Rules for Submissions
FamilyLightsm: Successor to Bridge to Understandingsm
Shows best in Internet Explorer.  May be distorted in Mozilla Firefox.


FamilyLight sm intends this website to become a place for exchange of useful information and discussion between people of contrasting opinions.  We welcome vigorous dissent.  However we expect dissent to be respectful and constructive.  We do not intend to permit the website to become a venue for libel or innuendo. We do not intend to be a venue for misleading promotional activities. 

In many cases, the best way to hold a school or program accountable for something you believe is a serious problem, is to alert referral sources and those who are evaluating for their own family regarding what they need to look for in their own evaluation rather than tell them what they will find.

Some specifics:

  • All persons submitting information and/or opinions for publication or intended to influence our own assessments must fully disclose their identities.  This means that we expect to have the person’s true name, at least one efficient means of instant communication (phone, fax, email address, etc.),  and the physical address and mailing address where they are located. 

  • All submissions must be free of propaganda techniques, such as glittering generality, broad brush, innuendo, and distorting the context to convey a wrong impression.  Generalizations must be backed with specific examples.  This applies whether a statement is in support of a school or program or criticizing it.  Examples:

    • References to the “unregulated” therapeutic schools and/ or “tough love programs” are not accepted.  The phrase “tough love” is welcome in its proper context but the only Tough Love program we are familiar with is the program of that name founded by Phyllis and David York. Most therapeutic schools and programs of concern to FamilyLight sm are subject to state regulation and many are subject to scrutiny by private accrediting groups. A reference to a particular school or program as being unregulated is fair but must be documented.

    • Reference to any provider as “the leading” provider would require a credible clarification as to why this provider rather than its direct competitors should carry that title.

    • References to a “sex addict” being on the staff of a program in a context that appears meant to suggest a child molester is not acceptable.  Such a reference would also need documentation of its accuracy and clarity of the purpose it serves. 

  • We want to hold schools and programs accountable.  However potentially libelous charges must be submitted in writing in a notarized statement.  One purpose of the Notary is to verify the true identity of the person submitting the statement.  Therefore we do not accept sworn statements lacking a notary seal even from states that allow statements under penalty of perjury without notary participation.  This statement must be accompanied by a release of liability and indemnification of FamilyLight sm for our use of the statement and (if applicable) authorization to release confidential information in so as to facilitate discussion of the allegations with the facility being criticized.  We have forms for this.  All such statements will be shared with the facility being criticized before we take any other action.  

  • We will be fairly liberal about “I statements.”   Examples of “I statements:” 

    • “I am not comfortable with the level of training of the recreation staff.”

    • “I particularly like the family visitation policy.”

    • “I encourage parents thinking of enrolling their child to take a close look at the liability release in the contract they will want you to sign.” 

  • We are likely to be more flexible with a person or organization responding to a criticism of itself than to the criticisms themselves. 

  • Our decision about whether or not to publish a particular submission is final. 

  • If a reader provides credible evidence of a deficiency in a school or program and we do not think we can safely publish the information we will watch for an opportunity to put the information out safely.

  • Schools and programs will be permitted the opportunity to publish a response to any criticism we publish about them. However the response must be point by point responding to the criticism and must not be an attack on the source of the criticism.

We appreciate your participation in our web project. 

Contact us regarding submissions

Last update June 6, 2009

                                    "Solutions, Not Just Referrals"

1999-2009 Thomas J. Croke & Associates, Inc.  All Rights Reserved.
Except lighthouse photo, which is public domain, no part of this website may be copied without permission.

For information  regarding use of content of this website, click here