West Ridge Academy Missionaries Tutor With Love

[_marg]

We do have factual knowledge of abuse. Eric was sent away at the age of 15 until he turned 18 and walked out. We know he was unable to maintain a close relationship with his mother and sister and friends as a result, that is abuse.

If one looks into the program itself, in which individuals start out with no rights, are treated as convicted criminals yet no trial, no professional assessment was ever done, we know that alone is abusive.

You certainly jump to conclusions easily without a lot of discrimination. [/quote]

Everything I've said above is factual.

You only have Goodk's own word for what happened in his family and to him. There have been several demands on this board for more enlightening information; can you imagine what might happen to a poster who offered inside information or a rebuttal to Goodk's facts? You -- in particular -- would jump down that person's throat. I would be crazy to offer personal information about Eric and his life, good or bad.

Look Crocket, the school itself says it only accepts mild to moderate behavioral problem kids. Erics' dad has stated Eric is not fundamentally bad.

So I think you should stop insinuating otherwise.

You have been asked twice previously and both times evaded answering. I'll ask again..what exactly do you think Eric has stated with regards to UBR that he has lied about?

And by the way, so far you have taken nil interest is assessing the school's program,you so focus has been to discredit Eric.

But, GoodK's family itself is well-known in some parts. You're just trashing them. Eric's dad and mom are wonderful people. His dad is no church leader and never has been. They don't live ostentatiously. The kids at home are active in school matters, good students and just great. Eric's dad perhaps likes spending too much time thinking about and writing about Mormon topics, but it is a hobby that others share as well Eric's dad isn't absent from the family; he doesn't drink; he doesn't lose his temper.

My comments were a function of what Eric's dad has written via DCP on this board. He comes across as a religious fundamentalist, a little bit off his rocker in my opinion. I don't insinuate I have insider information.

To trash them as often as you have, and to characterize them as dysfunctional, is really unfair. Eric's dad and mom are far better parents than I am.

I will have to disagree here. No parent who has a child with mild to moderate behavior problems assuming they even existed, which is a judgement call, should be sending their child away to a boot camp which uses the techniques Westridge does have assuming guilt, taking away all privileges and letting some privileges back with compliance..especially when Mormon fundamentalists are involved in running the show so to speak.

Let me suggest that for the privacy of the family, you Marg just leave your speculations to yourself about them and their failures. They aren't public figures and didn't ask their personal lives to be dragged before mockers.

I haven't speculated Bob, you have. Nor have I insinuated inside knowledge.

[_rcrocket]

Just quit saying negative things about his family. You have absolutely no basis to anonymously trash two good parents. None whatsoever.

I have already explained ad naseum my position on GoodK's story. I am not going to do it again.

Look Crocket, the school itself says it only accepts mild to moderate behavioral problem kids. Erics' dad has stated Eric is not fundamentally bad.

So I think you should stop insinuating otherwise.

I have never done any such thing. I do know, however, several kids who have gone to that program, other than GoodK. They all had violent histories. So whether the program has changed, or accepts those it says it doesn't, I don't know one way or the other. One kid is a rapist; I don't know how more violent you could get than that except murder.

[_harmony]

Everything I've said above is factual.

No, it's not. It's allegation. Learn the difference.

[_truth dancer]

But, GoodK's family itself is well-known in some parts. You're just trashing them. Eric's dad and mom are wonderful people. His dad is no church leader and never has been. They don't live ostentatiously. The kids at home are active in school matters, good students and just great. Eric's dad perhaps likes spending too much time thinking about and writing about Mormon topics, but it is a hobby that others share as well Eric's dad isn't absent from the family; he doesn't drink; he doesn't lose his temper. To trash them as often as you have, and to characterize them as dysfunctional, is really unfair. Eric's dad and mom are far better parents than I am.

Are you talking about GoodK's STEP father?

And, Bob, Dan chose to post a letter from the step father right here on the board, remember?

One last thing, the Westridge website clearly states the program excludes those with a history of violence, right along with those with a history of anti-social or Conduct disorder.

I would be interested in knowing how someone convicted of rape could be sent to this sort of institution that particularly states it is appropriate only for those with soft to moderate behavioral disorders.

Hmmm... something is not adding up here.

[_marg]

We have no factual knowledge of abuse. We have allegations of abuse, nothing more.

Sending a teenager away from home in and of itself is not abuse. Perhaps you should acquaint yourself with what abuse means, in legal terms. Under your definition, a teen who attends boarding school would qualify as abused. A teenager who goes to study abroad would qualify as abused. Me sending my son to live with his aunt would qualify as abused. None of those situations is by definition abuse, and, by definition, neither is GoodK's. That's why some of us here at least have been asking for some sort of documentation that legal action is proceeding. Until there is legal action, and UBR gets its day in court, there is no abuse; there are only allegations.

I'm not concerned with whether abuse is legal or not Harmony. I'm not arguing that currently school are illegally operating. The issues is whether Eric was treated with abuse.

The difference between sending a child to boarding school and you sending your child away versus Eric's experience is a function of the program and treatment offered. A boarding school is does not accept problem kids in fact most boarding schools will only allow those with high grades in, it does not treat the kids as criminals, does not put them into a program in which virtually all rights are taken away and disrespect is shown, and they are humiliated as part of the program and it offers a good educational program. And with your sending you child away again it gets down to your child was not treated with disrespect.

We know he was unable to maintain a close relationship with his mother and sister and friends as a result, that is abuse.

Again, not abuse.

I disagree it is abuse and it is part of the program to alienate the individual from contact with the world in order to break down their will.

If one looks into the program itself, in which individuals start out with no rights, are treated as convicted criminals yet no trial, no professional assessment was ever done, we know that alone is abusive.

In the USA, minors have very few "rights". You might want to do a little more research before you start talking about "rights". You have no idea what assessment was done, there have been no arrests, no searches, no hearings.

Legality is not the issue. Read the article I linked to by Maia Szalavitz..as a matter of fact I quoted her above addressing rights of kids in these programs.

Right now, children sent to private tough love programs have fewer rights than convicted prisoners. A parent can send a child to a private program where he can be held incommunicado until he turns 18, without any medical diagnosis or rationale for the treatment and without any oversight or means of appeal.

We only have GoodK's word, and in a court of law, that's not good enough. Courts require proof; those making the accusation carry the burden of proof. GoodK has obviously not met that standard yet, as we see no action in the justice system around this.

If changes are made it will not be because of one person. I will be an evolution of change, with the information getting out to people and they become better informed, an appreciation that these schools cause more harm than good, probably an appreciation that better laws are needed to protect the rights of under 18 year olds.

Danna's post above was an explanation that these programs don't work. Punishment is not how one makes positive long lasting behavior changes. Postive reinforcement which would involve treating kids with respect, not the disrespect which is currently employed is necessary. But in any event, sending a child to an institution for years for soft to moderate behavioral issues seems wrong.

I'll quote Maia Szalavitz:

And the parents who send their kids to these camps? For the most part, they are uninformed about the absence of evidence supporting tough love programs and often desperate to save their kids from drugs and delinquency. Until we figure out a better balance between the right of parents to place their kids in whatever programs they choose and the right of kids to be free from inappropriate punishment by agents of their parents or the state, the abuse will continue. The shame of it all is that we know hurting kids doesn’t help them.

[_marg]

Everything I've said above is factual.

No, it's not. It's allegation. Learn the difference.

That's not good enough, specify what I've said that isn't factual.

[_rcrocket]

One last thing, the Westridge website clearly states the program excludes those with a history of violence, right along with those with a history of anti-social or Conduct disorder.

I would be interested in knowing how someone convicted of rape could be sent to this sort of institution that particularly states it is appropriate only for those with soft to moderate behavioral disorders.

Hmmm... something is not adding up here.

[_marg]

Just quit saying negative things about his family. You have absolutely no basis to anonymously trash two good parents. None whatsoever.

I've never trashed his mother. I've never said the family is dysfunctional. I'm critical of the step dad based upon what he has allowed to be shared on this board and based upon the fact that he sent a son he admits is not a bad person ..to an institution for 2 years. However I allow that he may have been quite ignorant of the program there. Despite that though I can think of no excuse for a parent to send a child away to a boot camp for 2 years..a child they acknowledge isn't a bad kid.

I have already explained ad naseum my position on GoodK's story. I am not going to do it again.

Once again you are evading. You are accusing Eric of lying about the school and yet what specifically you think he's lied about you don't say.

Look Crocket, the school itself says it only accepts mild to moderate behavioral problem kids. Erics' dad has stated Eric is not fundamentally bad.

So I think you should stop insinuating otherwise.

I have never done any such thing. I do know, however, several kids who have gone to that program, other than GoodK. They all had violent histories. So whether the program has changed, or accepts those it says it doesn't, I don't know one way or the other. One kid is a rapist; I don't know how more violent you could get than that except murder.

You are doing it again! His dad said he's not fundamentally bad, so could you please stop insinuating otherwise.

[_rcrocket]

So I don't think you can assume Eric has anything to do with dysfunction in the family. But I think you can assume that the Church's teachings is a factor in the step dad's dysfunctionality.

[quote="marg"]

[_truth dancer]

One last thing, the Westridge website clearly states the program excludes those with a history of violence, right along with those with a history of anti-social or Conduct disorder.

I would be interested in knowing how someone convicted of rape could be sent to this sort of institution that particularly states it is appropriate only for those with soft to moderate behavioral disorders.

Hmmm... something is not adding up here.

Either their admission policy has not always been the same or they make exceptions. I have no way of knowing. But I do have first-hand knowledge of the admission of these kids. (I was able to keep one kid out by counseling the parents to avoid this solution. But, the school was about to admit a violent youth.)

Bob, are you saying that a child who committed a serious, violent crime was sent there rather than a detention facility? You write the child was "about" to be admitted... was s/he?