Hi all, :)
Just checking in and reading. Still don’t see anything on here about a seminar here in BC (Vancouver) called Choices. :( Run by Thelma Box. I know it is in Texas too, and Calgary, Alberta.

As time goes by more and more of my BC natives are jumping on the Choices bandwagon. Choices has found a perfect enrollee. The money is certain. It seems advocates for Choices are first targeting Band’s Chiefs and Councilors. Once they have them, they have it made. The Band Leadership in most cases then uses band monies and sends as many band members as they can. Last I heard it cost $2500 a person to go. My band alone has spent over a quarter million dollars sending people.

It is so disheartening. What is so sad, is that our leadership are educated, smart, people. I don’t understand how, even after going back for months that they don’t start to see the truth. Our Chiefs are now sending Teens to a special “Teen Camp” some are going as young as 12 maybe younger I am not sure.

Has anybody out there had experiences with Choices?


Here are some links
Also in the msn group sites you will notice the majority of people posting (and in most photos) are BC Natives. Also in the Choices Website you will see BC Natives in the little window showing Thelma Box and other people.

This is the Choices Web site-
[www.choicesintl.com]

an msn group for people that attended Choices
[groups.msn.com]

another msn group for people that went through the program
[groups.msn.com]

actually this site has many pictures of people that went here is a link to a page that takes you through 242 pictures. There is a drop tab with 21 pages of pics. Mostly natives, it is plain to see.
Here is link to photos-
[groups.msn.com]

yet another msn group for people that went to Choices
[groups.msn.com]

another msn group for Choices but now it is locked- boo hoo
[groups.msn.com]


Thelma Boxes son’s page, I here they had some sort of break up, not a team anymore :cry:
[www.adventureseminars.com]

My sister went to Choices in summer 2002.

This year she had a break down of sorts. Job stress and personal problems.

She had to leave work for about 12 weeks. And she is now seeing a Therapist. Choices came up in Therapy. Later my sister expressed anxiety to me, worrying that maybe her therapist had done Choices and wasn't telling her.

This is not right.

Also when she was in her family docs office, Choices came up. Her doctor told her "oh yes I have heard of Choices, some of my patients (non-native) went and are going because they heard the Natives are all going!!!

Good Gawd!! There are inocent searching people out there that think its gotta be a good thing because the natives are going. They think it is spiritual and a healing thing.

I know there are many people that feel natives have an inside track on spirituality and they want to experience cultural awareness but trust me
it is not a "native thing". Not even close, no way, not ever!!

[groups.google.com]

for a psychotherapist to put loyalty to his or her religion or human potential group above the welfare of clients.

A therapist has to be capable of remaining objective in relation to belief systems and human potential groups. If you're a therapist, you're like the designated driver at a party. Your job is to stay sober and awake so you can safetly drive vulnerable people home. Therapists and health care professionals are also top dogs in power imbalances, so this carries an additional legal obligation to protect patients.

For these reasons it is unethical for a psychotherapist who is member of a human potential group or religion to recommend that group or belief to clients, or remain silently complicit if the group in question appears to be harming a client who is in that therapist's care.

*It can happen that a client may choose to join a group or spiritual society and find by accident that his or her therapist is also a member. If both client and therapist find they are members of the same spiritual society, church, or human potential group, the therapist is under strict obligations to protect the client, and to take a stand if there's evidence that the group is moving in an increasingly dysfunctional direction. The client's confidientiality also has to be protected. What client and therapist discuss in session must never be disclosed in the group.

A therapist who find himself/herself in such a situation should immediately discuss this with trusted colleagues, preferably those who do not have ties to the group and are capable of remaining objective. The therapist should document this carefully and get regular consultations with colleagues to ensure that boundaries are being protected.

And if it ever appears the client is being harmed or risks being harmed in a group that both therapist and client belong to, the therapist is obligated to defend the patient, even if it means risking disfavor or expulsion from the group.

The therapist has special obligations to protect clients if the persons running the group are NOT licensed mental health professionals, recruit indescriminately, use methods that do NOT meet current standards of care, and especially when the group in question charges fees for service and claims to be benefial to everyone. (No one method of treatment is uniformly effective for everyone.)

Client welfare has to come first, even if it means the therapist must defend the client by taking a stand and critiquing a group or spiritual leader the therapist is involved with.

In a conflict of loyalties, loyalty to the vulnerable person--the client--has to come before loyalty to the most powerful party--the leader or the group.

If a therapist is in a group and cannot imagine how the group could ever harm clients--that therapist is unfit to practice, because he or she is unconscious and in a state of regression in relation to group affiliations. One cannot apply professional ethics unless one is adult and conscious. If a therapist is in a state of childlike regressed loyalty to a guru or a group, that therapist is like a designated driver who is drunk--he or she is in a child's state of mind.

A therapist who is regressed has a blind spot in relation to the group or person he or she has childishly bonded with. That therapist can be quite insightful in all other areas, yet be in a state of diminished capacity in relation to a guru or human potential group. That person could get A pluses in ethics classes in clinical psych training, yet will be unable to see how ethical considerations or boundary issues remain pertinent in relation to one's guru or group, just as you cant apply your driving skills fully when drunk.

To repeat, if a therapist really cannot imagine how his or her human potential group or guru could ever in any way, be harmful, or ever become harmful--that person is regressed and in capable of protecting clients if ever there should be a conflict of loyalty between client welfare and the therapist's human potential group or guru.

A suprising number of therapists lack a fundamental grasp of boundaries and professional ethics--especially if they socialize in New Age venues that make the mistake of equating regression with spiritual aspiration.

corboy wrote:

"To repeat, if a therapist really cannot imagine how his or her human potential group or guru could ever in any way, be harmful, or ever become harmful--that person is regressed and in capable of protecting clients if ever there should be a conflict of loyalty between client welfare and the therapist's human potential group or guru."

" suprising number of therapists lack a fundamental grasp of boundaries and professional ethics--especially if they socialize in New Age venues that make the mistake of equating regression with spiritual aspiration."

Are you a mental health professional? Or are you just speaking from your experience as a patient?

Have you done scientific research on this topic or for that matter on anything?

Just curious. You speak so authoritatively about such a broad range of subjects.
Maybe you're omnicient.

John-Locke:

Let's not get nasty.

Corboy may just be reading articles and remembering the points they bring out on this subject.

See [www.culteducation.com]

And also [www.culteducation.com]

And [www.culteducation.com]

Lots of material there about court cases, judgements etc. that indicate that some unethical therapists don't understand "boundaries."

You don't have to be "omnicient" to know this.

John-Locke:
Can we assume that by you using the name of this 17th Centuary British Philosopher that you may value his thoughts:

[[color=blue:234a18e4f2]b]"It is one thing to show a man that he is in error, and another to put him in possession of truth." (John Locke: Essay Concerning Human Understanding, bk. IV, ch. 7, sec. 11.)[/b][/color:234a18e4f2]

I have noticed that your postings seem to pull down what others say without adding substance to the discussion. I'm sure we would like to hear your constructive thoughts :)

Oz

I agree on all that you posted corboy.

I have a Choices pamphlet that was being given out beginning of last year.
Inside the pamphlet are a bunch of quotes from various people recommending the program with their names and occupations.

This is one exactly as it is stated on the pamphlet (name of therapist omitted) -

“Choices provides participants with an opportunity to discover and define what they really want in life, and to address any issues that are holding them back. All my family, many friends and numerous clients have attended Choices. As a therapist, I highly recommend this program. ***** ********; Registered Clinical Counsellor [/color:080c241d23]

This Therapist/Counsellor's name also appears on little Information Meeting handouts and email from Choice's Newsletter saying- Support Group @ ***** ********'s office with a phone number.

How can these so-called proffesionals endorse and recommend this stuff?

The people that run the actual training sessions are volunteers or TAs. I heard somewhere that they are calling themselves something else now, not TAs.

These TAs or coaches or whatever they go by now are regular folk, some from around here have gone on to TA-ing after they have gone through all the trainings.

What I am thinking is- If a professional therapist or counsellor recomends this, can they somehow lose their licence or anything like that? Or at least be held liable? :?:

Quote
john-locke
Are you a mental health professional? Or are you just speaking from your experience as a patient?

So one may only be qualified to judge a professional's behavior if they themselves are associated with said profession? Well then, who would be qualified to judge anyone really? I guess we'll just fold up and let everyone do whatever they want without paying any consequences since we'd have to be in college so long working on multiples degrees and then have several jobs to be able to completely understand each others professional requirements.

Or in other words, neither I nor anyone else needs to be a professional or patient to be able to see bullsh** when we see it. Only thing needed is critical thinking.

this is a very important point.

I dont think the erring professional could lose his or her license. But they'd very likely be warned by whatever organization they're answerable to,and something might go in thier record. This can be a useful way to alert the regulatory agencies to what appears to be an unexamined bias in the profession.

If you write a letter, point out that the therapist is recommending a program run by non-professionals, a program that is for-profit and that uses powerful methods. Tell the authorities that this is a problem of 'dual relations', and that there's a desperate need to bring this matter up in mandatory continuing education courses for therapists. Give a list of the references cited in the psychotherapy cults thread.

[board.culteducation.com]

**Note: someone may try to distract you by saying 'Well lots of therapists belong to and encourage their clients to go to 12 step meetings. Whats the difference between that and recommending an LGAT?'

The two situations look similar but are quite different.

AA & other 12 step groups are non-professional but operate in a non-hierarchical manner. They also have an explicit code of ethics (12 traditions followed by everyone. Above all, 12 STep groups do not operate for profit, and its meetings run at most 1.5 to two hours.)

Usually a therapist is accountable to at least two entities: the organization that governs the ethics of their profession (eg county medical society if the person is a psychiatrist, American Psychological Association if they are a clinical psychologist, the National Association of Social Workers if the person is an LCSW, MSW, CSW) and then the consumer affairs board of the state they practice in, because thats the one that governs licensing.

Problems arise (or risks for problems) arise if therapists who are members of human potential groups or spiritual groups do not undertsand dual relationships and see no harm referring/recruiting clients into such groups.

Problem is, this kind of referral creates what is called a [b:52d7eba986]dual relationship[/b:52d7eba986]--a set up in which the professional 'prime directive' to put client welfare first is muddied by a competing loyalty to guru or group. Professional ethics for therapists requires making every effort to AVOID creating dual relationships.

(Its different when a client independantly joins a human potential group, not knowing his or her therapist is already a member and then finds out they're both in that group. If this happens, the therapist is obligated to safeguard the boundaries, which means discussing this matter with colleagues ((who ideally should NOT be also members of that same group!)) and to keep ongoing documentation. THe therapist should also have a session in which he or she spells out the boundaries and would tell the patient

'I am obligated to put your welfare ahead of the welfare of any other person, including this group or its leader. If you have any concerns, if someone says or does anything that troubles you, or tells you to keep anything a secret, please come and tell me.'

And it's a boundary violation to work as a therapist with friends and relatives when there are other therapists these friends and relatives can be referred to.

I advise that you write letters to the relevant agencies the therapist is answerable to and express your concerns. It will at least start a paper trail.

What we really need is for this problem to be addressed both in clinical programs but in mandatory continuing education coursework--for someone to say 'You cannot function as a therapist and advertise/recruit for your clients to join the same spiritual or growth groups you're involved with, no matter how much you're convinced you have benefitted.'

When you're somebody's therapist, that automatically (or should automatically!) preclude certain other kinds of relationships.