Westridge & Other Schools(Formerly LDS Perceptions thread)

[_marg]

Did you ever answer my question J.G. ..what abuse that he has described do you suggest he should report. Just answer that if you are interested in offering constructive suggestions. I'll look back at this later.

I provided a direct link to Utah state statutes that includes a lengthy list of definitions and conditions regarding child abuse and neglect, and highlighted the section on the withdrawal of privileges. Whatever other answers you need are listed there.

That's right recently a day or so ago you linked to that web site. But I'm asking you, based on your professional opinion to point out what abuses he's mentioned that you think he should report and you think something will be done about it.

Maybe J.G. his web site, his complaints, his protests outside the school, his organization of others who have had similar experiences, his desire to write a book critical of UBR... have little to do with what is legal.

[_Jersey Girl]

Make a numbered list of the alleged abuses and I'll reply to them.

[_Jersey Girl]

Here's an example of what he's doing wrong, marg, and if you want to help him, you'd be asking the same questions or posing the same challenges. You'd be picking apart everything he publishes to determine where the holes are and beating it to death like you do everything else.

This is from his website:

West Ridge Academy - or the Mormon Gulag - claims to be qualified to treat "males and females ages 9-17" with issues ranging from "Bi-Polar Disorder, Victims of Abuse and Neglect, Substance Abuse, Learning Disabilities, Bereavement," and more. Curiously missing from their marketing material is the wide range of "sexual issues" they are also willing to treat, especially homosexuality.

Even more interesting is their single treatment method for the wide variety of “issues” they treat, which is simply called the “program.”

Single treatment method called the "program"?

That's both inarticulate and inaccurate. The program, according to the website, is a holistic approach (psych, emotional, spiritual) that includes individual, group and FAMILY counseling on a WEEKLY basis. It also offers (I believe it was quartely) parent seminars. Go ahead, and access the website and read that for yourself.

His claim of a "single method" flies in the face of what the website claims as existing program components.

Does he have proof that a single method exists? Does he have proof that no individual, group and family counseling take place on a weekly basis? Parent seminars? Does he think that WEST RIDGE admin has proof of those things?

Of course they do.

He fails to take that into consideration when he makes his claims based on his past experiences. When he fails to take into account the fact that the facility has to compile documentation of the program, his claim itself falls flat on it's face.

[_marg]

Make a numbered list of the alleged abuses and I'll reply to them.

You are the one griping because he hasn't reported abuses. If you think he has some abuses he should report, then list them. I'm doubtful that the sorts of things he has described are illegal, so I'm doubtful it is of value to report anything. Perhaps for purposes of a paper trail and maybe down the line some lawyer can use that information. I've said this before the problem is the system which allows and doesn't protect a segment from dehumanization via private institutions which market themselves as treatment places. And in this case this institution is aligning itself with the LDS church, using it to add value to its product and seeking customers from that niche market.

[_marg]

Here's an example of what he's doing wrong, marg, and if you want to help him, you'd be asking the same questions or posing the same challenges. You'd be picking apart everything he publishes to determine where the holes are and beating it to death like you do everything else.

This is from his website:

West Ridge Academy - or the Mormon Gulag - claims to be qualified to treat "males and females ages 9-17" with issues ranging from "Bi-Polar Disorder, Victims of Abuse and Neglect, Substance Abuse, Learning Disabilities, Bereavement," and more. Curiously missing from their marketing material is the wide range of "sexual issues" they are also willing to treat, especially homosexuality.

Even more interesting is their single treatment method for the wide variety of “issues” they treat, which is simply called the “program.”

Single treatment method called the "program"?

That's both inarticulate and inaccurate.

That's too bad that he's just not articulate enough for you.

Look J.G. I haven't offered him advice on what he should do. If he has a lawyer at this point... I hope that lawyer is capable.

The program, according to the website, is a holistic approach (psych, emotional, spiritual) that includes individual, group and FAMILY counseling on a WEEKLY basis. It also offers (I believe it was quartely) parent seminars. Go ahead, and access the website and read that for yourself.

His claim of a "single method" flies in the face of what the website claims as existing program components.

How could his family be in on counseling weekly when they lived 2 states away..it's not likely. by the way I've read with these places private therapy is not provided for all, it's an extra charge if the parents choose it.

It seems to me the one program fits all, is the idea that everyone starts out with no privileges, treated inhumanely, with disrespect and somehow that's supposed to teach them good behaviors.

Does he have proof that a single method exists? Does he have proof that no individual, group and family counseling take place on a weekly basis? Parent seminars? Does he think that WEST RIDGE admin has proof of those things?

Of course they do.

He has already said Jersey Girl that some people are allowed out on weekends, that some people do have family group sessions. It's not relevant though to his situation and others that he observed, if he and they didn't.

He fails to take that into consideration when he makes his claims based on his past experiences. When he fails to take into account the fact that the facility has to compile documentation of the program, his claim itself falls flat on it's face.

I'll let his lawyer determine whether he has a case or not. What I would counsel him to do is speak with other in organizations such as cafety, with other lawyers who have had cases and are very familiar with this industry and have suggestions on what to look for in a lawyer.

[_Nomomo]

I had a little case insomnia Saturday night and read all posts on this subject on my BB in bed that night. Here is my take on this all, Take it or leave it:

Eric's been a complete frickin' fool! Period! Irregaurdless of his very just cause (Of which I support. having knowledge from the 70's Boys Ranch and their cruelties, chaining a freind of mine to a pool table every night before he escaped),

Eric has been a nonsensical ass. Eric hasn't yet learned that a just cause is not an excuse, nor a tool to stroke ones own frickin' ego as he has done.

He has placed himself and his own childish, brattish self far, far above his cause.

Furthermore he has acted the far bigger ass than his opponents (who were quite the asses themselves) in that he outdid them in assholeness (is that a word?)

And talk about stupid, unaware and unperceptive! Eric is a frickin' babe in the woods, rcrocket played him like a violin exactly as he stated, and Eric continued with his rediculous responses not even getting a clue he was being played to make himself look stupid. Must have been a kick for him to do that (rcrocket) to tell Eric he was playing him knowing that that Eric would not even grasp this and would only make Eric become an even more subservient instrument to make himself look the fool! Not saying Crocket was brilliant here, it was too easy.

rcrocket very easily and mildly provoked Eric into destroying his own possible case against DCP. (Which was already asininely stupid enough as it is)

Hey Eric, You are not more important than your cause ya dumb ass. Your actions hurt your cause! Has the light bulb began to flicker ever so dimly in your yet undeveloped embryonic brain yet?

Here's a little bit of advice for ya Eric, though I doubt you are interested, (I'd love to be proven wrong)

Tell your self centered bratty ass frickin' childish ego to get in the back seat and STFU, and if he behaves himself maybe he will get a turn to drive.

Quit outdoing your opponents in egotistical asinine behaviour! You proved yourself to be a far bigger ass than DCP or rcrocket. and nowhere near as smart.

Your cause has been severely damaged because of your gawdamned placing your bratty ass inner child above it in importance.

You've f'd up big time Eric. Time for you to learn something if you have the guts! (I am doubting this) Or just plug your fingers in your ears and keep being an idiot if you are not ready to progress a smidgen and put your cause first.

Tell your frickin' idiotic whining ass ego to get the f in the back seat, sit still and be quiet! Maybe then you may be able to do something for your cause.

Hey just an idea.

And just to be clear, I support your cause (The important one anyway), but not your asinine bratty, imature, childish, shelfish ego (the cause you have placed above all others)

Wake the F up Norwood!

Respectfuly yours, Nomomo

[_marg]

An umemphathetic person doesn't devote 23 years to serving others.

Devoting 23 years to serving others does not preclude you from being unempathetic. You have not experienced what he has. Look at how you react to criticism on this board, with being unable to just accept it. I can just imagine how well you would have faired in a place like that which would use humilation and lack of privileges to improve your behaviors.

by the way, try to control your narcissism and refrain from making this all about you. You've been critical of me in this thread, I don't go on about it.

Having said that, the spiritual component is clearly stated on the website. So long as the issue is minor children, parents have a right to make decisions on behalf of their child. What you see as "forcing religion on to individuals" is a parental choice.

And what have I said before? The legal rights of under 18 year olds is poor. Is your point that the way it is, is the way it should be? Because if so, I disagree with you.

You have no evidence of a one program fits all treatment plan.

I've looked into the issue and other beh. mod schools use a one program fits all. The fact that they inform parents to not listen to their child's complaint leads me to believe, they use a punishment system to control. It's not an automatic that most youth should complain.

You have no evidence that independent professionals are not involved in the intake process.

From my readings on the net these places don't make it a requirement and why should they? Now if you know differently, that it is a legal requirement don't' hold us in suspense. If it is not a legal requirement then it stands to reason youth will be admitted without independent prof. assessment because it's in the financial interest of the institution.

Infact, had you examined the website, you'd see that you are wrong.

That place can not be responsible for assessing the youth they accept. They have a vested interest in accepting for financial reasons.

Most any troubled child is going to be resistant to being admitted/enrolled to a residential program. Thus the heads up to parents.

That's one way of looking at if you wish.

Eric has presented the ranch in terms of present abuse. If he or someone else has evidence of present abuse, it needs to be reported.

You've been saying that, but you've given him no indication of what sort of abuse they should report. What you keep doing is downplaying that the treatment Eric has mentioned is abusive. You are very much like a bureaucrat, in that you come across with a response of 'this is the way it is and this is the way it should be and this is the way it's going to be...because parents, and private treatment places can do as they please with youth, as long as its not currently legislated against'. That's real helpful J.G.

I understand why you'd like me to make good on my statement regarding lack of interest in the thread, however, so long as you present yourself as under-informed, I'll probably be back here.

I never thought for a moment you would actually leave the thread as you said.

What you are doing on this thread, marg, isn't helping Eric.

I've not offered advice to him. I don't presume to know more than lawyers, I don't necessarily accept everything he says without some skepticism. I have though looked into the issue and know that his experiences are consistent with other private behavior modification places.

I'm not interested in being a devil's advocate or trying to prepare him for some court case, or in trying to find fault.

[_marg]

marg, do you see the post where I pointed out that it's an observation of hypocrisy on the part of a person who positions himself as a child advocate to devalue children and the people who work with them, impact their lives?

Whether you like it or not, that's useful feedback to him as to how he will be viewed if he plans to continue his quest. My calling his credibility into question is nothing compared to what he will encounter should he bring this to court or to the media at large.

It's not up to you to prepare him for court. If you wish to play devil's advocate go ahead.

If he has a viable case and does follow through with a suit of some kind, he needs to learn to be aware of the image he presents to the public, especially in relation to his views on children.

Here we go back to this. You know what he meant, that his remark was a retort to your accusations that he has done nothing. For this particular issue of teen abuse in residential treatment centers his point was that he's done more in action to prevent abuse there than you have. His remark had nothing to do with his views on children, but boy oh boy have you focused on his criticism of you. by the way that is a trait of narcissists, I looked into it...they are unable to take criticisms.

Do you see me or have you ever seen me on any message board devaluing children?

I realize in your mind this is all about you. Yes in this thread. When you argue that it's the right of parents to decide that their youth ..we're talking mainly ages between 14 - 18 should be subjected to intense religious indocrination of a particular faith. What about the respect to give to youth to choose for themselves.

It's not in my nature to do so and that's why I've worked so long in the field. I respect children, and anyone who knows me (even message board buddies) knows that valuing children is in my DNA.

Oh my gosh, this is NOT about YOU!

While you are here attempting to play to his ego, I and others have been consistently feeding him information on this and other threads since the day he brought up West Ridge.

Is it working for you?

I'm not here to soothe his ego, marg.

I know that you are here to soothe your own.

Soothing his ego is counterproductive to seeing through a successful claim. I and others are here to inform him and point out the inconsistencies in his presentation.

Right and you advised him to not see a lawyer, I recall.

You can dig out all the comparative links you want to on this, marg. There is no subsitute for education and experience and if you were more interested in him seeing through that successful claim or contributing to impacting legislation for youth than you were in appealing to his ego, you would be thanking those who have provided the information, provided the challenges and asked the hard questions.

Once again J.G. this isn't about you, I realize you want a pat on the back and to be admired, but so far I haven't seen you offer him much constructive advice. You've been critical of him not contacting gov't agencies, yet you've not identified what it is he should contact them about.

No one who wishes to succeed or to see another succeed, especially on behalf of minor children, overlooks the value of reliable resources.

Is this another pat on the back for yourself?

I'm not in this for ego, for Eric or for you. I'm in it for children.

Bull crap, in this discussion you are in it to garner admiration and praise and have been unable to accept criticism lightly.

Unfortunately, you haven't had much opportunity to see me post on these types of issues. What with topics such as Mormonism, evolution and all of those from all those years. Like it or not, this is a thread related to the area of my expertise and I won't miss a chance to inform.

LOL, you don't stop do you?

This is me, marg.

No you don't.

[_marg]

Because the government employees at Department of Human Services WORK with and ACT on the laws every day.

A legal complaint is needed in order to report and document alleged abuse and/or neglect. It creates a file.
The file is the basis for the case.

Without the report, the file doesn't exist.
Without the file, the case doesn't exist.
Without the case, the facility remains in operation.

And without all of the above, the legislation that you continue to bring up on the thread, remains unimpacted.

How many times do you plan to go in circles on this, marg? You've thrown your critical thinking skills clear out the window on this one.

You seem to be taking the position I've advised him to not report what he considers abuse. That's not the case. Ihaven't advised him at all, except recently to suggest seeking advice from other experienced lawyers, and other individuals who have had similar experiences and are working proactively. And I don't think reporting is the only thing to do, for the issue, for himself. I think a lawyer and/or some others who have had similar experiences and are involved in proactive organizations are the ones to seek advice on this.

[_marg]

marg, a day ago you didn't understand how exemption status is used.

What I didn't know was whether Utah has a similar exemption status to Montana for temp. residential treatment places and you didn't either.

I've supplied you (and Eric) with an explanation of exemption status,

I found and posted the link for exemption status for Utah and upon rereading it, have decided it doesn't appear they have the same exmeption rules as Montana.

I've given you links to Utah DHS to answer your questions as to what constitutes abuse in Utah.

That's good for Eric to know about.

I've connected the dots for you in my recent previous postings between the fact that Eric implies current abuse, a desire to see West Ridge "shut down", the importance of abuse reporting, and how all of this ties to your claims about the need for improved legislation, essentially, how each issue is dependent on the other.

I don't believe Eric has argued he's not going to report. I've been pushing in these last exchanges between you, Harm and Liz for all you guys to identify what you think is legal abuse and what you think he's experienced that he should report. It has taken a while to finally get some answers on this. It is what prompted you to find out what is consider legally abusive in utah.

Of course, I'm critical of his failure to report current abuse. He claims to have left messages with a "licensing supervisor" that haven't been answered.

Your approach is off putting. It lacks empathy. Look at how you word it.."I'm critical of his failure" It's not failure J.G. It's a matter of having the energy, motivation and knowing what to report.

If a person has information regarding current abuse, needs clarification on current abuse, would they sit and wait for returned messages from the very agency who has the answers, while current abuse is taking place?

It's not particular abuse against particular individuals, from Eric's experience it's the way the program is run. And he's in an information gathering stage, which is also important on how to go about this and what should be reported if anything.

Does that make sense to you, marg?

No, it doesn't. If one person doesn't return your messages, you go to the next, there's a licensing board listed on the Utah DHS website. You go there. And if you can't get your questions answered or your reports made through DHS channels, you call law enforcement.

You assume Eric to have strength, motivation and persistence, that he may not have given the trials and tribulations in his life. I'd prefer he didn't waste time and energy, emotionally and physically and so I think he should gather information at a pace he's comfortable at and get counsel from those who have been there, done it and know what the best approach is. While suggesting for him to report is a good suggestion, telling him he's a failure, attacking his integrity is counter productive.

But you don't position yourself as a champion of children's rights and remain content to wait for unreturned calls when you suspect that current abuse is taking place.

Why? Because children are potentially being harmed while you wait.

He can still be a champion of children's rights even if he waits for returned calls..and be on a different schedule than you insist is necessary. Sometimes waiting to do things and gathering information is better than moving fast and doing things ineffectively due to lacl of sufficent information. Getting counsel on what and how to report from those with experience takes time and energy. And I'm not saying just from you guys, I believe he's in contact with people in organizations and I think their counsel is good to get, as well as his lawyer.