Category: News and Views
Hi. The topic I’d like to start deals with something that’s been in the news, on The Ghastly Dr. Phil Show and in other places. I think the title of this topic should say it all, but of course, I’ll elaborate further. First though, I’ll give some social context in which I can frame this problem we’re facing.
We live in a society where we hate kids. We portray them on TV as careless self-absorbed children who can’t or won’t think of others, who are lazy and who don’t care about school, as well as being preoccupied with committing crimes. If it’s teen kids we show on TV shows, then they’re shown as teen boys who are always partying, always having sex with girls or anyone they can find as well as the same typical attitude about not caring about education. When we show girls who are teens on TV, they’re shown as sexually loose and having generally speaking, the same attitude as teen boys. This isn’t an accident. We want to see kids this way, at least most in our society do, for it allows us to have the attitude of: “Oh, thank god I wasn’t that bad, or thank god my child doesn’t act that way.”. We do this and thus, we confuse cynicism and how we’re made to feel with knowledge. So it is with these attitudes that the new trend has been created in recent years, but it goes back decades.
Have you ever heard of Cross Creek Academy, Tranquility Bay or Casa By The Sea? Maybe you have. Dr. Phil on his over-blown and smart-ass show has sent kids to some of these schools all while they’ve been facing allegations of abuse, neglect, torture and even cases in which kids sent to these places have died. This is known by some who are trying to put a stop to it, as “The Troubled Teen Industry” and it’s destroying the lives of kids.
The next posting which will deal with the history of this industry will be posted tomorrow.
I don't watch TV, so can't say on that.
But, kids are important to the health and welfare of society.
I’m one that has kids, and one that loves kids.
I tend to feel, people that dislike kids, or can’t stand them in the neighborhood, or these all adult communities are basically self-centered, or selfish.
You were once a kid, bad or good, so how can you grow up, then hate them?
I don’t understand it. It gets my goat.
Yeah, I definitely think it's sad and something has to be done about it.
I don’t personally know anyone who actually hates kids themselves. I know many who hate how certain kids of this generation act however. I don’t think it’s anything new, it’s just different given North American society’s shifting as a whole. It’s true kids are, at least as a majority, generally depicted in a more negative and careless light. But then you could really say the same thing about adults in the media too. Upstanding morality and responsibility is put on the sidelines at times in the media, as it is in daily life. I don’t watch much TV, so can’t comment to a great degree on this. maybe it just isn’t as interesting to watch responsible adults and kids? One thing I do know is – and here comes the cliché – children are, wait for it, the future. If we project disdain on them and don’t hold them to a higher standard, we’ll either perpetuate the problem, or leave them to figure it out themselves. And then where will society be? Then again, the older generations had a much different approach, and look where we are now? Either way, children – and adults for that matter to a different degree – are highly impressionable. It’s up to each of us in our daily lives to lead by example. Not to bring religion into this, but I think that’s one of the fundamental reasons for the Christian commandment to love one another as we would love each other. I think people forget a lot, that’s all.
I’m not saying we can’t let kids be kids, but we can’t excuse certain behaviors just because they are, either. I hate the phrase “boys will be boys”, because while it is true to a point, it also makes allowances for poor behavior at times if not looked at responsibly. A lot of parents will just let bad behavior slide, even when the child’s development should signify they really should know better. . Back a couple generations ago, - and I’m generalizing majorly here – lots of parents used physical punishment. They were very strict. Now it seems – and again, generalizing – that we’re sliding to the other extreme. We don’t want to damage kids with too much discipline. We don’t want to hold them back in school if they fail. So often – and this I do have experience in – I see kids, older and younger – acting up in front of their parents. The parent will just sit there and do nothing. I’m not saying beating kids should be brought back. But I do think children need to be taught the real ramifications of their actions with real consequences, both good and bad depending on their actions. And no, I’m not advocating smacking or spanking as a general rule of thumb. For the most part I agree that it’s the wrong approach. This is an area close to my heart right now, having a three year old myself. Even now I find myself trying to balance letting certain things slide, versus corrective action which will hopefully teach her not to do it again. She’s better than she used to be. Attribute that to our parenting styles, her just getting older, or wishful thinking, it’s going okay. Remember that the root world of discipline is disciple, which is essentially a student. For me, proper discipline isn’t about making something stop right now, but rather a process of creating family and societal standards and establishing boundaries, both for her to adhere to for others, and maintain within herself.
Feel free to point out all the holes in my thinking.
Hi Remy.
I’ll be discussing points based on your message at further length in tomorrow’s post, but I’ll just say quickly that the mainstream media isn’t always wrong in its depiction of kids as using drugs and other bad behaviors. What society has in mind to correct such behaviors is what’s terrifying, not the behaviors the children are exhibiting themselves. This isn’t obviously because under-age drinking, sex among kids or drug use among kids is a good, but because such things don’t occur in a vacuum. Personally, I believe that if two kids who are within their teen years have had proper instruction of sexual matters and they’re keeping it between the two of them in private, are using protection or other forms of caution and aren’t forcing one another to do things with which they don’t feel comfortable, then it’s none of society’s business whether or not the two kids are having sex. I realize that this is an almost radical statement to make, for it may sound to some like I’m saying that kids should just go have sex and that’s not what I’m saying. I’m not saying that, because that’s not the norm of what’s happening. Sex between two kids of similar teenage years is almost always depicted as one or both of them not really in any deep way understanding what they’re getting in to, and the media always says that they don’t understand as in, the kids don’t fully understand things about teenaged pregnancy, S.T.D.s and rushing in to something like sexual activity at such young ages.
The reality is though, that the media implies not any of those reasons as to why two consenting teenagers shouldn’t have sex, but they give the idea that kids emotionally and physically might not understand what they’re feeling and they might have problems afterwards and to that I say bullshit. When my boyfriend and I made love a few times back in our last few teen years, we knew damn well what we were feeling and there was no guilt afterwards. The point though, is that society focuses on the idea of kids being sexually active as being filthy and dirty as if they’re just fucking anyone they can find of their own age or of older age groups and here in is my point. Sexual acting out in kids usually has far more if not all to do with either lack of education of sexual matters when they become physically adjusted and emotionally adjusted to know about sex and or, to do with the consequences of having been sexually abused currently or in the past and add to that, an abusive homelife and lack of psychological counseling with which to deal with everything, then that’s far more the cause of why you get teens who are sexually acting out in unhealthy ways as well as drinking, drugs and back-talking parents.
Long story short, the whole problem with “The Troubled Teen Industry” is that it doesn’t address these issues and I have to wonder just how many parents when looking for help are really being honest about the goings-on in the home as to why their kids are acting out in the first place, for when you start talking to these kids at length, you find that they themselves and their unhealthy behaviors in so far as there are any aren’t the problem and that the whole structure of the family system is the root of the problem and the child though in sometimes unhealthy ways is doing only what anyone in that situation with hardly any healthy coping skills would do, which is to survive. So Finally, let’s also remember that some of these kids who are imprisoned in these places haven’t done anything destructive or hurtful either to themselves or to others, and that some of these reasons are because of nothing more than a few bad grades at school for which investigations as to how well they’re doing with learning might be necessary as well as the fact that some of them are imprisoned for nothing more than the fact that they’re gay.
Also Remy, you brought up the point that teaching kids happens over time and this is why I slam this group of prisons and torture camps as hard as I do, for they want easy answers and this only adds to our culture as a whole of a collective who wants easy answers for everything. This death machine wants one slap, one screaming session or one forced exercise of children to fix them and make them be perfect little children who will be “The Perfect Child” and we only have human history through which we can look to see how well the idea of a perfect human being be it adult or child turned out for societies of different countries.
So Remy, it’s not that I disagree with you by any means, I actually find myself agreeing with much if not all of what you say, but I want to suggest that you consider the idea in case you’ve thought that if this industry can be regulated by law that it might not have all these problems, and if you thought or do start to think that, I’ll say not to, for the horrors done to these kids of which I’m about to speak on this topic in the coming days are not stories of out-of-control adults in out-of-control centers that are a part of an otherwise loving and well-intentioned movement, no, this is the movement in all its horror, torture, abuse and death, death first of these kids’ minds and personalities, then of their physical bodies, either because they’re murdered in these places or they kill themselves either in these places or back at home, un able to deal with the trauma of what was done to them. So you’re right, children being taught respect and morals as well as ethics won’t come quickly and with a couple of quick instructions. It’s too bad that the rest of our society with a couple of exceptions doesn’t know or chooses not to know that.
James
Okay, here's today's segment of my posting on this topic.
The History in Short
It all technically began back with a group called “Synanon” which operated back in the 1960s and it’s aim was to get people off drugs and alcohol. They had adults in the group, but kids were also involved by virtue of the fact that they were the children of parents in the movement. Abuse, physical and psychological was the norm in this place until it was shut down in 1991, but by then it was too late and like the evil idea demons in Dostoyevsky’s novel “Demons”, the methods of abuse in the cult took on a life of their own and are now used in centers that claim to help so-called “Troubled Teens”.
What brought the industry truly to life was in the form of a book called “Tough Love” written by David and Phyllis York back in 1985 where they give the idea that it’s kids who cause the problems in our society and kids alone who do this. They push the idea that abuse against children, parental neglect and other forms of social deprivation against kids effects them in no way at all. This was a way to demonize kids and get neglectful parents off the hook, to say nothing of the fact that it also told parents who were at the end of their rope with an out of control kid what they wanted to hear thus opening the door for them to be easily manipulated by these torture centers. In short, the book pushed the idea that’s still popular today, which is that a kid, specifically a teenager, but it can be any age of kid, acts out and their bad or at least their non-conformist behavior whether it be harmless or harmful to themselves or others, only happens in a vacuum and that the children and the children alone are responsible and that they should be held to account and so The Bible of the child haters was born and society for children has never been the same since. Never before in this day and age do we live in a place more unsafe for someone to be a kid than in than here in America. Our attitudes towards kids with the exceptions of a few people who don’t act this way is this, that if you can’t get your kid to pay attention in school, then don’t see what the root of the problem is if any, just give them street drugs in disguise, in that they’re given by a doctor and label them with the fake disease of either A.D.D. or A.D.H.D.. Don’t like that your son or daughter is gay, then break them in one of these centers. Don’t like that your kid isn’t being the boy wonder genius in school you want him or her to be, then send them away and once they’re starved, beaten, made to role-play rape, exercise beyond what they can tolerate and are forced to be screamed at in group-therapy sessions by other kids, then that little Bastard will shape up, no problem. In the end, it’s about a culture awash and intoxicated by a love for easy answers and children are paying the price for this intellectual laziness.
I hate children. I find them annoying by and large, and i choose to avoid
them. I can think of no situation which is improved by the addition of a child. No
one, as far as I know, has ever hoped someone would bring a child to any
gathering I've been to.
For example, I went to a dinner theater a couple nights ago to see a rat pack
impersonation group and have a nice meal with some lively converation. All of
that happened. I cannot think of a single way in which any of those things
would have been improved by the addition of a tiny person. I doubt they would
have enjoyed the music, and if they had it wouldn't have effected me since you
couldn't hear anyone over the music, they wouldn't have enjoyed the food
because children do not have advanced and developed tastes in our country,
and they would not have been able to engage in our conversation about the
complexities of modernist literature because children have never read modernist
literature or given it any complex thought that would have increased the
enjoyment of the conversation. I invite you to correct me if you can think of a
way in which children would have bettered my evening.
adn that goes for all situations I can think of. I feel that children should not be
taken to certain restaurants. If you want to take your child out, take them to
Chili's, or TGI Fridays where they can have chicken strips, and its too loud for
them to interrupt anyone else's conversation anyway. Don't tkae them to a
steak house, or any table with table cloths, where the meal is meant to be
enjoyed over wine and conversation. Leave those for the people who don't have
children, or for you when you can get someone else to watch them until they're
old enough to behave and perhaps enjoy the food. Until them, fed them at
home. Its more appropriate.
Planes, though its somewhat unavoidable I know, are places where it is
incredibly annoying to be situated anywhere near a child. I think most of us who
have travled can attest to that.
So yes, hear is someone who genuinely hates children. Not saying I think they
should be wiped off the face of the earth, or kept out of my neighborhood, or
that I think I never was one. Just that I don't enjoy them in my company.
Okay, I thought I had posted a comment on this board, but it must not have taken, so let’s try this again, this goes to Cody as did the original.
Cody, in your post, you talk about how you hate kids and at least you admit it. As for what you said about how they don’t have the capacity with which they can enjoy the food and drink of which you speak, what the hell are you even talking about, why would anyone even want to give a kid wine or related stuff in the first place, and second, Modernist Literature, what does that even fucking mean? Of course I want kids to be educated, and especially about concerns we all have such as them being beaten, harmed or molested or whatever the case may be, but I wouldn’t think that educating them about child rape should be done in the form of having them at a very young age read the part in Dostoyevsky’s novel demons where Stavrogin rapes a 14-year-old girl the end result of which is her hanging herself a few days later. So if they shouldn’t have to be compelled to read that as they’re children and as such, they should be educated at the area at which they’re minds work at the time, so thus they should be able to have that care-free period of their lives as children and not be made to read something as epic as Dostoyevsky, much less whatever that thing was you talked about. God damn, what are you even talking about! Frankly, I’m just wondering if you’re just not an internet troll just trying to say shit to get things started rather than trying to learn and have a healthy exchange of ideas, so I guess only time will tell.
James
I find some kids extremely annoying for some of the reasons Cody gave, but I can't hate them for it.
And Cody, I've been thinking about the analogy you gave earlier - comparing me to a musical composition. It's interesting but there's something wrong with it: People aren't much like art. Art doesn't learn, think, converse or act. It doesn't *do* anything. It just is. A composition may be complex enough that I have to listen several times before I understand it, but it never changes. If I listen again after a year, I have no reason to ask it what's new it its world.
Do people really only think of one another as useless decorative objects? I sure don't think that way. Even if I meet a person who smells really nice they are still someone who thinks and says and does things. If my thinking is so unusual, why are we having discussions on here? You can't hear me at all. Boring, right? Also, certain people really seem to want to be around me, and I don't think their acting skills are such that they could fool me for years and years. I might bore the subset of humans who care about nothing but arrangements of photons, but that doesn't sound so bad. After all, what could such lower lifeforms possibly offer me? They're unlikely to contribute any interesting ideas.
Ok, I thought it was obvious, but let me explain. We, that is four people
including myself, were sitting at a table enjoying our meal. My date has a
degree in modernist literature, its literature written usually between the world
wars, loosely call it 1914 to 1945 though there is a lot of debate and even I
would disagree with that; but never mind that. We were discussing the amount
of accuracy books such as The Great Gatsby have of reflecting the society at the
time, since we were all history educated. We also discussed the reflections of
flapper culture, that is a culture of women in the 1920s, in the writings of
Fitzgerald Et Al. A child, who has never read the great gatsby, would have sat
there, gotten bored, probably started throwing a fit and wanted to leave. The
child could not have taken part in our conversation.
as for the meal, yes, I agree with you that you should not give your child
wine. I would continue to maintain that you shouldn't waste the thirty five
dollars it cost to buy a place at that table on your child, who could not have
possibly understood the subtle flavors in the pork tenderloin I had for dinner, or
the cod casino my date had. Children's pallats are not that developed. That's
why they like chicken strips, but don't usually like pan seared cornish game
hens.
So, had a child been present at the dinner date I described, they would have
been bored, not liked their food, wasted their parent's money in having them
buy a seat for them, not been able to add anything to the conversation we were
having, not enjoyed the music, and given my past experience with children,
probably would have thrown a fit of some sort out of pure boredom. That, in
turn, would have ruined both my night, my date's night, and their parent's
night.
I'm amazed you didn't understand that from my post. I would have thought it
was clear why a child is not appropriate in that setting.
Sorry, I meant to post that in the topic about blindness and image.
Voyager, lets keep that discussion on its respective board. That way we don't
confuse people. I'm sure someone has already looked back at my posts on here
to try to figure out what analogy you're talking about.
I said I was sorry. I'd delete and repost there if I could. Maybe you could answer my question over on that board.
Sorry, I think we posted at the same time there.
Okay Cody. Well, I can’t help you with all that, as to go down that rat hole would not only get us on to other topics, but would also further derail the thread than it already has gotten.
James
I do agree that children should be taken to specific places, because they won’t enjoy it at all.
I’d not go out, and take my child and expect him or her to behave in a setting like that.
If on a date with a person that has kids, we go to a kid friendly place.
But, to say you hate kids bothers me greatly.
Having a child actually does much for you, if you approach it in the correct fashion.
You continue your family, kids are enjoyable to experience things with, to play with, to teach, and to love.
Kids continue the society, grow up to invent, create.
The problem with sex and teens, is the parents being sexually backwards, and not knowing how to teach a child about sex, or not being willing, because they have problems with it themselves.
I was sexual as an early teen, and I don’t have kids all over the place, nor am I worse because of it.
I’d say it taught me to be a better sexual adult, gave me more responsible sexual habits.
Someone had to teach me this, and my parents never limited me to what I watched, read, or heard.
I passed that down to my own.
Same with drinking. I had bad, and good examples around as to how drinking could affect you, so I learned moderation.
If you hold something back, and make a big secret over it, kids are going to want to open that box and see what you’re enjoying.
I believe in opening the box, so they can see exactly what it is.
When I got to college, I had no desire to do the benging, and such things, because I was allowed to drink at home at the age of 18.
As a child, my parents, and other adults allowed me to taste things, so I already knew some about it.
What I learned was about fine booze in college, and how to enjoy it, not abuse it.
I had enough uncles and drunks as examples of what abuse did for you.
My parents would say, look at him, or her. They are drunks, and that is the kind of life a drunk has.
Not all kids will grow up to be responsible, but not all adults are responsible either.
Just because you become legally adult, doesn’t mean a thing.
To you that might be true Wayne. You might enjoy playing with children, and
teaching them things, so on and so forth. I don't. I find playing with children to
be a chore. Teaching them even more so. I'm just not built to have kids, and
I'm fine with that. Like I said, I'm not about to say we should stop having kids
or that we should kill them all. I'm not evil. I just don't like being around
children.
I respect that.
If you know it, don't have them.
But, when they are in there place try to understand they need your care, love, and support.
You once needed it from some adult that didn't like kids too, I'll bet.
Cody, I'm glad there's someone else who has my same feelings about kids. Nice to know I'm not the only person that does. Which then gets into our society's tendency to talk about how wonderful parents are for all the work they do. What makes them so wonderful? They chose to have kids, which then necessitates taking care of them, and basically giving up their lives for said kids. Why does someone deserve special respect and admiration for only living out the results of a choice they made? That one confuses me. OK, done now.
Oh absolutely. If I'm with my family, and my little cousins or someone who is a
child is there, I'm not going to completely shun them simply because I don't like
them. I'm not going to tell them to go away. I'll play with them, and talk to
them, even teach them things. But I don't enjoy doing it. I don't look forward to
seeing them. I look forward to seeing adults, children I see mostly as a
coincidental chore until they're old enough to actually engage in something.
I completely agree with you on that one SC. I see no reason to worship
parents the way we do. For example, there was a restaurant, I believe it was an
italian sort of place if memory serves, and it had an upscale kinda feel to it. The
owner, tired of cleaning up after children who just destroyed the atmosphere of
his restaurant, put up a no children allowed sign. People went nuts because they
felt it was discriminatory against families with children. I think it was perfectly
reasonable, and if I lived in the city where it took place, I'd happily give him my
custom.
I didn't understand kids very well even when I was one. Some of them make painful shrill noises or startle me by running way too close to me at top speed. I can't say I absolutely hate them, but I see no use in having them.
Wow, Dostoyevsky should be thrashing in his grave by now. Christ!
Obviously I just read the latest comments and I definitely agree with ForReal. So it’s now on to the next segment of my topic. That’s going to be the next post here in a moment.
I thought I'd have to break this up in to smaller posts, but I'll post the rest of this document in to the next posting rather than continue to break it up in to segments as I had been doing.
What We Mean by a Troubled Teen
Troubled Teens or the image of said teens can conjure up images of less than favorable teen boys and girls, but the typical images of this class of youths usually generates images of teens addicted to drugs, alcohol, having risky sex and back-talking their parents and some kids are sent away for these problems, but there’s more to it than that. Some kids looked at as “Troubled Teens” can and have been sent away for little more than a few bad grades and others, because they’re gay and mommy and daddy aren’t about to have any truck whatever with that sort of “Faggy” nonsense, so it’s off to the torture center for Junior.
How It Unfolds
If the parents aren’t able to, or choose not to drive their child to the center, then they can get a “Teen Escort Service” to do it. The company will drive to the family’s house usually between the hours of 2:00 and 4:00 A.M. in the morning and once the parents let them in, the men, for that’s usually who do the escorting, but it can sometimes be women who are involved, will walk in to the child’s room and wake them. The driver usually says: “You can go easy, or you can go hard. It’s up to you.”. Should the child resist, then violence is usually employed to bring them under control and the hand cuffs are placed on their wrists and they’re taken to the van. Once inside, they drive the child to the school, or if the school is states or a few countries away, then they drive to the airport and fly there.
It’s not an accident that the child is taken under the cover of darkness as if it was a person in Russia under Stalin’s control being taken to jail in the night. The escort service operates in this way, because the child is usually easier to control when barely awake so they won’t struggle as much.
The Money
The Escort Services run between $1000.00 to possibly $1500.00 and payment is expected up front right when the escorts arrive at the house. As for the schools themselves, they can cost as much as a college students tuition payments. Some schools charge as much as $8000.00 a month to keep kids there. Here in is the real root of why they exists. Given that we live in an age of “Unfettered Capitalism” where profit is more important than protecting the planet, the lives of people and the health and safety of children, this is a business which turns children be they kids or teens in to commodities and the business feeds off of them as hungrily as any tapeworm.
Why They Do It
For all their talk of wanting to better the lives of “Troubled Teens”, these places destroy the lives of these children. Many of the teens who are able to leave these places either because of the intervention of law enforcement or because they graduate and I use that word very loosely, report numerous situations of verbal, physical and sometimes even sexual abuse at the hands of fellow kids, but mainly by the adults there who are supposed to be protecting them. The kids are given only small amounts of food, usually small amounts of vegetables and similar portioned amounts, if they are even allowed to eat. Kids are also forced to exercise beyond what their bodies can tolerate as well as beaten, and in some centers, they’re forced to participate in group therapy sessions where the kids yell at an individual kid for something they did or were perceived to have done wrong. This is called in some schools euphemistically a “Haircut” and this is one aspect of the institutional abuse that survivors of these torture centers have the most emotional and psychological trauma that continues to plague them to this day. In the end though, these places do it because they are criminals who believe that because they have the ability with which to abuse, that this gives them the right to abuse.
These people who have externalized bad behavior or “Evil” for the sake of simplicity, now believe that all risky behaviors or ideas that make certain kids stay outside the mainstream are within only these “Bad Kids” and that if these kids would act like the rest of normally functioning society and like the kids in the programs who got with the program, then they’re worthy of acceptance and love. Those who do not, or who can not conform to the group are abused, beaten, cast out and even killed. This is what happens when utopian ideas are the foundation of any group be it “The Christian Right”, “The New Atheist Movement”, or “The Nazis”. These centers are filled with adults who are criminals, child abusers and in certain cases, child killers and there is nothing in the end when you cut through their utopian dogma that makes them worthy of respect or acceptance from anyone. For all their talk of love of kids and wanting to save unfortunate and lost kids going down a wrong path, they are just criminals who are morally depraved and we should treat them as such and keep the children of our society the hell out of these prisons.
Conclusion
I’ll have more postings on this horror in coming days and I hope to have this topic active for a long time so that people can be made aware of what’s happening to the youth of our country and of our society. So keep a lookout for more soon.
James
You failed to mention that most of these institutions are christian in nature,
but other than that I agree. There's a great, though horrifying, documentary
about this called Kidnapped for christ.
Oh good god, really?
That's it Cody, do their work for them. Of course they identify as Christian, but given that they're attempting to force these kids in to being the "Perfect Child", then they're resorting to evil acts through which to do this, and many others have done this throughout human history who were not Christian. Sorry Cody, I'm not Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins or Daniel Dennett. I don't believe nore do I accept that religion is enharrently bad. The problem isn't religion, the problem is utopian ideas and I'm horrified at what "The New Atheists" have done by making arguments like what you've just made, for in focusing on whether or not these places are Christian and if they make sure they go after the Christian-based centers, then that's only going to allow others to spring up who won't call themselves Christian-based but who will do the same beatings and other things to mold these kids.
This "They're all Christian" argument is no different than looking at a boy who's killed his parents and when a search of his room is done and all the "Death Metal" albums are found if any, then the focus is on that with implications and sometimes being said out-right that somehow that might have influenced him to blow away mom and dad, when upon closer investigation in some of these cases, it's found that the murder has far more to do with abuse he secretly suffered from these parents and having no one to whom he could turn, or felt like he could turn to, he snaps.
As a Metalhead myself, I listen to the most extreme stuff with a few exceptions and I don't find myself wanting to be rageful at anyone and to the ones I do rage at, it has far more to do with certain things, some of which I already described on other places on the site. Not only is blaming Death Metal implicitly or other wise along with blaming "The Troubled Teen Industry" on Christianity risking us taking the focus off of others who do this and who don't listen to Death Metal or who are not Christian, but it is in the end, intellectually lazy. So sorry, Sam Harris, oops, I mean Cody. These kids aren't victims of Christians, but of utopian ideas, neo-liberalism on which profits are generated for this industry and a society-whide demonization of the children among us. So keep doing for them their dirty work and provide those destractions on which others in the mainstream can focus so they can continue to operate by way of taking advantage of said distractions.
That would be all well and good, if these places didn't frequently come
straight out and say that they do these things because of their faith. Like the
man who tried to commit suicide in California a couple weeks ago because the
center he was sent to specifically said that only jesus could heal, so they took
him off his medications. He's now lucky to be alive. If they specifically say,
"we're doing this because of the bible", I see no reason not to take them at
their word. You can use the no-true-scotsman argument if you want to, but it'll
just make you look more cowardly rather than more intellectually honest.
I’m a parent and I agree, I'm not special because of it.
I chose it.
Bars, and some places are not kid friendly, so an eating establishment can choose to be that way too.
I have no problem with that.
The problem comes in when people want to ban kids from everything based on the fact they dislike them.
If you want a kid free zone, move to a retirement center, or something, but don’t tell me your neighbor, I need to control my heathens because they are outside playing bothering know one.
They aren’t on your lawn, they aren’t in your driveway, so get a life.
As to these centers, they are designed for parents that can’t deal with the messes they’ve raised.
Sure, some kids are going to be difficult, but sending them away to a correction center isn’t the way.
These centers are teaching there one brand of morality.
I guess if you agree with it, that is fine, but all kids don’t need to be trained in that mold.
It isn’t society’s fault, it is the parent’s bad judgment.
Just because a center claims they’ve got the best training doesn’t mean you need to believe it.
Just because someone claims kids are bad, doesn’t mean you need to be a sheep and follow that opinion.
“Woe to he who offends a child”
Fyodor Dostoyevsky
“The Brothers Karamazov”
In the troubled teen centers, it’s a death spiral. Even if these kids survive physically and come out of them, and even if some psychological counseling can help them regain parts of a normal life again, they may not be as they once were, or they may never get a chance to turn in to the people they could be. These places break them as we call it, but even that’s not correct, for what ultimately happens to them is much worse. If their bodies aren’t killed, then the parts of them which cannot be quantified in a lab, and you can define this any way you like whether it be spirit, soul or any other, is destroyed and in fact killed. Thus, they’re murdered spiritually.
In Dostoyevsky’s “The Brothers Karamazov, the priest to whom Alyocia turns for guidance gives a series of sermons as he sits in his last moments of life. In one entitled “On Prayer, Love and the Touching of Other Worlds”, he says of children: “Love children especially, for they are little angels who God sent to bring men’s hearts to tenderness.” He goes on to say: “Here you pass by a small child in anger and you might not have seen him, but he saw you, and this can easily have implanted a bad seed within him.”
Dostoyevsky understood the damage easily done to children that while not showing up immediately, then it could possibly later in life whether it be damage they do to themselves or to others. He understood the lies we tell ourselves about what children do and don’t see as well as what negatively effects children and what doesn’t.
Have we listened to his words? Have we bothered to take care not to offend children? My answer is no. It’s no, because we lecture kids about not having sex, and yet when they’re raped by either a close friend, family member or a stranger, we make excuses, blame them or yell at them never to talk about Uncle Jack like that ever again. We rage at them for the moments when they have sex, yet we have no problem of sexualizing them on various fictional shows by virtue of the fact that we have story lines in which they’re sexually active usually with emphasis on it being promiscuous and we look at them as being dirty. A parent who is being beaten by the spouse tells themselves that the child isn’t being hurt by any of it, because they’re not the one being beaten and they ignore, assuming they even understand the reality that children can be more effected by witnessing their parent being beaten by the other than any slap across the face the child might get from the abusive parent. All these attitudes have raised up the scaffolding of carelessness, apathy and lack of responsibility on which “The Troubled Teen Industry” has been built. We talk of regulations of these places with them having better government oversight, but because these places believe in doing virtually every and anything to turn these kids in to “The Perfect Child”, then regulations are not a viable option at all, for the system given the view points by which these adults within the centers guide their behavior is inherently dangerous right from the start, for it gives the inherent belief that children are broken, and inherently evil and that unless they do the things to them that they end up doing, then these kids will never become like them. Yet some of us plead with this system to not hurt children and we beg the government for regulations or if not regulations starting out, then for better regulations, as if the people in these centers are good but for a few bad instructors and this isn’t the truth, not remotely or closely. This is a lie, and it is a lie this system tells and tells beautifully. At what point do we destroy this system and get back to really being there for kids in the first place and teach them what to do and what not to do not so they can be “The Perfect Child” then that same adult, but so that they can have good skills and tools so they don’t get in to drugs, drinking or other risky behaviors, but we also in taking care of them as a community again, have to take the time to do the hard work that gets down to the root of why these kids that this system labels as “Troubled Teens” have the behaviors they’re exhibiting in the first place. So at what point do we do this and put this in place of “The Troubled Teen Industry”? Will it come after another kid dies for no reason when an adult kills him or her at one of these centers? Will it come when another girl is forced to role-play a lap dance or participate forcibly in group therapy sessions where she has her history of having been raped used against her? Will it come when another kid comes back and grows up to be rendered more or less insane with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder? When will the breaking point come where we destroy this system, because we see it for what it really is rather than feed in to the big lie that it’s a good system aside from a few bad apples. Abuse of children in any of the forms I listed are not necessities used for bringing children under control, they’re not just the way things have to be because of children being inherently evil or broken. These are lies used to justify the amoral and to justify rape, beatings, verbal abuse and murder of these children. Yet we write sappy letters to our congressmen as if they read them, begging them to properly regulate these organizations and use proper government oversight, as if these organizations are islands of goodness and love with a couple of bad people within them harming the kids. We beg them to help this industry come back to its good roots. The system isn’t coming back to its roots, because it’s already there. This industry isn’t the problem in the end. We are for the fact that we believe the lies, with a few exceptions.
This would be no different than saying that aside from a few evil members taking women as sex slaves and cutting off peoples’ heads, that Isis is a for the most part, good and caring group of people. This group is not inherently good, but for a few evil murderers and thugs within its ranks. So it’s time to take the teapot full of tea, the plates of butter cookies and throw those fuckers in the trash and not attempt to negotiate with people who clearly are wanting to do harm to our children, in the same way that we wouldn’t try to sit down and try to reach across the aisle to Isis.
James
Aye me, what I wouldn't give for a little button I could push that would
automatically donate jme's book collection to his local library until he can learn
to actively read, but that's a different subject.
I don't disagree with most of what you have to say here James. These places
are horrible and should be done away with. But I think the many people who,
though they struggle, overcome the damage done to them in these centers
would be rather offended at you calling them spiritually murdered. I'm
absolutely certain my atheistic friends who have been through similar
experiences would be furious with you for such a phrase. They view them as a
crucible, not as a murder chamber. But, I don't really expect you to understand
that either.
Thank you for posting Cody. Have a good evening.
I seriously never thought about these centers.
Seems they are a rich [persons way of dealing with kids they don't have the time to love, or try to raise.
For that reason, I don't think America's kid population is in danger of these centers.
Bad parenting, sure, but that's natural.
But then there's the other extreme as well. Parents who never tell their kids no, who tell them how unique they are and try to make everything fair for them. They teach them that if they yell and scream loud enough, they'll get their way. When these kids get out in to the real world and on their own, they have to wake up, and wake up pretty fast, if they're going to get anywhere. I don't remember for sure, since it's been years since I've heard it, but I think they called them the American Express Moms. These moms do everything for the kid, teaching them no responsibility, then when the kid turns 18, they're expected to go out and be a productive and thriving adult, even though they've never learned the skills that would help them to do so.
Just figured I'd bring the other extreme out here.
What Anthony touches upon in the last posting is a part of the point I’m making actually, in that this is why some of these kids act out as the reason for some of them being told they need these places. In other words, the family system is damaged either because there’s abuse confused with discipline, or the other extreme is happening where one parent gives no rules or structure to the life of the child and so they act out as a result of that. Whatever happens though, this doesn’t change the fact that utopian visions of these centers is never justified.
If children are to grow up with the rules, structure and well-balanced lives we claim we want them to have, it’s only going to come because we devise systems of teaching, ethics and morality for children to follow that’s grounded in the real and the possible. These people who run these prisons, blinded by their utopian visions, no longer know what it means to be in the real and the possible. They have externalized evil on to these kids and thus have taken on the attributes of these kids they claim to oppose in that they now follow no rules, except ones that they’ll believe will get them what they want.
While these places mostly cater to the rich, to believe that because of that, they’re not a threat is naive and dangerous, in that it’ll only aid in a false sense of security and while tricked by that way of thinking, these centers will continue to do what they do. It’s only by waking up and understanding that these places need to be stopped as well as understand that they’re a threat to everyone no matter the financial side, that we have a hope of attempting to stop them. Fortunately, there are some people, most of whom are survivors of these places who call for the complete ridding of these centers, as opposed to other people who’ve never been through this who call for governmental regulation of these places which continues the myth that aside from a few murderers and torturers, that these places are a good and that they’re truly there to help.
James
I agree they aren't harmless at all, but I do think there are bigger threats to
our society. That being said, I do think they should be illegal, but even then
they'd just be moved to countries where it isn't illegal, and the practice would
continue.
I do tend to shy away from anything which even suggests that there is such
thing as a perfect family, or that a family is even necessary. we need to get past
this antiquated way of thinking that family units are important, or even a thing.
People do just fine in all kinds of family and non-family environments. The 2.5
children and a white picket fence motif needs to die a quick and painless death
if you ask me.
James, what you’re describing sounds a whole lot like the residential schools aboriginals of Canada (and probably America?) attended several decades ago. As for the religious aspects of some of these centers, that’s like blaming all muslims for the Orlando shooting or 911. Muslims may have done it, but they are still a minority as far as the religion they represent is concerned. No difference here. People can be just as cruel and kind with or without any religion or lack-there-of. And I’ve spoken at excrutiating length on this matter many times. These centers sound sick, degrading and barbaric according to your stories. I admit to being ignorant about their existence in this modern country and age.
As for respecting parents because they’re parents, I have mixed feelings. You don’t deserve respect by default, just because you squirted child juice into a receptacle. Though I think women do get quite a bit more for carrying that little vampire for nine months, not to mention delivering him or her. In most cases, at least here in North America, children are a choice. You don’t want kids, you do your best to take preventative measures to avoid them. I’m not one of those people who consider people without children, or who have no desire to have children second class citizens. Heck, I was one of you once. That said, there’s a reason the cliché children are the future exists. We need them. Not saying we all need to have kids, but kids do need to be had. And believe it or not, having kids is a huge commitment. You’re basically taking responsibility for the creation, nurture and shaping of a life. You’re turning that squalling bloody sucking little alien lizard into a sophisticated, intelligent human being with feelings, emotions, wants, needs, likes and dislikes. You’ll constantly wonder what you can do better, did you do enough, and yes, sometimes, where did you go wrong. There’s no manual or straightforward set of instructions, and what literature does exist on the subject is subjective, because all children are different. Being a parent is the biggest trial and error job you will ever have. So yes, I think parents who are at least making the effort deserve respect, even admiration. Theirs is an important, and at many times, thankless job. I work full time, and my wife stays at home with our daughter. She does everything for Eliza, and it’s amazing to see our little girl grow and learn under my wife’s love, care and tutelage. I respect and admire her so very much for doing that. And no, I’m not saying parents who both work are bad parents. My mom worked, and she was still a great mom. This is just what works for our family. Does my daughter have a class A tantrum now and then? You better believe. It’s like a switch, fine, then fury, then fine again. She’s a little firecracker, and yes, it’s incredibly frustrating at times. But she’s also 2, and she’s getting better every day. Even now I can see her little caring, inquisitive and intelligent personality developing. And I love that she’s not a pushover. If she doesn’t like something, she’ll be vocal about it. That has disadvantages, but also advantages too.
As for kids in public places, sure, I can see the annoying factor. I wouldn’t take my child out to a fancy dinner for all sorts of reasons. She would indeed get bored, and would probably fuss after a while. But Cody, the situation you described is probably not one in which most parents would bring a child, at least not a young child. Heck, that situation isn’t one every adult would be comfortable either. I know I wouldn’t. As for other public places, yeah, some children make spectacles of themselves. But then, so do some adults. The really young kids especially are notorious for making a lot of noise, especially when they don’t get what they want. But articulation, acceptance of the rules and subtlety come in time, and at no pre-defined age. Sometimes my little one has a meltdown when she is told no, othertimes she says “oh, okay” and caries on. Just remember that screaming little bundles of energy, though annoying at times, are also just trying to figure things out, too. And so are their parents. If you think you’re frustrated by those kids making a scene, just think how mortified and frustrated some of those parents are. When kids act up, people stare and whisper about it, if they don’t make outright remarks to the parents. And if none of that happens, there’s still the worry parents have about what everyone else thinks about their parenting style. I personally think that’s one of the reasons parents get so frustrated in public, because they’re worried about what others think.
As for discipline, neither extreme is good. In fact I’d say extremes in anything aren’t’ good. As a parent, you need to know when to let things slide, and when to step in, and how. And again, there’s no manual. Sadly, some people take a very heavy handed approach and genuinely do more harm than good. And others are pushovers and let their kids get away with – sometimes – literal murder.
As for families being important, I believe very strongly they are. I believe that, whether you’re young or old, but especially young, you need to have people close to you you can count on, and have a close relationship with. In most cases, a family, a mother and a father – or yes, mother and mother, or father and father – should serve as that unit, along with whatever other extended family there may be around. Families are important, but they are never perfect, and they also come in many forms. But families have a responsibility to maintain one another, to support one another. And when that doesn’t happen, either out of neglect, selfishness or abuse, that’s when you have problems. I believe one should honor their parents, but parents also need to live in a way that is worthy of being honored. In other words, don’t be an abusive jackass and expect your children to go along with whatever you say. Personally I think some cultures take it too far. Dishonoring one’s family is an issue in many places. But I do maintain that family ties are indeed important, but it is one’s individual responsibility to not bend them too far.
I have nothing to add to this topic, except that that was a beautiful post, Remy. No kids here and no intentions to have them, but yeah, I couldn't agree more with all that.
Allow me to clarify. I am not saying that because these institutions are
christian that all christians are sending their children to centers like this. I'm
saying that these centers use the weapon of christianity to prey on the
unintelligent, the ignorant, the afraid, the weak, the defenseless and the cast-
aside. They use christianity as an in to parents who are already predisposed to
believe in a biblical solution. That's why this is a minority group. Most christians
are not like this and don't send their children to these places. That doesn't
change the fact that in these centers, the bible is the rule of law.
Fair enough, Cody. And a damn scary rule it can be in such hands.
Yes, nice post Remy.
When little ones are acting up and you can't get them to stop, you just need to leave the place.
I never felt it was fair to have the whole place deal with my childs bad behavior.
I'm sad to say Cody is right on this one. Certainly not all schools of this nature are Christian-based. They existed in different forms before the popularity of the Christian-based programs, and they will continue to exist, faith-based or secular, as long as parents pay for them.
But cody is correct that all too often, these so-called schools are faith-based. I can't and won't deny that. As a Christian, and as someone who is familiar with such programs, I am ashamed for my faith, and myself on a very personal level. I know the documentary Cody refers to. When I was young, dumb, naïve and indoctrinated, I interned for a semester with the organization in that documentary. Most of their program was done in Indiana, but the worst was done in the Dominican Republic, where it couldn't be overseen and regulated the way it could in the States. I spent two weeks at the campus in the DR, which is when I slowly started to realize the terrible state of affairs there. Unfortunately, I didn't speak out as much as I should have. Back then I was of the mind-set that I was an intern, there to learn, and these people had more experience than me. Of course, as I got older, gained more experience, more confidence, and more training in concepts such as trauma-informed care, I realize just how bad that organization and those like it are. Thankfully that organization got shut down in 2011, I believe, or 2012. Not so thankfully, another one like them acquired their property in the Dominican Republic, and continues their work, though they claim to be a separate entity. I don't buy it. I've done what I can to apologize to the students I worked with and others I know who have been harmed by such programs. I speak out where I can about them. That's the only thing I can do to try to make amends for the damage I helped to cause, even though I never intended to damage anyone. So, I wish I could say James post was exaggerated and melodramatic, or that Cody is wrong, but I can't, because I experienced it from the staff side.
Cody, I personally find your opinion of kids disturbing; I know others have them as well though; not having a go at you; I just find it sad and an opinion I'll never understand.
Afterall, we were all that age once.
Yes, we were all once many things. We all, at one point, picked our nose,
some of us ate it, that's not something I wish to be associated with now either.
Keep in mind, I'm not blaming children for this. its not their fault. They're just
too young to have had much experience in anything. But that doesn't mean I
have to like talking with them. Just like, rednecks are just people of a certain
lifestyle, not really their fault either, but I don't like associating with them either.
I find them to be a drag and unpleasant to be around. Why is that disturbing.
Surely there is someone you've been around that you haven't enjoyed.
If you aren't one of these adults that make kids lives difficult because you don't like them, I'll respect that wish.
If you are one that goes out of your way to be mean to kids, say things to them, complain about them, I say go live in a kids free zone, because you are damaging how they feel about adults.
Adults that don't like kids seem to think they have a license to act badly with them, and that is were it gets my goat.
I'd love to go live in a kids-free zone. I do my best to, and thankfully largely can, because the apartment complex where we live just happens to have almost no parents with young children. I don't deliberately go out of my way to mistreat or act badly with children, but I'd most definitely prefer to be around them as little as possible. At least when they're between the ages of about 2 and 10.
You could move to an adult building, or complex.
I believe you can do a search for these now.
Or I could just not interact with children. its not that hard. Its not like I hate
the fact that somewhere in my building there is a child, and one day I will hunt
it down and make an ovecoat from its skin or something. I don't care if kids
play outside, I'd prefer them to play outside. I don't mind if my neighbors have
kids. My neighbors right now have three or four of them. My care factor is
absolutely zero. Its interacting with kids that I don't like. So don't ask me to
babysit your toddler, because I will say no. don't ask me to be an elementary
school teacher, ain't gonna happen. if you want to go to dinner with me or
something, I'd prefer you left your kids with a sitter. If I invite you over to my
house, that invitation does not extend to your kids, more than likely anyway,
there are a few exceptions I can think of.
I simply don't like them Wayne, I don't want them driven from my existence
like they're plague rats or something. I'm not the trunchble.
hahaha love that movie. :)
I guess I just have to agree to disagree with the logic of that opinion that the minority have. All good.
Shadow_Cat.
In the past on these boards, and in public QN’s, you have spoken favorable about children.
You gave valid reasons why you don’t have any, but had spoken about wanting one and having to make that choice.
At one point, you spoke about the female instinct pull of wanting one.
What changed?
Maybe because of your spouse’s feeling or the medical reasons you’ve started to dislike them?
Just curious.
Wayne, it's my silly biological clock that wants them. LOL. I used not to believe women had those. Maybe some don't, but apparently I do, even if I didn't think so when I was younger. It gets louder as I get older, louder than I thought possible, especially now that I'm with Mark. My hormones tell me I want them. Every rational fiber of my mind and personality knows that I don't. Whenever those hormones start to get the better of me and I need a dose of reality, I go spend time around kids, usually my nieces and nephews, and get set straight within about two minutes. I love them, but spending time around them or any kids is the best mental/emotional birth control out there for me.
Thank you.
Smile.
I wonder, if that silly biological clock, nature would defeat your rashinalside if you had a baby?
Just think, you could turn in to a spit up on the sholder, sticky substance on your pants, poop under your manicure, patient, at peace during screaming, baby talking, loving momma!
Than what?
Laughing.
What I suddenly find fascinating is how we all know we were kids once, and the most of us probably want children, but some of us find out we really don’t want much to do with children. I knew from a relatively early age that I wasn’t parenting material. I’m not saying I didn’t enjoy being a child, but I also know how I could get as a child. I guess maybe I didn’t want to deal with it as an adult. And babies just never did it for me at all. I don’t find them ccute, sweet or interesting. I wonder if there’s some gene we don’t yet know about that causes some of us not to be child-centered or family-oriented in that way. If you ask me, the sad thing is not the fact that you don’t want much to do with children. Rather, it’s not recognizing in yourself that you don’t want them around and having them anyway. Frankly, my mother’s father was like that. Had six kids, and as fathers go, he was far from anyone’s dreamboat. One of my uncles recently reminisced that he never heard an I-love-you from the man’s mouth. My grandfather died when I was just short of 24. Six years later, when I lived in Manhattan, my mother, who was down for a visit for a few days, sat in my living-room and sadly remarked that she just couldn’t find it in herself to miss him. My father never got along with him, and used to say that my grandfather was so mean, he’d give himself rabies if he ever bit himself. And then there was a friend of mine in college who loudly proclaimed how much she wanted children, but then discovered after she had two of them that she couldn’t take it and one day split the blanket. Left her husband and two kids, no notice, never went back. It’s honestly refreshing to see people being as frank with themselves as they are about kids and their own limitations where kids are concerned. Maybe if more people were, some other people wouldn’t be so messed-up as adults.
Completely agreed with the last post.
My parents arguably should have never had me, because they were in no mental position to actually deal with bringing up kids.One was abusive, and the other was generally disinterested with us once we got past a particular age, aside from the few moments we all connected.
I knowing I don't like kids, can't relate to them, find nothing about pulls at my heart strings, etc, etc, etc would make a very bad parent. I think I could teach a kid well. But I know I'd have less than no interest in my child and would probably be very frustrated with them until they were past the making sticky messes stage, and by that point, you're not really in the best position to build a relationship with a child, anyway.
Considering that... The logical thing for me to do is to never have children, because them not bringing me joy would probably cause me to create an environment that they didn't/couldn't fully enjoy.
Yeah, I hate the prospect of having a kid. I hate dealing with them, but I also know its not their fault they're kids if that makes sense, but knowing this, why would I have a kid, based on societies expectations?
Agreed, Johndy. I've known ever since I was a teenager that I didn't want kids. I had my tubes tied at 22, something that most doctors wouldn't do. I got them to do it because there's such a high risk of me passing cancer on to a child. But if I had a dollar for every time I've taken crap for not wanting kids, I wouldn't have to look for work. I've been told I'm selfish for not wanting them. I heartily disagree. Better to know I don't, then to have one, and then be a lousy parent. I've been told I'd change my mind someday, and loud as that clock is, I still don't see that happening. I know for a fact I'm not parenting material. I'm too low on patience and too high on temper, and that's a very bad combo when it comes to kids. It's no exaggeration to say that not having them is actually protecting them from myself. I do love babies...when they're not mine. At about two years old though, till they're maybe pre-teen, I'd prefer not to be around them anymore than need be. I'm glad more people are starting to be honest when they know they don't want kids, and not give into the societal pressure to have them.
Yes, far better for both to not have kids if you just aren't the type.
You both suffer, and that's no good for a healthy upbringing.
When is this clock supposed to kick in? Because I've never, ever felt it. I've
known I didn't want kids since I was little, and so did my mom. I recently
became an aunt and I care very much about my brother's son, but I don't think
it's the same feeling as I've heard described here and in many other places. My
mom calls it "baby fever."
As far as getting tubes tied, I made the mistake of asking a doctor about that
once. The doctor treated me with such disrespect that I'm unlikely to ever ask
about it again.
voyager, I suggest you don't ask a doctor. If you know getting your tubes tied is what you wanna do, then it's your choice to do so. So, do your research (which you probably have already), then tell a doctor why it's in your best interest to go through with the procedure.
I've known I didn't want kids for years, and am one who has also had her tubes tied a few years ago. I've never regretted the decision, as many people in society tell me I would, nor have I changed my mind, as many people in society say I would. In fact, it's one of the best decisions I've ever made.
Maybe now that I'm a little older they'll listen to me, but I'm not sure of that.
None of the reasons I gave mattered to the doctor. The procedure had to be
reversible or they wouldn't even consider it.
Go to a planned parenthood center. They will listen.
But, you need a good reason.
You can also find a doctor that will agree, just keep looking.
It isn't illegal or anything.
I would really like to do research on this industry. I have watched documentaries on Tranquility Bay, Provo Canyon School, and the one in California that i cannot remember the name of currently. I have read heartbreaking survivor stories of Tranquility Bay inmates. I want to research the legality of these institutions, and why with all the legal issues parents can still be sucked into sending their children to them.
if you don't want kids, don't have them. Make sure your partner and you are on the same page though. Speaking as a father who never wanted kids, I can say in my own personal experience, your opinion really can change after the fact. I never really wanted kids, but now that she's here, I do love my daughter can't regret having her. Do I remember my life without her? You bet. it was great. But having her is great too in a different way.
What counts as a good reason?
Logan, they aren't illegal. The parents sign over legal rights do the facilities,
and since we still allow parents to beat their children, the facilities are allowed
to do it. For some reason we can't get it through our heads here in america that
hitting your kids is not a viable punishment for anything. The facilities also tell
the parents to expect their children to lie, so when the kids call and say "Mom,
they're starving and beating me", the parents will automatically think they're
lying.
Now, if a child dies, then they'll usually get shut down, but the owners will
usually just set up another school and do it all over again. And, if you look at
the voting record in congress, the people who have voted against making places
like this illegal are all right wing conservative christians. There is a
representative from California who has been trying to make them illegal for a
long time. If memory serves he introduces the bill about four times a year.
Voyager, Wayne gave you good advice: don't give up till you find a doctor who will tie your tubes. To add to that, don't let people, like Remy or anyone else, try to talk you out of something that seems like you know exactly what you want.
The major health issues I had in 2013 made me sit with the thought of "What if I'm holding a newborn and it falls out of my arms due to me having horrible leg/arm spasms?" I told the doctor I didn't wanna inflict even such a possibility on anyone, and he did the tubal ligation without question. He said he respected me for admitting that truth, and I'm glad I at least had his support in that decision, cause society doesn't very much like hearing there are people in the world who don't want the same things most people want.
So, stand firm in your decision Voyager, whatever it may be, and know that I'm here if you ever need an ear/have any other questions. I mean that.
I know about WASPS. They have had most of their "schools" shut down because of dying kids. Most of their schools though were outside of the United States. They do this because they get protection from the United States government, while they get the lack of laws of other countries. Many countries have outlawed these facilities.
Also after a specific age, I don't know it, doctors must do as you ask in this reguard anyway.
Find one that agrees, because you don't want a botched job, you want it done right.
Again, check planned parenthood.
Voyager, I'm not sure how old you are. My biological clock didn't kick in until I hit my 30's. But for some women, it simply never does. Not all women feel it. Some women, like me, feel it, but know it for what it is, and don't give into it. Other women start out thinking they don't want kids, get hit with the clock, and do change their minds. It's a totally individual thing, and no two women's experiences are the same. So, don't think that something is wrong with you if you never feel that biological urge. It just means you're one of, in my opinion, the fortunate ones who doesn't have it. Nothing wrong with that at all.
As for getting your tubes tied, you're right, many doctors are unwilling to do it on a young person. But try not to let one doctor being close-minded shut you down. All too often doctors forget that these are our bodies, and we have a right to the procedures that are best for us. Keep advocating for yourself with different doctors, and you will eventually find one who will listen to you. These guys are right though. What are your reasons for wanting them tied? What answer would you give to that question? I'm not saying you have to answer it here on a public board, but think about that. It's got to be something more than just, I don't want kids. Yes, a doctor should listen to just that answer, but usually they don't. In my case, it was that the risk of passing on cancer was far too high. I wasn't scared of having a child who was blind, but in my opinion it's an idiot who isn't scared of cancer. No way I was willing to pass that on to a child. That, and I live with bipolar disorder. I was not about to subject a little one to the anger and sometimes downright dangerous impulses I have toward children. That would most certainly not be in any child of mine's best interest. My doctor understood both of those things, respected my honesty, and had no problem doing the procedure.
Too many doctors get stupid when it comes to listening to a woman's desire not to reproduce though. I don't get it, but they do. Actually, maybe I do get it. They worry about lawsuits. If they tie a woman's tubes for example, and then ten years later she does change her mind, she may say something like that the doctor took advantage of her young age, when she didn't know any better, and sue them for doing the procedure. So maybe it does make sense. Hmm.
I'm with Chelsea. Having it done was the best decision I ever made. It's given me peace over the years, plus a barricade against being stupid when the hormones get loud enough to make me consider going against my better judgment. I'm very grateful it's hard to reverse.
As for the overseas schools for youth, I too would make them illegal if I could, especially having been witness to the destruction and terrible harm they cause.
I knew I always wanted kids, though I didn't dream it be this early. I kind of wanted to party through my early twenties.
Either way I've always had a fondness for kids. The issue with our society is that parents want to let their kids run them over. I can not stand when I'm at the doctors and the kids are all over me and my baby. They have germs and I feel so uncomfortable that I have to politely tell them to get away.
At one visit I had taken Mylina, these ki ds were jumping from chair to chair, and all the mother did was say stop. She also was concentrated on her phone, I know this because the way she sounded, like something was in her face, and a my friend that was with me confirmed this.
I'm big on spankings, I'd be damn if my little girl is going to be acting up in public like that. I don't give a shit what public opinion is on them. Kids need to be taught at an young age, and some parents just don't have the back bone to do it.
Also, to me there's a difference between a beating and a spanking.
I wouldn't full out fly off the handle with my daughter. But a good smack on the butt with my hand won't kill her, it'll set her straight. I also don't believe in spankings with stuff such as belts and what not. When my dad would spank me when I was younger, the belt yes taught me a lesson, but a lesson I could've learn just as well by my mother.
MY mom was more in our lives under the age of six, so she took care of the spankings, just rarely when my dad came home did the belt come into play.
After a few times we learned to behave quickly, because a pinch in public meant bad news at home. And who wants to go home and be punished when we can run around barefooted outside instead?
I know a woman who really wanted kids. She married a guy who didn't want kids. she said she knew he said he didn't want them, but that she knew that once they had kids, he would love them just as much as she did. So after a while, she went off her birth control and had a kid. The husband was furious, threatening to leave and the likes. She just waited it out, saying she knew it would blow over. When their second child was born, in the same way and he pitched another fit, I really didn't have sympathy for him this time. He should have known that if she deliberately set out to deceive him for her own personal satisfaction, that she'd most likely do it again. He could have insisted on condoms. Still, I do think she was pretty low for how she did it. Now, in a fit of rage, he could honestly tell those kids that he never wanted to be a father to begin with.
That happens more then I’m comfortable with.
Even in my personal life, I have seen women go off birth control and not tell the husband, or boyfriend until she has that wonderful news from the doctor or the pregnancy kit.
One girl claimed it was going to make her boyfriend grow up and stop being a child. Another figured it would make her man love her more, and that list goes on.
Even for someone like myself, that loves kids just fine, it is an extreme violation of trust for a woman to do that to someone before you agree to have kids.
I have heard the argument that we man are responsible for our sperm, and even the law says so if we can be found and attached to it.
I agree with that to a point, and that point is when you are trusting someone to be honest, and especially in this area.
That is when I disagree.
Women will say, if I am on the pill, or some other method, we can be more spontaneous, have more pleasure if they don’t like condoms. We agree on that, then she takes advantage of that trust.
A man can’t take her to court and say, we had a contract.
Even if her donates his sperm to a woman, if he’s not completely anonymous, or the records get breached some way, he is held to responsibility for the child.
It is absolutely unfair, but there it is.
I also agree my little one will behave in public.
Parents face that two sides sord, and that isn't fair either.
Ok, so that woman thinks her lover will grow up when the kid comes along. Is she willing to take on the responsibilities when he doesn't miraculously do so? And then these women wonder why there are so many loser deadbeat dads. She knows what he's like already, and still wants a kid with him.
Yes, and many complain the guy just isn't putting in his fatherly duties.
They never say they forced him. The law condones it too, so I always advise tie it up, and take it with you when you leave. Lol
Or flush it.
Never leave the condoms behind, boys. Just don't do it. Frankly, I'm glad I'm a snipped man; at my age and stage, the last thing I need is me making new ones. Grandkids eventually, that's one thing if that happens. But no more offspring. Lol
at least the FDA is finally making moves to ban the electro shock devices used at places like the Judge Rotenberg Educational Center. I'd heard about that institution from a close friend a few years back who had a friend who was forced to attend.
That place, and the people who run it are utterly fucked in the head.
Probably wouldn't google the name of that place unless you're ready for some hard reading.
That place is/has done some terrible things. i read a testimonial letter from a girl with high functioning autism who was in there, and had the device used on her. It was heartbreaking to read.
With all my issues medically, having kids would be just giving the state someone else to screw up. CPS is a joke. We worry about the centers for kids, foster homes are not that great, either. You get nice ones, and then the jerks come out, take the kids from the nice ones, so they get as much injury from being a "Ward Of The State," as they would at home. Heck! It took them 11 years, to free me, because I wasn't crying wolf like some kids do. They saw bruises, and didn't care. They let my mom flee the state with us.
If you want to get your tubes tied, I hate to say this, but show them where it benefits the insurance company, or saves money. That's what sells your case.
I was paralized by cramps for days because of Fibroids. I was told that the pain would decrease, without my uteris, and they didn't want to do it. I asked if the government should pay for E R visits because I was in severe pain? You'd be shocked how fast that doctor changed her mind.
I didn't want to hurt my kid, or fall while carrying in the womb, or any number of things that could go wrong, due to my medical conditions. And, after my wonderful experiences with Child Protective Diservices, I wouldn't put an innocent child through a hell they didn't need.
I have family with kids, and I see them a lot. My brother and his wife don't let the kids shriek and/or misbehave. They aren't mean to the kids, because they love them. They punish when it's necessary, not to "get them out of the way," like my stepdad would do, sometimes.
Besides, I can barely manage my own care. I couldn't care for a kid. I know this, and it isn't my fault. I am glad I had that surgery, and it's been 14 years.
God Bless,
Sarah
Let’s Send These Child Haters Packing!
The following is written with some of the introductory research taken from the article called “Prisoners of the apparatus” written by Quentin Davies.
The Judge Rotenberg Educational Center was formed back in 1971 originally named as “The Behavior Research Institute by Mathew Israel. Israel believed in the Behavior Modification Methods of the specialist B.F. Skinner who formed many of the ideas that became what we know today as “Behavior Modification”. Israel used abusive methods such as spanking, pinching and spraying kids in the face with water in order for them to cease whatever behavior he wanted stopped. It wasn’t long before in the 1980s, groups internationally and nationally such as disability rights groups began taking notice and calling for a shut-down of the center. I’ll give the more correct definitions of what was done to these kids and is still being done. I’ll give these terms not as The Mainstream Media gives them, but as they really are, but before that, I’ll explain how the center came to be called “The Judge Rotenberg Educational Center” which is in Canton, Massachusetts. It became known as such after judge Ernest Rotenberg ruled several times in its favor against it being shut down due to complaints from parents because of the instructors using electro-shocks and other painful stimuli as corrective measures to get kids to refrain from certain behaviors.
Over the years, the center has become known for using what’s called “The Apparatus” on kids who they claim were misbehaving. The device is placed in a backpack which the child or adult wears on their back and the wires are attached to their exposed skin. The first device that Israel began using was called “the Self-Injurious Behavior Inhibiting System” which administered up to 2.02 milliamps lasting for about 0.02 seconds. He eventually upgraded to a new device called “the Graduated Electronic Decelerator” which gave off 15.5 milliamps for about 2 seconds. He then upgraded once again to “the Graduated Electronic Decelerator” 4, which amped it up to 45.5 milliamps. It is this along with food deprivation and physical restraint that serve as the punishment system at the center.
Kids have died from this device and one case made the news big when in 2012, footage was made public of Andre McCollins being shocked and held down while said shocks were administered for between seven and eight hours. Instructors at the school claim that breaks were taken in between each session to make sure he could use the restroom and get a drink if he wanted it, but most evidence shows that little was done to secure his comfort and that he was given little more than torture, although as far as I’m concerned, even 2 seconds of this device is torture. So I’ll call all of this for what it is.
The Judge Rotenberg Educational Center is in practice, a torture center to torture kids who society chooses not to take the time to love, protect and give even a small attempt at education or compassion to.
Aversives: Shocks, beatings or any other methods of pain and injury inflicted on these kids for no reason and to torture these kids who’ve done nothing wrong and who did not choose the disabilities for which this torture chamber has been selected as their prison.
the Graduated Electronic Decelerator: A torture device used to shock, cause pain and burn through the skin of children for evil, demented and hateful adults who have no regard for the suffering and for the lives of kids that society has written off as flesh-and-blood trash.
Behavior Modification: Techniques used to terrorize behaviors out of men, women and children, but in this case used to terrorize children who are different than what society feels should be considered normal.
Finally, let’s call these instructors not as teachers or any of the other titles they’ve secured for themselves, but by the names they’ve earned for themselves based on their evil actions on the helpless. Let’s call them for what they really are which are, criminals, murderers and abusers who have chosen to torture and abuse the children and adults who they’re supposed to protect.
James
For once you posted something I totally agree with James. Though your first
sentence makes me a little mildly curious. Precisely which group of "child
haters" are you talking about there?
Okay I'm late to this thread but I would like to say something. I admit that when my wife and I are out at a nice place, I can't stand when some kid is screaming his or her head off. I don't hate the kid for it however. Why? Well usually the parent or parents are allowing the kid to be out of control. They let their little pecker head run around, scream, and cause a disturbance. So it is not bad kids that is the problem. It's bad parents. Indeed, bad parents create bad kids. And that, good people, is the heart of the issue. Do your job, be a parent!
I definitely agree with the latest poster.
Also, I was talking about the creeps at the school as being the child haters in this case, and that's the best title I could think of at the time for that piece.
Perhaps torturing scumbag could have cut it as well, LOL.
James
Ah, then I agree with you 100 percent. And I actualy agree that we should
blame the parents for screaming children. parents deserve a lot of the blame
too. But, I don't like kids much when they're behaved either.
Yeah, I extremely dislike children, but I'd never ever ever condone that kind of activity.
It is the reason I stated if I could get my child under control in a public setting, I leave and take them home.
In many cases with the Judge Rotenburg Center, the kid is a ward of the state. The parents have often times signed over their rights to the state, because they believe the center is the child's only hope. Also, the adults in this center are usually ones whose behavior is unmanageable in another facility. They have no family, and the people that previously cared for them feel as if they can't anymore for one reason or another.
I will look up the letter written by the autistic woman, and i will link it here for you all to read.
Here is the link. I warn you in advance you will definitely feel after reading this. It's heartbreaking and infuriating.
http://www.autistichoya.com/2013/01/judge-rotenberg-center-survivors-letter.html
The centers give the parents away out. They can't discipline their kid so they ship them off. So sad.
These employed animals deserve the same punishments that petofiles and child molesters receive in jail-- the absolute worst punishment and torture endured by a living thing. And the parents who send their children to these hell holes on Earth should be placed there for a week just to observe what happens without the option of leaving, unless they agree to leave with their child and never return to such a skum hole. That's what should happen, and of course it won't. I'll do some research when my stomach stops churning.
Posts 38, 71 and 83 said it better than I could hav. Parents ned to be fucking parents. They decided to have sex. They decided to bore a child whether or not they wanted to, whether or not they realized what it involves, whether or not they are lazy and selfish. Do your job and b a goddam parent so those of us who want some peace and quiet get that respect. If you can't say no to your 5-year-old and tell him aggressively to knock it off, you have no business bringing him out with you. I love kids, and I absolutely hate lazy, irresponsible parents.
I'm curious Cody, are you more okay with adolescents or is young adulthood your cut off?
Yes, I think, probably in the majority of cases, it's the parents we need to blame for not controlling their kids; I can't stand that.
One of the many examples I have is coming back from the U.K to Australia. It took over twelve hours to get to the first stopover and I had a child kicking the back of my seat the whole, entire, way. In their defence, I felt to say to say anything at the time but the child was constantly mucking around so you'd think the Mother, who was next to him/her would ask them to stop and behave.
So don't get me wrong; despite my earlier posts, I get fed up too.
And don't start me on schoolkids in my train carrige.
sorry, that was, "I felt too shy to say anything"
I agree, it's all on the parents.
I also blame CPS. If a parent or parents allow someone to, or abuse the children themselves, where's the people protecting the kids? I'll tell you where. Sitting in offices complaining about case loads. CPS was aware of abuse in my situation when I was 2 years old. I didn't escape till age 13. Anyone see a problem with that?
And, let's not forget that in my home state, they found a kid starved to permanent injury, by his mom and dad. And the 14-year-old that looked eight, because she was so badly cared for. Then there's the 4-year-old they sent home to her mom, who killed her.
Not even our government gives a rinky-dink damn about the kids it's supposed to protect. Half the reason I'm not able to walk far is because of the government leaving me with Mom and her husband.
I'm saying this, cause kids don't have any safe place to go. You got the centers shocking them repeatedly, or home, where Daddy diddles the daughters, and beats the boys, and Mom sits by worrying if the wife-beating, child-beating man she married is going to leave. I see so many cases of that kind of thing, just by living.
I enjoyed some of being a kid, but as an adult, it's nice to have somewhat of a decision. Still, I'd be better, if I'd been protected.
Now, it's just fighting the state. They kept me in a home where I was messed up, in many ways, and I have to fight for everything I need cause they left me there, for 11 years.
Sarah
Yes indeed they play a part but it still starts with the parents. If your going to squeeze a life form out of your girl hole you had better assume some responsibility. And the men need to step up as well.
Agreed.
My brother and his wife are so good with their kids. I was so pleased to here my Nephew say "Thank you." without being prompted. Just he knew. And if he's too loud, someone will say "Inside voices, please?" and snap, he's soft.
It can be done. And if a couple that's both visually impaired can raise two respectful kids, the sighteed folks don't a piddley excuse I'll even pay attention to.
It's nice to say that a kid is a "good boy," when you see him. I don't give society any room for reasons for kids acting out.
This friend I used to know, but who left the state was really good with her daughter, too. So, as I say, there's no reason kids can't be raised right, instead of tossed in what amounts to a kiddy prison.
God Bless,
Sarah
I don't understand why we give parents so much wiggle room and pats on the back when they don't deserve it.
Because, those of us with migraines can't stand when kids don't behave. So when parents take that time, I think it saves sanity. And since most parents are willing to spare the rod and spoil the child, i'm impressed when someone takes actual time to work with their kids, and not plant them in front of the tube all day long.
God Bless,
Sarah
I'm not saying parenting is easy but come on!
Most people as in parents don't care. It's nice to see some that do. I guess that's my view. When a kid feels comfortable, as my former neighbor's kid did, to tell his mom he did something stupid, and not be scared to hide it, and have one stupid thing lead to another, that's good parenting. Something youu just don't see enough of.
I gues my thoughts are see the positive parts. Yeah, there's parents that shouldn't be. Like the one telling her 3-year-old he's being unreasonable. At three, that didn't mean a thing to me.
Then there's the good parents that teach their kids words like Please, Thank You, and: "Don't pet guide dogs when they are working."
The positives are what I like.
God Bless,
Sarah