Disclaimer: I know nothing personally about any of the people named in this post. I am relating only what has been written about each in publicly, easily accessible documents on the Web. I make no claims as to the innocence, guilt, or potential culpability of anyone named in this post. Finally, I am not a mental health professional, nor do I claim any special knowledge of the “therapy” described within this post. My opinions are my own, and not presented as anything but.
Backstory: “Proposition 8 Donor Arrested and Charged with Six Felony Counts of Child Molestation: Tom Daniels, Senior Pastor, First Baptist Church of Rio Linda, CA,” Lavender Newswire, December 30, 2010
A lengthy article in Friday’s Sacramento Bee, “Citrus Heights pastor ordered to stand trial on molestation charges,” reveals shocking new details about Tom Daniels, a.k.a. Tommy Gene Daniels, senior pastor of First Baptist Church of Rio Linda, who (as first reported on The Lavender Newswire December 30th) donated a total of $230 to Proposition 8, the 2008 ballot initiative which stripped the right to marry from California gay and lesbian couples — and who, on December 9, 2010, was arrested at his Citrus Heights home and charged with six felony counts of child molestation, including lewd and lascivious acts with a child under 14.
As it turns out, the child molestation charges are only the tip of the iceberg. Do read the SacBee piece in full — but do not neglect to read the rest of this post, which delves into the horrifying details of a point the SacBee only touches upon: Daniels’s connection to a fringe form of child “therapy” — the techniques of which bear little difference from some of those used at Abu Ghraib, from food and water deprivation to “stress positions” to crushing restraint*** — to which Daniels and his wife apparently subscribe.
Whether or not you will be shocked, you will be sickened.
Among the SacBee’s most salient points:
• Tom Daniels is accused of sexually molesting five children (presumably all foster or “respite care” children), all girls, at least one as young as five years old, over a five-year period.
• Four of those children were, reportedly, referred to the Daniels home for “respite care” by the same marriage and family therapist, one Mell LaValley (who, I’ve found, is listed alternately as Mell Elaine La Valley and Mell LaValley-Sandoval; the correct spelling of “LaValley” appears to be “La Valley“). According to the SacBee, which relied on court records, La Valley appears to have placed children in the Daniels home even after the Danielses ran afoul of the California Department of Social Services.
One does not need to be licensed in California in order to provide “respite care” (which the SacBee explains in detail). However, Daniel’s wife, Brenda (who, the SacBee notes, is “listed in bankruptcy documents [filed in November, 2010] as the church’s paid youth director”)…
…lost her day care and foster care licenses in 2003 due to substandard care, violations of state regulations, lying to state and county workers and misappropriating public funds — as well as her husband’s threat to a social worker about having a gun…
• That last incident involved Tom Daniels allegedly threatening a social worker over the phone when the state planned to remove a baby from the Daniels home.
Daniels later denied saying that he had a gun, according to the state documents. The couple told state licensing officials that Positive Option was fabricating stories to discredit them, since they had “planned to expose Positive Options (sic) as an immoral organization (a ‘Sodom and Gomorrah’ in Mr. Daniels’ words) which embraced homosexual and alternative lifestyles.”
For the record, Positive Option Family Service (www.pofs.org) describes itself as:
…a non-profit, licensed foster care agency. We provide services to children, from birth to 19 years old, regardless of age, race, or disability. We believe that all children have the right to a loving, caring, and stable family life. It is our duty to uphold these rights as we help our foster children cope with the loss of their biological families. We train our foster parents to care for foster children with emotional and physical needs and disabilities, providing them with tools for coping with the many challenges that our children present. Our goal is to help our children and the families caring for them to live together in a cohesive family unit until they can reunite with their families, or start their own lives with skills that will help them to thrive for a lifetime.
While I couldn’t find any evidence of “immorality” on the POFS site (much less a “Sodom and Gomorrah”-style angel-raping free-for-all), I expect Mr. Daniels was outraged by the fact that same-sex couples are (as are all single adults, for that matter) indeed eligible to apply as foster parents in the state of California, a fact alluded to on the POFS FAQ: “1. What are the requirements for being a foster parent? You may be single, married, partnered, divorced or widowed to become a foster parent…”
• The SacBee has received no response from either La Valley or her lawyer as to whether La Valley knew the Danielses’ childcare licenses had been revoked. But before you give La Valley the benefit of the doubt, consider this:
LaValley … is associated with a controversial Colorado woman who promotes a coercive treatment for children with Reactive Attachment Disorder.
Before we get to that “controversial Colorado woman” and that “coercive treatment,” let’s take a look at Reactive Attachment Disorder (RAD).
Explains the Mayo Clinic (bold emphasis mine, the reasons for which will soon become obvious):
Reactive attachment disorder is a rare but serious condition in which infants and young children don’t establish healthy bonds with parents or caregivers.
A child with reactive attachment disorder is typically neglected, abused, or moved multiple times from one caregiver to another. Because the child’s basic needs for comfort, affection and nurturing aren’t met, he or she never establishes loving and caring attachments with others. This may permanently alter the child’s growing brain and hurt their ability to establish future relationships.Reactive attachment disorder is a lifelong condition, but with treatment children can develop more stable and healthy relationships with caregivers and others. Safe and proven treatments for reactive attachment disorder include psychological counseling and parent or caregiver education. …To feel safe and develop trust, infants and young children need a stable, caring environment. Their basic emotional and physical needs must be consistently met. For instance, when a baby cries, his or her need for a meal or a diaper must be met with a shared emotional exchange that may include eye contact, smiling and caressing.A child whose needs are ignored or met with emotionally or physically abusive responses from caregivers comes to expect rejection or hostility. The child then becomes distrustful and learns to avoid social contact. …Controversial and coercive techniquesThe American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, the American Psychiatric Association, and the American Professional Society on the Abuse of Children have all criticized dangerous and unproven treatment techniques for reactive attachment disorder. Controversial practices can be psychologically and physically damaging and have led to accidental deaths.Some unproven treatments for reactive attachment disorder include:• Re-parenting, rebirthing• Tightly wrapping, binding or holding children• Withholding food or water• Forcing a child to eat or drink• Yelling, tickling or pulling limbs, triggering anger that finally leads to submission
Mayo concludes: “Beware of mental health providers who promote these methods. Some offer research as evidence to support their techniques, but none has been published in reputable medical or mental health journals. If you’re considering any kind of unconventional treatment, talk to your child’s psychiatrist first to make sure it’s legitimate and not harmful.”
The American Psychiatric Association is even more direct in its Position Statement on Reactive Attachment Disorder:
While some therapists have advocated the use of so-called coercive holding therapies and/or “re-birthing techniques”, there is no scientific evidence to support the effectiveness of such interventions. In fact, there is a strong clinical consensus that coercive therapies are contraindicated in this disorder. And unfortunately, as recent events attest, such unproven and unconventional therapies can also have tragic consequences.
Now, what kind of adult would ever forcibly bind any child, emotionally disturbed or not, withhold food or water from a child, force a child to eat or drink, or deliberately provoke a child into a rage?
That “controversial Colorado woman,” that’s who.
Meet Nancy Thomas, who is described as follows by Advocates for Children in Therapy, “an educational and public advocacy organization dedicated to halting the dangerous cruelty done to children by Attachment Therapy” (again, bold emphasis mine):
Nancy L. Thomas is a leading proponent of Attachment Therapy parenting methods (a/k/a “Nancy Thomas Parenting”).
Thomas has no formal training in psychotherapy and no academic credentials. She calls herself variously a “Therapeutic Parenting Specialist,” a “secondary lay-therapist,” and “co-therapist” in Intensive Holding Therapysessions. A former dog groomer, Thomas learned many of her methods working as a “therapeutic foster parent” under Foster Cline at the Attachment Center at Evergreen (now Institute for Attachment and Child Development).Thomas claims to have been trained and worked with other Attachment Therapists as well, including Lloyd Boggs, Neil Feinberg, William Goble, Deborah Hage, Daniel Hughes, and Michael Orlans. She was a part of Connell Watkins & Associates at the time Watkins killed Candace Newmaker.
In 2002, the peer-reviewed Scientific Review of Mental Health Practice (SRMHP), in its unequivocal dissection of AT, “Attachment Therapy: A Treatment without Empirical Support,” summed up the Connell Watkins case:
Few events have raised so many questions about the validity of a mental health intervention as the death of 10-year-old Candace Newmaker during a therapy session in April 2000 (Crowder, 2000). The conviction in a Colorado court of the two principal therapists in the case made national news a year later. Connell Watkins and Julie Ponder were each sentenced to 16 years’ imprisonment on charges related to Candace’s death (Lowe, 2001).
Watkins and Ponder were carrying out an exercise called “rebirthing” as part of their practice of attachment therapy (AT). Candace’s adoptive mother, Jeane Newmaker, had brought Candace to Colorado on the advice of therapists in North Carolina, seeking treatment for symptoms she believed to be caused by an attachment disorder. According to testimony at the Watkins-Ponder trial, a therapist in North Carolina had diagnosed Candace with Reactive Attachment Disorder (RAD) on the basis of a questionnaire filled out by Jeane Newmaker.At the trial, as well as in published material and on associated Web sites (Randolph, 1997a), practitioners and advocates of AT asserted that research evidence existed supporting the treatment. Some government agencies and insurance companies have apparently agreed with this claim. States have appropriated funds for the practice and teaching of AT (New Hampshire Executive Council Minutes, 1999), and testimony at the trial referred to payment for treatment through health insurance. There has been little formal opposition to AT. Only a few clinicians (Hanson & Spratt, 2000; James, 1994; Lieberman & Zeanah, 1999) have published criticisms of AT; legislation attempting to control the practice has been passed in only one state, Colorado, and, as of this writing, has been proposed in Utah.
Back to ACT:
Thomas also had strong ties to the infamous Cascade Center for Family Growth (in Utah), which is now closed.
Thomas’s specialized parenting methods are based on isolation, deprivation, humiliation, and being non-communicative with the child. She claims her methods are effective not only to treat children with Reactive Attachment Disorder and the bogus “Attachment Disorder,” but also Asperger’s, Tourette’s Syndrome, and those who have been “ritualistically abused” by satanic cults. One of her online workshops carried this warning from the host (Foster Care & Adoptive Community): “PLEASE NOTE: Some of the strategies outlined in this workshop may be considered in-humane and unethical by many child protective agencies and can result in an investigation and loss of foster care license.”Today, Thomas lectures widely. She claims to have instructed “over 28,500 parents and professionals.” Thomas sells her books and tapes through her organizations — Families by Design and the non-profit (Stop America’s Violent Youth). Thomas materials also are sold by Love and Logic. …
On the same page is an exhaustive — and horrifying — list of quotes attributed to Thomas and some of her adherents; I am sorely tempted to excerpt a small sampling here, but that would not be in my best interest (see Christopher Mooney’s “DMCA Abuse Challenge Rejected in Maine,” January 1, 2010).
Just read the quotes. Promise yourself you’ll read the quotes.
So, what does all this torture have to do with “Tommy Gene” Daniels, his wife Brenda, and Mell La Valley, the MFT who kept sending RAD children to live in the Daniels home?
Back to the SacBee:
LaValley is listed as a “parent recommended” attachment therapist on the website of Nancy Thomas…
The Daniels told a state licensing worker in 2003 that they had attended a seminar on the “Nancy Thomas model” for children with RAD.
This, of course, does not mean that either Tom or Brenda Daniels ever employed the “Nancy Thomas model.” Frankly, considering the two sentences above I just quoted, I cannot imagine they did not; but I cannot know, nor would I ever dream of accusing them, or anyone else, of doing such a thing.
For more information on the torture of children under the guise of RAD “therapy,” start Googling — and check out the rest of the Advocates for Children in Therapy Web site, as well as the additional links at the end of this post.
One article in particular, originally published on phillyblog.com (now offline, but reproduced hereand here), “$35,000 College Fund Spares Parents Up to 30 Years in Prison (Utah Parents Accused of Starving Russian Adoptees; ‘Attachment Therapy’ Parenting in Picture,” brings it all home — and makes me ask the question: How is any proponent if this dangerous, sometimes lethal quack “therapy” allowed to walk free on the streets?
A Utah couple who used AT parenting techniques, and as a result were accused of “one of the worst” cases of child abuse ever seen by local authorities, was able to strike a bargain with prosecutors and avoid jail completely
Theresa and Reed Hansen had been accused of felony and misdemeanor charges for withholding food, sometimes for days at a time, from two of their three children adopted from Russia (Hansen Siblings Victims Page), who were of pre-school age at the time. All three adoptees were removed from the home in 2002 and have thrived since in new adoptive homes. …Teresa Hansen was on probation for early charges of beating one of her adoptees a year before. …One of the new adoptive parents for the abused children correctly calls the penalties a “slap on the wrist.” Even prosecutor Sherry Ragan called the deal “a tradeoff to get back the money,” perhaps a reference to adoption subsidies possibly paid to the Hansens.The only significant consequence of the guilty pleas is that the Hansens will never again be able to adopt. Unlike other parents found guilty of child endangerment, the Hansens are in no danger of having their biological children removed from their home. Authorities say the Hansens’ biological children were treated better than the adopted ones were, and are in no perceptible danger. No mention was made of the Hansens “forfeiting” their right to raise children because of almost killing two of them. An argument similar to that was made by Ragan in pressing for prison time for Jenette Killpack.
The Killpack case is the one involving the Cascade Center for Family Growth mentioned in ACT’s profile of Nancy Thomas. For just some background on that horror story, see:
“Provo child center under fire,” Deseret News, April 17, 2003 (“The Orem-based center was thrust into the debate over holding therapy following the water intoxication death of a 4-year-old Springville girl. Police say the adoptive parents of Cassandra Killpack forced her to drink substantial amounts of water as punishment for taking a sibling’s soft drink. Richard and Jenette Killpack are charged with felony counts of child abuse homicide and child abuse. A criminal investigation into the girl’s death revealed the Killpacks took the girl to the Cascade Center during the week prior to her death. …”)
“Water intoxication trial continues,” BYU Universe, September 26, 2005 (“The most disturbing testimony of the day came from another neighbor, Maria Wilkey, a friend of Jenette’s who served in their ward’s primary presidency. Wilkey … told the jury of an incident that happened in September or October of 1999. Richard Killpack called her while he was away in Texas, asking her to go to the house and visit Jenette because she was upset. Wilkey found Jenette in tears because she had strangled Cassandra for not swallowing her food. Wilkey said there were bruises on each side of Cassandra’s neck around her collarbone. Wilkey also said Jenette had told her she didn’t know if she wanted to keep Cassandra after taking her to an LDS temple. The jury watched a videotape of a police interview with the Killpacks 7-year-old daughter on Wednesday. The girl told of how she helped her mother tie Cassandra’s hands behind her back so they could make her drink water as punishment for sneaking a sip of her younger sister’s juice.”)
“Mom convicted in daughter’s drinking water death seeks parole,” KSTU, January 19, 2011 (“Cassandra Killpack died in 2002 after prosecutors said she was forced to drink too much water. Jennete Killpack claimed during her parole hearing the child drank only 24 ounces of water. Parole board chairman Curtis Garner said prosecutors claimed it was about a gallon. Killpack acknowledged she forced the girl to drink water, as well as other harsh forms of discipline, but claimed it was on the advice of therapists who were treating Cassandra for behavioral problems. … Killpack was convicted by a Provo jury in 2005 of child abuse homicide, a second-degree felony, and sentenced to serve 1-to-15 years in prison. That same jury acquitted her husband, Richard, of the same charge.”)
(The name Killpack immediately rang a bell for me. Does anyone know if Jenette Killpack is related to Sheldon Killpack?)
“Control over food,” continued the phillyblog.com article…
…is a common device used by parents involved with Attachment Therapy parenting techniques. AT ‘parenting specialists,’ such as Nancy Thomas, counsel that parents must pick their battles with their children and win them at all costs. Starvation, or near-starvation, is a clear risk with such parental strategies; it has been reported in several cases around the country, with Nancy Thomas AT parenting involved. (For instance, see Heiser Victim Page.) Some of Nancy Thomas’s books were reportedly found in the Hansen home. Business cards from the now-defunct Cascade Center for Family Growth were also found there.
• Finally: This is not the first time Tom Daniels has been arrested on suspicion of child molestation. Reports the SacBee:
Daniels was first arrested in 2005 by Citrus Heights police on suspicion of molestation, but no charges were filed. Citrus Heights Police Lt. Ray Bechler said additional victims later came forward, and the Sacramento County District Attorney’s Office elected to proceed.
The Danielses “had been under intense scrutiny for years from child welfare agencies,” notes the SacBee, with records showing “[frequent visits] by state, county and foster agency workers, following up on complaints about lack of supervision, mistreatment of a distraught foster child and children biting and hitting” before the couple’s childcare licenses were revoked.
I’m glad of only one thing: the knowledge that Tom Daniels will stand trial. Conviction or acquittal, it seems imperative that any prosecutor worth his or her salt must explore the “Nancy Thomas model,” and whether or not such prescribed torture techniques had anything to do with the alleged sexual molestation of five little girls.
More recommended reading:
“Attachment therapy“
Wikipedia (yes, a very good, well-linked article)
Wikipedia (yes, a very good, well-linked article)
“Be Wary of Attachment Therapy“
Shannon-Bridget Maloney, Quackwatch, July 24, 2003
Shannon-Bridget Maloney, Quackwatch, July 24, 2003
“Attachment Therapies: A Deadly Cure without a Disease?“
Review of Attachment Therapy on Trial: The Torture and Death of Candace Newmaker
Jean Mercer, Larry Sarner, and Linda Rosa, Scientific Review of Mental Health Practice , 2004
Review of Attachment Therapy on Trial: The Torture and Death of Candace Newmaker
Jean Mercer, Larry Sarner, and Linda Rosa, Scientific Review of Mental Health Practice , 2004
“Report of the APSAC Task Force on Attachment Therapy, Reactive Attachment Disorder, and Attachment Problems“
American Professional Society on the Abuse of Children, February, 2006
American Professional Society on the Abuse of Children, February, 2006
“Enclosed beds cause controversy: Is it a cage or bed? Cruel or therapeutic?“
USA Today, January 17, 2006
USA Today, January 17, 2006
“Pat Schroeder’s endorsement of Rage Reduction Therapy: The Cult of the Celebrity Strikes Again“
Linda Rosa, RN, Scienced-Based Medicine, October 8, 2010
Linda Rosa, RN, Scienced-Based Medicine, October 8, 2010
“Attachment Therapy (AT)“
Evidence-Based Medicine (ebm-first.com)
Evidence-Based Medicine (ebm-first.com)
Comments on this post are closed, and will remain closed. I am all too aware of the movement to silence critics of what I personally consider a dangerous, destructive quack “therapy,” and I have neither the time nor the desire to 1) debate proponents, nor 2) be deluged with astroturf comments. Furthermore, any attempt to promote “attachment therapy” via comment on any other post or static page, or by any other means, will result in the commenter being banned from this site, permanently. As always, of course, threats or other abuse or harassment will be forwarded to the originator’s ISP and, if warranted, to appropriate law enforcement authorities.
*** Yes, I would say rape, too, at least in the figurative sense. What is rape but the twisted gratification of forcing another human being to submit to one’s will through violent physical assault? By the time you finish reading the quotes on the ACT page linked above, you’ll see exactly what I mean. If you need more convincing, read this commentary on Adrienne Rich’s classic poem about rape: “Rape is not about sex and lust; it is about power, about making another person submit to violent sexual atrocities out of fear. It is about shaming and debasing someone else and getting high from it. It is all about power and control that is seemingly absent in all other aspects of the rapist’s life.” Remove the word “sexual” from this quote, and you end up with a most fitting description of the “therapy” discussed here.
If you find yourself scoffing at this as some sort of radical-feminist tripe (oh, yes, I know more than a few reading right now think exactly that), then consider these words from someone who most certainly does understand the concept, psychologist Jan Hunt, M.Sc., “attachment parenting/unschooling counselor,” author and director of The Natural Child Project, in her short essay, “Holding Therapy” (a must-read in its entirety):
As Alice Miller wrote:
I regard [holding therapy] as a kind of violation. People with the best intentions just don’t feel what they are doing when they violate the rights of another person – the child. … Force, the therapy implies, is used for the child’s own good, and the child will be rewarded and loved for his tolerance in letting it happen. He will come to believe that force contributes to his well-being and is ultimately beneficial. A more perfect deception and distortion of someone’s perceptions is barely imaginable.
It is human nature to resent and resist the use of force. The use of forced holding by a parent will inevitably engender strong feelings of fear, confusion, helplessness, anger, and betrayal as the child’s natural attempts to break free are disregarded by those they have come to love and trust. When held by force, the child finally understands that freedom comes only by giving in to outside control – a dangerous lesson to give to a young child. Their will can be broken, but that is not what I would call psychological health. Imposing any action by force on a child, who is in no position to make an informed choice, is unconscionable. … When a child cannot say “no”, what does his “yes” really mean? The coerced child has learned to feign attachment behavior. Such dissimulation is at the core of the sociopathic personality. …There is yet another compelling reason to challenge this procedure: how can we justify forced holding in a society where children are cautioned – for good reason – to “say no” to unwanted touch? Whether by a parent, therapist or stranger, physically overpowering a helpless child is wrong. Justifying it by calling it “love” or “therapy” is a violation of the child’s trust and understanding of life as he has come to know it. Like all other forms of forced compliance, forced holding associates love and submission. Delusional defenses are likely as the child tries to comprehend and make sense of something he knows in his heart to be a distortion of what love should look like. …How sad that something as lovely as having a child in our arms – when the desire is mutual – has been perverted into such a heartless practice.
1 comment:
Russian tiny humans in Utah. Praise the lord. Where is Mittens?
Post a Comment