| Opinion
& Essays
-
Oct, 1993 Issue #24 |
WILDERNESS APPROACHES
Archie Buie, Editor
Therapeutic Wilderness Camp Newsletter
Cleveland, Georgia
706-865-7033
While on vacation in Seattle;
as editor of the Therapeutic Wilderness Camp Newsletter, I
called everyone I could find to locate a Therapeutic Wilderness
Camp for my mailing list. That is, as I know them; long term
residential campsite programs. I was quickly enlightened,
there were none. Why? I asked myself, knowing the TWC's were
the best tool America has to help its growing legions of troubled
youth.
I got my answer -- when I got
back to Georgia -- from a short article in WEA's THE
CAMPFIRE by Dr's Dene Berman and Jennifer David-Berman,
both PhD's. California, Washington, and Hawaii have all chosen
regulations "that effectively prohibit wilderness programs
from operating." Why was this so? Still a mystery but some
interesting results came out as I tried to get answers.
And, OK, I was looking for long
term programs. The west coast model is for shorter programs
characterized more as Treks, Trips, Adventures, Challenges
-- varying from a few days to as much as 96 days according
to results sought.
In the beginning, as they say,
the East Coast model began with Campbell Loughmiller
at the Salesmanship Club near Dallas, Texas.
His WILDERNESS ROAD outlines the basic model for the
campsite oriented, long term program that is widely used in
the Eastern United States. Loughmiller was very clear that
camping is an essential ingredient in helping a youth find
his way back to his family.
On the other hand the West Coast
model seems to spring from Larry Dean Olson, founder
of Anasazi, who found his connection with the wilderness
in a different way. His notion was to use the connection with
nature the wilderness provided to challenge, to provoke changes,
but not in long term living in it.
Actually, the differences appear
to stem not from philosophy as much as application of the
meeting-with-nature in terms of time. Both believed that a
young person could be shaped by his relationship with a nature
that is un-wrapped of buildings, streets, Walkmans, etc.
Kids respond to the wilderness
challenge both long and short term. The difference could be
in the seriousness of the youth's problems. Common wisdom
is that one third of all troubled youth will be helped no
matter what the wilderness program is. One third may more
or less respond to either type of program, long or short term.
One third will respond more slowly but will show more improvement
in long term wilderness camps. Vast over simplification, but
appropriate.
So! It would appear that both
systems have large benefits but for different groups of young
people. Which raises the problem of identifying accurately
who you are seeing during an intake interview, another question
entirely.
Long term VS short term is another
easy way to make a difference that isn't really meaningful
in our context. Both definitely have their place, both can
contribute.
They work to return kids to their
families able to cope with today's world.
Copyright
© 1993, Woodbury Reports, Inc. (This article may be reproduced
without prior approval if the copyright notice and proper
publication and author attribution accompanies the copy.)
|
