Author Topic: Reform sought in teen homes  (Read 1315 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Reform sought in teen homes
« on: November 26, 2004, 04:20:00 AM »
Reform sought in teen homes

http://http://www.sltrib.com/utah/ci_2473546

Key lawmaker reverses stand on regulation  
By Kirsten Stewart
The Salt Lake Tribune
Salt Lake Tribune  
 
Panguitch Republican Sen. Tom Hatch is calling for more oversight of Utah's thriving teen-help industry.

But his draft bill, which would give state regulators more leeway to crack down on unsafe group homes and some other live-in programs for troubled teenagers, is a near-mirror of legislation he actively opposed last year.

"I am not a big fan of regulation or the heavy hand of government," said Hatch, introducing his bill at a recent meeting of the Health and Human Services Committee. And that hasn't changed.

What has changed is the growing appetite in Hatch's district for reform after the brutal slaying of a group home counselor at the Maximum Skills Life Academy in Cedar City.

"It's a subject that caught the attention of our entire state," admits Hatch.

Anson Arnett, 31, was at work alone when two 17-year-old wards of the academy attacked him with a baseball bat and left him for dead. They were later arrested and charged.

Arnett's father, Perry Arnett, later told legislators there still is work to be done to prevent similar tragedies.

"I could talk to you about the loss that the family feels. But I prefer to talk about the loss that you should all feel," said Perry Arnett, noting that his son was a "bright, literate, self-disciplined and talented contributor to society."

Blaming his son's murder on Utah's laissez-faire attitude toward regulation of residential treatment facilities, Arnett told legislators, "If you value the culture that we live within, then value life. And if you value life, enact appropriate legislation with enough teeth to ensure that deaths to employees do not occur in the work place. That's all I can say. You know your duty . . . Do your duty, please."

Hatch said his bill "walks a fine line between balancing the need for protecting the public and not being over-regulatory."

Among other things, it gives state licensing the power to categorize residential treatment facilities according to the services they offer and the clients they serve and to impose appropriate health and safety rules.

"If someone is coming in for a minor behavioral problem, that's not the same as a sexual predator who is a repeat offender," said Hatch. The bill also requires the state to notify city and county officials when a treatment provider applies for a new license, so they can weigh in with possible concerns.

But Cedar City officials and others say the measure walks too fine a line.

Cedar City Councilman Raymond Green wants lawmakers to pay to hire more inspectors. About 20 licensers are now responsible for 1,300 group homes and 1,200 foster homes statewide.

He also wants periodic inspections imposed and employee background checks required, and a limit placed on the number of group homes that can be established in a particular region.

"We're quite concerned about the proliferation of group homes in our community," said Green.

But Hatch fears the cost of adding more inspectors could kill the bill.

Hatch has made other concessions in an effort to get his legislation past the regulation-shy Legislature: His legislation would not regulate private boarding schools that cater to wayward youth.

"This is a big business in the state of Utah," Hatch said. "It seems California has gotten so heavy-handed in regulation, that it's losing its schools to other Western states."

But Fraser Nelson, head of the Disability Law Center, argues boarding schools don't deserve special treatment under the law.

"These may be private schools, but they hold themselves up as treatment facilities," said Nelson.

A bill that would have permitted regulation of boarding schools and group homes mysteriously disappeared in the late shuffle of bills during the 2004 legislative session after the founder of a chain of controversial schools lobbied key lawmakers.

Robert Lichfield, founder of World Wide Association of Specialty Programs and Schools, dumped thousands of dollars into key Republican campaigns shortly after the session.

One of Lichfield's programs, Majestic Ranch, has been investigated three separate times for alleged abuse, resulting in one criminal charge and conviction.

"If there is a school with a record that ought to have some oversight, it's Majestic Ranch," said Sen. Chris Buttars who sponsored the bill last year to crack down on the teen-help industry.

The West Jordan Republican was criticized because he was head of Utah Boys Ranch, a licensed competitor of Majestic. Buttars has since retired but plans to push again this year for regulation of boarding schools.

"Oversight should be for everybody, not just because they call themselves a group home," Buttars said.

The Lichfields donated to Hatch's 2002 campaign. But he denies that influenced his decision to exclude boarding schools.

"I'm just philosophically opposed to general boarding schools being regulated," Hatch said. "Nobody is really happy with the bill. And generally from my experience, that's pretty good legislation. Everyone got a little of what they wanted and no one got everything they wanted."
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline hurleygurley

  • Posts: 87
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • http://www.thetroublingtroubledteenindustry.org
Reform sought in teen homes
« Reply #1 on: November 26, 2004, 12:38:00 PM »
I will go into greater detail BUT I've just been through the wringer in Utah and I'm convinced that nothing will stop these people. A suit against the state is in the works. Anyone interested, please let me know. The suit is focusing on lack of regulation over these programs, continued non-reponsiveness from state agencies regarding these problems and fraud regarding the reporting of abuse and coverups. Any stories you have regarding contact with Utah state agencies, PLEASE  LET ME KNOW. We are not doing this specific to our case, we're doing it for all the kids, past, present and future who pass through these programs. A suit, if won, can bypass the legislation that will never be.

Backing up - We just took our Writ case to the 10th District (Utah) Federal Court. The procedure was a sham. The federal judge, Paul Cassell, absolutely, clearly, undeniably DID NOT EVEN READ OUR DECLARATIONS!!!, not to mention that what is supposed to be a "swift" process because it's Writ proceeding and not a lawsuit, stretched from max. 15 days to 8 weeks! It's shocking that this can happen at the federal level, although, given what other kinds of **** our gov't does, it shouldn't be. But when it happens in your face, it's quite sickening. I will post the opinion of the judge and some background on my web page this week. The only good part of this is that on appeal we can destroy this opinion with a few paragraphs.

And we still have many options left.

The judge, in his opinion, assures the public that his decision "does not leave children unprotected" , a sick, sick joke. (Not to mention that I clearly stated in my declaration that I had gone to every state office to make my complaints with no response.) Also, as an aside, the SLC Tribune published the article on the case right  beside an article of a man found guilty of heinous child abuse AND the front page article was about Meth PARENTS who'd killed their child from neglect. The judge said "he's not inclined to question the judgement of parents." Sad irony. Also, the mother in our case, stated IN HER OWN WORDS in a TRO (illegally) filed against me, that her judgement was impaired. There was no evidentiary hearing. I did not get to respond to any of the b.s. that the Judge smugly spewed from on high. I've never been in court before and had a hard time not screaming.

 Anyway, after the dismissal of our case, (and essentially being sent back to the state by the judge) my friend's lawyer and I went to the head of licensing in Utah, who acted as if he listened and understood our plight. He knows the lawyer, a Mormon and respected member of the SLC legal community. The lawyer was simply trying to get access to my young woman friend at Youth Care because SHE HAD REQUESTED LEGAL COUNSEL TO ME BY SNUCK IN CELL PHONE!The core rules regulating RTC's give patients the right to counsel. He tried going to Youth Care and got no access. He tried calling the Director of YC, no return phone call. We were promised that licensing would go out and ask my young friend, SPECIFICALLY, if she wanted counsel. We had our doubts, which is why we went to the head of Licensing, Ken Stettler. We wanted to make sure that what was reported back to us was the truth, just in case we heard that my friend said "no." Lo and behold, it was reported that she said "no." Stettler and the Deputy AG, who was appraised of this situation stonewalled us completely, after Stettler promised he would investigate if there was a "no" answer.We wanted proof and the only proof we could accept is if the lawyer went down to YC and spoke with my friend directly. IMPOSSIBLE. We have reason to believe my friend was moved to Youth Care's "brother" RTC, Pineridge (intentionally) and may not have even been at Youth Care when the licensing person visited.

At the highest levels of Utah gov't we were baldly lied to with apparently sympathetic promises which won't be kept. We know this girl wants this particular lawyer's representation. One of the issues on which we were dismissed was that I, having no blood relation to my friend, did not have standing to petition for her, which in itself is highly questionable. Her relatives who haven't seen her for years would have standing. Having known this girl intimately for the year prior to her placement, being a professional in the mental health field, etc... don't qualify me. If my friend were able to sign the petition herself, the question of standing would be moot. Will she be allowed to see the lawyer who is representing her? We're going to try through California court to make this happen. Utah is lawless and as for the new legislation introduced by Hatch, actually it would make a significant dent in the "untouchable" policies regarding these places. It's not everything but there are some good provisions. Will it pass? I have almost no hope, despite the Mountain Park tragedy (AND SO MANY OTHERS!).

So, again, please send me your Utah gov't experiences! email me at [email protected] . Thanks.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Deborah

  • Posts: 5383
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Reform sought in teen homes
« Reply #2 on: November 27, 2004, 09:50:00 PM »
"I'm just philosophically opposed to general boarding schools being regulated," Hatch said. "Nobody is really happy with the bill. And generally from my experience, that's pretty good legislation. Everyone got a little of what they wanted and no one got everything they wanted."
***

Someone needs to put Hatch's feet to the fire. How does he define 'boarding school'?
The ICPC defines them as schools that provide nothing other than education and traditional extra cirricular activities. BM facilities are NOT boarding schools, except to the extent that the teens are boarded. Some don't even receive adequate education.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
gt;>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Hidden Lake Academy, after operating 12 years unlicensed will now be monitored by the state. Access information on the Federal Class Action lawsuit against HLA here: http://www.fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?t=17700

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Reform sought in teen homes
« Reply #3 on: November 29, 2004, 11:28:00 AM »
The SLT isn't impressed either:

http://http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/ci_2475786

Getting tough
 
Salt Lake Tribune  
 
Utah needs to get serious about overseeing the growing number of teen-help programs in the state. However, new regulations being proposed by Sen. Tom Hatch, R-Panguitch, don't offer the kind of tough oversight that would force unsafe group homes to make changes.

   Hatch says he will introduce a bill in the upcoming legislative session that would give the state licensing board the power to categorize residential treatment facilities according to the services they offer and what clients they serve and to impose appropriate health and safety rules.

   That is a reversal for Hatch, who opposed a similar bill that disappeared as this year's Legislature drew to a close in March. That happened after Robert Lichfield, founder of a chain of controversial homes, lobbied legislators. Hatch is now responding to his constituents who are rightly concerned about the safety of teen group homes after a group-home counselor was brutally killed at the Maximum Skills Life Academy in Cedar City. Two 17-year-old residents of the academy have been charged in the killing.

   The Hatch bill takes one step toward tougher regulations. Unfortunately, it goes no further.

   It does not give the state more money to hire additional inspectors to oversee the homes where troubled teenagers live, work and are supervised, sometimes for years. Only about 20 inspectors are now responsible for 1,300 group homes and 1,200 foster homes statewide.

   It does not require background checks on employees or periodic inspections. And the bill does not include limits on the number of group homes in any one particular area, something requested by officials in Cedar City, a community that has seen a proliferation of teen-help homes recently.

   The proposal's biggest deficiency, however, is its failure to include private boarding schools that promote themselves as treatment centers for teenagers who are in trouble.

   Hatch denies he may have been influenced to exclude boarding schools by campaign donations from Lichfield.

   He uses economics as a reason, saying the private boarding schools are "big business" in Utah and that regulating them might encourage them to leave. Hatch points to California's tightening of its oversight as a reason the schools are coming to Utah.

   But, any center that houses teen residents and purports to offer behavior-altering treatment must be regulated, including private boarding schools. If their owners relocate to avoid California regulations, that should raise suspicions in Utah.

   The state has a clear responsibility to see that all live-in centers that treat teenagers with serious behavior problems are safe and well-managed. Hatch's bill should stay on the drawing board until it does just that.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Reform sought in teen homes
« Reply #4 on: November 29, 2004, 11:54:00 AM »
***Hatch denies he may have been influenced to exclude boarding schools by campaign donations from Lichfield.

Right!! Does he think anyone believes that BS?

***He uses economics as a reason, saying the private boarding schools are "big business" in Utah and that regulating them might encourage them to leave.

Well, its always good to put economics before the safety of defenseless minors.

***Hatch points to California's tightening of its oversight as a reason the schools are coming to Utah.

And Oregon, or anywhere else they can avoid oversight. Like Bobbi Trott/Christiansen and Crater Lake?
http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?to ... rt=0#29229

***But, any center that houses teen residents and purports to offer behavior-altering treatment must be regulated, including private boarding schools.

This is in line with the Federal ICPC law and should be enforced.

***The state has a clear responsibility to see that all live-in centers that treat teenagers with serious behavior problems are safe and well-managed. Hatch's bill should stay on the drawing board until it does just that.

At a minimum. Is there another reasonable senator who might propose more protective legislation?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline cherish wisdom

  • Posts: 586
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Reform sought in teen homes
« Reply #5 on: November 29, 2004, 04:24:00 PM »
The schools are big business and that is why legislators have been lax in regulating them - for purely economic reasons. Children have died - a staff member was recently killed in an irrational escape attempt since he was the only one superving. There have been reports of sexual, physical, psychological and emotional abuse. There have been reports and complaints about civil and patient rights violations. The authorities look the other way and do nothing. These victims of this unregulated teen industry are left with nothing but wounds and a life-time of regret and pain.  

Children in Utah are currently being treated worse than prisoners of war in these UTHA based youth programs. No one can see what's going on except the staff members who maintain a code of silence. Even when staff members make reports to the authorities - nothing is done. They are left doubting their humanity.  Mr. Hatch is doing nothing more than giving lip service to a community upset over the death of a staff member.

Where was the public outcry when children died as a result of staff cruelty and negligence?  Were these children expendable because the industry is profitable to Utah? I'd really like to ask Mr. Hatch if he really cares about human life.  

These programs are using dangerous and unorthodox Pavlonian behavior modification treatment on children, many of whom have mental illnesses.  This industry needs regulation and it needs to be opened up to the public - just like nursing homes and hospitals.  

If the public were allowed to visit during the day - there would be less abuse.  If the children could use a pay phone for even one hour per day - there would be less abuse.  If there were video cameras in the facilities there would be less abuse.  

Unfortunately these children are kept behind locked doors and have no contact with the outside world. They are not allowed to even see a lawyer or report child abuse to the authorities.  Their mail and communications and visitation is all strictly limited, controlled and monitored.

These children are especially vulnerable to all types of abuse.  Unfortunately it looks like the authorities and politians are going to continue with the status quo because the industry is "big business" for Utah.  With that big business comes big political contributions that look more like bribes.

The mystery of the beginning of all things is insoluble by us, and I for one must be content to remain an agnostic.
--Charles Robert Darwin, English naturalist

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
If you lack wisdom ask of God and it shall be given to you.\"

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Reform sought in teen homes
« Reply #6 on: November 29, 2004, 06:35:00 PM »
Is this true?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Reform sought in teen homes
« Reply #7 on: November 29, 2004, 08:25:00 PM »
PFRR would love to get involved with some national tough standards, as a matter of fact Senator's Kennedy and Kerry are my Senators I am going to talk to them both about this.  United we stand, divided we fall.  Residential Schools will go on, what we have to do is work hard to insure high quality care, high standards in healh, welfare, safety, and service delivery.  We have list serves in all states as well pfrr.org
We also believe that parents who are better educated about their rights and most importantly their children's rights bring better end results.  There are some kids that will need this level of care, but not boot camps, and Casa programs or Desisto's of the world.   :flame:
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »