Breaking the Vow of Secrecy

A true story about Teen Help/WWASP by Karen E. Lile

Under penalty of perjury laws of the State of Washington, I declare the following to be true and correct.

My name is Karen E. Lile (Bean). I am a resident of Clayton, CA and can be contacted at kl@pianofinders.com or 925-676-3355

On January 9, 1998, I, Karen E. Lile, took a vow of secrecy at the request of a facilitator of the Teen Help Discovery Seminar at the Holiday Inn in Livermore, California. The next day, at approximately 4:30 PM, I left the conference room in a state of distress and emotional shock. Before I walked out of that room, I was told, by a seminar staff person, that I could not come back again while the seminar was in progress. The doors were locked on the room and the windows covered, so there was no way I could renter the room anyway. Today, I am breaking my secrecy vow and stating why I have decided the vow was not only made invalid by the actions of the facilitator/trainer, but is unethical and goes against my deepest personal values. I am going to relate what happened to me, how it affected me, and what questions and actions the processes and substance of this seminar provoked. I am opening my actions and the actions of the facilitator and participants to public comment and feedback. I am hoping that people will take what I have written and compare it against their own values and standards. I want to know if others feel there is legitimate cause for concern about these events and their import to the hundreds of teens who are confined in the Teen Help residential programs and the parents who have placed them there.

Before beginning my story, I will tell you about myself. I am 39 years old, a law abiding United States citizen and resident of Clayton, California. I have been married to Kendall Ross Bean for almost 19 years and have two daughters. I have never been divorced.

I have shared ownership in a piano business with my husband, in Contra Costa County, California for 16 years and am also the President of a California nonprofit corporation currently applying for federal exemption status. I completed my college studies at Brigham Young University, The University of California at Berkeley and the University of Texas at Austin. In 1982, I graduated from the University of Texas at Austin with a Bachelor's Degree in English and Special honors in English. I am currently a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. I value my religious freedom and support others in theirs.

As a teenager, my grandmother enrolled me in MENSA and the Children of the American Revolution as a member. I value freedom of the mind and the United States Constitutional freedoms. I have held membership in many professional and community organizations. I have been actively involved in the community, serving in leadership roles of various capacities. I have been involved in local government affairs, writing proclamations and resolutions that were later ratified by city councils and county boards of supervisors.

WHAT WE EXPECTED FROM THE DISCOVERY SEMINAR:

On April 20, 1997, my husband and I placed our daughter in a residential behavior modification school, Tranquility Bay, in Jamaica, West Indies. She had been missing for over a year and we felt at the time that this decision was an intervention to save her life.

When my husband and I entered the Livermore Holiday Inn Hotel to attend the Discovery Seminar, we checked into the hotel expecting to stay for three days. We had been looking forward to this event because we had heard glowing reports of the seminar's significance to us and our family from other parents and from Teen Help. Teen Help is the organization that referred us to the seminars and to Tranquility Bay and we believed at the time that they were our advocates, representing our interests.

The full name of the series of seminars, of which this Discovery was the first, is called "TASKS" , or "Teen Accountability, Self-Esteem and Keys to Success" . On the first day of our Discovery seminar, we knew that our daughter had already attended all of the TASKS seminars with the exception of the Parent/Child Seminars.

Promotional Teen Help literature stated that "These seminars [are] aimed at enhancing self-esteem, honesty, accountability, integrity, trust, agreements, leadership, communication and responsible decision making. The seminar series also strengthens a teen's ability to overcome anger, peer pressure, and self-limiting beliefs."

This sounded wonderful. I was greatly interested in having my daughter learn these principals. I took these words at face value and expected them to mean what people in my culture understand them to mean. I had no idea that words like "accountability" , and "integrity" had hidden meanings to "insiders" ; that "outsiders" , (those who had not been through the seminar) could not hope to understand.

Other literature I had read before signing the contract to send my daughter to Jamaica, had given me further expectations:

"As students participate in the seminars, they are immersed in a combination of educational, therapeutic and experiential activities, that give teens an opportunity to evaluate the negative results of their past choices, and begin making effective new choices".

I had participated in many progressive educational experiences, including activities as part of my honors classes at Brigham Young University, which had been labeled "experiential" . I felt that I understood the scope of activities that might fall under the categories of "educational" and "experiential" activities. As a former associate member of the Association of Mormon Counselors and Psychotherapists and affiliate member of the International Society for the Study of Dissociation, I had studied a broad range of literature, reports and research and felt that I understood what types of activities might fall under the category of therapeutic activities. Even with my educational and research background, I could not have anticipated what my daughter was put through or I was about to enter into, as you will see by reading my experience as described later in this document.

Teen Help literature further explained that:

"While a child is in Tranquility Bay, parents are invited to participate in a three day Parent Seminar. The parent seminar is similar to the seminars attended by the Teens. As each student returns home, their families are then invited to a three-day Parent/Child Seminar. This seminar creates working relationships within the family structure and sets the tome for a smooth transition."

These seemed to me to be worthy goals. I was looking forward to open discussions, opportunities to talk freely with other parents, and an environment that promoted freedom of thought and association with others. I looked forward to these future seminars and was motivated to complete the Discovery Seminar in order to qualify. We had been told that Parent/Child Seminars are not open to the family unless the parents have completed the Parent Discovery.

The cover letter to the Tranquility Bay parent manual had stated: "I cannot overemphasize how vital it is for parents to complete these trainings. Everything seems to get a lot easier once you have completed the Parent Discovery training. For then, you will have a clearer understanding of how changes will come to occur in your child. For these are the same trainings your child will experience in the Program. They will assist you in moving forward, both personally, and as a family, and provide the needed support and understanding of your child's program."

Both my husband and I were extremely interested in what our daughter was learning and experiencing. Tranquility Bay had controlled and limited the communication between our child and us. There was a lot we did not know. We hoped that this seminar would give us greater insight into what our daughter was being taught. We imagined we might see slides of her activities at the facility, have her curriculum outlined and receive other information about what she was doing. We expected that we would be the one's asking the questions and that there would be people there to answer them.

As a parent who had recommended three other families to Teen Help in previous months, I had been given no reason not to trust the Teen Help Family of Services and Tranquility Bay. The day before, on January 8, 1998, the Contra Costa Times had published an article in which I was quoted as a parent defending locked facilities. The writer Gayle Melvin quoted me on my experience with my daughter in Tranquility Bay. (See http://hotcoco.com/newslib/index.htm and search under Contra Costa Times, Parents Defend Locked Facility as Aid to Kids.)

I did not expect anything remotely like the experience I was about to undergo. I entered the seminar with an open mind, eager to learn and share; excited to find out more about my daughter's program. My daughter had written to me expressing her feelings of joy and significance after completion of her Discovery Seminar. I expected my experience to worthy of the same sentiments.

I didn't know that the nature of the seminar process was so foreign to ordinary human experience, I couldn't possibly have understood the true nature of what I was about to undergo from anything I had read or heard before hand.

MY EXPERIENCE OF DISCOVERY SEMINAR  JAN 9-10, 1998, LIVERMORE, CALIFORNIA

THE BEGINNING:

When I checked into the Holiday Inn, it was late Thursday night. My husband brought up our luggage and collapsed on the bed, being exhausted from a week of long work hours. I was full of energy and anxious to check out my new environment. I took a walk around the hotel and located the conference room where we would begin our Seminar the following morning.

When I looked inside, I saw about 20 people busily engaged in setting up chairs and assembling packets of materials. Someone was assembling a sound system and plugging in the cords to a mixing board. Posters with slogans like "That Which is Not Acted Upon is Not Learned" and "Based on the Results you have Exactly what you Intended" were on the walls. There was a feeling of underlying excitement in the activity of the staff members as they busied themselves at the various tasks. One man gave me a look, as I was standing there in the doorway, that gave me the impression that I was interrupting something very private and was not welcome to come in. So I passed on down the hallway and returned to my room.

The next morning, we got up bright and early, ate breakfast and were standing in the hallway at 9 AM; as instructed by the letter we had received beforehand. The letter had outlined some rather unusual ground rules (see posting on February 26, 1998 4:27 PM EST at http://www.bridgetounderstanding.com/cgi-bin/bbs.pl?read=190) which I really did not understand completely. But I knew we had been told to arrive on time and stay for the duration of the seminar.

The seminar however was not ready to begin. The doors were locked and the windows in the doors were covered with paper, so we couldn't see in. I had rushed my breakfast a bit to be on time, and was a little surprised that the staff were not on time. But, I didn't take much notice of it and began to look around. The hallway was very crowded with parents. Most of them looked to be in their 30's to 50's and fairly affluent, judging by their clothes. There were a few teenagers and a few grandparents as well. One parent came up to our husband and I, (I will call her Rebecca to preserve her confidentiality) and began talking to us in an animated manner. We were glad to meet her and in the 20-30 minutes we stood in the hallway waiting for things to begin, we discovered that our children were both at Tranquility Bay in Jamaica and had been there for almost the same length of time. Other parents had children from Paradise Cove in Samoa, Spring Creek in Montana and Cross Creek in Utah, all Teen Help programs. This was the first time we had heard that all these facilities were using the TASKS seminars.

I saw parents picking up nametags from a table with their names on them and went to look for my name. It was there, and I pinned it to my shirt. When we entered the room, I observed that there were about 90 parents assembled there. The padded stacking chairs were arranged in two sections, facing the front with military straightness, with a long isle exactly down the middle about 5 feet wide. There was masking tape on the floor marking the exact position of each row. My husband and I sat next to each other on the left-hand side. Then I looked at the letter I was carrying which stated that we were not supposed to sit next to anyone whom we had previously known before the seminar. I figured that included my husband, so I found a seat a few rows back, next to two strangers. These people, on my right was obviously married and sitting next to each other. I was trying to keep the rules and so asked a staff person to clarify things for me. He stated that it didn't matter if I sat next to my husband at this point in the seminar, so I went back and sat on the isle seat next to Kendall.

At this point and time, I had some time to observe, before the seminar began. I noticed that all of the participants (the parents, grandparents and teens) were dressed in casual clothes. We were instructed in the literature to dress comfortably and casually. I noticed that there were approximately 15 staff standing around the sides of the room. They were dressed in more business-like clothes. I assumed that they were in positions of authority in the seminar.

When everyone was seated and the doors to the outside hallway were closed, a 6'4" muscular man in a suit strode purposefully towards the front of the room. His presence commanded our attention because he presented himself before us as though he were the one in authority. He asked us to put all of our personal belongings at the side of the room and not to record or take notes on the seminar processes we were about to experience. There was a flurry of movement as everyone obeyed and took purses and other belongings and put them by the side of the room and then took their seats.

The speaker then welcomed us to the "pilot" seminar for the Livermore area and introduced himself as the facilitator of the Seminar. He stated that these seminars were initially taken from a corporate training program and that Resource Realizations came together with the Teen Help folks to make up a new brand of seminar especially for the teens. He said that the Teen Seminars had been so popular and successful, and there had been so many requests for a parent's version, the seminar we were about to undertake was created for the parents.

He told us that we needed to participate in this seminar for ourselves, not our children. This sounded something like the 12-step philosophy, and didn't seem too unusual a request. I assumed that soon he would begin to tell us more about our daughter's program as well. He gave an inspirational speech of about an hour and a half in length on the subject of why we were all here together that day. He drew upon his own experiences and assumptions about the experiences that parents must have been through before placing their child in the program. He told us that he personally knew all of our children, because he was the facilitator who conducted their training. He joked about how ridiculous these "little white punk kids" looked when they said, "I'm a gangster." He mocked their posture giving the audience his profile and then thrusting his shoulders back and head to the side. He said how funny he thought it was to see these little rich kids pretending like they were gangsters. The audience laughed. Then he said, "I look at these kids and say, " You don't know nothing about what being a gangster is." He then told us that he was the authority on gangsters because he was raised in East LA and he belonged to two gangs where people were shot if they were in the way of the gang. He hunched his shoulders forward and showed us a truly aggressive stance, which I later came to call his "gangster" stance. He said that one day, as a teenager, his father gave him an aggressive wake-up call, saying," I would rather kill you myself than see you doing this stuff." He said that this had really turned him around and that later he had gone to college and then become the speaker that today we saw before us.

I understood his logical point was that we should hope that our children could grow up to be one day like him. I however, wasn't prepared to conclude that he was a role model for my child. Being from a more conservative background, his style identified him as a different culture than mine and I felt I needed to translate his behavior and words into my own understanding. I was really expecting him to tell us what his credentials were and why he was qualified to be the facilitator of this seminar. In my culture, these types of personal stories are best not talked about publicly. However, I put a filter on so that I could try to understand what he was saying from his set of assumptions. Obviously he felt that this qualified him to be working with the teens. I decided to suspend judgement and go with the flow, keeping an open mind.

I looked around me and saw that others in the room were really involved in what he was saying. They seemed to respond to his statements as credible and to support his authority. I found myself drawn in by his entertaining personality and command of the emotions of the audience, getting us to laugh at the appropriate moment and moving to dramatic and persuasive climaxes with the ease of a revivalist preacher. In fact, his speaking manner reminded me very much of some of the more energetic preachers I had seen in the movies. He walked up and down the aisle, making eye contact with various audiences members. He gestured boldly to emphasize his points. He had the timing, the powerful voice, and the emotion, the rhythm and dynamic control of a dramatic actor. My husband turned to me and whispered, "He's quite good" referring to his style. I found myself enjoying his speech and thought him quite talented. In fact, his personal presence was so overpowering, I found myself focusing more on his delivery than on the content.

The content however required my attention, so I began to focus more on the words than their delivery. As I stated earlier, I had some expectations about this Seminar and was here to obtain more information about my daughter's program. I listened with interest as the facilitator (whom I will call Don hereafter) explained the TASKS Seminars and outlined the various stages that the teens pass through.

THE FACILITATOR'S UNEXPECTED BEHAVIOR:

At one point, he used a large white writing pad placed on an easel in the front of the room, to write comments and illustrate points. After informing us that the object of the seminar was to find our Magical Inner Child, he drew a small circle and surrounded it with three other circles. The inner circle represented the Magical Child, the next circle layer represented "Fixed Beliefs" , the next layer represented "Fixed Emotions" and the outer layer represented "Fixed Behavior" Image" He used words like "protection" and "ego" as well. He stated that the purpose of the Discovery Seminar was to penetrate all these outer circles to reach the Magical Child, which was hidden in all of us. I was rather perplexed about the relevance of this to me. I had done an extensive amount of individual and group therapy, read numerous self-help books and done lots of inner growth work. He seemed to be assuming that I did not have this knowledge. Considering that Teen Help had never asked for my personal background and growth experience before asking me to attend this seminar, I realized Don couldn't possibly know very much about me and what work I had already done. I was sure I could find something of value in what he was saying and so continued to pay attention.

He then began to talk about concepts of right and wrong. To illustrate his point, he singled me out, walking halfway across the room, to the outer isle seat where I was sitting. He stood so close to me, I was very uncomfortable. I had feelings of intimidation. I didn't want to act on those feelings, so I stood up and faced him squarely and said, "You are in my space". I had put my hand on my hip, when I said that. Instead of stepping out of my space, he put his hand on his hip and mocked me with his expression and gesture and leaned closer to me. He did not step back. I am about 5'4" tall and he was about 6'5" tall and broad across the chest. I had a tremendous urge to take my hand and gently push him away from me until he was at an appropriate distance, but I decided to wait and see why he was doing this. I was fully aware that my husband would stand up in my defense if I gave him an indication I wanted help.

I said, "You are also much bigger than I am" . I had a full sense of the power of Don's personality and also of his physical strength when he was standing this close to me. Suddenly, he changed from a mocking behavior to the aggressive stance he had described earlier as gangster posture. He pointed his finger at my face, about ½" inch away from right between my eyes. He said forcefully, "I could rob you." He paused, looking me straight in the eyes with menace; "I could take away your woman hood." He paused for a response and when I gave none, he said, "I could kill you."

I looked back at him and felt the full force of his words. I knew that this facilitator knew nothing about my history. Others had confronted me before with this full intent. I looked him in the eyes and knew he was indeed capable of doing these things. I stood my ground, but I was shaken to the core. He had changed his behavior so quickly, I had had no warning and I was frozen in a state of shock. There were 90 other people in the room watching and no one said a word. He shook his finger at me and leaned closer, raising his voice to say, "and could I say I was right?" I was convinced that he could indeed believe that he was right in doing these things. I never wavered in my eye contact, feeling that this was indeed a dangerous man that I could not afford to show fear to. I answered softly, but with firmness, "Yes, you could" . He stared at me for a few more minutes in silence. I stared back.

Then he broke the tension by laughing. He dropped his aggressive stance and leaned closer, saying, "You are welcome in my space anytime," in a slightly suggestive manner. I was shocked at his uninvited familiarity and said nothing, neither did I laugh or move back. Actually, there was nowhere for me to move back to without stepping on my husband who was still sitting in the next seat.

Don turned around and walked over to the front of the room again. He continued speaking, as if there was nothing abnormal about his behavior. He went on to prove a point that even murderers can kill people and say they are right, believing it entirely. He said, "even a serial killer has a support group." I thought of Hitler and his support group and realized that Don had a valid point. Don then made the bold and unexpected conclusion that this proved that there was no right or wrong. From there he went on to tell us how words could be powerful shapers of reality and that we would be better to use the words "working" and "not working" .

He went on to talk of other concepts. One thing he said hit me hard. He was making a point that everyone in the room had a problem or they wouldn't be at the Seminar. To prove his point, he said that he had heard our children's confessions and had information that we did not have. He said that our children had told us about how we had wronged them. He stated that he had even felt their nails clawing on his arms as he had to wrestle them to the floor." I don't remember why he said he had to wrestle them to the floor, because his statement was so shocking, it provoked a host of questions. I thought, "What is this man doing touching my child? Why is he doing seminars for all the programs? Why should he have more information about my child than I do? What kind of relationship does he have with my child?"

I was too much in a state of shock, from what was happening, to carefully process my questions and listen to his words at the same time. And he was talking so fast; there was no time to think about things. In order to cope with my emotions and still focus on what had just happened, I found myself start to experience the seminar on two different levels simultaneously: an emotional level and a mental level. On an emotional level, I was truly frightened that this man had been so disrespectful of my space and person to do and say what he had just done and said. I was also beginning to worry about my daughter and what it had meant earlier when he had said that the Parent Seminar was a "watered down version" of that experienced by the teens. I was a bit worried about what more he would feel inclined to do with my daughter, if he had been so bold with me. On a mental level, I was trying to set aside what had just happened and follow the logic of what he was saying. This was an effort, because my emotions were quite strong. But, I have developed a powerful ability to appear calm and rational in the midst of a crisis. I used this talent to follow the content of his words.

He next began to solicit involvement from the audience. He was moving very fast and there was little time to process what was happening. He told people that he wanted them to give him words that represented the "image" that people had about themselves. As people raised their hands, he would point to them and then turn around and write what they said on the board quickly and forcefully. He supplied the first few words to get people started. He wrote words like "tough, angry, perfect, pitiful, clown, comedian, gang, shy, attitude, conceited, know it all, victim, cheap, macho, judge, nerd, nothing's wrong," on the paper. Then he moved quickly on to the next page and solicited words to describe the Magical Child: "precious, joyful, open, curious, innocent, playful, powerful, happy, soft, loving, friendly, moment, natural, cute, spontaneous, smart, trusting, unique, wise, and understanding."

As I was thinking about what he was saying, I started to realize that his questions were not at all open ended. When he had opened the pad of paper and said, "All right now it's your turn to talk. I promise I won't always be the one up here talking all the time," I had expected him to be conducting an open discussion, inviting questions from the parents and then shaping a discussion tailored to what they felt was important. Instead, he seemed to have already decided what he wanted to hear, and was leading the audience in a set of rhetorical questions designed to produce the answers that would support his thesis.

At this point, he stopped and said, "The purpose of Education is to unsettle the mind." And explained that he had had a university professor that had taught him what education was really all about and that this had formed the basis for his assumption. He stated with pride that he was going to do for us in this seminar what his professor had done for him. I wondered who this professor was, and why I should consider him an authority in my life. If unpredictable behavior, mixed messages and flaws in the logic provoked unsettling the mind, then he was doing a good job.

It is my belief that the purpose of education is to expand the mind, giving it freedom, room to grow and lots of opportunity to analyze and weigh differing viewpoints. My educational experience had emphasized freedom of thought and supported diversity. I wasn't willing to accept his assumption that unsettling the mind was the objective. But, coming from an education in which I had encountered many viewpoints, I was willing to try out his hypothesis during the course of the seminar. It was my intention to learn what I could from this experience and to take what I could from his comments, even if I didn't agree with the way that he was approaching things.

STAFF TESTIMONIALS

After the lecture had been going on for about 2 hours, Don asked the staff to come up to the front of the room. Approximately 15 staff members came up at his request. He told us that after we had completed the Discovery Seminar and Focus Seminars it would be our privilege to serve the organization by staffing these seminars. He said that all of these staff members were Discovery graduates and that he was really proud of their achievements in graduating the previous seminars and being here to help us today. He told us that our children were also given the opportunity to staff the seminars in their program, when they had graduated and that this was a real privilege, teaching them leadership and giving them valuable experience. Then each staff person introduced himself or herself by name and gave their testimonial about how bad it had been for them before the Seminars and how wonderful it was for them now that they had graduated. Most of the staff was made up of parents with children currently in the program.

There were two staff members who were teenagers, recently returned from the programs.

There were a few parents whose children had already graduated from the program. I listened to their stories with sympathy. I also realized that these staff members were still in the midst of their emotional crises and were not the trained professionals that I had expected to be filling these roles. I looked around to see if there was anyone else in authority besides Don. I didn't see anyone except a woman in the back that was not yet introduced. Later, she was introduced as someone with 30 years experience as a facilitator in similar types of corporate seminars, whom Don was training in the TASKS format.

This made me feel somewhat uncomfortable. I did not accept Don as an authority in the field of education and he obviously wasn't an authority in the field of mental health. I was wondering who was qualified to conduct the educational and therapeutic activities that we had been told would be part of this seminar. I really didn't have much time to ponder these things before we were moving on quickly to the next part. As you can see, just by the fact that it has taken me 1 to 2 paragraphs to describe my reaction to incidents that took place in a matter of seconds, the whole proceedings were provoking a lot of thought. In fact, the pace at which things proceeded; the amount of information presented without time for absorption; and the conflict between my expectations and what was happening, all caused me to start to feel overwhelmed. In addition, I was finding my emotions more and more unsettled, because I hadn't had time to sort out all of what had happened and why no one had objected.

It seemed like everyone was behaving as though this was perfectly normal behavior; and that this facilitator was qualified to be our leader for the next three days. There were 90 people in the room going along with things. I found myself doubting my own reality and giving into the reality of the group. The reality of the staff seemed to be that this Seminar was the best thing next to the resurrection, and that I was really privileged to be a part of it. The reality of the my parent peers up to now, seemed to be that what was happening was okay with them and there was no cause for concern.

On one level I realized that several of my assumptions before attending the seminar were frustrated. I had assumed that no therapeutic activities conducted during the course of the seminar would be conducted by anyone who was not appropriately licensed in the State of California and governed by the professional ethics set forth by my state. I now realized that there was no one in the room who seemed to have those qualifications. I expected that any educational activities I would be asked to engage in would be relevant and appropriate. I did not understand how Don's personal threat to me was appropriate or relevant. I expected all activities to encourage analytical thinking, diverse viewpoints and freedom of thought. It was obvious to me that the only viewpoint being discussed here was that of Don. His process of working with us did not seem to encourage analytical thinking and there was no time to think clearly, we were being bombarded with so much information at once.

I was unsettled by the contrast between what I was feeling and thinking and what everyone else appeared to be accepting. But, then I looked at the poster on the wall again with the slogan, "The purpose of the education is to unsettle the mind" . Well it was working. And if I were going to get the most out of this program and adopt the "party line" , I would have to admit that my mind was unsettled and see where that took me.

REQUEST FOR A SILENT VOW

Now that Don perceived that he had the support of the group, he said it was time for us to make a commitment to continue with the seminar. He quickly rattled off the ground rules of the seminar. He then asked everyone to stand and take a silent vow that they would keep these ground rules. The rules, as he stated them, didn't seem that alarming at the time. I did wonder at three of them. I wondered why we were not supposed to disclose the processes of the seminar and what that meant. I wondered why I would need to promise not to engage in any new sexual relationships with anyone in the group. I thought, "What about the Seminar would provoke me to do that?"

I also wondered why I was supposed to promise not to make any major changes in my personal life in the next 30 days. I didn't understand why Don would be interested in my personal life or would even want to know what I was doing with my choices. I didn't see how this was relevant to anything except that maybe he was asking me not to take my child out of the program if I didn't like the seminar. I also realized that the next seminar we were supposed to attend was in 30 days and wondered if that had anything to do with it. But, these questions just flitted through my mind briefly and without emotional impact. My attention was riveted by what was happening in the room.

I was standing along with everyone else in the room. There was only one woman sitting. Everyone was looking at her and there was a great amount of energy directed at her. I felt as though I were standing in the middle of a mild mannered, but focused mob of people. I usually don't attend sports or other activities where people are sharing intense emotions at the same time unless I am sitting near a place I can easily leave if things get "too hot" . Its not that I can't take it, it's just that I am so much of an individual, I like my space. I don't like to be carried away with the crowd in a moment of frenzy. I have seen groups of people do some crazy things, including erupting into violence. Usually my choice of preference is to attend a classical concert, where everyone is quiet and respectful and emotions are shared in an understated and refined manner. "Of course" , I reminded myself, "This is not a mob. These are just parents like me and we have just been asked to stand and take a harmless vow to show our commitment to Don's rules. You keep rules every day."

Anyway, we were all looking at this woman who was sitting down. Don walked up to her and asked her if she had a problem with the ground rules. I noticed that he was standing too close and that she was visibly intimidated. Her voice was shaking and she was on the verge of tears. She said something about having been through a lot of trauma and that she didn't want to have to be separated from her husband, whom she found a great support. I could see she was in distress. Don explained why this vow was necessary for her. But, I didn't notice his words as much as his attitude. He was confronting her about her choice in a rather aggressive manner, the same manner he had confronted me earlier, with his gangster stance. I felt very uncomfortable to be witnessing this. The message came across very clearly that if I decided to object, I would be treated the same way. I had recently had an encounter with Don that I was still in shock over. I didn't feel prepared to be confronted again.

Someone asked, "What are you going to ask us to do?" and Don responded, "I promise not to ask you to do anything unreasonable."

While we were all silently standing together, I decided to take the logical approach and consider this a contract. Looking back, I might describe my thoughts succinctly as, "As long as they don't ask me to do anything I consider unreasonable, I won't talk about the process or content of the seminar." At the time, however, my thoughts were a bit jumbled and I couldn't have clearly expressed them.

After having two months to think about my experience in retrospect, I realize that I had some definite expectations at the time of that vow. They were so basic, I didn't think about them in words. For example, I expected to be treated with civility and respect. I expected that I would not be put in a situation where I felt I was under pressure to adopt any belief, viewpoint or action that I would not normally adopt outside the environment of the seminar. Yet here I was, taking a vow that I felt pressured into it, after having allowed someone to treat me disrespectfully without my protest. I was surprised at myself. I realized that I was giving into peer pressure. I hadn't known everyone else's actions would affect me so deeply. I decided to put these issues aside and see if perhaps there were some educational reason that Don had put us into this situation.

I had been involved in experiential activities in the past where I had been lied to or put in uncomfortable situations and then within the hour, had been told the truth and given an opportunity question my experience and sort it out in terms of what I had learned. I thought perhaps these situations I had been confronted with in the Seminar would all make sense at some future point. I hoped that I would soon see the relevance and appropriateness of Don's actions and that these insights would help to compensate for my mounting concerns. I realized that the seminar had already departed considerably from what I had expected, but decided to make the most of it, especially if it would help me understand what my daughter was being taught and what processes she had gone through already.

It never occurred to me that my daughter had been asked to take this same vow of secrecy and what the implications of that were. We had been given no information, at any point in time, that would lead us to believe that our daughter was restricted from talking freely with us about the processes she was undergoing in the program during the 10 months she had already been there.

I WAS BEHAVING IN AN UNUSUAL MANNER

At this point, I think it is important to break frame from the chronological account that I have been giving of the Seminar. I was behaving in a manner that was unusual for me by this time in the seminar. I didn't notice it until several weeks after. Let me explain. First, I need to give you a bit more background on a subject that may seem unrelated. But bear with me, it is very pertinent.

In my piano business, I have been working with consumers who are making major purchases for over 16 years. I had begun to notice a trend among my piano customers. Often times, they decided to buy or sell a piano at a point in their life where some dramatic change was happening. Often time's people would be selling their piano after the death of a loved one, because they were moving or getting a divorce. People might be buying a piano a the time of a marriage, a move, a remodeling of their house or a significant re-evaluation of their life that caused them to be looking for something more. When they were in these circumstances, I began to realize that people were vulnerable to sales pressure and might make decisions that they hadn't thought out and would later regret. Our competitors in the piano business engaged in some pretty heavy duty "high pressure" sales tactics. We did not believe in this type of approach.

Our approach might be better described by Jim Cathcart's book "Relationship Selling." Long before reading that book, we had decided that our purpose was to educate customers about the consequences of their choices rather than persuade them to do something. We assumed that the customer was the one most qualified to decide what met their needs, not us. It was only our job to give them accurate information and full disclosure, not to put pressure on them. When we sensed that a customer was acting on an emotion of urgency and a fear of losing a good opportunity, we encouraged them to sleep on their decision and take their time to think it through and be sure that it was the right choice. Although we were taking a risk that they would later decide not to buy the piano they had been looking at, or to sell their piano, we found that this built trust with our customers. They might decide to wait to buy or sell something. Sometimes they would even buy a competitor's product because it was better suited for their needs. In the short term, we sometimes lost revenue. But over the years, we had developed a reputation for honesty and fairness that increased our business. If someone bought from us or from our competitor, they still referred their friends to us. Often they would tell people that it was much better to start out by working with Piano Finders first so "piano dealers won't eat you alive" .

Eventually, we began to realize that it was not the products we sold, but the process we used that people were buying. We also realized that we were not selling products and services. People sent us pictures of their children and their piano after they bought it and kept in touch with us over the years. People preferred to develop trust and long-term relationships with us. The piano or service they were buying just happened to be the subject matter of our conversations.

Realizing that it was the process that was important, not the product we were selling actually caused us to restructure every aspect of our business. We ended up closing down an 8,500 square foot facility, selling off our rebuilding shop. We sized down our overhead to a couple of small offices in downtown Walnut Creek and started to share our knowledge with our clients and former competitors, acting in the capacity of consultants.

Our competitors were pouring money into "blowout" piano sales and discounting their prices. Every time a competitor had a piano sale, we would get calls from people two or three days later that regretted their decisions. If the dealer was willing to let the customer back out of the deal, they usually did not have problems with the customer. Some dealers however were pretty aggressive and would even threaten to sue a customer if they didn't take the piano. I heard of many lawsuits being initiated by customers because of aggressive sales tactics that had been employed by a few of the dealers. People would call our hotline in extreme distress and anger when they felt they had been taken advantage of and coerced into making a premature decision, even if it was a piano they might have bought after more thought. This further served to convince me that it was unwise to put pressure on people to buy something.

My own experience in the piano business has changed the way that I shop and buy products and services. When buying from others, both my husband and I are as interested in the process, as the product. I have begun to examine every relationship I have with retail organizations. If I find myself being pressured into buying something, I choose not to do business with that retailer, even if they have a product that suits my needs. If I feel that a store's displays and music bombard my senses and make me want to buy more than I had planned, I stop shopping there. If a bank or a company l have a long-term relationship has employees who do not treat me with respect, I take it to the manager and ask them to make changes to their policy or correct the problem. When employees or business earn my trust and respect, I will pay more for their products and even write letters of encouragement to the president of the company.

I have not been watching television for several years, because I got tired of the commercials and their effect on me. I don't read a lot of magazines and usually avoid the ads in the newspapers. I throw out the junk mail in my mailbox without even looking at it. To me it is irrelevant. I am not interested in low prices; I am interested in knowing who I am doing business with and what their character is. If they are trustworthy and honest, they will sell me things of quality at fair prices. Having produced a few television shows and studied sales and promotion tactics, I am more aware than most consumers of the devices used to manipulate people into buying a product or service. I feel that there is no need to manipulate people into buying a product or service. If they have something I need and I trust them, I will buy from them not only once, but many times.

So, looking back on the fact that I took this secrecy vow during this stage of the seminar, I can now see that I was behaving in an unusual manner. Under normal conditions, I would have either objected much earlier in the process or walked out.

WHY I DIDN'T WALK OUT

Somehow the situation had overcome my usual objections to this type of process. I was in a vulnerable position emotionally because of the long-term crises that we had experienced with our daughter. In the past several hours, I had felt myself carried along by a powerful and charismatic speaker; I was experiencing an overload from the amount of information given and speed of delivery. I didn't have time to emotionally and rationally process what was happening. The confrontation by Don had put me into a state of emotional shock and made feel personally threatened and afraid.

My defenses were down because I was already trusting of Teen Help and expected something different. I felt an urgency to stay and participate in the seminar, because I had been persuaded to believe that my daughter's life depended upon it. I had been told if I didn't attend, our family could not participate in the Parent/Child Seminars that were vital to our daughter's reintegration into our family. I wanted my daughter to come home and I wanted help with the reintegration processes from the program that best understood what she had been through. That was one of the main reasons I was at the Seminar.

Besides, I had already made a significant investment of money, time and energy in this program and my reputation was on the line. If I objected and walked out now, I would have to explain to the newspaper reporter who had interviewed me a few days before why I had done it.

I had referred three people to Teen Help and wanted to believe I had done the right thing. No one likes to feel they have made a mistake and endorsed a company they will later wish they hadn't. I had trusted Teen Help and the results I was seeing with my daughter's progress in the program. I would not have referred families to this program if I had had any doubts.

Besides, I owed R & D Billing, the billing company for Tranquility Bay and Teen Help, a sizeable amount of money and I was paying them off for my daughters care with referrals to the Teen Help was in a financially vulnerable situation and felt an obligation to protect the program's best interests.

All of these reasons contributed to my decision to stay and take the Silent Vow. These were certainly not normal circumstances and I was not behaving in a manner consistent with my normal behavior. I did not, however think all of this through at the time. Rather, I was swept along in an experience that seemed to be accelerating in pace and unusualness. I also assumed that things would eventually explain themselves and that I was through the worst part of the seminar.

WE ARE HANDED A SEMINAR BIBLE

Before the first break, the staff started to handout a packet of information to all the participants. (We were no longer audience members, having all made a commitment to participate and follow the leader). I was thinking of Don as our leader at this point. He had done several things to augment his authority over the group and I felt that we had all accepted him as our leader when we stood together and vowed to stay and obey what he told us to do.

Several things now happened quickly. Don told us that we were to consider this packet of information our bible. He said that we were to keep it with us at all times, study it in our times between sessions and to never be caught without it. He informed us we would be confronted if we were found without it at anytime in the seminar from here on out. At a later point in the seminar, things began to take on a religious fervor. Participants started to clasp this book, with its new vocabulary and concepts to their chest and run back to get it if they left it on a table. I discovered that the content of the book for people became not as important as the fact that Don told us to obey him and that it contained the approved vocabulary. The way that Don used words was difficult to understand because they did not have the standard definitions. I started to realize later that a lot of my daughter's letters contained this same vocabulary. I realized later that someone who had not attended the seminar would not understand the "insiders" meanings for these words.

I was rather surprised at his use of the religious term bible, since this seminar had made no reference to religion up to this point. But I knew that it is common to refer to something as a bible in non-religious settings when it is something that is considered very important and is referred to too often. I was getting used to being surprised by the unexpected things Don would say and to have no time to reflect on their meaning. This made me feel a bit numb and lowered my resistance. Besides, I was hungry at this point. This opening session had extended past lunchtime and my stomach was demanding attention.

I BEGAN TO QUESTION THE REASONS FOR THE GAMES

Don flipped the pad of paper until he had turned to a diagram with nine dots arranged in rows of three to form a square. He said we were now going to play a game. He told us to draw three rows of three dots on an index card we had been handed. I was unclear as to his instructions. I wasn't sure if I was supposed to copy the example of how the dots were configured on the paper in front of us, or I was supposed to follow his words literally, which did not specify a particular configuration. I didn't really want to draw his attention to me at this point, and so did not ask a question to clarify the directions. Instead, I decided to take what he said literally and drew three dots on the page in three rows, but not as was shown on the paper pad in front of us. I thought that perhaps it was more important for me to listen to what he was saying rather than what I was seeing. He then told us that the object of the game was to connect all the dots without letting our pen leave the paper. We were instructed to raise our hands when we had correctly solved the problem and a staff person look at the solution, tell us if we were right and if we were we could go and stand at the side of the room. I remembered having heard of this game before, but couldn't remember what the solution was to the problem. My husband raised his hand and asked, "What if we already know how to do this?" Don answered, "Then keep the answer to yourself." He instructed us not to look at other people's cards, but only at our own.

We all began to solve the problem. It turned out that it was easy for me to connect my dots because of the way I had configured them, and so I quickly solved the problem. I raised my hand; a staff person came over and looked at it and solemnly shook his head "no" . I realized that this staff person was one of the teens who had recently returned from the program.

Kendall then raised his hand and the same staff person came to look at his card. Since I was sitting between the staff person and Kendall, I couldn't help but see the solution Kendall had achieved when he tilted it forward for the staff person to see. He had configured all of the dots on the paper identical to those on the pad, and had solved the problem by connecting all the dots without lifting the pen from the paper. The staff person looked at Kendall's card and shook his head "no" . I was confused. Why had he said no?

I looked around the room to see what other people were doing. Several staff people were shaking their head yes and at least 20 people were now standing by the side of the room. I decided not to try and solve this problem any more. I thought that perhaps the object of the game was something other than stated and decided to wait and see what happened next.

At this point, Don asked the people who remained sitting why they hadn't gotten the answer yet. He said several things that put pressure on us to finish the problem quickly. He told us that we could ask the staff people for help if we were having difficulty. Several people raised their hands and a staff person came forward with an index card and showed it to them. I wasn't trying to solve the problem anymore. I had decided that it was more important for me to understand what was happening than to win the game and stand at the side of the room. Besides, the chairs were more comfortable and I was content to sit.

I noticed that the cards the staff members showed the participants all said the same thing, "Go outside the nine dots" . This instruction would later become a slogan and part of the Seminar jargon. But at the time, it was new to me. I bided my time. Several more people stood up and went to the side of the room, having been told they had the right answer. Kendall had put his card in his pocket and was just watching. After a period of time, Don stopped the proceeding and told people the game was over. He drew a solution on the paper for all to see and said that this was the right answer. I noticed that his solution was not the same as Kendall's or mine. Kendall had solved the problem differently with the same configuration of dots and I had configured the dots differently but still found a solution.

He asked people who were still sitting how they felt and what they had learned about themselves during the game. People started to raise their hands. One man said, "I felt stupid. I couldn't get it. I thought I was supposed to be able to get it and I couldn't do it." Another woman said, "I felt really pressured. I couldn't think clearly when I was so pressured."

I raised my hand and said, "I followed your rules as you explained them and solved the problem but was told my answer wasn't right. Did you intend for us to configure the dots in the same manner as up on that page?" He said, "Yes." Then he proceeded to make fun of the fact that I configured the dots differently. I said, "perhaps you should change the way you describe the rules." He laughed heartily and looked to the rest of the audience and said, "Oh, I'm going to have fun with this one." He then turned to the people who were standing and said, "How did this make you feel?" One said, "I felt relieved. It felt good to know I didn't have to keep sitting there." Another said, "I was happy I got it right. I felt better than everyone else who hadn't."

At this point, I raised my hand. Don acknowledged me and I said, "My husband solved the problem and his dots were configured exactly as you outlined on the paper. Why was he told his answer was wrong? Do all the people standing at the side of the room have the right answer or were the staff being arbitrary in their selection?" He seemed irritated by my question and said, "It doesn't matter. It only matters how you feel." Then he called on someone else.

At this point, I was a bit upset. I felt that somehow he had belittled my comments and questions. This was not at all what I expected from a game whose purpose was education. I was used to a teacher encouraging questions and validating people's contributions, not making fun of them and telling them their observations didn't matter. I was starting to become aware that Don was not going to support analytical thinking. He was placing the emphasis upon emotional response. Later he would call analytical thinking being "in your head" as though it was something very negative. He would shout out to the group as a whole and say, "you're dissociating," if no one raised their hands to answer his questions. I wondered if he knew what "dissociation" meant. I had never heard of a mental health professional concluding someone was dissociating without careful examination and observation over time. How could Don know that everyone in the group was dissociating? I wondered if Don was making a suggestion that we should dissociate.

When he talked, he moved back and forth across the front of the room with a regular rhythm. He seemed to ask rhetorical questions in a metronomic way, while everyone was concentrating on the game. People would be trying to solve the 9-dot puzzle and he would be saying things like, "What are you doing? How are you feeling right now? Are you following my instructions? Are you asking for help?" Over the course of the seminar, I would come to realize that he did not expect anyone to answer these questions out loud. In fact, he would often repeat himself and sometimes would say things that contradicted each other or didn't make sense. Later in the day, it became almost impossible to focus on what he was saying and concentrate on the tasks he had given us. Later, I would find myself losing track of the content of the questions and focusing instead on the rhythm and emotion of his voice. This had a hypnotic effect on me after a while. But, at this moment, I was very much "in my head," which seemed a safe place to be. I wanted to figure out what the purpose of the game was and why Don was behaving in this manner.

Next Don told us it was break time. He played a piece of music, the theme from 2001 A Space Oddessy, and said that each time we came back and heard this music, we were to be seated before it ended. We were also told that we should take our tags off each time we left the room and give them to a staff person. When we came back, we were to find them on the outside table, and put them on again. I later realized that this was the way in which they could tell who was missing after a break. People who showed up at the door were told they had to get their nametags on before they could come back in. Later I was to learn that people who had missed part of the seminar would not find their name tags on the table the next time, and thus were prevented from re-entering. There were also marks on some of the nametags, which I assumed represented a secret code to the staff about us.

We were now hustled out of the room and told that we were not to sit next to anyone we knew next time we came back in. The staff shut the doors behind us and I could hear intense activity inside, and moving of chairs. We were given a short hour to find a restaurant and eat. I had already discovered that the Holiday Inn was not adequately staffed in their only restaurant and decided to find someplace we could eat at with quick service.

A CHANGE OF CHAIRS

My husband and I left in the car, found a restaurant, ate and returned at the designated time. When we entered the room, we separated and sat in different places. All of the chairs were placed with their backs to the sides of the room this time. This was a rather large conference room, and the open space was big. It was disconcerting not to be sitting next to someone I knew and have the room changed as well. I soon discovered that each time we left, we would come back to something different. The period of time without breaks was long. We never knew when our meals were going to be and we were not supposed to even go to the bathroom without permission. After a while, I found myself regressing in my age behavior and noticed that other people were doing the same. We were becoming a group of children following Don, who didn't want to stand out and be noticed for doing anything different than he approved. Through nonverbal communication of the staff and situations that occurred during the course of the day, it became obvious that the definition of the word "working" was what Don thought was right and the definition of the word "not working" was what Don thought was wrong. There was continual emphasis on the fact that there was no "right" or "wrong" . But, in practice, it was apparent that there were certain types of behavior that would be supported by the group and Don and other types of behavior that would be confronted Don with the support of the group. I was not consciously aware that my behavior was being modified by peer pressure, but it was.

There were three games before the next break. The way that the games were conducted by Don, made me suspect that the purpose of the game was not what appeared on the surface. I didn't understand what these unrevealed purposes were and would keep observing things that others seemed not to notice, in an effort to understand. I decided we were supposed to figure it out. So, instead of taking you through the entire explanation of the games and all things people did while participating, I will give you my conclusions about what the purpose of the games seemed to be, what I chose to do and how it affected me.

In the first game, we were all told that a staff person would be placing a name on our backs that we could not see. We were supposed to enter the center of the room and ask the people around us questions that could only have "yes" or "no" answers until we could guess what our new name was from what information we could gather talking to others. The names were of famous people or animals. Everyone entered the center of the room and began the game. While we were engaged in asking each other questions, the staff was circling the room, with pen and paper in hand, writing down notes about our behavior. Don was also walking around us, almost like a sheep dog herds sheep, asking his questions in that rhythmic pattern that had become familiar to us by now. I had almost ceased paying attention to the content of his questions on a conscious level. At one point Don stopped everyone in the room and said, "What are you doing?" in an accusatory manner. He admonished us to not just stand in one part of the room, but to move around and find people in different parts of the room that we didn't know. This got people moving around the room, like bees in a hive. Everyone was busy trying to guess the name on his or her back.

I had decided that the objective he laid out for us, to guess the name on our back, wasn't as important to me as the way I went about doing it. I tried to interact with people in a civil and respectful manner and to help them first by answering their questions, before asking mine. As it turned out, when he called a halt to the game, I was one of the 15 or so people who had not guessed the name on their back.

This didn't really bother me, until he brought us all into the center of the circle. Everyone else who had gotten the right answer was standing on the outside and I was one of the few standing on the inside of the circle. He came up to each one of us and confronted us asking us what was wrong with us that we hadn't guessed the name on our back. When he came to me, he mocked and made fun of me. I found that my mind was starting to shut down. He demanded that I guess what the name on my back was and I couldn't think at all. My emotions were in a state of turmoil and I felt very frightened and intimidated. I felt like a little child who had done something wrong and was being confronted by an angry parent. I couldn't respond, I was frozen into silence. I started to doubt myself.

I wondered if the purpose of the game was to make us doubt our knowledge about ourselves and look to others as the source of our self-image. I also wondered why Don was using tactics that were clearly intimidating and humiliating. I did not feel that there was any logical reason to do this. He eventually moved on to someone else and then called out the rules for the next game.

ALL ABOUT TRUST

The next game was the trust game. My husband has described this in his story (click here) so I will not go into details about the game, I will just tell you my perspective. As I was moving around the room, I felt somewhat battered emotionally. My analytical thinking process had shut down at this point. I found myself going around the room, looking people in the eye and telling them "I trust you" , "I don't trust you," "I don't know if I trust you," and "I don't care to say" depending upon what message I was receiving from the person looking at me. I let them take the lead and found myself considering whether I trusted them or not based upon my emotional response, not my reasoning. I ended telling most of the people that I trusted them. This became a calming and affirming experience for me. I began to feel more comfortable and comforted when I did what everyone else was doing. At every stage of every game, Don was always shouting out questions and giving instructions. There was almost no time during the seminar in which I found myself uninfluenced by his voice and approval or disapproval.

He interrupted the trust game to give us a new condition. He said that we were now to imagine ourselves in a situation where someone we loved dearly was in danger and we were too far away to help them ourselves. We were told to look at each person in the room and decide if we would trust that person to make sure our loved one got to the hospital. This question alone woke up my mind a bit. It wasn't hard for me to imagine this situation because that is exactly how I felt about my daughter. I had sent her to a foreign country to be cared for by people I did not know, a great act of trust.

As I moved around the room and looked at people, I started to realize that I didn't know whom I could trust with this task. I didn't have enough information about these people to make a good judgement. I felt compelled by my previous encounter with these people to give them the same answer as before, but while my brain was engaged I could not. I found myself only telling people that I trusted them, if I could tell by looking at them that they were aggressive enough to demand the attention of a doctor and get help for my child if they encountered resistance. A lot of people told me that they would trust me with this task. Later this would prove to haunt me as I thought about the teens I saw at Tranquility Bay. One of the reasons I have felt it necessary to tell you this long and personal story is because I am concerned for their welfare. It is not enough to bring out my daughter. I keep thinking about those girls and boys there in that remote facility, under oaths of secrecy not to talk about process they were going through, having their communications controlled and isolated from everything on the outside world.

As my mind started to take control again, I started to realize that I had been really trusting of the Teen Help Family of Services and Tranquility Bay. I began to question that trust and to realize that this seminar was not at all what I had expected. But, as I circulated around the room, I became involved in the experience again. Lulled by Don's voice in the background, I began to forget my concerns.

Then Don stopped the process again. This time he told us to think of our deepest and darkest secret, something we would be ashamed to tell even our dearest friend for fear they would reject and shun us. He told us that we were now to tell the person in front of us whether we trusted them or not with this secret. At this point, I felt rather uncomfortable. I didn't know how to understand his instructions. He hadn't given us enough information. Under what circumstances were we supposed to be telling people our secret? I might answer differently under different circumstances. I did not want to ask the staff for clarification, because it appeared to me that they had no authority in the room. (Their role seemed to be to make notes about behaviors that they did not approve of and then make rather negative comments to us about them. This did not build my feelings of trust for the staff. Especially since I felt that many of the comments were unfair and untrue about others in the room whom I had been observing as well.) I did not want to ask Don for clarification because of my previous experiences, so I found myself apologetically telling most people I didn't trust them.

Don stopped us suddenly; saying something to the effect that he wanted us to prove what we were saying was true by telling our secret to the next person we said we trusted.

MY HUSBAND OBJECTS TO THE GAME

This is the point at which Kendall spoke up and objected to the game. (click here for Kendall's story.)

I was standing about 10 feet away and looking at the situation. Once again, I found myself silent in a mob of people supporting Don in a confrontation of someone who was objecting to the situation. Only this time, it was a much more intense emotional environment. I was sensitive to the fact that people were in an emotional state. I was not thinking clearly and was also still in a state of shock. I couldn't say anything and watched mutely. This time, the person being confronted was my husband. I knew his body language and could see that he was very threatened. Don came up to him and adopted his gangster pose, interrogating him for his objections. I felt that Don was verbally attacking Kendall.

I could see that Kendall was in a very vulnerable place and wasn't able to respond to the attack quickly or with his usual vocabulary and control. Kendall looked very upset as he stood up to Don and voiced his objections. He spoke civilly, but his message was powerful. He was stating that he objected to the game on moral grounds and was explaining why. I knew that it took a lot for Kendall to feel provoked enough to say something like this.

I was convinced that Kendall was alarmed and felt strongly about what he was doing. I believed he was sincere and was proud of him for speaking up about it. But I did not have time to think about what he was saying. The nonverbal situation seemed too dangerous to me. I realized how intimidating this must be for Kendall to be surrounded by 90 people all staring at him with great intensity. I felt immobilized to do anything myself. I was afraid of being criticized for "helping" my husband; something that it had become clear was not a positive behavior. I wasn't in an emotionally strong enough state to feel I could withstand the attention being focused on me if I spoke up in Kendall's defense. My defenses were down and I was afraid for myself and for Kendall.

After what seemed like about 10 minutes, Kendall told Don that if Don proceeded with the game, he was going to leave. Don turned away from Kendall and ignored him. Kendall walked out. After a pause Don finished his explanation, and asked us to proceed with the person in front of me. The person in front of me said he trusted me and proceeded to tell me his secret. Don had given us no option to say we didn't want to hear the secret, and so I just listened. But, I was in a state of inner turmoil over what had happened. I couldn't clearly focus on what the parent was saying.

When it came time for me to share with him, I told him, "I'm sorry, but I can't think right now. The person who just left the room is my husband and I am in a state of shock." Several people came up to me and said they did not trust me. This added to my general emotional vulnerability. Then Don called the activity to a halt and had everyone sit down on the floor with a partner and gave us an exercise to perform with that person. Then in the middle of that exercise Don asked us to turn around and face him. He then asked people to stand, take a microphone and give testimony to their experience of the trust exercise. One man stood up and said that he had not told anyone his secret in honor of the man who had just left. Don was about to say something, and I stood up and took the microphone. I said, "the man who just left was my husband. I am really concerned about him. I came in the same car with him and I don't know whether he is okay. I am in a state of shock right now." One of the staff people spoke up and said that she had been outside talking with Kendall and that he was doing fine. She said he would be returning shortly. A little bit later, Kendall came back in the room. I was relieved that he seemed to be okay, but still found myself quite unsettled.

By this time, it was after midnight. Don gave us a homework assignment to do sometime before the following morning when we were to return at 9 AM. He told us not to discuss what had happened at the seminar with our spouses or anyone else that night. He made it clear we were to be spending our time outside of the seminar with the people he had assigned us to and only doing the activities he had instructed us to do.

I however, did not feel it appropriate not to talk to Kendall about what had happened to him. We met after we were dismissed and went up to our room. Kendall told me that he was feeling very upset about the seminar and did not even want to remain in the hotel room to spend the night. I knew that he had been working very long hours the week before and was really tired. I could understand his position in leaving, but personally was too battered my self by the experience to think clearly. I just didn't want to make any decision until I had had some sleep. I recommended that if he left, he write a letter to Don stating his reasons and I would deliver it in the morning. I told him I hadn't decided whether I wanted to continue with the seminar or not, I was too tired. He offered to leave me the car and find another way home, but I told him it was okay for him to take the car. I just asked him to keep his pager with him in case I needed to come home early. Then I attempted to go to sleep while he was writing his letters and packing up his stuff. I found I was just too upset to sleep at all that night.

ASKING HOW THIS WOULD HELP OUR FAMILY

By 7:30 AM I decided to get dressed in a comfortable business suit. I was feeling too vulnerable to dress casual. I went downstairs to find Don and talk to him before hand about my concerns and about Kendall's reason for departure. I had had some time to process what had happened the night before, and although I hadn't slept, I had a clearer perspective than I had five hours earlier. I asked a staff person if I could talk to Don. It was my hope that I could express my concerns in a less threatening environment and also not take up everyone else's time with my objections. I was striving to follow a process that was more acceptable to me and give Don an opportunity to hear my feedback in a situation where I would not be putting him on the defense in front of everyone else. She put me in touch with the head staff person, who told me Don was unavailable.

This parent, who seemed to have made the arrangements for the hotel, and whom I also knew to be the head of the local parent support group, said that he had some time to talk to me. He was very courteous and listened to my situation and questions. I told him that Kendall had left and would not be coming back to these Seminar Trainings. I said that I too was considering leaving. If I stayed, it would be because I wanted to understand what my daughter was being taught in Jamaica. He told me that I should not attend the seminar for my daughter, I should do it for myself. At this point, I had already concluded that this process was not the best thing for me and felt that I was in the best position to decide. But, I did not say this to the staff person. Instead, I told him that I was concerned about how the program handled situations where one family member did not complete the Seminars and others did. I asked if there was any provision in the program for these differences and how they helped the family reintegrate if not all attended the seminar. He told me that he was not in a position of authority to tell me what the program's policy was.

He shared his personal belief that it would benefit me to stay for the full seminar. He said that if I stayed for the third day, I would find it beneficial, no matter how hard it had been up to that point. I began to realize that he had given me all the information he had. He wasn't in a position of auhority to make a change to the system, to get Don for me or to address my concerns. He was just another parent, like me, and he believed that these seminars were the best thing for everyone, no matter what their problem. It became clear that if I had any objections to the proceedings or any unaswered questions, the only person in a position to address things was Don. And the only opportunity I would have access to him, was in front of the group. I thanked the parent for his input and went to breakfast.

Several parents saw me eating alone and invited me to join them at their table. I declined, thanking them for their offer. I wanted some space to think this through. I sat down and wrote.

Before the Seminar, there was no mention in any literature that this seminar involved personal therapy for myself. I did not think that I would need to consider how it related to my own personal therapy or our family's therapy with Kaiser. I assumed that I would not be asked to participate in any process that would be at counter-purpose to my current therapy. I also assumed that if any therapeutic activities in the seminar were to cause adverse psychological effects on me or others, there would be appropriate oversight, trained and licesenced mental health professionals available with an adequate safety plan to protect me from harm. I saw no reason to expect that I, as a parent, would be involved in any behavior modification treatment during the course of this seminar. I had clearly understood the term "behavior modification" as used in Teen Help literature to apply to my daughter's treatment at Tranquility Bay, not my own treatment.

Now, however, I realized that this seminar's purpose was to reform the parents. It was not a normal group therapy session that abided by the code of ethics I was accustomed to with Kaiser and Walnut Creek Hospital. Neither my husband nor I had been screened by the program to see if the Seminar was appropriate and relevant to our own personal therapy. Teen Help and Don seemed to assume that we had a problem and what ever our situation was, this was the best way to fix it. Don had made it quite clear, on several occasions that we would not have a child in the program if there wasn't something wrong with us. He had emphasized our need to self-disclose our personal problems and confess our shameful secrets to the group as a whole. I did not feel that this was the type of environment in which it was safe to be vulnerable and engage in such intimacy with strangers. As a matter of choice, I reserved intimacy for those I had known a long time and had sufficient reason to develop a relationship of trust with. I also reserved my personal therapy for controlled sessions conducted by a licensed mental health professional of my choice.

I continued to think things through. I had heard no explanation by Don or others of a safety plan in the case of a psychological emergency. The only mental health professional on the premises that I knew of was someone I hadn't seen and who hadn't been introduced to us by Don. A parent had told me there was a M.F.C.W. with a child in the program that he had been quite devastated to realize that his parenting skills, with all his knowledge of therapy, hadn't worked for his child. The doors were locked to the Seminar room and it was not possible for me to enter and ask questions before things started.

I reflected on my role as a consumer. I was paying over $2,000 per month in cash and barter for my child's treatment at Tranquility Bay, I had every reason to expect that I had made a wise purchase at the time I did it. I fully expected that all literature and information had been open and honest and accurately described what I was purchasing. In less than 24 hours, it was becoming clear to me that my