Troubled to Treasured

I recently attended a meeting, which supposedly was intended to help a youth who was having difficulty in school. He would not do his schoolwork and created disturbances in the classroom. By their own statements, the administrative staff admitted that they were at their wits’ end regarding ways to motivate this child.
I’ve heard the same statements in similar meetings and from frustrated parents as well. In most of these cases, there were no apparent handicaps other than social skills; the children demonstrated the ability to achieve academically, but they simply wouldn’t make an effort. In this case, as in others, the youth’s behavior was seen as a means to get attention. They were demanding that he meet their expectations by using intimidating and coercive means. They expected him, a socially handicapped child, to understand all the ramifications of their positions when they weren't even able to recognize or understand them themselves. By their own statements they had failed to motivate him; they had failed to recognize his real needs, and were failing to teach him academic as well as associated social skills to enable him to meet their demands. They were “putting the cart before horse,” so to speak and then blaming the child for their own failure.
In fact, they were reinforcing the very behavior they were trying to extinguish. But meeting the child's real needs must precede the response that they desire and that of society in general.
I don't mean to suggest that the many people working with children having these handicaps are ignorant or not sincerely interested in helping these children succeed, but they simply don’t have the appropriate knowledge or the skills to achieve their ends. Those that do have the skills are, too often, misled by false assumptions that have no basis in fact; there is no conclusive empirical evidence to support those assumptions.
In working with these children for over forty years, I have repeatedly succeeded in bringing about changes in their lives—often dramatic changes. I have helped them function much better and achieve their potential interpersonal relationship skills. I’ve worked with some considered the most difficult of all. I’ve worked with them in nearly every possible social situation.
The data I offer is neither new nor original, merely presented from a different perspective and correlated into a single comprehensive statement. When adhered to, I have consistently achieved the desired results. This is not a matter of my personal evaluation, but a matter of public record, as well as the testimonies of parents, clients, co-workers, and administrators.
In efforts to communicate this information to those working with these children, I’ve found that too many reject any input that may change their position. The subject is too complex to simply explain “off the top of my head.” Yet many of the parents I’ve spoken to can identify with what I say. They testify to my results, but they have also found difficulty being heard. When they attempt to communicate their knowledge of their child’s idiosyncrasies, they find themselves being blamed for their child’s behavior.
Those responsible for teaching the children blame the child for their own failings rather than question their methods. If a method isn’t working, the only logical conclusion is to change the method. The purpose of this book is to present other methods based on empirical evidence and recorded results.
My primary focus is to present evidence to aid in the recognition of specific, identifiable personalities who have many symptoms ascribed to other personality types, but who have additional symptoms which, collectively, identify them as a specific personality type requiring special treatment techniques. The techniques and concepts to be presented are not new. They are being de-emphasized in favor of more popular methods. Too many of the popular methods are based on false assumptions without empirical evidence to support them. What support they do have is inconsistent and merely based on chance results, or inadvertently using appropriate techniques, unknowingly and haphazardly.
My original intention was to describe a specific personality and effective methods for treating them. However, as I proceeded with my work, I realized it would be necessary to describe other personality types and the specific effective methods for treating them. My purpose for doing this is to emphasize the need for differential treatment methods as suggested by the authors of the “I-Level Theory” and attempted at The California Youth Authority institution of O.H. Close School for Boys in Stockton, California, in 1963.
In the following chapters, I intend to present the findings and theories of others, ones I have utilized to justify my assumptions and techniques. These early chapters (Section I) may seem complex for the layman and many parents, but I hope to clarify these complexities in the latter chapters (Section II) dealing with treatment techniques. My repeated results provide evidence that my techniques are successful, though some of my rationale may be questionable. I do not profess to be the most knowledgeable person regarding the many aspects of the human organism; however, my results testify to my skill in changing the behavior of children often described as “monsters” to the most loving and lovable children I’ve encountered. I might add that this is not, nor is it intended to be, a scientific treatise. However, it can well suggest several areas that would be worth thoroughly researching.
Unfortunately, my references are limited, since I never intended to present a scientific article describing my work much less write a book about it. Many of the articles from which I gained my data were never recorded. In many instances, data I acquired was secondary data that I encountered while doing other research work. At the time, they appeared to be merely unrelated bits of information, but later were found to be significantly related.
It is hoped that the readers will judge my work by my results rather than my literary skills.