Author Topic: My Experience of PURE, Inc. and Sue Scheff  (Read 16059 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Carey

  • Posts: 826
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
My Experience of PURE, Inc. and Sue Scheff
« on: May 17, 2003, 12:31:00 AM »
For anyone who wants to know about my personal experience with PURE, Inc. and Sue Scheff please email me at [email protected]

I would like to share what I have learned about this corporation and the president over the corse of the last nine months.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Carey

  • Posts: 826
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
My Experience of PURE, Inc. and Sue Scheff
« Reply #1 on: May 17, 2003, 10:27:00 PM »
I have had so many inquiries through email on my experience with PURE, Inc. and Sue Scheff that I decided it would be easier to post it here than to try and address each email individually.


Here it is:
What I have learned about Sue Scheff is that she operates much like the WWASP organization operates.  She refers kids to programs when she herself is not qualified to do so. I feel like she is using people to fight her battle more than she is using people to help kids who are being abused.  I also believe that she is using people to help her to draw kids out of WWASP programs so that she can refer them to other programs.  Her saving kids comes third to the other two issues already addressed.

There is alot of money to be made in the placement of kids in programs, whether it be a WWASP program or any other program.  My argument with Dundee from the very beginning, before I even knew about the abuse, was that the people who work with these "at risk teens" are not properly liscensed or trained to be doing so.  Sue and her placement of kids in programs is really not any different.  How is she qualified to determine placement of kids?  How is she qualified to determine whether or not a certain school is staffed and liscensed properly?  How is she qualified to determine that a certain school offers programs that  a particular child may need in terms of treatment, therapy, ect.?  What makes her different from the other consultants out there that she tends to bash?


As for consultants in general, most of them belonging to the IECA, and being CEPs and IECPs, I don't think they have the qualification for placing at risk teens into any kind of treatment facility.  Their titles are self proclaimed and their memberships are bought by means of the dues they pay.  It has nothing to do with any kind of formal education.  That to me equates to a parent telling another parent who has a handicaped child to put that child into a school that does not have the proper accomodations and resources needed to properly care for a specific handicapped child because the parent offering the advice knows nothing about handicapped children and what they need.  If an educational consultant is placing a "normal" kid in a "normal" boarding school, meaning they are not being placed because they have a behavior problem, drug problem or some other mental problem, then maybe there is place for them.  But when they start placing the more challenging  problemed teens in schools, there is a problem. Unfortunatly though, if you view her websit http://www.helpyourteens.com you will see she is targeting those who need special placement. That is where the money is made and the kids who are targeted by Sue and alot of the other consultants are the "at risk teens."  Special needs, need special placement by professionals!

She is trying to maintain control over people and what they say and what they hear!  I beleive that is wrong.  Are you familiar with the listerv?  It is suppose to be similar to the WWASP bulletin board with the exception that it does not censor those who are on it.  Well I have found out that it does censor individuals and what they say.  I was booted from it yesterday because I spoke out against Sue.  She has told me on more than one occasion, and I have seen her tell it to others on the board, who they should and should not be communicating with.  I spoke out against that.  I speak the truth, look for the facts, if I don't have them then I ask questions, and I will be damned if Sue is going to tell me who and who not to speak with, ask of, or listen to because she think she already knows it all.   Because of it, I was said to have been upsetting some of the other parents on the board, I was removed.  Does that not sound like what Sue accuses the WWASP bulletin board of?  She claims the WWASP BBS controls what parents on on the board say to one another because it may make them start to think outside the "program".  It may upset other parents.  It may challenge their thoughts and cause independent thinking.  What Sue has done is no different.

She has a hidden agenda and alterier (sp) motives that are not helpful in our fight against WWASP.  If she were truely an advocate like alot of us parents are, instead of out there making money off of  teens at risk, she would be more easily accepted as being true to the cause

Anyone holding back information about child abuse is guilty of turning their heads and letting it happen.  Sue is encouraging people to hold back information so that she can use it in her suit.  I believe if anyone has information about abuse then it should be reported to the proper authorites first and  it should be done now, then if the proper authorities don't listen it should be taken to the news media.  

If a fact is a fact it will be the same fact in court
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
My Experience of PURE, Inc. and Sue Scheff
« Reply #2 on: May 18, 2003, 11:53:00 AM »
This sounds like a chapter from a Stephen King novel. Does anyone know how many other parent "volunteers" are involved in the private placement of children either for a fee or some other kind of compensation?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
My Experience of PURE, Inc. and Sue Scheff
« Reply #3 on: May 18, 2003, 05:07:00 PM »
Within the WWASP wring there are probably hundreds if not thousands. WWASP uses $1000 cash rewards or free tuition to those who refer a teen to WWASP. WWASP has 1000 of web pages, and probably thousands more that are independently owned, if you have ever noticed the footer on these pages that have: "Code: dapmap" on the bottom. This is so the owner of that site can cash in.

People are treating this like some "work at home" make easy money type deal. When really there are thousands of troubled teens at stake. Its a sick industry, bottom line.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
My Experience of PURE, Inc. and Sue Scheff
« Reply #4 on: May 18, 2003, 08:43:00 PM »
Here is a link to a news article that discusses parent referrals.  

http://www.free-times.com/archive/cover ... chool.html
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Carey

  • Posts: 826
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
My Experience of PURE, Inc. and Sue Scheff
« Reply #5 on: May 19, 2003, 08:20:00 AM »
Lon is a source of information for parents who's children are in boarding schools.  He is another outlet than can be used for reaching parents.

My comment about with holding information about child abuse is relevent.  If not posted on Lon's site, then give it to the media to post.  If parents could see the evidence then parents would know what WWASP and those who profit from WWASP are capable of.

Sue does use the parents on her listserv to help her to pull kids from WWASP programs.  She then in turn will try and find them placement else where. She will tell parents that she does not recieve payment from the parents of the kids she places, she says she recieves it from the schools.  Well that is worse, that means she is working for the schools and not the parents.

Don't get me wrong, WWASP is bad, they have hurt me and my family terribly, but Sue is not a whole lot better.  She operates in much the same way as they do.  She just does it behind the scenes.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
My Experience of PURE, Inc. and Sue Scheff
« Reply #6 on: May 19, 2003, 09:10:00 AM »
Quote
On 2003-05-19 05:20:00, Carey wrote:

"Lon is a source of information for parents who's children are in boarding schools.  He is another outlet than can be used for reaching parents.



My comment about with holding information about child abuse is relevent.  If not posted on Lon's site, then give it to the media to post.  If parents could see the evidence then parents would know what WWASP and those who profit from WWASP are capable of.



Sue does use the parents on her listserv to help her to pull kids from WWASP programs.  She then in turn will try and find them placement else where. She will tell parents that she does not recieve payment from the parents of the kids she places, she says she recieves it from the schools.  Well that is worse, that means she is working for the schools and not the parents.



Don't get me wrong, WWASP is bad, they have hurt me and my family terribly, but Sue is not a whole lot better.  She operates in much the same way as they do.  She just does it behind the scenes."



Don't worry, we know.
Karen how dare you.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Carey

  • Posts: 826
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
My Experience of PURE, Inc. and Sue Scheff
« Reply #7 on: May 19, 2003, 09:11:00 AM »
Karen,

Maybe Sue should speak for herself instead of using others. Anyone who associates with her is sticking their neck out and risking being pulled into the mess that she has created.

She is damaging your creditability because of her profession.

People "outside" the "group" would be more willing to listen to what you have to say if you could think and act independent of Sue Scheff and PURE, Inc.  

If everyone wants to know what I was "harping" on, as Karen puts it, it was on pictures that were taken of a facility where children were housed.  I wanted the pictures to be put out there for parents to see, because if parents could see what was happeing in these places then they would have proof of what WWASP is capable of.

Yes, I was removed from the list because the people on the list did not want to hear what I had to say about it, they prefer to keep the pictures to use in a court case that could take up to a year to ever even happen.  A year is a long time for kids to have to wait to be saved, especially knowing there is evidence out there right now that would help parents to see the the truth now, today.  

Most of the people on the list have kids who are already home, they don't see the need to move quickly to save those who are still in these programs.  So the need of urgency is less important to them.  The need for "revenge" for lack of a better word, is on the top of their list.  I want accountabiltiy and I want to prosecute those guilty of child abuse but I want kids out of these programs and safe first.  I want the parents to have all information that is available out there for them to view.  Then we can go after and make accountable those who have profited off of this terrible "child warehousing institution."

I don't care what media they use, it does not have to be on Lon's website.  However, I was asked by the person who owns the pictures to see if Lon was willing to post them.  He said he could not and suggested that they be taken to the media.  

I know if my boys were still in a WWASP program and I found out someone was holding evidence that would show me what can and has happened in one of these schools then I would hold them accountable for letting it continue to happen.  I don't think you should hold on to evidence for a court case when it could help save kids today.

Carey
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
My Experience of PURE, Inc. and Sue Scheff
« Reply #8 on: May 19, 2003, 09:57:00 AM »
Not much of a flip side Karen

Those are important details Carey, thank you for taking the time to clarify those. I agree with you 100%. You?re are doing the right thing. More people appreciate your efforts than you realize. Good to hear you speak out. These stories are continuing to break media. You are being heard. The right people are now reading these boards.
Thank you -
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
My Experience of PURE, Inc. and Sue Scheff
« Reply #9 on: May 19, 2003, 12:12:00 PM »
Just three.

1) To which schools does Sue Scheff refer families?

2) How does she go about determining that they are safe and non-abusive?

3) How does she get paid?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Carey

  • Posts: 826
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
My Experience of PURE, Inc. and Sue Scheff
« Reply #10 on: May 19, 2003, 12:48:00 PM »
Sue, these questions are directed at you.
I know the process, but I think it best if you answer on your own behalf.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline seesgurl

  • Posts: 2
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
My Experience of PURE, Inc. and Sue Scheff
« Reply #11 on: May 19, 2003, 03:52:00 PM »
Rebuttal:
  It is true that Carey Bock was removed from a
private discussion group of individuals dedicated to implementing regulation, oversight and accountability of specialty programs for children. She was excluded for reasons including disrespectful postings, breach of confidentiality, and general instability.  You will note that all of these things are evident in her postings at this forum, and we know that reasonable people will lend those rantings no more credence than they deserve. Neither I, nor other members of the group,will engage in further dialogue on the subject at this or any other forum, as it serves no useful purpose, and we prefer to dedicate our time and energy to protecting children.
-J.C.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Carey

  • Posts: 826
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
My Experience of PURE, Inc. and Sue Scheff
« Reply #12 on: May 19, 2003, 04:12:00 PM »
That was a very vague response (like the WWASP verbage).  Can't you be a little more specific with your accusations.  I am specific with mine.  I can directly state what my argument is with "the other BBS" (that is Sue's BBS). Why can't you?  

I will respond to any accusation you put before me. I will tell the truth and I will argue my case.  

I can also use my real name because I am not hiding in fear of my statements.  Why can't you?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Carey

  • Posts: 826
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
My Experience of PURE, Inc. and Sue Scheff
« Reply #13 on: May 19, 2003, 04:17:00 PM »
Post the three things I was removed for.  Show the reason "including disrespectful postings, breach of confidentiality and general instability."  Make sure they were before I got the boot by including actual postings with their times and dates.  Then I will show when I was booted and we can see if that was why I was booted.  You can't do it because it is not true!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
My Experience of PURE, Inc. and Sue Scheff
« Reply #14 on: May 19, 2003, 06:36:00 PM »
195 views and only 15 replies. Are these very difficult questions???
Quote
On 2003-05-19 09:12:00, Anonymous wrote:

"Just three.

1) To which schools does Sue Scheff refer families?

2) How does she go about determining that they are safe and non-abusive?

3) How does she get paid?"
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »