The Troubled Teen Industry

[BlueSwan]

Sexual activity, in general, does two (2) things.  The first thing it does is create a bond.  The second thing it does is imply a promise; the promise of fidelity and commitment.  This is what it does, normally and naturally; this fact is the cause of the devastation that sexual trauma brings.

These are not facts at all. These are your norms and the norms of certain cultures. Infact, one could argue that the precise reason why many cultures have gone to great lengths to ensure the sexual "purity" of their young ones is because this is NOT the natural order at all. Sexual exclusivity is mostly a cultural phenomenon, there's nothing particularly natural about it.

Like most human activities the meaning of sex is not externally given, but depends on the context. Yes, in MANY situations sex creates an emotional bond, but it some situations it doesn't and an emotional bond might not be desired by either party.

What is often hard to convince religious people of is that sex is neither moral nor immoral. It has precisely nothing to do with morality, it is just an act between people that sometimes carries great emotional meaning and sometimes is just a fun activity between people who have little real interest in each other outside of the sexual act.

I have a very positive attitude towards sex. Infact, the only sex I regret is that which I did not have in my teenage years because I have always been incapable of flirting and got friend-zoned endlessly. My three children are not very old yet (from 7 to 12 years old), but I genuinely hope that they will have better sexlifes than I ever had devoid of any guilt when it comes to whatever desires they may have. I will teach them to protect themselves from STD's and pregnancy, but I certainly will never try to tell them to stay away from sex.

Denmark is very liberal when it comes to attitudes towards sex, yet we have very low teenage pregnancy rates and teenage birth rates are one fourth of what they are in the US. I have been a high school teacher for the last 12 years and so far there's has never been a pregnany teen at my high school - or if there was said person must have had an abortion.

[HillGoose]

Your way of thinking about "control" is not the way of a decent parent. Bluntly, when a kid "acts out", it's often, if not usually due to a terrible parent more into control then respect.

Somehow, I doubt you've ever been a parent.  Somehow, I suspect you're either in your late teens or early twenties.  Somehow, I suspect you've never been responsible for a child, other than babysitting..  I'm willing to stand corrected, but I don't think you get it.

"Control" regarding children and teenagers is not a dirty word.  It doesn't mean dictating every choice, but it DOES mean acting affirmatively when a teenager will not attend school,, will not behave in school, will not remain sober, will not remain sexually abstinent, will not obey laws, will not keep curfews, and will not refrain from behaviors harmful to themselves or others that parents become financially and legally responsible for.

The reason I acted out in school was because I had undiagnosed Autism Spectrum Disorder and Major Depression with Psychotic Features and my parents didn't allow me to see a psychiatrist until I DID act out in school. My parents were so afraid that social services would come and find the drugs they had in the house that they didn't care about any neuropsychiatric issues I may have had, even though I had been suicidal since I was about 10.

I DO NOT blame all my problems on them. However, the fact that I suffered since the beginning of my life with very horrible neuropsychiatric disorders that my parents refused to have treated influences my opinion of them or their priorities.

So do you ever think that MAYBE, the reason many of these children act out is because their parents are hiding something horrible that they don't want found so badly, that they would rather their child commit suicide than anyone find?

I wish I had known the drugs were in my parents house when I was a child, and told someone at school or the cops or something, so my parents would have got what they deserved for how they were treating me at the time.

That's over now, but still. Sometimes it is without a doubt the parents fault that their child is acting out.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Your way of thinking about "control" is not the way of a decent parent. Bluntly, when a kid "acts out", it's often, if not usually due to a terrible parent more into control then respect.

Somehow, I doubt you've ever been a parent.  Somehow, I suspect you're either in your late teens or early twenties.  Somehow, I suspect you've never been responsible for a child, other than babysitting..  I'm willing to stand corrected, but I don't think you get it.

"Control" regarding children and teenagers is not a dirty word.  It doesn't mean dictating every choice, but it DOES mean acting affirmatively when a teenager will not attend school,, will not behave in school, will not remain sober, will not remain sexually abstinent, will not obey laws, will not keep curfews, and will not refrain from behaviors harmful to themselves or others that parents become financially and legally responsible for.

The reason I acted out in school was because I had undiagnosed Autism Spectrum Disorder and Major Depression with Psychotic Features and my parents didn't allow me to see a psychiatrist until I DID act out in school. My parents were so afraid that social services would come and find the drugs they had in the house that they didn't care about any neuropsychiatric issues I may have had, even though I had been suicidal since I was about 10.

I DO NOT blame all my problems on them. However, the fact that I suffered since the beginning of my life with very horrible neuropsychiatric disorders that my parents refused to have treated influences my opinion of them or their priorities.

So do you ever think that MAYBE, the reason many of these children act out is because their parents are hiding something horrible that they don't want found so badly, that they would rather their child commit suicide than anyone find?

I wish I had known the drugs were in my parents house when I was a child, and told someone at school or the cops or something, so my parents would have got what they deserved for how they were treating me at the time.

That's over now, but still. Sometimes it is without a doubt the parents fault that their child is acting out.

I am in agreement with the highlighted parts.  Definitely. 

I have worked with folks who, while children or adolescents, were, prior to family counseling sessions, instructed not to tell about one or both parent's drinking, drug use, domestic violence, unreasonable corporal punishment, etc.  Yes, these parents are very much to blame.  The only reason many of these parents wouldn't want their kid committing suicide is the fact that such an event would trigger all sorts of investigations that might be ominous for them.

And, yes, diseases on the autism spectrum are often undiagnosed and misdiagnosed, although teenage drug usage complicates the diagnostic process. 

What I am saying is that on this issue, the pendulum with some folks is entirely in the other direction.  I'm saying that (A) it's not always parents' fault, and (B) even if it IS the fault of parents, the parents have a duty to act to take whatever measures they can to control their child's behavior, especially if it is unlawful, criminal, and/or injurious to themselves or others.  Yes, Mom and Dad may stink as human beings, but if the kid isn't in Foster Care or under protective supervision, they still have the responsibility to act, for the well-being of that child, and for the well-being of other children in the home.

[HillGoose]

Your way of thinking about "control" is not the way of a decent parent. Bluntly, when a kid "acts out", it's often, if not usually due to a terrible parent more into control then respect.

Somehow, I doubt you've ever been a parent.  Somehow, I suspect you're either in your late teens or early twenties.  Somehow, I suspect you've never been responsible for a child, other than babysitting..  I'm willing to stand corrected, but I don't think you get it.

"Control" regarding children and teenagers is not a dirty word.  It doesn't mean dictating every choice, but it DOES mean acting affirmatively when a teenager will not attend school,, will not behave in school, will not remain sober, will not remain sexually abstinent, will not obey laws, will not keep curfews, and will not refrain from behaviors harmful to themselves or others that parents become financially and legally responsible for.

The reason I acted out in school was because I had undiagnosed Autism Spectrum Disorder and Major Depression with Psychotic Features and my parents didn't allow me to see a psychiatrist until I DID act out in school. My parents were so afraid that social services would come and find the drugs they had in the house that they didn't care about any neuropsychiatric issues I may have had, even though I had been suicidal since I was about 10.

I DO NOT blame all my problems on them. However, the fact that I suffered since the beginning of my life with very horrible neuropsychiatric disorders that my parents refused to have treated influences my opinion of them or their priorities.

So do you ever think that MAYBE, the reason many of these children act out is because their parents are hiding something horrible that they don't want found so badly, that they would rather their child commit suicide than anyone find?

I wish I had known the drugs were in my parents house when I was a child, and told someone at school or the cops or something, so my parents would have got what they deserved for how they were treating me at the time.

That's over now, but still. Sometimes it is without a doubt the parents fault that their child is acting out.

I am in agreement with the highlighted parts.  Definitely. 

I have worked with folks who, while children or adolescents, were, prior to family counseling sessions, instructed not to tell about one or both parent's drinking, drug use, domestic violence, unreasonable corporal punishment, etc.  Yes, these parents are very much to blame.  The only reason many of these parents wouldn't want their kid committing suicide is the fact that such an event would trigger all sorts of investigations that might be ominous for them.

And, yes, diseases on the autism spectrum are often undiagnosed and misdiagnosed, although teenage drug usage complicates the diagnostic process. 

What I am saying is that on this issue, the pendulum with some folks is entirely in the other direction.  I'm saying that (A) it's not always parents' fault, and (B) even if it IS the fault of parents, the parents have a duty to act to take whatever measures they can to control their child's behavior, especially if it is unlawful, criminal, and/or injurious to themselves or others.  Yes, Mom and Dad may stink as human beings, but if the kid isn't in Foster Care or under protective supervision, they still have the responsibility to act, for the well-being of that child, and for the well-being of other children in the home.

Thank you for your explanation. The thing that bothered me was, I've never done drugs. Never even smoked weed and didn't drink alcohol until I was 21.

So it bothers me that I was the one people thought was "acting badly" when my parents were the ones making my life hell with drugs, I got that a lot as a child or teenager.

[pbrower2a]

I know a few people from my high school who went to these camps, and all of them were engaged in very high-risk behavior, had gotten suspended multiple times, got in fights, had an addiction to drugs/alcohol, etc.  I'd imagine statistics on this are hard to find, but I'd be surprised if the main reason people were sent there was because of their sexual orientation, and many times such a treatment option is the best of a list of bad options.  

Obviously, abuse of this system is terrible, but there are cases in which children are so physically violent or unruly that they simply cannot stay in their parents' home.  I don't get how the existence of these camps is controversial.  

It's controversial for the following reasons:

1.  Someone forced a teenager to do something they didn't want to do.  (Heavens to Mergatroid!)

It is normal for a teenager to test the limits of parental authority. That's part of being an adult. Anything else implies the existence of a treadition-0bound society that will eventually fail to adapt to changing realities and eventually face ruin for such.

It may be true that there are rules to be followed if society is not to be ripped apart -- this if I had kids that would be expectations that statutory laws will be obeyed, there will be no street drugs, tobacco, or underage drinking, that there will be a curfew and a limited range of driving a motor vehicle. Premarital sex is out of the question. If that is strict, then at least I can explain reasons for such.

But kids will still need to develop their knack for critical thinking, and if that should lead to disagreements with me, then so what? That's part of growing up -- developing a personality.
  

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Again, that may imply parental incompetence. Take a course from the junior college on child development, and you will understand much more about the complexity of parent-adolescent relationships and how to mitigate some of the difficulties.
  

You must be logged in to read this quote.

One can have a wholesome LGBT life. Such does not include drugs, alcoholism, criminality, personal violence, or substandard performance in schools.

Of course I have a hypothetical situation -- but if one had to choose between a son becoming gay or becoming a car thief, which would you choose?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Which may be necessary. Would liberals complain if the behavior modification is to divest a kid of racism or homophobia, both of which can be dangerous?

Offenders often have no lack of self esteem. I have sen plenty of instances in which people had to be broken down before they could go back to normal life.  With alcoholism, that may mean 'reaching bottom'.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Indeed. It may be necessary to take away the distractions (like electronic entertainments and other pleasureful activities) to force concentration on the personal mess.  

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That is a very bad teacher. I've been a sub and hope to be one again, but I would protect a student from a gang-up situation. ADHD is to be treated with kid gloves.  Maybe ADHD must be treated with some special attention.  

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I have reported my suspicion of child abuse. There was a sixth-grade child dressed like a whore, and clearly under-dressed for the time of the year. She seemed very dim-witted, which might not itself be a sign of abuse... but if I had a twelve-year-old daughter of limited intellectual development and likely moral discretion as well, she would be dressed in a way that exposes little flesh. I found out that a child had gotten the dubious opportunity to stay up to watch Letterman on TV every night and acted in class as if he was sleep-deprived.   I made a report of that for the principal. I might have gotten away with not reporting those incidents, but with good cause one gets away with such.  

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Ideally, prevention.

1.  Authoritative parenting  (not authoritarian, which is brutal) establishes clear rules that a parent can usually explain. College is good, and prison is bad. Drugs (and for children, alcohol might as well be a hard drug) degrade life. Problems must be resolved. Extremely harsh or extremely permissive parenting both get bad results, and alternations between permissiveness and brutality lead to really bad results.

2. Pay attention to what teachers say in parent-teacher meetings. The angel at home may be a monster in school. Good teachers have documentation.

3. Set high, but achievable objectives and reward kids for meeting those expectations. Childhood is a time for developing good habits. You do not have the excuse that you have better things to do than to go to an amusement park with your kids.

4. Get your kids involved in active organizations to push them in benign directions -- Scouting, Boys and Girls Clubs, the Y, 4-H, FFA, religious youth clubs... or get them heavily involved in creative activities. Kids do not generally want to be isolated loners.

5. Get your kids out of dysfunctional communities, if necessary. This may involve sacrifice of a career and living in a place of cultural staleness, but if it takes leaving your job as a software engineer in Silicon Valley to be an assistant manager in a store in a farming community, then the sacrifice could well be worth it -- if that is what it takes to lead your child away from delinquency or destructive behavior.  

6. If you have a problem, then get help. Don't do shady stuff like lying about your age to get a senior discount, cheating on parking, stiffing waiters, or violating traffic laws. Treat honorable behavior as an expected norm and anything less as a loathsome anomaly. Be monogamous.

If this is not enough, then your kid might need residential treatment.    

[darklordoftech]

The police and the court system are less likely to abuse your kids than the troubled teen industry is. In fact, there are stories of teenagers commiting crimes because they'd rather go to prison than to a troubled teen place.

[America Needs R'hllor]

The police and the court system are less likely to abuse your kids than the troubled teen industry is. In fact, there are stories of teenagers commiting crimes because they'd rather go to prison than to a troubled teen place.

Which is further argument for the complete nationalization and heavy regulation of this industry. I mean, come on, this is not the kind of thing to let the free market run.

[darklordoftech]

The police and the court system are less likely to abuse your kids than the troubled teen industry is. In fact, there are stories of teenagers commiting crimes because they'd rather go to prison than to a troubled teen place.

Which is further argument for the complete nationalization and heavy regulation of this industry. I mean, come on, this is not the kind of thing to let the free market run.

My opinion is that if it's gotten to the point that your kid needs to be sent to such a place, it should be the police that you call. There's a reason we have a legal system.

[afleitch]

Parents are responsible for their childrens' sexual behavior.  What that means, quite honestly, is that teenagers under 18 aren't supposed to be having sex.  Any kind of sex.  Period.  Parents are responsible to control the sexual acting out of their teenagers, period.  

WOW! This is crazy. Nothing good comes from having this attitude, and I mean NOTHING.

This. Children and teenagers are human beings, and when you treat them like objects and animals which are yours to control they generally won't appreciate it.
This is especially true about sexual issues. If you treat it as a matter of strict control and try to act forcefully, they just won't tell you things. As simple as that.
Also, a child isn't property, so parents shouldn't be allowed to send lgbt youths to these terrible places. Ban conversion therapy and any sort of "treatment" against homosexuality, and start nationalizing or at least heavily regulating this entire industry.

And before you ask- no. I have not been a parent, and this is why I said nothing about your parenting. I'm not in a position to judge. But as an lgbt youth, I think I do have some insight.

Children aren't property, no, and they are, indeed, autonomous human beings.  But PARENTS are legally responsible for everything their child does until they're 18 years old.  Think about that.

My sons, and any child I am legally responsible for, will be shown, from the Bible, God's standards for sexuality.  They will be taught that the Bible is the inerrant Word of God and it is their responsibility to conform to it.  They will also be taught that it is the responsibility of parents to conform to that standard.  That standard includes heterosexual activity.  I certainly believe that sexual activity is reserved by God for a man and woman who are married to each other; that's what the Bible says, and while you may adhere to different mores, don't tell me that Scripture says differently.  It doesn't.  This isn't an LGBT thing; it's a standard (A) set by God, and (B) reinforced by civil law. CHILDREN AREN'T SUPPOSED TO BE HAVING SEX, PERIOD!  Even 17 year olds.  That's a legal, as well as a moral issue; the law does not condone parents turning a blind eye toward their children's sexual acting out (even as they hand out condoms and birth control without parents' consent). 

That contradiction in law; handing out condoms and birth control pills to people who are, legally, not supposed to be having sex, is certainly one reason our young people are confused.  Think about it; the contradiction just hit my like a ton of bricks as I type this.

Another reason why a lot of young people are confused is because people like you demand that 'they will be taught that the Bible is the inerrant Word of God and it is their responsibility to conform to it.  They will also be taught that it is the responsibility of parents to conform to that standard. That standard includes heterosexual activity.'

So you're on the one hand railing against the sexualisation of teenagers, yet talk about the 'standard' of 'heterosexual activity.'

A lot of young teenagers know themselves. I knew I was gay when I was 10. It's people like you who make them doubt, hate and hide themselves.

[Fuzzy Bear]

The police and the court system are less likely to abuse your kids than the troubled teen industry is. In fact, there are stories of teenagers commiting crimes because they'd rather go to prison than to a troubled teen place.

Which is further argument for the complete nationalization and heavy regulation of this industry. I mean, come on, this is not the kind of thing to let the free market run.

That's a separate issue, and on that I might agree. 

[America Needs R'hllor]

The police and the court system are less likely to abuse your kids than the troubled teen industry is. In fact, there are stories of teenagers commiting crimes because they'd rather go to prison than to a troubled teen place.

Which is further argument for the complete nationalization and heavy regulation of this industry. I mean, come on, this is not the kind of thing to let the free market run.

That's a separate issue, and on that I might agree. 

Mayhaps. But would you agree, for example, that part of the regulations will be "no, your child isn't troubled because he's homosexual and we're not going to treat him for it because it's not a condition"?

[Fuzzy Bear]

The police and the court system are less likely to abuse your kids than the troubled teen industry is. In fact, there are stories of teenagers commiting crimes because they'd rather go to prison than to a troubled teen place.

Which is further argument for the complete nationalization and heavy regulation of this industry. I mean, come on, this is not the kind of thing to let the free market run.

That's a separate issue, and on that I might agree. 

Mayhaps. But would you agree, for example, that part of the regulations will be "no, your child isn't troubled because he's homosexual and we're not going to treat him for it because it's not a condition"?

I would agree that being gay, in and of itself, is not a reason for these sort of extreme behavioral measures.  If your kid "comes out" and says he/she is LGBT, that's not a reason for these programs, in and of themselves. 

I do thing that teens engaging in sexual activity is an at-risk behavior, however.  Teenagers aren't supposed to be having sex, period, and for good reason.  I stand by what I've said, and, quite frankly, I find all the arguments against that stance to be unconvincing. 

[America Needs R'hllor]

The police and the court system are less likely to abuse your kids than the troubled teen industry is. In fact, there are stories of teenagers commiting crimes because they'd rather go to prison than to a troubled teen place.

Which is further argument for the complete nationalization and heavy regulation of this industry. I mean, come on, this is not the kind of thing to let the free market run.

That's a separate issue, and on that I might agree. 

Mayhaps. But would you agree, for example, that part of the regulations will be "no, your child isn't troubled because he's homosexual and we're not going to treat him for it because it's not a condition"?

I would agree that being gay, in and of itself, is not a reason for these sort of extreme behavioral measures.  If your kid "comes out" and says he/she is LGBT, that's not a reason for these programs, in and of themselves. 

I do thing that teens engaging in sexual activity is an at-risk behavior, however.  Teenagers aren't supposed to be having sex, period, and for good reason.  I stand by what I've said, and, quite frankly, I find all the arguments against that stance to be unconvincing. 

So to clarify, you believe that sexual activity by teenagers warrants sending them to a Troubled Teens center?