Troubled Teen Industry

Nov 13, 2025 | Sexual Abuse

The “Troubled Teen Industry” is an industry made up of facilities designed to reform young people’s behavior into something more desirable. They include behavior modification facilities, wilderness therapy, boot camps, “tough-love” facilities, and more. Offending behavior could be disobeying their parents, drug use, or playing too many video games.

Parents who feel as though they are unable to control their “troubled teen” are promised by these facilities that they will return their child back properly disciplined and respectful. These methods of discipline are often rooted in a Synanon philosophy – a cult which pioneered the use of harsh behavioral modification techniques. Often, parents are sending their child off to what could be years of abuse, with a lifetime of trauma.

What helps perpetuates this abuse is the lack of legislation that allows many private facilities operate without any state oversight. If a facility does close due to allegations of abuse, it may be only temporary. Many will just move to a new state, change the name, and start again. In Missouri, faith-based organizations do not need a license to operate, as they are a considered a non-profit that receives no state funding.

Circle of Hope Girls Ranch

One Missouri facility that has gained recent national attention is the Circle of Hope Girls Ranch. The state of Missouri began an investigation into Circle of Hope this August, following allegations of physical, emotional, and mental abuse.

At least 25 girls were removed from the facility, whose goal is to “help young ladies who were destroying their lives through poor choices and behaviors, change their future”. Unfortunately, many of the residents’ futures are now ones filled with life-long problems stemming from months, or years of abuse.

The Circle of Hope owners’ daughter, Amanda, has been a vocal advocate against the abuse at her parent’s ranch for years. She took her advocacy to Tiktok, where it gained momentum. Amanda explains, “They have been working in the troubled teen industry for 30 years, so it’s been 30 years of abusing kids. I just wish people would understand that even though they’re troubled teens, they’re not teens anymore. They’re adult women.”.

New Lawsuits are Filed

Lawsuits filed recently cite two plaintiffs who were residents at Circle of Hope Girls Ranch as teenagers. The lawsuits allege multiple counts of sexual, physical, and emotional abuse.

  • Co-owner Boyd Householder appointing one of the teenagers as his “secretary”, a hand-picked position that allowed Householder to often isolate them from the rest of the group, allowing for inappropriate sexual remarks and activity.
  • Residents were allegedly prevented from speaking to one another “except in strictly regulated group environments”;
  • Staff and “senior residents” were allegedly ordered to monitor girls’ daily activities “at all times” including showering and restroom use;
  • Restricted restroom use such that some residents experienced “accidents” and were forced to work in wet or soiled clothes;
  • Physical abuse including throwing residents against walls or to the ground and performing “restraints” in which four or more people held the limbs of a restrained individual;
  • Under- and over-feeding to address perceived weight problems, along with forced feeding until girls vomited;
  • Limited water breaks during work hours;
  • Refusal of medical treatment; and
  • “Forcing residents into solitary confinement in complete darkness for days at a time.”

A Long Time Coming

Many former residents have shared their experiences with Circle of Hope Girls Ranch for years, but only now are investigations and lawsuits being filed. Why has it taken this long for something to happen?

As previously mentioned, the lack of legislation to properly regulate and oversee institutions of this nature is a large factor. In addition, the nature of how the facility is ran increases the difficulty for the residents to report abuse themselves.

These facilities limit, control, and distort any relationships the child has outside of the Ranch. They are under constant supervision, and all outside communication is monitored. If the abuser is always listening along on the phone call back home, the survivor may not feel as though they are able to disclose the abuse.

Survivors Face Additional Barriers to Reporting

Even if they are able to tell their parents, a friend, or law enforcement about the abuse, there may be no further action. Having already been labeled as a “troubled teen”, their credibility is diminished, and will be used in defense of the institution perpetrating the abuse. On top of that, there are additional obstacles to reporting that survivors of any situation face:

Confusion: Perpetrators take advantage of a child’s limited perception and general trust in adults. Many times, it is not until they are older that they realize what happened to them was inappropriate.

Denial: It can be easier to pretend the abuse never happened, rather than face the pain, fear, and shame that comes with admitting abuse. Especially if the perpetrator was someone the child trusted.

Fear: Fear that the perpetrator will continue to harm the survivor further, or the perpetrator may threaten to harm their family. There is also the fear that they will not be believed if they do disclose the abuse, creating further problems.

Shame: Many times, victims don’t want anyone else to know about the abuse. They feel embarrassed and disgusted. Perpetrators will feed into the idea that the victim brought the abuse upon themselves.

Moving Forward

Circle of Hope Girls Ranch isn’t the first, and certainly won’t be the last facility that commits cruel abuse against children as long as the law allows it. Policy changes that allow regulations and oversight are key to preventing abuse like this in the future.

We can educate ourselves, friends, and families about warning signs of sexual abuse in children. By being able to identify these warning signs, we can stop the abuse and help the child more quickly. In addition, creating an environment that helps survivors feel more comfortable to disclose the abuse will result in getting the help they need more quickly. This means not being dismissive of allegations of abuse and believing survivors. Even those labeled as “troubled”.

If you have questions about sexual abuse or these teen facilities, contact our office today. We have resources available for victims and attorneys. Our sexual abuse booklet introduces victims to their options within civil courts. Our firm always appreciates the relationships we can build with other firms through referrals and co-council.

David Mayer

Position: Managing Shareholder

Office: Kansas City

David M. Mayer is the managing shareholder of Monsees & Mayer, P.C., in Kansas City, Missouri, where he focuses on advocating for victims of sexual abuse, motor vehicle accidents, and premises liability. A Kansas City native, David is dedicated to seeking justice for his clients, particularly children and the elderly harmed by the negligence of others. Notable cases include a $5 million verdict for a swimming pool negligence incident, $24 million dollar sexual abuse verdict and numerous multi-mllion dollar confidential settlements in sexual abuse cases. His work has helped clients secure compensation for injuries from dangerous conditions in stores, car accidents, and other harm caused by negligence.

*This blog post is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or create an attorney–client relationship. While Monsees & Mayer strives to ensure the accuracy of the information presented, laws and legal interpretations are subject to change. Content on this site may not always reflect the most current legal developments. For advice regarding your specific situation, please contact Monsees & Mayer directly.

Our Proven Results

Witness Statements As Critical Evidence

Witness statements provide crucial evidence to support claims of sexual abuse. They help establish a timeline of events, reveal details about the abuse, and identify potential suspects. However, witness testimony must be carefully evaluated for accuracy and reliability.

Interviewing witnesses promptly after the alleged abuse is reported maximizes the chance of obtaining an accurate statement. As time passes, memories can fade or become distorted. Witnesses should be interviewed separately to avoid influencing each other’s recollections.

Look for witnesses who were present around the time of the alleged abuse and may have observed interactions between the victim and suspect or noticed signs of distress. Teachers, caregivers, family members or neighbors are examples. Their statements can corroborate the victim’s account and provide additional details.

Evaluate witness credibility by considering factors like:
  • Their relationship to the victim and suspect. Unbiased third parties may provide more objective testimony.
  • Consistency of statements over time. Contradictions may indicate unreliability.
  • Vested interests that could motivate false testimony. Look for witnesses with no obvious agenda.
  • Their opportunity to observe relevant events. Statements from those frequently with the victim and suspect are more credible.
  • Age, mental state, sobriety and other factors that could impact perception or memory.

Compare witness statements to look for both consistencies and inconsistencies in the details. Consistencies increase reliability while inconsistencies should be explored further. Witness testimony, combined with other evidence like medical reports, can provide persuasive support for claims of abuse. However, no single piece of evidence should be viewed as definitive proof. A preponderance of consistent and collaborative evidence is needed to substantiate such serious allegations.

How Cell Phone Data Can Provide Crucial Proof

Digital evidence from cell phones should be interpreted carefully, as there are limitations. Data can be imprecise or misleading, and records may be unavailable or incomplete. However, when used properly, cell phone data provides an objective, factual record that supports or refutes claims made by involved parties. In sexual abuse claims where evidence is often scarce, cell phone data can make a critical difference. By triangulating data from multiple sources, investigators can build a compelling timeline of events to support charges and secure a conviction.

Call Detail Records

Call detail records (CDRs) provide the date, time and duration of calls and messages. CDRs are useful for establishing communication patterns between individuals, especially around the time of the alleged offense. An abrupt change in calling behavior could indicate a significant event occurred. CDRs may also reveal the locations of the cell towers accessed during a call, providing further location details.

Cell Towers

Cell phones constantly transmit data to cell towers, which creates digital records that provide location information. This data, obtained through a search warrant, can reveal where individuals were during key points in time.

Cell Site Location Information

Cell site location information (CSLI) pinpoints which cell tower was accessed by a phone at a given date and time. Although not precise, CSLI can narrow down someone’s location to a few city blocks. By analyzing records over time, investigators can track the general path a person traveled. CSLI is often used to corroborate or challenge statements made by victims, witnesses or suspects regarding their whereabouts.

Precision Location Information

More advanced technologies like precision location information (PLI) rely on GPS and Wi-Fi to identify a phone’s location within a few meters. PLI produces a nearly minute-by-minute account of where a phone has been, providing critical evidence for timelines of events. However, legal access to PLI typically requires a search warrant due to privacy concerns.

Sexual
Abuse
Booklet

Download our free educational booklet to better understand how sexual abuse claims move through the civil court system.

Other Sexual Abuse posts you may be interested in.

Difference Between a Civil and Criminal Sexual Abuse Case

There is a difference between a criminal and civil liability case within the justice system. Criminal liability is brought against an individual(s) by the state or federal government in order to protect society, while civil liability is all about the survivor. The attorneys at Monsees & Mayer, P.C. advocate exclusively for survivors.

Criminal Courts

The criminal courts are entirely about the criminal; in this case, the sexual abuser. Cases are handled by a prosecuting attorney, and the purpose of the proceedings is to impose fines or prison sentences upon the abuser.

While some restitution or financial compensation may be awarded to the survivor, the criminal courts are a poor avenue through which to pursue it. This is because the purpose of criminal courts is to protect society as a whole, rather than advocate for individuals’ rights.

The criminal system’s standard of proof is “beyond a reasonable doubt”; in other words, an individual can only be convicted of a crime if the jury is certain the abuser is guilty. Because of this, there are many morally culpable people who escape criminal liability because of this doubt in proof.

Civil Courts

The civil justice system is all about helping sexual assault survivors. Cases are handled by civil attorneys, and the purpose is to obtain compensation for the survivors of sexual abuse. The survivor can seek compensation for the damages they incurred as a result of the sexual abuse: depression, loss of self-esteem or relationships, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), lost income and earnings capacity, medical expenses, and frequently, a lifetime of emotional distress.

The civil system’s standard of proof is relaxed compared to that of the criminal side. The survivor must prove their case by a “preponderance of the evidence.”  In simpler terms, the jury must “believe” the survivor’s case is more likely true than not; the scales must be tipped slightly in their favor. Therefore, even if an abuser escapes punishment in the criminal courts, they can still be punished within the civil court system.