Re: SO children
[15 Apr 1997]

My own child was in pre-school at the Cadet Org. The preparation for first grade was non-existent
with the constant turnover of untrained and unqualified personnel (who were mostly cast-offs
that the other orgs didn't want on staff as they were "DBs" - degraded beings).
My kid ended up failing the first grade.

From: Miss X <>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: SO children
Date: 15 Apr 1997 06:49:08 -0400
Organization: Mail to Usenet Gateway
Lines: 149
Message-ID: <>
Comments: This message was sent with The MailMasher pseudonymous service
Comments: Please Report abuse to

> wrote:
> Miss X and others:
> At MY time in the Sea Org (late 1980s) things had not changed much. I was
> friends with a woman who worked as a nanny. She worked with others taking
> care of children who weren't old enough to be in the Cadet Org. I believe
> the ages for children in this capacity was newborn-6 years or so.
> It was a CONSTANT flap for many reasons. 1) they were undermanned by
> California State law constantly.

This was true back in the 70s as well. I remember one "all hands" where
most staff in PAC had to go over to the Cadet Org and be a nanny for a day
or two each week. This was when the Cadet Org was on Melrose Avenue.
We had to do this in addition to our regular posts *AND* get our stats
up too, of course!

> I think the ratio was supposed to be
> something like 1 adult to every 15 kids,

It depends upon the age as to the ratio of kids to nanny/child care worker.
In California in the 70s, it was one nanny for every 4 kids under 4 yrs old.
The Cadet Org was _WAY_ understaffed. The "all hands" was to create an
appearance that everything was legal when the inspectors came. I have an
issue on this where the SO actually admits that they were tipped off by
an ally inside the welfare dept that a "raid" was going to take place. This
is why $cientology has to put operatives (plants) inside government - to
alert them that they are about to get caught!

> but in reality it was like 30
> kids to one adult. Sometimes they knew when city/state inspectors were
> going to show up. When they had advance knowlege, they made sure that
> enough parents took enough kids out so that it would appear that they were
> compling with the law.

This was done in the 70s as well. I remember well that a few of the Cadet
Org nannies took a large group of children to the Hollywood parade one
year. I think it was 1978. I received a call from the Hollywood Police
asking me to come to the station to get my kid! The nanny had let my child
get separated from the rest of the group! This is not a very good thing
to let happen when you are a child care worker, especially on Hollywood
Boulevard around Highland Ave. This area is the runaway, prostitution and
drug haven of the US. I was never so relieved in my life than I was on hearing
the news that everything was OK.

> When the inspectors arrival was not known in
> advance, it was a HURRY to either a) get kids out
> b) tell the inspectors that some of the nannys were on lunch, or at
> school...etc.
> EVERY TIME it was a cover-up of some sort.
> 2) The kids I saw were not well taken care of. Ratty clothing,
> dirty/unkempt quarters, few toys. At least they ate fairly well from what
> I saw.

Shit. There is almost nothing good to say about conditions for the Sea Org
children. I brought a brand new crib once for my child. It was at
the Cadet Org when it was still located on N Bronson St, next to what is now
Celebrity Center. The building was at the corner of Franklin Ave and N
Bronson. Anyway, one day I went over on family time and my child's crib
had been moved to another room so someone else's child could use it. Kind
of like socialism where nothing really belongs to anyone! I was pissed
because my baby was on the *filthy* floor crying!

> 3) Kids that were sick were put in isolation - not the kind of Lisa
> McPherson isolation, but away from other sick kids, by themselves, all day
> long often alone in one room.

It is done by Flag Order. I have the issue in my "Sea Org 2D Hat pack".
No shit! Maybe I'll post this too!

> 4) Parents are allowed ONE HOUR PER DAY to have as "family time" with
> their children. How in the HELL are you supposed to raise your kids or
> have a family. And the survey says: you don't.

In fact, we weren't let off post until 5PM. We had to be back at the galley
(cafeteria) by 6PM. That gave us 1 hour including the time it took us to drive
through city traffic about 3 miles each way from the Complex to the Cadet
Org and back. So in reality, we actually had about 35 - 40 minutes max to
spend with our kids. I used to spend a little extra time with my child by
using part of my dinner time, which was 6:00 - 6:45. Muster was at 6:45
sharp. One did not dare to show up late, or ethics would be applied. The
second or third time one was late, a lower condition was assigned - like
"DOUBT" for "no report".

> I also often noticed that kids that had grown up in the SO or mostly in
> the SO did not join the Sea Org in great numbers. I often thought this odd
> until I was out and could lood back and see what kind of conditons
> (emotional and otherwise) they grew up in.

The schooling was very bad. My own child was in pre-school at the Cadet
Org. The preparation for first grade was non-existent with the constant
turnover of untrained and unqualified personnel (who were mostly cast-offs
that the other orgs didn't want on staff as they were "DBs" - degraded
beings). My kid ended up failing the first grade. (This is one of the
situations covbered in the Aides Order 203-71 that I have posted excerpts
from which states that "Quite a number of children are behind in schooling
which is absurd since we have study tech and wogs don't.") Some parents even
blew the SO and left their kids behind!

I wish that the child care regulatory agency would make a surprise visit
to inspect the conditions in the Sea Org with regards to the children.

> I'm not by any means slamming the nannys or other people who worked with
> children. They often gave them the love and attention they could, as best
> they could but the whole scene was f'd up from day one, IMHO.

Very. I left the Sea Org, in large part, because of a failure of $cientology
management to demonstrably care for the children. I wrote up many "knowledge
reports", "things that shouldn't be" reports, "hat dump" reports, etc.
Nothing ever changed to any lasting improvement. I used to take my child
to post (my job) with me because I could take so much better care.

> I do not know what conditons were like at other Sea Org locations. As
> stated before and by others, if you decided to have children, and were in
> the Sea Org at PAC, you got shipped off to a struggling Class V org.
> Struggling org = no money, having to land another job on top of your post
> and raising a family, AND still being dedicated to the SO. I have seen
> people do it, and the toll is enormous.

I have seen this too. Even Heber Jentzsch's wife (Karen) was upset with the
fact that Heber didn't spend more time with their child. She is divorced
from Heber now. I recently saw her web page.

> The treatment of children at PAC makes me BURN with anger - so maybe I'll
> post more about this. Oh yeah, you should have seen what happened when
> whole families joined the Sea Org and there was no berthing for them. But
> berthing at PAC is another strory for another day.

Agreed. I could write *volumes* about my experiences alone!

> Mr. Ex-CMO (and yeah, I was there to see all this first hand. So no
> God-D** PRing about it from anyone)!

That's how I feel too! Anyone who tries to gloss it all over is lying.

"Do not invite credit. We are a financial institution not a bank. The
Registrar should be provided with a bad risk list by Accounts.
Badly overdue accounts must now be sued." -- L. Ron Hubbard
from HCO PL 4 June 59 _Invoicing and Collection of Money_


Love, Miss X - Another Old Timer (ex-Sea Org) and "OT" ;-)