Hi Marg,
I owe you an apology for getting upset about the use of the term ‘behavior modification’ referring to involuntary youth boot camps. I got to work today, to find the paper I had been reading still on my screen. The journal I had been perusing was Behavior Modification – which my have primed me to be a bit sensitive to it on the weekend! (I was reading The Effectiveness of Intervention on the Behavior of Individuals With Autism: A Meta-Analysis Using Percentage of Data Points Exceeding the Median of Baseline Phase (PEM))
It is very clear these horrible camps have co-opted the name. I now feel quite confident in saying that if a residential program uses any combination of the terms ‘military academy or boot camp, and behaviour modification” it should be investigated thoroughly before sending children there. Major warning flags are a program cutting communications between parent and child, and a program telling parents not to trust or believe their child about abuse at the facility.
Interestingly, a new Westridge director of clinical services left after only about a year and set up this place(apparently with Westridge funding) which emphatically states that it is not behaviour modification, and has this set of principles:
• Students get what they need, not what they earn
• Nurturance is a right
• The change agent is relationships
• Alliance not compliance
• All interactions are therapeutic opportunities
• Changing Behavior from the inside out
Needless to say, their program does look like it is firmly grounded in (real) behaviour modification principles with some relationship therapy on top.
I did a search for boot, and bootcamp in the online Behaviour Modification journal database. Exactly one paper returned with the use of the term: Social Problem-Solving Skills Training for Incarcerated Offenders: A Treatment Manual. The paper summarised bootcamps in the introduction as being largely ineffective. so much for that.
Using the university database to look for bootcamp research, there is only research available on state-funded voluntary programs - usually adults. Much of this is on the web as well. None of these 'official' programs or reports turned up the word 'modification' on a search. So it looks like the term is self-applied by private outfits. The overall consensus from official research is that bootcamps may make offenders feel a bit better about themselves in the short to medium term, but have no overall effect on recidivism or re-offending. A while ago, I heard one good description of the results of bootcamp research: bootcamps produce stronger, faster, fitter, and better motivated criminals!
Anyway. It is discouraging that the term got co-opted. I know some behavior analysists come across people who have awful preconceptions about what their work involves, and have difficulty setting up a program, e.g. teaching life skills to a developmentally delayed child, because of prior biases by other teachers or parents. Misuse of the term is only going to make this situation worse.
Sidebar - Apology to Marg
-
_marg
Re: Sidebar - Apology to Marg
I didn’t know you were upset Danna, but if you mean you didn’t like the term being used by these teen residential programs I can understand that. But you don’t owe me an apology. I think we are on the same wave-length and I appreciate you’ve done quite a bit of research into this issue.
As you pointed out the Westridge web site raises flags that there is something terribly wrong with the way they operate. Warning parents that kids are going to complain and that they should ignore them, or not allowing communication for first month between parent and their child are obvious flags. In addition I noticed much too heavy an emphasis on God and religion on the web site, but for a religious parent it would probably be a selling feature, which Westridge is milking to their advantage. It wouldn't surprise me, if the majority of kids there are sent because they are defiant against the religious indocrination at home.
I took a look at the place you linked to and it seemed very good, but it still gets back to what sort of government regulations are in place to ensure kids get good care. But I agree with you, it seemed like it would be an excellent facility. The problem stems from an inadequate system of U.S. government regulations over private care teen programs. I don't know if the problem exists here in Canada.
Unfortunately though it's not criminals being sent to these places, it's teens with parents who can afford to send them and parents who are largely ignorant of what goes on.
I read on the Net that 3 places have closed recently, Tanquility Bay, Spring Creek Lodge and another one, possibly due to economic downturn. Perhaps Westridge will always have clients though because of its niche market, that is Mormon parents looking for a facility which promotes Mormonism. Mormons generally buy into the notion that following Mormonism equates to having good moral values, so they'd obviously feel more comfortable with a facility which ties itself to the LDS church.
Apparently one doesn't need to have behavioral issues to be accepted at Westridge, as an example, one can be deviantly anti religious and to a fanatically religious individual therefore perceived as a bad influence on other siblings and in need of behavior modification. A parent with a bit of money to burn, might think Westridge is an easy solution, and be ignorant of the incompetence and ineffectiveness of the program. I'm not saying this is the situation that occurred with Eric and parents, because I don't know what went on in their minds.
As you pointed out the Westridge web site raises flags that there is something terribly wrong with the way they operate. Warning parents that kids are going to complain and that they should ignore them, or not allowing communication for first month between parent and their child are obvious flags. In addition I noticed much too heavy an emphasis on God and religion on the web site, but for a religious parent it would probably be a selling feature, which Westridge is milking to their advantage. It wouldn't surprise me, if the majority of kids there are sent because they are defiant against the religious indocrination at home.
I took a look at the place you linked to and it seemed very good, but it still gets back to what sort of government regulations are in place to ensure kids get good care. But I agree with you, it seemed like it would be an excellent facility. The problem stems from an inadequate system of U.S. government regulations over private care teen programs. I don't know if the problem exists here in Canada.
while ago, I heard one good description of the results of bootcamp research: bootcamps produce stronger, faster, fitter, and better motivated criminals!
Unfortunately though it's not criminals being sent to these places, it's teens with parents who can afford to send them and parents who are largely ignorant of what goes on.
I read on the Net that 3 places have closed recently, Tanquility Bay, Spring Creek Lodge and another one, possibly due to economic downturn. Perhaps Westridge will always have clients though because of its niche market, that is Mormon parents looking for a facility which promotes Mormonism. Mormons generally buy into the notion that following Mormonism equates to having good moral values, so they'd obviously feel more comfortable with a facility which ties itself to the LDS church.
Apparently one doesn't need to have behavioral issues to be accepted at Westridge, as an example, one can be deviantly anti religious and to a fanatically religious individual therefore perceived as a bad influence on other siblings and in need of behavior modification. A parent with a bit of money to burn, might think Westridge is an easy solution, and be ignorant of the incompetence and ineffectiveness of the program. I'm not saying this is the situation that occurred with Eric and parents, because I don't know what went on in their minds.