Fornits

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

Wow. Thank you for your post, Shanlea. I, too, was there - rather briefly. I worked there and quickly saw things I was uncomfortable with. I left. And here I am with a visceral response to even the name, CEDU. So I wonder... how must it be for the kids? I can't imagine.

Fifteen years ago. No kidding? You were there 15 years ago and you're here posting? How long does it take to lose interest in an experience in one of these schools?

Ginger, I would love to, but it would take too much time. I really don't know if I have time for this. There is no debate in the therapeutic community about it. It has to do with boundaries, shaming, and inappropriate confrontation. Any textbook on therapy will tell you. I'll summarize:

1) Therapists and counselors are to maintain appropriate boundaries at all times. This includes appropriate self-disclosure. Self-disclosure must be minimal, so as to keep the focus on the client. A therapist/counselor who self-discloses too much is using the client to process his own material. Propheets are a splendid example of this. Staff in groups such as propheets have been described go over all their "dirt" from their pasts, sometimes yelling and crying. This is the POLAR OPPOSITE of what therapists are taught in school. Therapists and counselors are to NEVER do anything of the kind, as it a) places focus on the therapist, b) causes the client to question the therapist's judgment and mental health, and c) sanctifies bad behaviors - "so-and-so used to engage in casual sex and use drugs and he turned out okay..."

2) Shaming is never appropriate - many of these schools use shaming as a behavior-shaping tool. The old addage "kids live down to what you expect of them" applies here. A therapist/counselor is never to shame a client. Clients shame themselves. Even a client who does not express remorse will NOT gain insight into wrong behaviors by being shamed. Shaming will cause such a person to become defensive and it will be destructive to the most powerful tool you have - the therapeutic alliance. Kids who naturally feel guilt and shame will feel much worse when others shame them. This can cause them to become more depresesd and sometimes, suicidal. Many of these schools use peers to shame the kids - you see this in the raps. What actually is happening is psychological bullying. The kids don't gain meaningful insight from this - they only learn to play the game so they can earn privileges and get people off their backs. Irnoically, they learn to manipulate. Intersting.

3) Appropriate confrontation is gently directing the client to HIS OWN insight into something. "You said you felt guilty about stealing but you're planning to shoplift with your friend tomorrow. Talk to me about that." Many of these schools yell in their confrontations, or more insidiously, take a smug, smart-ass attitude and not engage in discussion. There is a way to handle a kid who is blowing off. Taking a smart-ass attitude escalates the kid's rage. Sometimes staff will take a smart-ass attitude and then refuse to discuss the issue with the kid. I have witnessed staff standing with feet apart, arms folded, silently looking into the eyes of a kid who is going off. It may look like the staff is being calm and the kid is out of control, but actually what this is is a subtle and psychologically sadistic maniuplatin on the part of staff. It confuses the kid, because he's wondering how he is blowing up while the staff is quiet. He starts to doubt himself - wondering why he's yelling and screaming at a staff who is saying little or nothing. This is truly insidious. It causes the kind of self doubt that is helpful to no-one. The kid forgets that it is the staff member who intentionally set him off and then stood back to watch the explosion. This power-play is of particular concern to me as it does cause the kid to doubt his understanding of social interactions and he fails to recognize that it was intentional baiting and psychological torment by the staff entrusted to care for and help him. Either one of these things - yelling at the kid or engaging in this psychological crazy-making is detrimental to emotional growth and development.

The bottom line here is that these kids will all grow up, regardless of what you do. They will all become adults. You don't want them to make decisions now that they will pay for the rest of their lives and parents send them to these schools because they are afraid this will happen. For that, they have a purpose. But, to infuriate a kid, to escalate emotional upset, and to model these behaviors of poor boundaries, shaming, and inappropriate confrontation gives the kid more work to do when he leaves. A lot more work.

I recall posts by the ottawas - the real ones. Remember how furious everyone was at them? Remember how superior, smug, and infuriating ottawa5 was? Her attitude was quite a bit like some of these things I have outlined here. And you all were ready to hit her because of POSTS! Imagine being a kid in a facility and this person has total power over you. How must that feel? I can't imagine. I'll tell you this - the goal of therapy should be client empowerment. Trying to break a kid down is just plain wrong.

I hope this helps. I have to get back to work now. Just know that there is NEVER debate in the psychological community about these things. Whenever you are asked, just give them this post. Maybe it will help. If it does not, you're talking to a hopeless case.

It is my understanding that it is illegal to tape record a person without consent. You need to report this person.

On 2004-10-04 16:58:00, finlyrite wrote:

"Let me say this...I posted on the internet - asking for information about Thayer Learning Center - while my son was there.  I received an email from someone stating they had information from parents, cadets and ex-employees interested in filing a class action against Thayer Learning Center.  I gave my phone number to be contacted.  I was pumped for information, asked how I had this information and words were put in my mouth.  I was later told by John Bundy that this person I was talking to was actually his attorney and the entire conversation was tape recorded.  I prepaid 6 months tuition at the time, after checking many of their references and searching for negative feedback - none found at the time.  During my exit interview Mrs. Bundy admitted refusal of giving my son mail that I had directed he be given was a mistake, as Mr. Bundy had admitted in a phone conversation there were some communication problems at Thayer.  I was asked where I stood on payment to Thayer and answered I was paid ahead.  Mrs. Bundy said a credit would be sent if one was due.  My refund has been denied for the reason my son did not complete the program.  Does this sound like a credible and trusting professional organization that you would want to trust with your child?[ This Message was edited by: finlyrite on 2004-10-04 17:01 ]"

Okay, so I misinterpreted - she's still full of shit, though! Okay, so my goal here is to ignore her from now on.

Interesting...

WOW, WOW, WOW, WOW, WOW!!!!! I can't believe it! Wow! Ginger said that the IPs matched and she was posting as AARCgrad. Also, Ginger noted that she had posted 32 times anonymously! Here's Ottawa's post that sparked Ginger's response:  

A parent who sent a child to
 Posted: 2004-07-31 10:00:00    

On 2004-07-10 11:45:00, ottawa5 wrote:

"Normally I don't address anonymous postings (you can't always tell if it is a new person or one of the site "regulars" having a little fun with you)

On 2004-09-23 12:04:00, Deborah wrote:

"If the IPs match then she indeed posted those messages posing as a 'somewhat' happy grad of AARC. That would be my take, not that she attended the program. It wouldn't surprise me. Only Ginger could confirm it though.



This thread was specific to AARP. She claimed to know nothing about the program. This is an earlier thread in which she introduces herself as a Psych working on her doctorate, slings around plenty of pysch terms/labels, and quasi diagnoses.

http://www.fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.ph ... rt=0&Sort=[ This Message was edited by: Deborah on 2004-09-23 12:24 ]"

Here's the problrm. CEDU is not an emotional growth school; it's an emotional stunt school. When I was there, I saw UNTRAINED staff - I mean, completely untrained - "treating" kids. Real therapists were ignored. The most abusive, smart-ass staff were promoted. It had nothing to do with skill or training. I'm telling you right now, they wree untrained.

On 2004-09-21 11:10:00, Just Trying wrote:

"I am so glad people have made some worthwhile comments.  Thank You.  I like the analogy of the baby and the fly ball, but I don't quite see the connection, maybe I would if I was ever a student.  I know having a degree doesn't mean you are smarter than anybody, I was just commenting on a statement that CEDU workers are all uneducated.  For the crack problem, I would blame the system that profits from it, not the victims. Bryan, I think you are far too quick to violence and you need to calm down.  Mike, I definitely agree with you that being forced into an institution is not a good way to start emotional growth.  Minors have absolutely NO rights and it sucks.  I think its the major social problem of our era.  Those kids up there are amazing.  They are good kids and they want to change the world for the better.  Many of them are ready to leave, but can't and it is sad to see.  What I would really like to know from Mike and any other former CEDU student is what I could bring to the school to make it either less painful or please forgive me, even happy?  CEDU intrigues me.  In many ways it is a social experiment, but I do not consider you our "guinea pigs".  I believe all institutions could learn alot from CEDU.  However, I don't think all CEDU students deserved to be institutionalized.  It's an unfair contradiction.  Some CEDU Students get help they don't need and many more people who need the help in the outside world don't get it.  Prisons don't teach emotional growth properly and neither do mental health institutions.  If they did, we would probably need less of them. That's just my opinion.   "