Westridge & Other Schools(Formerly LDS Perceptions thread)

[_Jersey Girl]

Jersey Girl please answer my questions, what constitutes abuse legally in these places? I've been to the Utah DHS site and I see nothing which specifies what is considered abuse in them. I listed some examples and asked you whether they would constitute as abuse, since you claim knowledge in this area.

Yes, I sure as hell claim knowledge in this area. Want to see how complex this really is?

1. You need to look up the rules and regulations for the operation of programs that Westridge is licensed for. truthdancer posted the specific licensure for Westridge. The standards which are likely minimum standards are what the facility is held to by DHS in order to remain "in compliance". You'll have to search for it because I'm working right now.

2. You need to look up the state statutes that define child abuse and neglect. Liz put up the state statute that applies to mandated reporters. You need to sift through Utah state statutes until you locate the section that deals with child abuse and neglect.

3. You need to look up the health department regulations that apply to the specific type of program and figure out what allegations fall under health department reg's.

4. You need to look up each accreditation organization and examine the criteria for each specific accreditation process. In other words, what criteria must be met or percentage of criteria must be met and figure out what allegations if any, violate the accreditation criteria.

5. You need to find out of the ranch receives any type of federal funding. For example, the Department of Health and Human Servies, USDA Food Program subsidies. What food subsidies might bear on the amount of other types of program funding the school may receive. Are any of the students in IEP's? Are the requirements of the IEP's being met? You need to find out if the ranch has been reported to the GAO for violations in the same way that other types of programs have been reported and investigated by the GAO. (Government Accounting Office) You can look for GAO investigation outcomes on these types of programs online. It's all there.

6. You need to find out about the credentialing of the therapists and health care workers there. What credentialing criteria are they held to? What constitutes violation of said credentialing criteria.

I'm not fully done and it's not well organized, but that comes as close as I'm going to get right now. What Eric needs isn't a lawyer. What Eric needs is a current and active report of abuse and/or neglect. You turn it in to DHS or Law Enforcement and they do the rest. In some form or another, from state to state, that's how it works.

No program that is licensed and accredited is an island, marg. Every single one of those organizations and agencies has the ability to do unannounced visits and inspections. Including DHS, Health Deparment, and every accreditation organization that I listed on this thread. Licensing inspects based on reports of violations, re-licensing when facilities change (for example it will re-inspect when they add a building or other structure or when they change buildings) prior to renewal of the license, say, every three years. There are a zillion ways to go with this, marg. A zillion things to take into consideration. I tried to briefly and quickly list some of them above.

What other people not just Eric are interested in doing is raising awareness and having pressure put on U.S. Gov't to improve legislation which would increase child protection in these facilities as it currently stand. There is no point in reporting abuse which is what you want Eric to do for others, if it is not considered illegal.

Raising awareness of what? Kids being made to read the Book of Mormon?

Did I see a comment by you something about kids not being able to make phone calls when the parents contracted for it?

That's the parents place to question that.

You need to sort out where the responsiblity lies in each and every instance of alleged abuse and/or neglect.

Phone calls contracted for and the kid doesn't call? That's on the parents to deal with.
Kid being made to read the Book of Mormon? Parents already know it.

Kid not being allowed to read any other books? Is Westridge an accredited school? Are you saying the kids aren't allowed to read their own text books? Are you saying that high schooler's housed in a program that is accredited six ways till Sunday, aren't receiving literacy education?

Or are you saying that they can't read a magazine or a personal book of poetry or something? Guess what, no one cares. It isn't essential to their education and well being.

You need to isolate every single allegation and sift through it. Some of this stuff is likely within the parameters of state rules and regs and it's simply up to the parents to investigate and stick their own nose into it.

I could go on and on and on. But thankfully and mercifully, I have to work.

Later.

[_Jersey Girl]

This is how stinking NICE I am to you, marg.

Go here: http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/code/r277/r277-401.htm

Look under the first section on definitions. It gives the coded section to look for the definitions of abuse/neglect in Utah. Try to find where that section is located. I'd look for it myself but I can't right now.

Might I mention that I'm not getting paid for the consult here?

[_Jersey Girl]

You don't deserve me, marg, and you likely never have. THIS is how GOOD I am to you!

Poke around here in the Utah Code Title, I'm giving you a link to the section on abuse/neglect.

http://le.utah.gov/UtahCode/getCodeSection?code=78A-6-105

When you're done wading through that vortex, please let us know if your questions have been answered.

Edit: Here is a freebie:

(b) "Abuse" does not include:
(i) reasonable discipline or management of a child, including withholding privileges;

[_Jersey Girl]

I'm going to take this in pieces as I feel like it.

by the way to note in that PBS video I mentioned previously which was done in 2006, for Montana at that time, there was no requirement for licensing and Spring Creek was essentially offering the same services as UBR/Westridge. In the video it mentioned about some school in Utah shipping the kids off to Montana to avoid legal pressures of legislation. It is therefore likely that laws have changed in Utah since Eric was there and that licensing may be required in Utah.

Let me try this again because I am not getting through to you.

That Westridge is licensed is NO indication that it DOES NOT meet criteria for exemption from licensing.

It means that either it does not meet exemption criteria or that it has chosen to forfeit exemption status for some other purpose and chosen to be licensed.

Let me give you an analogy to work with. Many if not most, of the non-profit early childhood programs in the US are owned and operated by churches. These programs can be exempted from licensing (according to their particular state if it applies) depending on the percentage of religious content taught in the program.

THOSE programs CHOOSE to be licensed in order to (1) reassure parents that the program meets certain standards, including DHS and Health Dept. (2) in order to apply for accreditation that ensures quality and (3) in order to apply for certain types of grant funding and government (state and fed) subsidies.

Do you see what I'm saying? It isn't a case of licensing OR exemption. It can be a choice that a program makes for a specific purpose. In most cases the specific purpose is that grant funding and gov't subsidies. The $ pumps up the quality of the program whether it is used for equipment, continuing education and staff tuition reimbursement, etc...a whole host of things.

The licensing door opens numerous other doors.

And that's why programs (including Westridge) may ELECT to become licensed care facilities instead of choosing exemption even though they may qualify to operate as an unlicensed facility.

...

Do you see where you're saying that laws may have changed and that Utah now requires licensing?

You're talking in circles, marg.

You just provided me with a current list of exemption criteria for the state of Utah accompanied by your speculation that Westridge may not need to be licensed.

That means that your idea that Utah now *requires* licensing doesn't make sense.

I'll be back here at some point in time but only if you're lucky.

[_marg]

I'm going to take this in pieces as I feel like it.

by the way to note in that PBS video I mentioned previously which was done in 2006, for Montana at that time, there was no requirement for licensing and Spring Creek was essentially offering the same services as UBR/Westridge. In the video it mentioned about some school in Utah shipping the kids off to Montana to avoid legal pressures of legislation. It is therefore likely that laws have changed in Utah since Eric was there and that licensing may be required in Utah.

Let me try this again because I am not getting through to you.

That Westridge is licensed is NO indication that it DOES NOT meet criteria for exemption from licensing.


It means that either it does not meet exemption criteria or that it has chosen to forfeit exemption status for some other purpose and chosen to be licensed.

Let me give you an analogy to work with. Many if not most, of the non-profit early childhood programs in the US are owned and operated by churches. These programs can be exempted from licensing (according to their particular state if it applies) depending on the percentage of religious content taught in the program.

THOSE programs CHOOSE to be licensed in order to (1) reassure parents that the program meets certain standards, including DHS and Health Dept. (2) in order to apply for accreditation that ensures quality and (3) in order to apply for certain types of grant funding and government (state and fed) subsidies.

Do you see what I'm saying? It isn't a case of licensing OR exemption. It can be a choice that a program makes for a specific purpose. In most cases the specific purpose is that grant funding and gov't subsidies. The $ pumps up the quality of the program whether it is used for equipment, continuing education and staff tuition reimbursement, etc...a whole host of things.

The licensing door opens numerous other doors.

And that's why programs (including Westridge) may ELECT to become licensed care facilities instead of choosing exemption even though they may qualify to operate as an unlicensed facility.

...

Do you see where you're saying that laws may have changed and that Utah now requires licensing?

You're talking in circles, marg.

You just provided me with a current list of exemption criteria for the state of Utah accompanied by your speculation that Westridge may not need to be licensed.

That means that your idea that Utah now *requires* licensing doesn't make sense.

I'll be back here at some point in time but only if you're lucky.

The reason I said "It is therefore likely that laws have changed in Utah since Eric was there and that licensing may be required in Utah." is because of the timing. The video was made in 2006 and only then was a school in Utah moving kids out to Montana which had no legal requirements for residential schools because of legal pressures. Do you understand that J.G. ..why would they do that at that time? In addition I was also considering the fact that WWASP the organization which was started by Lichfield in 1998 was set up in Utah. WWASP has had to close a number of its facilities due to abuse, it is noted for complaints about abuse, noted for the behavioral modification system it's schools employ. So I figure the reason Lichfield first set up shop in Utah may have been because of little legal regulation in Utah over residential programs. he first started working at a place in Provo 1977 which used behavior modification. He created WWASP and its headquarters in Utah and some of its schools are run, so I figure that Utah has been good to his business and if he's setting up headquarters in Utah 1998 it is likely that the law were favorable to his schools that his organization WWASP represented at that time.

So the fact that a facility in Utah around 2006 is shipping its kids to Montana because the laws are more favorable there and to avoid legal problems, tells me that likely things changed legally in Utah and probably close to 2005 or whenever this occurred.

Now I didn't claim to know with certainty whether laws changed since Eric's time, but it seems to me to be a fairly good probability.

[_marg]

You don't deserve me, marg, and you likely never have. THIS is how GOOD I am to you!

Poke around here in the Utah Code Title, I'm giving you a link to the section on abuse/neglect.

http://le.utah.gov/UtahCode/getCodeSection?code=78A-6-105

When you're done wading through that vortex, please let us know if your questions have been answered.

Edit: Here is a freebie:

(b) "Abuse" does not include:
(i) reasonable discipline or management of a child, including withholding privileges;

Well then why are you telling Eric to contact various gov't agencies if what he describes is not legal abuse? Just because laws don't recognize abuse does not mean abuse isn't there. This is why there are people working to change legislation. This is why it's good for Eric to write a book describing what he has experienced. It's good to have a web site where others can describe their experiences, where they can gather information amongst themselves, where parents thinking of sending their kids might gain a different perhaps more accurate perspective than what they can get from Westridge's web site. It's not up to you or I to determine whether Eric has a legal case, so I think you should refrain from that advice to him that he shouldn't see a lawyer. I'm guessing but if he had a case, I think what might factor into it, is that there was no independent process to determine whether in fact he should have been sent to a treatment facility in the first place. And it's questionable that any place which offers a one size fits all program knows what they are doing with regards to treatment and are effective.

But if it's useless for Eric to be complaining on behalf of others to state services, because what he views as abuse is not legally abusive then your advice to him to do just that has been for him to waste his time. So in actual fact he's doing the right things, by organizing and helping those who went to Westridge to communicate with one another, share their experiences, inform potential clients. And he's doing the right thing by writing a book

This is why I asked you what abuse do you think Eric should report to Gov't authorities, which you think they'd respond to and act upon.

[_marg]

This is how stinking NICE I am to you, marg.

Go here: http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/code/r277/r277-401.htm

Look under the first section on definitions. It gives the coded section to look for the definitions of abuse/neglect in Utah. Try to find where that section is located. I'd look for it myself but I can't right now.

Might I mention that I'm not getting paid for the consult here?

Jersey Girl I don't think the abuse occurs in the school. It is outside in the residential area, it is what they do mainly outside of school time. I doubt very much teachers see much abuse and I'm not just referring to what is considered legal abuse.

by the way in regards to the long post above in which you are responding to my question of what constitutes abuse..I think you later answered it that much of what goes on in behavioral modification programs would not constitute abuse legally. Fortunately there are people fighting to improve legislation in order to enable legal protection of rights of kids which is currently lacking.

[_GoodK]

Jersey Girl's background is in Early Childhood Education teaching.

Kindergarten teacher? Preschool? Yard duty? Lunch lady?

Might I mention that I'm not getting paid for the consult here?

Eric, I know that for whatever reason, you have your differences with Jersey Girl.

See above, Liz.

I will address a lot more in a post later on this week, I've been way too busy to even read this board, but let me say this:

I am not permitted to talk about the legal case against the Utah Boys Ranch. Some might have noticed that there is no mention of any lawsuit against the ranch on my website anymore, nor are posters on my message board allowed to speak about it.

One more thing; while it is very easy for me to ignore the nosy, not-so-smart, nobodies here, it's really hard for me to stomach some type of glorified babysitter pontificating about what I could be doing to prevent institutionalized, for-profit child abuse while I have singlehandedly, without a doubt, done more to prevent child abuse in the last six months than anyone participating on this board. Period.

For those of you yearning for a response from me regarding other topics -- it's coming soon.


All the best,

Eric

[_rcrocket]

GoodK wrote: Shortly after that incident, Professor Peterson and his weird, mean-spirited, attorney friend Robert Crockett began to antagonize me on this board with libelous, taunting, and defamatory statements for the public to see -- meant to specifically; one, silence me, two, discredit me, and three hurt me or make me mad.

I've gotten what can only be described as "bizarre" correspondences from Robert Dale Crockett, #105628, ever since.

Untrue. I challenge you to post anything I have ever sent you.

Both Daniel Peterson, a BYU Professor, and his attorney friend Bob have tried to leverage this outing and vague, thickly separated personal relationship - if you can even call it that - to substantiate false, and sometimes disgusting comments about me.

Untrue. I have never posted anything about you personally on this board except one thing. I know your dad and your family. I have claimed that you don't have a degree, but I based that upon the fact that you can't command the English language. If I am wrong, bring it to my attention and I'll recant about your degree. I don't know one way or the other.

On a thread on this message board, the self-proclaimed LDS bishop proceeded to claim possession of some "inside information" about my personal life, and then proceeded to defame my character and personal reputation with blatant lies.

Not me. Whatever inside information I have about you I have never shared. With anybody. Principally because I can't sort out truth from fact and so I leave it at not knowing anything.

But, GoodK, I just don't buy large parts of your story. I don't defend your Mormon Gulag and hope to stay the hell away from it. But, I found the posts about your family and their straits uncalled for and calculated to hurt them, since you obviously knew that hundreds of people had received the very email you were publicly posted. And since I was friends with your family, I felt that somebody had to stick up for your dad, your Mom and your poor sister.

I am not permitted to talk about the legal case against the Utah Boys Ranch. Some might have noticed that there is no mention of any lawsuit against the ranch on my website anymore, nor are posters on my message board allowed to speak about it.

This is kind of like walking into a store and trying to get a refund, and having the owner of the store pointing to a sign: "Management policy: No refunds." A self-imposed rule to add legitimacy to questionable conduct. If a lawyer is telling you this, it is so you don't trip yourself up in lies, and that is the only reason you are getting that advice. When I represent a plaintiff in a notorious public-interest case, we send out press releases and submit the plaintiffs to press interviews to get the word out, get regulators interested, and possibly get the jury pool educated. What you're doing is the exact opposite from somebody wanting to get the truth out and things done about it.

[_Rollo Tomasi]

And since I was friends with your family, I felt that somebody had to stick up for your dad, your Mom and your poor sister.

Butt out of another's personal family affairs, Bishop.