Your child freedom formula / child anxiety programmes - thread 2

[Psuedoshoes]

Carrying on the discussion of YCFF and other similar programmes...

Link to previous thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/child_adolescent_mental_health/4239684-your-child-freedom-formula-has-anyone-tried-it?msgid=108493516#108493516

Sam would have been allowed to post but it transpired that she’d also been posting pretending to be a parent but not letting anyone know that this is what she was doing. This also happened at the beginning when two posters with different usernames, pretending to be different mums, were actually the same person.

She has also been invited by MN to email them if she wants.

@Daaxy - I just reached out to a Mum who contacted me a few weeks back who had watched the Webinar but decided to do some more research and PMd me here regarding her concerns. I asked her to write a TrustPilot Review on the new 'Peaky Parent's TrustPilot account to highlight the change of company name and I guided her on the content so she is less likely to have it flagged or removed.

If you have had a bad experience you could also write a review - ensuring no false claims are made and these only relate to your experience is really important for TrustPilot as it may be removed.

I will keep an eye out for the review to be done as I know this Mum is busy and has two children experiencing anxiety.

I hope this helps signpost other prospective customers of the Robins' so that they can make a more informed and balanced decision about whether they want to proceed with them.

What accusations have been made? I initially did think it was an MLM but now i don’t think that.

And no, I don’t work for MN. It was explained in MichaelMumsnet posts.

JOR15 Honestly, if your partner is distressed by this thread the best thing he/she can do is to not read it.

The problem is you have posted a relatively emotive thread with not a lot of detail. (But at least no ! ). Most of the proponents of of YCFF/PP post highly emotive threads with very little substance.

Whereas the more skeptical want to understand, if the product is so good

• why there are name changes in the business?
• why there is such a hard sell technique with up front ££££ commitments (rather than a weekly cost)
• why there is no visibility on training / qualifications of the staff

This is not helped by the (now removed) claims of 100% success or the message that if it doesn't work it is because you the parent were insufficiently committed.

No business or caring facility should be beyond following due safeguarding and processes. No business is beyond due diligence from potential customers/users of a service.

I'm sure MN would be happy for Sam to come under her own name (and not simultaneously posting as a parent using the service) to answer

• what qualifications she and her employees have
• why the hard sell techniques
• why such large upfront fees commitment (even if can now be paid in stages)
• what she understands about safeguarding & privacy (wrt having videos of children online on the website)

However MN does not permit 'sock puppetry', and I suspect most posters on this thread would also not tolerate being ranted at or being told we are bad parents because we prefer to use therapy techniques with more visibility and background to them.

@SwanShaped I didn’t think you were, I posted at the same time as others so it got confused.
@JOR15 can you explain what accusations have been made?
Also, who is being hurt or suffering from this post?
Michael from MN posted to say that dick puppetry had been going on. It is clear he will have access to IP addresses and login email addresses etc so can clearly see that Sam has used different accounts which is why the post from her was deleted. This was explained by him in a post and an invitation for Sam to contact him to share her side on the thread,

Jor - I too work with children and vulnerable families. It can be hard work, challenging and draining. Families seeking help from PP are very vulnerable. People usually in that line of work are committed and caring and it sounds like that is what your partner is like.

The vulnerability of families is exactly why any organisation dealing with such clients needs to be regulated, ethical, professional, transparent, trustworthy. This offers protection to both the client and the provider. Some legitimate questions have been posed about YCFF/PP.

My understanding is that PP would see themselves as pioneering in the work they offer. No other provider in the country offers what they do. This of itself is a further reason why care should be taken to scrutinise the legitimacy or otherwise of an organisation that is to be entrusted with a child's well being.

I hope your partner receives the support and supervision she needs.If this was my business I would not want an employee doing this type of work, to do such hours. Boundaries need to be kept along with work/life balance otherwise workers burn out. I hope your partner is ok and is able to look after her own well being as well as that of others.

Exactly daaxy. I also have worked a lot in my time with vulnerable families and young people. I now don’t do front line work anymore but do work in the field. Nothing should be above scrutiny. And anything saying it’s proven should show that proof, particularly anything new.

swan I just wanted to post in support of what you've said, I am also hugely invested in this and no amount of manipulative, threatening or emotionally blackmailing posts from different user names are going to convince me that we should not challenge and scrutinise any service set up to work with vulnerable young people and families. Many of us on this thread have been subjected to belittling (" you mum's" etc etc) threatening (the "comfy sofa" video) behaviour from advocates of YCFF / PP. If Sam could have just come on and answered questions / criticism instead of being so dishonest, perhaps she could have come out of this in a better position.

I am not personally aware of any investigation that's going on, but if this company is all they claim to be then they should have nothing to worry about. All they need to to is be transparent and honest about their work, qualifications, procedures etc.

I've tried to stay calm and unemotional on this thread but I am as angry as you swan that these people are allowed to continue.

To the person claiming that their partner studied for 3 years to work with YCFF, do you know why YCFF/PP don't put this on their website? Instead the section about qualifications starts with deflection (Saying that psychiatrists etc are qualified and insinuating -I think - that therefore qualifications are not important?) Then some vague waffle about how some of the mentors are ex teachers or therapists and finally a rant about how they're not here to help you if you're a bad parent who cba to put the work in.

Anyway, I feel like doing another flounce. I'm sure I'll be back shortly though.

So now JOR/Martin has been zapped too. There’s a surprise.

I so wish I’d read the posts by ‘RobinsSam’ - I wonder (I can hazard a guess!) what they said..??

I'm sure they were a coherent and well reasoned response to the concerns raised on this thread.

@Mibb2 yes, I’m sure they were...

As I’m up early (a family member is in hospital and I’m worried so can’t sleep) I did some further research for my file.

It has long been suggested that YCFF/PP is using the Linden Method approach to curing anxiety and I’m certain they are.

The LM group were reported to the ASA for misleading claims over a decade ago; reading the report on the outcome of this ALL claims were upheld. The report (linked here: quackwatch.org/cases/foreign/asa/2011-2/linden/) is all too familiar based on the content of PPs newest website content (which is in effect a copy and paste from their old YCFF site as I took lots of screen grabs of it before it was taken down).

I just thought I’d post here to say that The Linden Method is very much still active and controversial.

What , Jor has gone?! I am catching on now (remember I am new to mumsnet) . So Jor has been removed by mumsnet because he/she has posted previously under different names using the same IP address - and is thought to be Sam or Mike?
I kind of wish mumsnwt would highlight the posts and make it clear the post is from someone doing the above rather than delete. Anyone reading this thread in the future would benefit from seeing the nature of the posts that are being removed and why they are being removed.

If Jor was not real, which now appears to the case, his posts were absolute drivel.

I am so naive! Jor posts achieve the counter effect of why they actually wanting to do which is to engage with people who question their business and practise. They are not doing this well so far .
It really would be helpful to have a professional dialogue about some of the concerns that have been raised

Hi daaxy, I reported JOR as I thought the writing style, tone etc were exactly the same as some previous posters. So on Mumsnet you can change username (lots of people do if they want to talk about something sensitive that they don't want linked with their regular profile), but what's not allowed is "sock puppetry" where someone posts from different names pretending to be different people and especially if it's a company pretending to be their own customer. There has been a lot of this obvious going on on this thread. I agree it would be great to still see the posts though.

You can change names on MN but you can’t post on a thread pretending to be different people, in order to manipulate people reading the thread. MN know if you’re the same person somehow. Like if I was on here, posting under different names in order to try to discredit peaky parents, then that would be deleted too.

So if you look at the first thread, then you’ll see some deleted posts. They’re also because it was the same person posing as multiple people, pretending to be parents. I didn’t know this until someone said it on the first thread. So now, if you think someone is the same person, then click on report.

It would be helpful for the deleted posts, to have highlighted why they’ve been deleted. I know it was mentioned by michael but anyone not reading the whole thread won’t know that.

Just be aware that if you announce you have reported a post or that you think someone is being deceitful you are likely to come under attack from one of the YCFF /PP people, so if you want to avoid then you might want to avoid mentioning it. I'm honestly past caring now so I don't mind who knows that I've reported or have suspicions.

"breakthrough" coach and parent on video testimonial, share the same (not very common) name:

• trustpilot review...

The video also mentions their child by name and discusses their personal details. FFS.