excited, untrained teenagers on the hard concrete floor.
   Yes Whooter, I have been in a program.  And yes Whooter, it was horrible.  Horrible might not even be a strong enough word.  Twenty five years have gone by and I still have nightmares about that place.

Assuming (just for a moment) that you really did attend a program, your account is vastly different than my daughters.  They had great food, she gained weight in spite of being 10 times as active.  Not one restraint was needed ever that she or I could recall or other graduates before and after her on any student.  The only time the kids had to sit for long periods of time was when they were in the class room.  The kids called the place a bubble because they felt safe there, they were never scared or had a reason to be.

How can a person grow and build self esteem, work on family issues, study for PSAT's etc. in an environment that you describe?  Either these programs are vastly different and vary from one to another or you are not being truthful to the readers here about being in a program or the details you described.

...

BUILD self esteem?  No, they were attempting, with a large degree of success, to DESTROY our self esteem so that we would be obedient little stepford kids.  Vastly different?  Prove it.  And as for me being in a program, you probably have George Ross on speed dial, see if he remembers an angry red haired boy who would be called out for "intellectualizing" nearly every day.  A kid who spent over five months on phase 1. Since I know you have no experience with these programs, intellectualizing is what they accused you of when you attempted to point out how abusive their "help" was.  Or if the counselors just thought you were smarter than they were, and therefore had no clue if you were being "honest" or not.  Oh, and "abscess" is a better descriptor than "bubble" for these places.  A bubble, sure, but one filled with infection and toxins.

 My daughter cannot stand some of the music she heard while in the program because it reminds her of the tough time she had there and even disagrees with the musicians views.

...

A "tough time" is what your daughter was having BEFORE you forced her into a mind rape mill ( assuming for the sake of argument that she really exists ), probably as a result of having at least one completely incompetent and selfish parent.  And I'm with Heretic on John Lennon, anyone Nixon hated that much must have been doing something right.

There is very little existing data on the TTI so we need to go with our experiences.  I base my post on what I have read here on fornits, outside of fornits and the people that I have met that have had children placed in programs and the children themselves.  Very few kids do not do well and the overwhelming majority of the kids benefit greatly from their stay at a program.
Fornits does not represent your average cross section of kids who were sent to programs.  This is an entirely different culture here which has its own language and definitions and is not representative of the majority of survivors.  You would know this if you ever speak to a child who went to a program whether they did good or poorly they speak about the pros as well as the cons (they dont use the terms gulags, incarceration, kidnapping, isolation etc.). Here on fornits a reader rarely reads a post which speaks of nothing but the negative aspects of a program.
Do you see what I mean?

...

Welcome back Whooter,  good to see you are as nonsensical as usual.  You are contradicting yourself, first you say ; "I base my post on what I have read here on fornits",  then you say;  "Very few kids do not do well and the overwhelming majority of the kids benefit greatly from their stay at a program", which is a perspective only occupied by you, here.  I believe that I, personally, have enough data to state that the overwhelming majority of the kids are greatly diminished by their stay at a program.  I have read the recent accounts of survivors and they are NEARLY IDENTICAL to my memories of the Straight spinoff I was in in '85.  And the reason a fornits reader rarely reads a post which speaks of anything positive in a program is there isn't anything positive about these programs, they are a nightmare come true, for the kids as well as the parents.  Parents  might gain the compliance of their kid, but at the expense of the longterm health of their relationship with them.  Do YOU see what I mean?