Talk:Residential treatment center

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Addictions and recovery, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of addiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Addictions and recoveryWikipedia:WikiProject Addictions and recoveryTemplate:WikiProject Addictions and recoveryaddiction and recovery
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Medicine: Society / Psychiatry Mid‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Society and Medicine task force (assessed as Top-importance).
	Psychiatry portal This article is supported by the Psychiatry task force (assessed as High-importance).

Psychology Low‑importance

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Social Work Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Social Work, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Social Work on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Social WorkWikipedia:WikiProject Social WorkTemplate:WikiProject Social WorkSocial work
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 10 September 2020 and 15 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Wikidlee13579.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 08:04, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Content removed from article

Over 1/3 of the RTCs in the United States are located in Utah, due to the state's large lack of children's legal rights.

An example of a locked RTC: Island View RTC, located in Syracuse, UT

An example of unlocked RTC's: Discovery Ranch, located in Mapleton, UT

Um...that's in the article. Piercetheorganist 23:30, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Verifiability

If edits being made to this page are being deleted for not being cited, then how is the claim of being "highly successful" with absolutely no citation allowed as well? Find some documentation if you require those who oppose to do the same thing please.DJJONE5NY (talk) 20:50, 1 August 2008 (UTC)djjone5[reply]

Im trying to add some references to the edit I just made. Can someone help me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cafetychris (talk • contribs) 19:42, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Updated the number of treatment centers to a more current number and added a source.Kkrupp (talk) 02:54, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Scope

I can't help but notice that this article pretends that residential treatment is only offered to adolescents, when residential treatment centres for adult suffering from alcohol and drug addiction (as well as myriad other psychiatric ailments) are quite common, as a quick Google search will demonstrate. Heather (talk) 05:38, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good point! I just did some minor reorganizing that I hope will make it easier for someone to expand the article to include discussion of residential treatment facilities for adults. --Orlady (talk) 14:48, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article still only talks about children in rehabilitation facilities — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.244.129.235 (talk) 04:19, 9 November 2018 (UTC) Kkrupp (talk) 05:33, 7 May 2020 (UTC)I think an expansion to include a discussion on RTC's for adults is very necessary. It would greatly improve this article.Kkrupp (talk) 05:33, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Efficacy

Unfortunately, measures of efficacy are tainted by political agendas. The question is often asked, "Does residential treatment work?" The answer is, "For who? The client? The state? Budget analysts?" There is no simple answer. By and large they do work for the client. The idea that because some don't they all don't, or because abuse happens at one it happens at all of the them is a logical fallacy that is pervasive. Politically, there is a large push away from accountability in adolescent treatment and toward a more "social-work" type model (because it is cheaper, not more effective). As a result, RTC's efficacy is called into question because it fits a political agenda to do so.Ooze2b (talk) 23:35, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

One can not argue to any useful outcome from the mere existence of political agenda. "Those people have a political agenda" must be the most useless sentence in any language, unless you believe that people are standing around muttering to themselves with their inside voice "lordy, anyone who can stand around like that spouting the obvious must have mojo acumen superpowers" before they all meekly capitulate. Nor does the polarization of "bad apple" impress me. That's what they said about Enron, using the rhetorical approximation 1=0. Opposite spin is 1=100% (preferrentially framed in terms of rats rather than apples). Neither side of this rhetorical device is remotely numerate. Enumerating the innumerate is not a long-term win, either. — MaxEnt 15:28, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Academic section

The section titled "Research on effectiveness" has an excessively academic tone and does not strive for balance.

It's easy to cherry pick papers showing one result or another. This batch is all current 2010–2012 and it's not by any means clear that the conclusions are representative of the issues warranting investigation, nor of the results obtained.

I trimming the long lists of three to six authors listed inline per citation (these remain in the citations themselves), but this hardly addressed the lingering problems.

What's needed as a starting point is a roll-up paper describing the major issues in the field with a survey of best established results. — MaxEnt 15:14, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Silo effect

I added residential treatment program as a second lead head because the various pages in this realm struck me as excessively siloed, without enough broad strokes in any one place.

It's not the only possible solution, and likely not the best solution, but it was the quickest way to make a small improvement and then to move along. — MaxEnt 16:06, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]