Author Topic: AARC  (Read 20600 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
AARC
« on: July 10, 2004, 03:12:00 AM »
We are parnets who are thinking of putting our son into Arrc. there is no denial that he needs help or needs nothing less then 90 days at least. we are looking for responses from people who as attendent aarc. we can send him to any treatment center in North America
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline ottawa5

  • Posts: 144
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
AARC
« Reply #1 on: July 10, 2004, 02:45:00 PM »
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) but the situation that you describe is so touching ot me! It is exactly what we went through when my son was 15, using drugs and placing himself in danger in a variety of ways. I remember so well the feeling of not knowing what to do and who to trust, but realizing that something had to happen.

I don't know much about AARC--my son went to a CEDU school and is now in college and doing fine, personally and academically. This is not meant to be an infomercial for the school that I chose--there may well be many other schools and programs out there just as good and a better match for your particular child.  You'll have to make that decision.

What you will hear at this site is, I imagine, that not everyone had the good experiences that our family had with this kind of program. You are likely to hear from some, in fact,that the very notion that some people report a good experience is proof that we are in a cult, brainwashed, etc. Obviously I don't believe that this is so. Neither does our son who has told us that being sent away gave him a future and possibly saved his life.  

The parent seminars and workshops that were part of our son's program were a real growth experience for us as parents as well as for our child.  It is now one of my dreams to open my own school someday, building on the positive aspects of existing programs and refining them in other ways, such as by modifying them for kids with certain dual diagnoses and less ego strength than is needed for certain confrontory approaches.  To accomplish this I've gone back to school and have just gotten my masters in clinical psychology and am working on my doctorate. I watch this and other sites to get non-academic input about the whole therapeutic boarding school industry, and to hear about the perceptions of a variety of people, whether, at the end of the day, I agree with them completely or not.

My advice to you in making your decision is, as noted, to be somewhat skeptical of people who don't give some kind of identifier.  If the claims made by anonymous or even named posters seem really unlikely to you (for example, the whole governmental apparatus of a certain state is covering up a particular school's abuses), check around on news web-sites or other postings here and get a perspective on the believablity of the claim. It doesn't hurt to go to the profile of a named poster---sometimes the way they describe themselves speaks volumes.

I wouldn't worry too much about the "potty-mouth", gratuitous profanity in some posts, some of these people have had at least unsatifactory experiences, and are quite angry--try to see past the words and the anger and consider whether what is being reported is believable and generalizable to all such schools and programs that you are considering.

What convinced me to send my child to the school we did was talking with other parents who had had children there--both parents who had kids who graduated and parents who withdrew their kids---our school gave us a list of both and those we spoke with gave us other names as well. We spoke with a couple of dozen people before making the decision. I really think that if you are a good judge of character talking to people directly, face to face or even on the phone can give you pretty important insights.

So good luck to you. When we sent my son away it was the hardest thing I had ever done--if there had been another way, any other way, I would have taken it.  But by the time we realized that things were out of control, it was just not possible, by counselling or by reasoning or by loving him, to change things in a way that would make him safe. I had to live with the fact (and still do) that if I had been more attentive to his emotional needs earlier in his life, if our relationship had been stronger, if I had done a variety of things differently, we might not  have ended up where we did.  But we can't go back in time and I did the only thing I could in the circumstances.  And by the grace of God (or luck or destiny or fate, some people might say) we had a happy ending.

Perhaps you can find a way to make things work out at home---if you can, that is always the best way.  If you can't, really can't, my advice to you is get as much info as you can here and elsewhere, choose carefully, and do what you have to do.

P.S. As I looked over my message, I saw that it  may sound extreme that my son would think that being sent away saved his life--in our case it is in fact a real possibility.  A neighborhood friend who he used to cruise around and buy and sell drugs with went across a median at 3 in the morning some time after my son had gone to the school.  That boy was dead that the scene and it is quite likely, given their friendship that my son would have been in the car with him if he had still been at home and running with the same crowd.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
AARC
« Reply #2 on: July 10, 2004, 05:03:00 PM »
thank you for a response
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Hamiltonf

  • Posts: 188
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
AARC
« Reply #3 on: July 10, 2004, 08:02:00 PM »
i recently attended a Seminar given by a well known Family Court Judge from San Diego who favours coerced treatment, yet at the same time says that the worst thing you can do for a child is put him in foster care.  
I've encountered many parents with kids who have behavioural problems who would "speak up" their kids sentences in, for example , youth court, or call the police to assist in settling disputes.  In the short term such "tough love approaches" may seem to work.  I can assure you that in my experience they do not work in the long term.
What I think you need to do, since you are in Alberta is first contact AADAC for information about the various drugs, then search around for a good, properly credentialled psychologist.  Unfortunately, even well credentialled psychologists are not always that knowledgable about the pharmacological properties of the drugs in question.
If you want to have information about the types of schools of which AARC is an example, you might want to contact Professor Barry Beyerstein of Simon Frazer University.  He is a Psychopharmacologist and as such he is even more knowledgable about drugs young people use and the effects they may have on the brain than even the people at AADAC. He is the most familiar of anyone with the "cult" aspects of schools that spawned those such as AARC as he wrote the book.  
Or, you might try Dr. David Cooke at the University of Alberta.  He has been interviewed  on a number of occasions by CBC.
Before you do anything, I would suggest that such  organizations as AARC are the absolute last resort, and probably should be avoided like the plague.
Unfortunately I have had to advocate for a client to go into coerced treatment (he was a methamphetamine addict) but this was only because his only other choice was to end up in a federal penitemtiary for three years.  Had he been the US it would have been twenty years minimum.  I don't like what this coerced treatment has done to him any more than I like what the Meth did to him.
But I can tell you this, -- At no time did anybody in the system ever ask why he was abusing methamphetamine.
And guess what --- there are pharmacological reasons in many many cases why young people resort to drugs.  It is often a result of self-medication for a (sometimes) undiagnosed medical condition -- in the case of meth -- ADHD or ADD, or sometimes bipolar
And many people who suffer from unrecognised clinical depression whether situational or chronic, find relief in cocaine, which is extremely dangerous, but this form of use does not require coerced treatment rather guidance in obtaining appropriate alternatives.  
So please, find out what's bothering your son.
And determine whether it is "use" or "abuse" since some recreational use of drugs, e.g. LSD can be quite enervating.  The INFORMED use of many of these designated illicit drugs may often be more beneficial than some of the licit drugs PUSHED by pharmaceutical companies.  One has only to look at the recent banning of SSRI's in Britain for use with children to realise that there is an awful lot of misinformation to be dug through on these matters.
And if you really are serious and not an anonymous poster opening the door for the coerced treatment advocate who first replied to you, you can contact me by registering and sending me a private message , so that I can give you further information about a credentialled peer counsellor with a psycho-pharmacological background who has had some phenominal success with some serious Meth users and someone who'd been labelled a crack head.  Not one of the persons she has counselled has been required to give up their freedom or enter into a "program"  
cheers
      [ This Message was edited by: Hamiltonf on 2004-07-10 17:11 ][ This Message was edited by: Hamiltonf on 2004-07-11 09:11 ]
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
uote of the Year
The Bush administration has succeeded in making the United States one of the most feared and hated countries in the world. The talent of these guys is unbelievable. They have even succeeded at alienating Canada. I mean, that takes ge

Offline ottawa5

  • Posts: 144
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
AARC
« Reply #4 on: July 10, 2004, 11:51:00 PM »
If the lawyer from Canada had read my previous post with at least some degree of open-mindedness, I should think it would have been clear that we are not really saying such different things:  coerced treatment should be a last resort, after everything else has been attempted.

But sometimes, hopefully rarely, as parents we do reach a "last resort" position, and when this happens, it requires courage, balance, and resolve to act in the best interests of a child in trouble. I don't really think claims about cults or imagined plots to "open the door" to an over-broad advocacy of that "last resort"  help to reach that kind of balance.

By chance, I used to be a Canadian myself before my marriage, and, at least when I lived there, in some provinces, a child of 14 could refuse either a drug test or any kind of treatment. Don't know if it's still that way. Obviously different people will have different opinions on whether this kind of decision-making authority should be given to 12 or 10 year olds (or younger?).

And to the paremts: of course you may contact me also if you are interested in talking further.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
AARC
« Reply #5 on: July 11, 2004, 12:37:00 AM »
May I ask why you would consider sending your child to AARC when you are aware that AARC is a branch of the Synanon church and has a long history of abuse behind it, so much so that places such as AADAC offer therapy for youth who have been put through it? Did you link here from http://www.thestraights.com? There is no situation desperate enough to put a youth through these experiences. If your child needs to physically detox from drugs he would be safer in a hospital where proper care can be taken from him. If he's emotionally in need you probably can't force him to change anything, just be there to love and listen as a parent. But there are many good treatment centers that do not take away someones civil rights and who assist in healing via the help of certified therapists, psycotherapists, psychologists, analysts, and psychiatrists, as opposed to AARC where there is only "graduates" and a former gym teacher.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
AARC
« Reply #6 on: July 11, 2004, 01:38:00 AM »
thank you for your time to responed.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
AARC
« Reply #7 on: July 11, 2004, 01:39:00 AM »
thank you also for your response
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
AARC
« Reply #8 on: July 11, 2004, 09:39:00 AM »
This is an AAARC bashing website why don't you phone AARC for yourself and look at their website. ALso the people below have not gone to AARC so how can you take their advice....get your son help whereever you can!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Hamiltonf

  • Posts: 188
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
AARC
« Reply #9 on: July 11, 2004, 12:01:00 PM »
The only way I see places like AARC as a last resort is when the only other alternative is worse.  And the only time I have had anyone go to coerced treatment was when the only alternative was far worse -- Federal peniteniary.

In other words, the WORST thing you can do for your child, unless he is facing incarceration in a Federal penetentiary is send him to AARC.  I do not know how I can be any clearer than that!  

As it happens, if the anonymous poster had read and  fully comprehended my post, he would have seen that I recommend far better alternatives.  
It is pretty clear to me that the anonymous parents seeking advice really are not interested in hearing about viable alternatives to coerced treatment as they have not registered in order to communicate with me privately.  I can refer them to an individual who can talk to them and the child, assess them and make recommendations.  This individual has been doing some work connected with Vancouver's lower east side, and will be flying into Edmonton to spend a week next Tuesday (20th July).  If these parents are in Calgary, I'm sure  that if they care as much as they say they do, they can afford the trip up to Edmonton and I can arrange for the first step to be taken.
It'll be far more effective than destroying this child's free will and substituting the "opiate of the masses" for whatever his drug of hoice might be.  Isn't this opportunity better than wasting $30,000.00 on Orwellian conditioning?
[ This Message was edited by: Hamiltonf on 2004-07-11 09:15 ]
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
uote of the Year
The Bush administration has succeeded in making the United States one of the most feared and hated countries in the world. The talent of these guys is unbelievable. They have even succeeded at alienating Canada. I mean, that takes ge

Offline ottawa5

  • Posts: 144
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
AARC
« Reply #10 on: July 11, 2004, 01:22:00 PM »
I do not agree at all that it is "pretty clear" that the anonymous parents are not really interested in hearing about viable options in addressing their child's problems.  

Maybe they are still considering some of the advice that they have gotten (from any one or all of those who has offered it here). Maybe they are looking elsewhere. Maybe they don't like the idea that revealing themselves may lead to a long, pointless, badgering series of "true believer"-type messages from people with opinions that they are still deciding whether or not are believable.  

I know that as a parent in a similar position to the one that they describe I would have been pretty offended if someone had made that kind of blanket statement about me. Especially someone I didn't even know existed a day ago. The fact that they are not immediately accepting some poster's particular opinion, hook, line and sinker, may be the sign of independent thinking and the kind of balanced approach that sounds like a good quality in navigating the complex situation in which their family finds itself. No one likes the hard sell approach of "I'm telling you I know everthing--take this opportunity right now or you are this, that, or the next thing"--it reminds me of high pressure tactics for selling a used car.

In psychology we talk about "cognitive rigidity" and "uncertainty avoidance", this black and white way of thinking which allows only one approach to weighing and looking at complex situations.  The fact that these people are not responding that way may be a sign that that they are not afraid to face the ambiguities, a quality that is very well suited for the complex problem they have on their hands, whatever they decide to do eventually.

Of course any parent in this situation will want to act as expeditiously as possible: that is not the same as allowing one's self to be guilted or manuevered into a premature, party-line, solution.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Hamiltonf

  • Posts: 188
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
AARC
« Reply #11 on: July 11, 2004, 04:12:00 PM »
Once in a while we get posts to this site that are presumably asking for "advice" to deal with some wayward drug-addicted child.  Inevitably the immediate response, out of the blue is a response from some AARC supporting person parroting what a wonderful programme it is.  
Repeatedly I, and others, offer a way of communicating with the anonymous poster in a way that is none-threatening and maintains confidentiality  -- and guess what?  The concerned poster never establishes contact and reinforces my belief that the post is a hoax, designed to open the door for cult members to perpetuate their disinformation and lies about the effectiveness of treatment.
Once again, though, if these parents are genuine, I would encourage them to subscribe, contact me by private message whereupon I will provide them with my e-mail address, telephone number and anything else they want to know.  In return I will give them information that will truly help them with their problem.  They have no reason not to do it.  Nothing to fear, other than perhaps facing some truths they might not like, but then, that's what comes from truly considering ALL the options.  

I would have thought that if these individuals ARE genuine, which I am now even more uncertain of, the converse of what Ottawa5 says must be true.  

So,  what are they afraid of ?

Contact me or the moderator of this site --- [ This Message was edited by: Hamiltonf on 2004-07-11 13:13 ]
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
uote of the Year
The Bush administration has succeeded in making the United States one of the most feared and hated countries in the world. The talent of these guys is unbelievable. They have even succeeded at alienating Canada. I mean, that takes ge

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
AARC
« Reply #12 on: July 11, 2004, 05:23:00 PM »
The Canadian lawyer may or may not be right in the analysis given of these parents being not genuine-I would certainly be interested in knowing if they really exist or are some kind of front for a scheme to entice people to a program.

However, it sounds as though the lawyer really does not know this to be a fact. It may just be that sometimes people come to this site, looking for info when they have a kid in trouble, they don't like the zealous, "I have all the answers" tone of some of the posts, and move on. They may just be too stressed out to deal with some stranger they don't know from Adam, pushing an agenda at them: after all, just because a poster sees him or herself as an expert on what to do with a troubled child, that doesn't mean that a) it is true that he or she is an expert, or b) the parents accept that it is true.  That would be an alternative explanation of the phenomena of anonymous posts that dry up after a few exchanges.

But as to the current anonymous parents or their intentions, I am not afraid to say "I really don't know" (it's a valuable thing to be able to admit to, in general, by the way) that's about where I have to leave it. The lawyer's interpretation sounds a bit paranoid to me, I admit, but then again it is not impossible. I will be interested to see if they do post again however, and I wish them well regardless.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Hamiltonf

  • Posts: 188
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
AARC
« Reply #13 on: July 11, 2004, 11:04:00 PM »
Well, the style of the last post sounds awfully like  Ottawa5, only this time anonymously.  they still haven't responded.  I'll give them another week. if no private response, I will draw the obvious conclusion, and challenge Ottawa5 to prove me wrong.
Of course I can guarantee that if they do respond privately I will let you no, even if they never post to the public board again.
Otherwise Ottawa5 is full of ----- well, you know what.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
uote of the Year
The Bush administration has succeeded in making the United States one of the most feared and hated countries in the world. The talent of these guys is unbelievable. They have even succeeded at alienating Canada. I mean, that takes ge

Offline ottawa5

  • Posts: 144
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
AARC
« Reply #14 on: July 12, 2004, 12:25:00 AM »
It was definitely me, that last post--I was responding to a seemingly infinite amount of email from various sources and somehow skipped the sign in at this site, I guess. (Actually this gives me a good insight into why certain people post by name sometimes and sometimes anonymously--live and learn, as they say).

However, I don't really get why I am somehow responsible for whether these parents, who I do not know at all beyond the posts here, ever return to this site again.

And, by the way, I don't think the  lawyer's promise to report on any contacts that occur is going to encourage a response if they are concerned with privacy. Quite to the contrary, I will certainly not report anything to anyone, here or anywhere else, if they contact me and ask me not to.

I have, in my previous posts, simply put forward what would seem to be a reasonable hypothesis that the reasons that they have not returned may not relate to authenticity,  but rather to their engagement with the tone of the site.  

I suppose that it may be hard on the legal-ego when strangers do not, out of the blue, accept and kow-tow to, self-proclaimed expertise, in this case on the subject of treatment of troubled children--- but that's not my fault as any sensible person could discern--again I see in the lawyer's remarks the rigid thinking that tries to draw clear, and, in this case, blaming inferences where logic dictates that this cannot be done.

In the abstract sense, this could represent  disordered thinking but more likely just a lawyerly way of trying to slyly scape-goat someone just for the heck of it?  I come from a family of attorneys so this kind of gamey-ness is not unknown to me.

Nice try, that is if you like being gamey, but in my view at least, a person would have to be pretty green to take it seriously.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »