An interesting juxtaposition

Discussion in 'Scientology and Anonymous' started by Anonymous, Apr 19, 2011.

  1. Anonymous Member

    The Law Project for Psychiatric Rights (PsychRights) is a non-profit, tax exempt public interest law firm whose mission is to mount a strategic legal campaign against forced psychiatric drugging and electroshock in the United States.

    PsychRights is considered by some to be a legitimate patient advocacy organization and as much as that may be open to debate, like other "anti-Psychiatry" organizations, PsychRights has made it a point to distance itself from Scientology and CCHR in particular, as evidenced by the following disclaimer posted on their website .

    PsychRights has developed a "streamlined" Qui Tam (whistleblower) complaint model for use by former Foster youth as a means toward aiding these individuals in filing lawsuits against psychiatrists, their employers and connected pharmacies, essentially for filing what they consider to be fraudulent Medicaid claims for prescriptions of psychiatric drugs used in the treatment of conditions that these drugs were not specifically indicated for.

    According to PsychRights, this model can be easily modified for use by others wishing to file similar complaints such as parents, teachers, therapists, etc. and PsychRights stands ready to offer assistance to persons interested in bringing these lawsuits forward.
    Not too surprisingly, the first such interested person to come along and bring a case forward using this model would be none other than Randy Kretchmar of Chicago OSA/C.A.N. fame who for the last year and a half or so has been pursuing a case against child Psychiatrist Lilian Spigelman, M.D et al. on behalf of Linda Nicholson in the U.S. Northern District Court of Illinois (Case #: 10-CV-03361).

    PsychRights Press Release link...

    IncIdentally, Randy's case isn't going particularly well at this point, but perhaps more importantly, he seems to have done a splendidly uptone job of getting his nose under PsychRights tent. It remains to be seen how long it may be until PsychRights finds itself compelled to reconsider that CCHR Non Affiliation Statement of theirs or for that matter begins referring to itself as "Old PsychRights", if at all.
  2. Anonymous Member

    Oh FFS. Stop with the Industry of Deaths posts. This isn't a pro-scientology forum.
  3. Anonymous Member

    I take it that reading comprehension isn't your strong suit.
    • Like Like x 3
  4. Anonymous Member

    Thumbs down.
  5. Anonymous Member

  6. Anonymous Member

    A TL/DR just for you Anon. Try and keep up....

    An anti-psych outfit that considers itself legitimate on it's own terms or at least isn't rambling on about obliterating the "psychs" and all entirely...

    A. Goes on the record that it will not allow itself to be associated with CCHR no way uh uh they'z crazy.
    B. Releases a template for filing lawsuits against teh "Psychs".

    The first person to launch that template in court just happens to be a major CCHR shill and also one known to be a major player in the Cult Awareness Network takeover.


  7. Anonymous Member

    Based upon what you have presented to read, it works for me.

    It isn't just catholic priests who abuse children. At least once a year or more, where I live, there are charges of sexual abuse or other serious misconduct laid at the feet of some kind of medical practitioner.

    And yes, within the last five years, such charges involved a psychiatrist and his psychiatrist wife. There's a gruesome story from around here about a psychiatrist who used sadomasochistic drag to cure his female patients. He was also a professor at the local university. He's in the slammer, now.

    In no way am I anti-psychiatry. Benefited from it myself a few years ago. The doctor was a tremendous asset. I just think news of a place where individuals can blow the whistle on abuse of any kind, is probably a good idea.

    Any profession is gonna have some fucked-up practitioners, but just few, fortunately.
    • Like Like x 5
  8. Anonymous Member

    No doubt there are some serious problems within the psychiatric profession. Problems which have resulted in a proliferation of "anti-psych" sentiments and actions, some more well placed than others.

    My reasons for posting this thread weren't intended for debating the merits of psychiatry good or evil, but rather to draw attention to what appears to be a rather sly attempt by at least one person within Scientology to co-opt a non-affiliated "anti-psych" organization by inserting itself as an associate of that organization in spite of that organizations having made it abundantly clear that it wants nothing of the sort following previous failed attempts by Scientology to sidle up to it.

    I don't know the degree to which those persons involved in PsychRights are aware of Mr. Kretchmar's relationship to CCHR happens to be, but I suspect that if they aren't fully aware already (and they may well not be) they're going to be in deeper than they ever imagined possible before they know it.
    • Like Like x 2
  9. Anonymous Member

    Much food for thought and grounds for further research (and strong vigilance). Thank you for the heads up.
  10. Anonymous Member

    CCHR covers it's ass well. when I called All the Oregon legislators who were voting on the Psych bill that CCHR testified against, they didn't care. Same for TV and Newspaper.
  11. xenubarb Member

    Oh, please. Did you see the date on that? 2006. Do you think we were just twiddling our thumbs waiting for you to come along? We were not, and PsychRights gave us some lulz with their statement. We subsequently informed the fuck out of them.
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Anonymous Member

    Yes Barb, the CCHR non-affiliation disclaimer is indeed dated 2006 and stands to this day. Evidently they weren't informed quite the fuck effectively considering that they didn't begin promoting how wonderful it is that Randy Kretchmar has joined forces with them by being the first (and apparently only) attorney to run with their sue the psych's plan, which they've been issuing press releases on over the past year.
  13. DeathHamster Member

  14. Mantis Member

    well just because he's the only one on public record to be running with it, doesnt mean there arent other interested parties currently preparing whom have simply not been revealed yet.
  15. Anonymous Member

    I don't really know much of anything about Mr. Gottstein. From what I have seen, as much as I may not agree with his methods personally, he at least appears to be committed to his values. The whole kids, drugs, and psychiatry thing is a complex can of worms. People are going to have wildly opposing viewpoints but it is easy to see how the CCHR posse would want to PA him and PsychRights at every possible opportunity as further evidenced by those ARS postings.

    It's also easy to see why he'd want to distance himself from any of that as much as possible in order to maintain any legitimacy towards his own work. As for his sue the psych's on a Medicaid fraud technicality framework, while just as controversial, he put it out there for the world to use or ignore freely, and with that he has no real control over who chooses to pick it up or why.

    I'm not at all surprised that a CCHR aligned lawyer would be the first to pick it up and can't imagine that he'd have been too surprised by that either but thats right where things would have to get pretty weird. Suddenly promoting his own efforts and promoting CCHR become one and the same whether or not any CCHR related agenda is mentioned specifically. A parallel that likely has not escaped CCHR's attention either.
  16. Anonymous Member

    No question there. For that matter, if you or I happen to know anyone who's ever been prescribed a psych drug of any sort for a use which that drug hasn't been specifically indicated for, regardless of how widely used that drug may be for the condition that it was prescribed for, and thE purchase of that drug were paid for through Medicaid then you or I (or anyone else) could file suit against the prescribing physician, the physicians employer, and the pharmacy that supplied the drug on that persons behalf. WIN!

    Sure, it would probably get thrown out of court as it appears likely to be in this particular instance, especially if we also went full AnonOrange about our suit being an indictment of the entire profession rather than sticking to the facts of the actual case itself but that's neither here nor there. For a cult looking to expand it's obliterate the psych's agenda, even losing in court would still be seen as doubleplus win no matter who gets ground up in the gears along the way.
  17. Anonymous Member

    Hey hey! What's going on in this thread?
  18. Anonymous Member

    Apparently the same bunch that took down the Cult Awareness Network seem to be up to their old tricks again.

    Nothing to be concerned about.

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors


Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins