Quote
rrmoderator
fnkythspn:

Look at the first page of this thread.

Research by a clinical psychologist points out the inherent problems with LGATs (large group awareness training).

It seems like you are attempting to blame the victim, rather than acknowledge that these programs are potentially unsafe for anyone.

I have looked at the first page (and I presume here that you are referring to you 'own' post about the potential problems/challenges of LGATs) and I absolutely understand why there are concerns. At the same time I also acknowledge that there are likely many companies who take the same material that New Era uses and implements is dangerously and unethically.

I also have acknowledged that these programs can very well be unsafe for those who are not psychologically stable (including those who struggle with anxiety, depressive, psychotic, and most other diagnosable disorders).

My perspective is not that LGATs are completely safe and OK for whomever, but rather that New Era specifically (with it's two veteran trainers) is ethically sound and does its due diligence when selecting participants.
The ratio of participants who had a negative reaction to New Era's trainings compared to those who found nothing but positivity from their experience heavily weighs in favor of New Era.

I fail to see where my perspective blames the victim. If you care to explain further, I am open to it.

fnkythspn:

You said, "unsafe for those who are not psychologically stable," which essentially blame the victims by claiming insinuating that only those that are unstable will suffer negative consequences.

However, that is not the case.

Many people that fit no such description have suffered serious psychological and emotional damage according to research and reports through LGATs like New Era.

You attempt to limit negative results to one group, which is misleading and not fact based.

What actual accountability does New Era really have?

Are its trainers licensed and if so by whom?

Is the program accountable through a state board or what authority?

What are the educational and professional requirements for a trainer at New Era?

Are they mental health professionals and/or board certified counselors?

What recourse would participants have if they experienced negative results? Could they file a complaint with a licensing board or some accountability authority?

Are potential participants considering New Era ever asked to sign a release, which would in any way, shape or form limit the liability of New Era, if there was an injury and/or negative results?

rrmoderator, let me respond to your questions/comments one at a time:

Quote

You said, "unsafe for those who are not psychologically stable," which essentially blame the victims by claiming insinuating that only those that are unstable will suffer negative consequences.

However, that is not the case.

Many people that fit no such description have suffered serious psychological and emotional damage according to research and reports through LGATs like New Era.

I can understand how you see this particular statement as victim blaming. Let me clarify: those who are psychologically unstable are ill-advised to participate. This is the group most likely to have an adverse reaction to the trainings. Although it is possible that those without a history of psychological instability will react negatively, the chances of such are considerably less among those who are and have been psychologically healthy as a rule.
This statement of mine does not blame victims because I am not indicating that they, as participants, "ought to have known better", thus removing culpability from the training facility/directors/etc, but rather that New Era specifically takes this into account and should - assuming that all potential participants are honest in answering the questions on the registration form - partial out those who are more likely to have an adverse reaction to the trainings.
I want to be clear, once again, that I am ONLY referring to the work done by New Era and its trainers, not the LGAT 'community' at large because I most certainly understand the trouble that can arise without.
I believe that you are taking my position and extrapolating it unduly to account for all LGATs, even LGATs who use the same 'curriculum' as New Era, but that is not the case.

Quote

What actual accountability does New Era really have?

New Era has accountability financially. Those who go through the trainings and are unsatisfied can request their money back (save for a $50 registration fee). Refunds are issued without hassle. To be eligible for the refund, participants only need to be present through the end of the 5-day training.

Quote

Are its trainers licensed and if so by whom?
Is the program accountable through a state board or what authority?

New Era trainers are not held accountable to any state board because no such board exists for life coaches (a profession swiftly gaining legitimacy) and other psychologically-bound professions that do not fall under the narrow category of psychologist. Technically and legally, anyone can call themselves a counselor or therapist without any education or liscensure whatsoever. The only legally protected term is psychologist. In this way New Era trainers are not held accountable by any psychological institution.
They ARE, however, held accountable for their business practices. As with any other business, a negative experience can be utilized in civil and criminal courts as well as with the business licensure boards of the city in which the company conducts business.

Quote

What are the educational and professional requirements for a trainer at New Era?

To be a New Era trainer, essentially you have to be either Jim or Lynne. This is their company and they do the trainings. Both Jim and Lynne have more than 20 years of experience as trainers and are the most requested trainers in the business. To my knowledge, the requirements for becoming a trainer in general are varied, and I can only speak to the requirements for the trainers at New Era.

Quote

Are they mental health professionals and/or board certified counselors?

They are not, nor do they claim to be counselors, so they are not certified as such. Given the work they do, one may consider them mental health professionals, yes.

Quote

What recourse would participants have if they experienced negative results? Could they file a complaint with a licensing board or some accountability authority?

This seems to be a rephrasing of a previous question. Recourse ranges from request of refund to civil or criminal suits, which under the state statues of California regarding mental health harm can be extremely penalizing (and certainly some who take up such cases are rightfully successful). New Era (nor it's previous inceptions of iImpact and Accelerate) has not experienced a lawsuit of any kind; no one to my knowledge has seen fit to demand such repercussions. Complaints may also be filed by the Better Business Bureau.
Once again, New Era is as responsible for its actions as any other business.
The trainers and staff take their jobs very seriously; they know that not everyone is suited for such a training and do everything they can to ensure that they do no harm.

Quote

Are potential participants considering New Era ever asked to sign a release, which would in any way, shape or form limit the liability of New Era, if there was an injury and/or negative results?

Potential participants are asked to fill out the form that can be found through this URL:
[neweratrainings.com]
This is a questionnaire that asks about current and past mental health problems and cautions people to review their own psychological well-being. Anyone participating in therapy is recommended to NOT take the course, but if they feel that they are capable of doing so anyhow are asked to obtain release from their treating therapist.
This, and the registration form (which is little more than "I agree to pay this amount via this method") are all the paperwork signed by a participant. Neither of these release New Era from responsibility.
The only disclaimers on the form are reiterations that these trainings are NOT for people who was to deal with issues of drug and alcohol abuse, sexual abuse, and etc. Reading the form makes it very clear that New Era is not designed for those with severe psychological difficulties.

fnkythspn:

What education have Jim or Lynne completed?

What are their qualifications to conduct such trainings?

The following provides all of the information I have readily available to me:
[neweratrainings.com]

Any more questions?

OK.

So per the Web site Jim is a former high school coach with a BA degree.

Lynn has a sales background and no college degree is cited at all.

Neither are qualified as counselors, mental health professionals, etc.

In my opinion, based upon the bad track record of LGATs generally, those interested in resolving personal or professional problems would be better served through more credible, mainstream and accountable alternatives.

This might include seeing a clinical psychologist, marriage and family licensed therapist, participating in a support group facilitated by a board certified professional, or improving work skills through continuing education at a local college or university.

LGATs are potentially unsafe and most often run by people with little or no meaningful qualifications to address serious personal problems. They are not board certified, licensed or really accountable to anyone.

Professional, licensed counselors are accountable and therefore less of a risk. You can rely upon educational requirements to receive a license and accountability to a licensing board or state board if they do something wrong.

Talking over your problems with old trusted friend, family member or clergyperson, would also be a safer alternative.

The trainings are not designed to "solve problems." I agree - if someone has a specific "problem" that he/she wants resolved, a focused, specific group or counseling setting is advisable.

The New Era trainings are designed for people whose lives are working and want to take it to the next level.

That is the key point it seems that you, personally, are missing.
Someone who has a focused problem should address it as such.

The trainings are designed for people whose lives are going well, but they want to make it outstanding. Personally, I was an A-student who participated in volunteer programs, had a job, was involved in sports and arts programs, was generally responsible, and maintained good relationships. Because of these reasons, I was a good candidate - despite my youth.

I did not solve any "problems" in the trainings, but was able to clear my path to a better life; I will reiterate that I don't necessarily think that I would not be where I am without the trainings, but I KNOW I would not have been able to handle life's curve balls as well as I have without it. Between when I completed the trainings and now, I have experienced various unfortunate events and the skills and tools I garnered during the trainings have fortified me in countless ways.

I was, have been, and will continue to be a supporter of New Era, but as a psychologist-in-training I believe that an implementation of legal regulations on these companies and trainings is advisable due to the inherent risks for those without strong, stable egos. Fortunately for the Bay Area, New Era is a 100% ethical company, but all companies providing this training should be required to hold the same standards.
Additionally, an implementation of legal regulations would provide legitimacy to the work, giving more people an opportunity to participate without concern.

fnkythspn:

"Take it to the next level"?

Whatever that means.

People that want to take it to the next level can more safely and credibly opt for continuing education, to acquire a degree, additional professional skills etc.

There are business and management courses etc.

An LGAT run by a former high school coach doesn't seem that credible.

You are a diehard supporter of "New Era" though, which is plain to see from your posts here.

"Life's curve balls"?

Sounds like high school coaching talk and a euphemism for personal issues better discussed with family, old friends or a professional licensed counselor, that specifically focuses on that genre of problems, such as marriage, family, career counseling etc.

"Take it to the next level" can mean a variety of things including: developing deeper relationships with family and friends, creating more self-esteem/confidence, participating more fully in the world community (through volunteering, political involvement, etc.), realizing one's life goals, overall being happier, and managing life's little stressors with more grace, agility, and enjoyment.

These things are not accomplished by learning about the new sales technique in a business course. You cannot find that kind of passion for life in an economics course. These trainings teach you about personhood, not business management.

Remember, Jim is not just a former high school coach, he holds a degree along with his 20+ years of experience.

I am a supporter of New Era (duh) but I have demonstrated a capability to think clearly and objectively. I am not an illogical person, nor am I Pollyanna. It is clear from your perspective that you are die-hard anti-LGAT, acknowledging nothing positive about them whatsoever. So what? From my understanding, it is your job to present that view -- no one is paying me in ANY way.

"Life's curve balls" refers to things like experiencing the death of someone close, being a victim of an assault, having one's car stolen, and overall encountering various unfortunate and unforeseen events that are stressful. These can be described as "personal issues," but that term (personal issues) is mostly associated with the idea of something that comes from within and not from without (victim blaming?).
Hypothetically: if my mother dies, I can handle it poorly or well (well meaning that I spend time, grieve, and feel the pain but am able to manage my life so that it does not fall apart while I am dealing with the difficulties associated with the death of a parent). As a graduate of the trainings, I am better-equipped to handle the situation well. I can experience the emotions and psychologically manage myself, but also find a way to take care of my job, my family, and all of the extenuations. I am more centered and more clear. It means I do not require special professional counseling and know how to best use the resources at my disposal.
[[Note: I do not go to the trainings to deal with this; this is what I can do having already been through them.]]

These are not things you learn in a regular classroom. These are the things one learns how to do through the trainings.
This makes your suggestions irrelevant.

I am speaking from personal experience. I have been through it. I have seen what it can do.

You voice concerns, and understandably so. Recall, however, that personal human development has been controversial for centuries and, in many cultures today, the simple seeking out of professional psychological aid is seen as a vehemently negative action.

While this is ostensibly your job to maintain and pull the party line in response to posts like mine, I (as you may recall) am a graduate student who volunteers, works, and makes enough time to maintain exceptional relationships with people in my life.
I will refrain from a post-to-post response at this time, unless I feel that a new and worthy argument is made.

I appreciate your candor, but I would recommend that you honestly examine your motives and knowledge.

fnkythspn:

Now you have raised some very serious concerns about "New Era."

You say New Era helps people in "developing deeper relationships with family and friends, creating more self-esteem/confidence."

However, Jim's BA and high school coaching experience does not specifically qualify him professionally to provide such counseling.

Also, an LGAT is no replacement, nor the equivalent, of individual counseling that can provide focused individual attention addressing such issues through a trained, credentialed professional counselor.

The only substitute for such expertise, might be a close long-time personal friend, mentor or family member.

Jim is no replacement for someone in that role, and a large group training is inappropriate to address such personal and individualized needs, one size or philosophy does not practically fit all and each individual has his or her own special needs.

This issue is just part of what's wrong with LGATs.

You also say New Era would handle the "death of someone close, being a victim of an assault."

Again, Jim and Lynne are not specifically trained and/or qualified to handle such situations, as grief and/or trauma counselors.

There are also specifically designed support groups and counseling programs for such situations facilitated by trained professionals.

Again, family and friends would be the a possible substitute, but not an LGAT.

You really have brought out what's wrong with New Era through your statements.

Thanks.