Concerning negative Internet information about Foster Cline

After writing some ten books and numerous articles, some quotes and information about me has made it to the net. Some of the information on the net is factual and some is not. But the negative writing is not designed to really illuminate the issues but simply negate the effectiveness of therapy that has been used in the past to reach extremely disturbed youth. Those who wander through life negative and complaining and critical are always more vocal, it seems, than the satisfied folks. Thus there are plenty complaint departments, but no satisfaction departments. One way to evaluate negative information about anyone is to see if those complaining have constructive responses and answers. I haven't seen such from my critics.

I have been involved in two endeavors. One was founding, with Jim Fay, the Love and Logic Institute. The Love and Logic material has been published in seven languages, and parents and teachers all over the world have found the information helpful. No one, generally, takes umbrage with the Love and Logic material which deals with the parenting and teaching of children in general. Love and Logic materials, tools and techniques have absolutely nothing to do with the treatment of severely disturbed children. Use of all the love, tools and techniques that help healthy children grow may not always be enough to reach very disturbed youth.

While there is understandable disagreement on how to best reach and change severely disturbed children, there is general agreement that traditional and "safe" methods are often ineffective. In fact, a friend who works in prisons notes that many if not all of those incarcerated for serious and cruel crimes have a history of treatment and special education programs which obviously didn't work.

There is disagreement about the use of the more intensive methods that I wrote of in the '80s and '90s that was successfully used by a number of therapists to treat severely disturbed children. Anyone who is interested can find and view THE REPORTERS news video of a child successfully treated.

And the American Psychiatric Association and other well known authorities have disavowed the usefulness of holding children or confronting them heavily. The problem is, it is legally dangerous to advocate the holding of children and it is understandable that no one sticks out their necks to recommend it. Yet, I note that even now, in the winter of 2008, there was an NPR program positively highlighting the holding difficult children. No matter how the detractors of holding decry it, every one of us deep down inside knows that touch and holding are important in healthy relationships. I continue to believe that it is necessary to hold some children, look them in the eye and work through their anger and rage and help them reach loving conclusions if they are to be successfully reached. It is unlikely in today's climate that a severely disturbed child will ever be held and his or her problems worked through. But should it ever be done, it must be done by a trained person who best avoids control battles, and is most likely to reach a loving conclusion.

For example, looking back on her therapy that took place decades earlier, it is interesting to read what one woman has said about the more intense techniques after fruitless years of traditional therapy. Or the response of another after a hospital holding many years previously.

That being said, the majority of good and traditional therapists disagree with the necessity of using intensive methods to reach the severely disturbed.

There are websites that quote my writings and they have generally quoted me correctly, but taken out of context, my overall thoughts can be misconstrued, just as Christ, Prince of Peace, would seem a war monger if quotes from gospels were pulled out of context: "Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter in law against her mother-in-law." Matthew 10: 34-35

Lisa Greene, who coauthored a new book with me responded to a friend who had read some of the negative material on the internet. You may see that correspondence by clicking here.

For those of you wishing to really delve into my thoughts on bonding and attachment, I have put relevant information up on the professional areas of this website. Further, I sincerely hope any of you with questions and concerns will e-mail me with your concerns. Because of misinformation on the web about my moving to Evergreen and a letter of admonition I received from the Colorado Medical Society, I'll address those two concerns directly here.

Concerning moving to Idaho and my Colorado License:

About 1990, it was becoming obvious that Colorado was becoming crowded. A little smog was spilling over into our beautiful Evergreen Colorado meadow and it was getting hard to see the stars at night. My wife, growing up in Minnesota, the land of 10,000 lakes yearned for water. So we begin a three year search of where we might spend the rest of our lives. It was hard to decide. America is beautiful. But when we saw north Idaho, we knew our search was over. We moved here in 1993, and have loved it ever since, thanking God each day for life in the midst of a Kodak moment.

After three years after moving from Colorado, I remained licensed in four states: Colorado, Montana, Washington and Idaho. In 1996, I no longer had use for the Colorado license and requested it be placed on inactive status. Letting that license become inactive had nothing at all to do with attachment therapy.

Many more years after moving here, a child died in rebirthing therapy. My name has been linked to that death. Fact is, I had nothing to do with that death, and although I knew the therapist, didn't even testify in the trial.

In the 1980s, two therapists, (I supervised one and another psychiatrist, the other) treated a child who had been admitted to the foster care program after threatening to stab his little sister. I never saw or consulted on this boy. Based on the child's complaints, (the parents were in total agreement with the therapy and were willing to testify in defense of it) the two therapists were investigated for being too intrusive in a therapy session. After a through investigation, no reprimand or consequence was given to either therapist, and reportedly one was told by an investigator, "You deserve a gold medal for working with that kid".

Nevertheless, because I was involved in the supervision of one therapist, eventually, after 6 years, I agreed to a letter of admonition in 1995 by the Colorado Medical Board. In the admonition, I admitted no guilt and agreed not to engage in the physical holding of children in Colorado. At the time, I had lived in Idaho for a number of years, and was not even practicing in Colorado. I felt a legal hassle was not worth the expense even though I felt the admonition ill advised. It simply denied my right to do something I wasn't doing anyway, in a state where I didn't live!

Perhaps, now, knowing of the negative publicity that has been engendered in some quarters, I should have fought it. But to clarify, I retained my Colorado license for a number of years thereafter before finally, voluntarily allowing it to go inactive. I am licensed in Idaho, Washington and Montana.