On June 24, 2001, Teresa Summers,
Vice-President of the Lisa McPherson Trust (LMT) posted one of those
"Scientology is evil incarnate" / "LMT is our savior"
posts. The unavoidable horror stories were duly present. It contained,
however, a few details about one of the suicides Mike
Gormez likes to collect on his web site to depicts Scientology as a
dangerous and murderous cult, the suicide of Greg Bashaw. Unwittingly,
Teresa Summers provided indications that the LMT may not have been
completely innocent in this case.
According to Summers, Greg had been involved
with Scientology for many years and had been auditing OT VII for a long
time. In February 2001, we are told, he was in a psychiatric ward
after having tried to kill himself three times. While there, Teresa
"hooked" him up with two OTs to "discuss body
thetans"!! Some time later, Greg took his life.
The thing here is that Summers just admitted
that the LMT intereferred with the psychiatric treatment Greg was
undergoing. Talking to him about "Body thetans" may have
worsened his case rather than improve it. Letting qualified
practioners treat him would have been much wiser.
Needless to say, altough Rod Keller's
"ARS Weeks in Review" is supposed to "summarizes the
most significant postings from the Usenet group Alt.religion.scientology",
Keller doesn't mention a word of the raging controversy in ARS, only the
fact that a Scientologist committed suicide. This is consistent with his
common practice where things that badly reflect on critics are carefully
censored out of his "ARS Week in Review".
Do we have any other
information than Teresa Summers' post about this case?
No. Jim DBB tried to back-pedal for the LMT,
saying Teresa's only "alluded to some things in a vague way",
but neither he nor anyone else from the LMT have provided anymore details
- even though these are supposed to exonarate the LMT. Later on he came up
with a similar excuse claiming the post was a "camoflouge
post" (sic) but failed to answer the logical questions that arise
from such an allegation.
Was the death caused by
something done by Scientology in trying to cure him, or by Greg's distrust
of psychiatrist?
No. Summers clearly said in her post that
"Scientology wouldn't help him any longer". As for the
argument brought up by Tory Bezazian, another Scientology apostate and
apologist for the LMT, that Greg, as a Scientologist, "wouldn't/couldn't
really see a psych to get some help", it is simply belied by the fact
that Greg *WAS* in a psychiatry ward where psych tried to help him until
the interference of the LMT-recommented OTs.
Excerpt from Teresa Summer's post that mentions the suicide (which will
later be revealed by JimDBB as being that of Greg Bashaw).
In closing, I want to share one more little story with you that I
hope will
refocus all of this and reiterate what ALL of us at the LMT are really
working
for and against.
In February of this year, an older gentleman came into our office. He was
distraught. I sat and spoke with him for about an hour.
It seems his son, who was in his late forties, had been involved with
Scientology for many years. He had been auditing OT VII for a long, long
time
and was now in a psychiatric ward after having tried to kill himself three
times. This father was trying everything he could think of to help his
son.
He was desperate not to lose him.
After speaking with him, I learned that the problem was the son could not
accept the help of anyone outside of Scientology, but Scientology would
not
help him. The son was having a problem with these body thetans and since
Scientology wouldn't help him any longer, he felt no one could help him.
Well, the only thing I could think to do was hook the son up with another
OT
VII that he could talk to. Someone who could discuss body thetans as if
they
were real...at least long enough to get the son stabilized. And it did
work,
somewhat. The two OTs spoke and the son was able to be released from the
hospital.
But, he was not in good shape. Scientology had abandoned him; and he had
donea lot for them. He couldn't pull it together. Many people tried to help
him,
none of them Scientologists.
I just learned this morning that he killed himself.
He is not the first. I don't believe he will be the last. But I do
hope and
do work every single day with the hope that some day, this will end.
Diane Richardson catches up Tory Bezazian
(Magoo) trying to capitalize on this incident
On Sun, 24 Jun 2001 05:23:50 -0400, Magoo
<magoo44@worldnet.att.net>
wrote:
[snip]
>The or what is just this:
>He works for OSA...who in fact is SUPPOSED to be safequarding
Scientology. If they were doing what they are supposed to be doing, this man
would most probably never have died. If one is really taking care of people,
even if someone is "an illegal PC".....well, let's look at how it
actaully is, and then what it should be.
>Ok....auditing is the solution to EVERYTHING, so Scientology says.
And the Psychs are ALL evil, so Scientology says. So the Only *real* form of mental healing is via Scientology. However, if you are someone like
this young man,,,,who they then decide is an "illegal PC"
(after taking much of his money and indoctrinating him re BT's and how those BT's MUST be handled as any BT's are handled...with ONLY the "true"
tech of NOTS) ...here is what happens.
>Now you have someone so fully indocrinated and screwed up that he
knew he had to handle his BT's ..yet Scientology wouldn't help him. He was
so bad off he tried to kill himself, but wouldn't/couldn't really see a
psych to get some help...as they are all evil and bad. Soooo what happens? He
kills himself. How utterly sad for his father and family who tried so hard
to get him help.
If you're referring to the story related by Teresa Summers, either
you
or she have misrepresented the facts.
Teresa Summers claimed this guy was in a psychiatric ward when she
was first contacted by the guy's father. That's not quite the same as
your claim that he "...wouldn't/couldn't really see a psych to get
some help...."
So what's the truth? Or are you both inventing "facts"
as you go
along?
>What SHOULD have happened? Scientology,
even if they had decided they could not help him, should have insisted someone (some
"OT" close to him) stayed with him and somehow bridged him over into some real help.
This is disgusting.
What's disgusting is the LMT staff's belief that they are
qualified
and competent enough to treat mental illness. What was related
in this story sounds hauntingly similar to what happened to Lisa
McPherson.
>Having lived through their
medical-malpracitice myself, I have some very personal reality on how bad this can be. I wasn't an illegal PC
...but they sure put me through some very bad times. The fact that they
hope and wish the world respects them as a *real* religion is killed by this
very abusive neglegance that they do, over and over again.
>Shame on you, Scientology. Ever single one of you.
>And don't say you didn't know about him. If you are on this newsgroup...you know this thing is happening on a regular basis, in
one form or another.
>What are YOU going to do about it?
I think the question you need to answer is what are YOU going to
do about LMT interference in situations that should be dealt with
by qualified mental health professionals.
Sending in two OT VIIs to a mental ward to assist a man in
"dealing with his BTs" is nothing more than intefering in the
medical treatment of someone found to be in need of treatment.
What makes you think such interference "helped" this man
rather
than made his condition worse? It certainly doesn't look that way
from what I've read.
>[Diane is using "you" to refer to Tory Bezazian, whose
post she followed up. I'm just jumping in with my take on Diane's charges.]
>>If you're referring to the story related by Teresa Summers,
either you or she have misrepresented the facts.
>I think there are a couple of facts missing:
There's more than "a couple of facts" missing in this
story.
>whether or not it was a voluntary commitment, whether the OT's were trying to treat him or
were just available for conversation, whether they encouraged or
discouraged him to cooperate with real mental health care providers, and
possibly a few more. Without those facts I think condemnation is premature.
I have never yet known of a mental facility that permits anyone
but
immediate family and perhaps a close personal friend in to visit a
patient, whether it's a voluntary or involuntary commitment.
>>Teresa Summers claimed this guy was
in a psychiatric ward when she was first contacted by the guy's father. That's not quite the
same as your claim that he "...wouldn't/couldn't really see a psych
to get some help...."
>>So what's the truth? Or are you both inventing "facts"
as you go along?
>Teresa didn't mention whether the guy was in the psychiatric ward voluntarily or not.
Why do you believe that makes any difference?
>After three previous suicide attempts,
an involuntary commitment seems possible. (Danger to self or others is the current standard for involuntary commitment, right?)
If it were an involuntary commitment, I cannot imagine any mental
health facility in the United States permitting a patient visits with
strangers. That scenario is thoroughly unbelievable.
>>What's disgusting is the LMT staff's
belief that they are qualified and competent enough to treat mental illness. What was related in this story sounds hauntingly similar to what happened to Lisa McPherson.
>Except that in this case the victim received at least some care from mental health professionals which is very different from the sole emergency room visit with non-psychiatrist MD's that Lisa McPherson received.
I have no idea, based on Teresa Summers' post, how much care
this purported patient received from mental health professionals.
Do you know?
>Except that Lisa McPherson had not
previously attempted suicide and didn't die from suicide and this guy had previously
attempted suicide and did die from suicide which is also a very big
difference. There are some similarities in how they both were messed up by their involvement in Scientology[tm], but I don't see any in the
circumstances of their treatment or the manner of their deaths from Teresa's
story. There might be damning similarities which were omitted, but I don't see them in what was written.
>>I think the question you need to answer is what are YOU going to do about LMT interference in situations that should be dealt
with by qualified mental health professionals.
>If the man was in a psychiatric ward, mental health professionals had already gotten involved and *were* dealing with the situation.
Until, according to Teresa Summers, the LMT inserted itself into
the situation, brought in strangers to provide "treatment" to
this
individual. If Teresa Summers isn't just inventing this little drama
out of whole cloth, I'd say the LMT is engaging in the very same
type of activity for which they condemn the CoS.
>>Sending in two OT VIIs to a mental
ward to assist a man in "dealing with his BTs" is nothing more than intefering
in the medical treatment of someone found to be in need of treatment.
>They didn't send the OT VII's in to audit the man, they sent them in to talk to him about things he presumably wouldn't speak of to people who hadn't reached that level.
What makes you draw that conclusion?
>If he really cared about the subject and wanted to talk about it with others, then I strongly suspect that the mental health professionals approved, although
Teresa didn't say so and I'm just reading that into the story.
That's not all you're reading into the story.
>>What makes you think such
interference "helped" this man rather than made his condition worse? It certainly doesn't look that
way from what I've read.
>If he was an involuntary commitment, then the fact that they
released him is testimony that the mental health professionals believed his condition had gotten better.
I'd say that the fact that the 72-hour limit for involutary mental
health observation expired and the patient was released as required
by law is a more reasonable deduction.
>If it was a voluntary commitment, his checking himself out shows that he believed his condition had gotten better and presumably he did not do so against medical advice. (If
he did check out AMA, and the OT's encouraged him or approved of that
action, I'd obviously have a different opinion.)
And, of course, we have no idea what actually occurred. We're
only operating on the story Teresa Summers deigned to grace this
newsgroup with -- and that story is full of questionable material.
>A man with three previous suicide
attempts is in pretty bad shape to begin with and a fourth attempt doesn't say much about whether the "interference" helped or harmed him. Suicide hotlines
exist because people believe that having someone to talk to helps. I've seen no indictment of suicide hotlines, so I'm unsure why you feel the need to indict the LMT for trying to get this man in touch with some members of the very small group of people who he felt free to speak with, unless you're reading in treatment attempts involving BT's
where Teresa writes someone to talk to about BT's. (That's not that far a stretch, but it is a stretch.)
Has it occurred to you that "talking about BTs" may have
exacerbated
this man's mental instability rather than calmed it? That's certainly
what I would expect would happen in such an instance. That's
basically why people are admitted to psychiatric facilities -- to
remove them from the environment with which they are having
trouble coping with. Bringing in the OTs (if it actually occurred)
was nothing more than introducing the cause of this man's problems
into what had been a safe haven.
>I can see where your condemnation would
be justified if these volunteers had tried to treat the man rather than simply making themselves available for conversation, but that wasn't what Teresa said and I think you need to get something more damning before I will join you in condemnation.
Whether you agree with my opinion or not is of no interest to me.
Diane Richardson
referen@bway.net
More than a week after the original post,
critics are still trying to justify themselves. Diane's sensible
questioning is now called a "black propaganda campaign"...
referen@bway.net (Diane Richardson)
Tue Jul 03 15:20:28 2001
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: LMT position on mental health needs of Scientology victims
Message-ID: <3b41c049.4341518@news1.bway.net>
On 2 Jul 2001 19:31:57 -0000, Say What?!
<Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote:
>>>In article <9hm0ph$s5f@netaxs.com>, Rod Keller says...
>>>>Monica Pignotti (pignotti@worldnet.att.net) wrote: Well
said, Deana. Let's see where these relative newbies are 15 years from
now, who are so quick to judge veterans who had very little funding and
were doing the very best they could, and then some.
>>>>The thing that bothers me about this post is that not
only do you disagree, you disagree with my right to hold an opinion.
Even if I hadn't paid my dues, this would be wrong.
>>>No, I'm not disagreeing with anyone's right to hold an
opinion. What I am saying is that I find it very arrogant when new people
come into this scene and criticize people who have been around for a long
time and seem to believe that they have nothing to learn from such people
and would do things better. Such people don't even realize how much they
have to learn and what they don't know.
>Monica, what's the difference between new people doing this and
people who have been around for a long time doing it? Look at Diane Richardson.
Does she ever take into account what she doesn't know before she attacks
the LMT or any who supports it?
Certainly I do. For instance, I have asked everyone who claims I
have
"insufficient data" on the Bashaw incident to provide me with
the
"data" I lack. Thus far, those I have asked have not provided
the
additional information.
Such a lack of response indicates to me that either (1) there ARE
no
additional data, or (2) the additional data do not support the other
person's argument.
If the "missing data" so many LMT defenders claim
exonerates the
LMT from any responsibility, why don't the LMT defenders provide it?
>Does she ever let her ignorance of facts
stop her from accusing people she personally dislikes of real or imagined
crimes and mistakes?
As I've said repeatedly regarding the Bashaw incident, I base
my argument entirely on the FACTS provided by Teresa Summers,
Vice President of the Lisa McPherson Trust, Inc.
If the facts the LMT VP provided are incorrect, why not provide
a correction? To date, no corrections have been made; thus, I
will continue basing my opinion on the facts presented by her.
>>Isn't it possible that someone new
could arrive with new information or new ideas or just a new viewpoint? Isn't it equally arrogant to
assume that nobody who has been at it for 20 or 30 years or whatever
the qualification for Grand Old Elder is has nothing to say? In
fact, isn't it entirely possible that someone new CAN do things better, or
that they already DO know how much they have to learn?
Not when it comes to treating clinically depressed, suicidal
mental
hospital patients. That's why suicide hot-line volunteers are
provided with training before they begin answering phones, and
why these volunteers have mental health professionals to assist
them.
>>In fact, isn't it entirely possible
that someone who has been at this for 20 or 30 years is frustrated, harassed and tired and not in the
best state to be dictating policy? 20 or 30 years is a long time in terms
of personal interaction, and a long time to lose objectivity, or
even to be completeliy out of touch with the current state of the playing
field.
>>(I'm not saying that's the case in any universal sense, but I've
certainly seen it more than once that a Grand Elder is flagrantly wrong
about something, and Elder status is no reason not to call them on it,
nor is it some form of lese majeste to do so.)
>>>I suggest the LMT look at their own errors rather than going
back into the past and picking on others.
>Did someone at LMT bring up the past errors of others first? Or was
it Diane Richardson who attacked LMT first and then brought in old CAN
to spread her attack some more?
Someone at LMT brought up the past errors of CAN first. There
appears
to be a few newsgroup participants who would insist uninformed
criticism of CAN is laudable, while informed criticism of the LMT is
a capital offense. Sorry, but I won't play your silly game.
>>>Getting back to the original topic of this thread, the recent case where the OT VII committed
suicide is a prime example where if seasonsed mental health professionals
familiar with cults (e.g., Margaret Singer or someone at Wellspring)
had been consulted to work in conjunction with the psychiatrist at
the hospital, tremendous mistakes made by well-intentioned new people who
didn't realize how much they didn't know (such as going in
reinforcing the cult mindset with someone in a mental institution) could have
been avoided.
>>I agree with regard to Wellspring or Margaret Singer. On the
other hand, a seasoned OSA operative like Bashaw would probably regard
Margaret Singer as the Devil Incarnate and Wellspring as a bunch of
deprogrammers. I really don't know enough about this to judge it, yet. Jim Beebe
appaears to have been aware of this situation for a while as he posted
about it a couple months ago.
>I agree with Rob about Bashaw refusing to see "psychs and
deprogrammers."
That ignores the fact that Bashaw had no choice but to see psychs
while he was in the psychiatric unit.
>I would also like to know what the
people who have been attacking the LMT and Jim Beebe and others would have said if Margaret Singer or
someone at Wellspring *had* worked with the hospital and Bashaw but Bashaw had committed suicide anyway? Would they be doing their best to run a
black propaganda campaign on these people too?
Who's running a "black propaganda campaign" here?
Perhaps once
you identify the people you are accusing of doing this, they might be
able to reply to your question.
[snip]
>Does OSA ever comment when Diane or
others are already doing their work for them?
I offer my opinions regardless of who might or might not approve
of
them, Say What. Others may censor themselves based on whether
"the powers that be" approve or disapprove of their thoughts.
I don't
do that. My freedom to express my own opinion in my own words is
far too important to me.
If your fear of assisting OSA causes you to censor your own
thoughts,
I'm not at all sure how you're any different from the Scientologists
we condemn for doing the same thing.
Diane Richardson
referen@bway.net
JimDBB ludicrous excuse that Teresa Summer's post was a "camoflouge
post" (sic).
referen@bway.net (Diane Richardson)
Tue Jul 03 15:26:10 2001
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: LMT position on mental health needs of Scientology victims
Message-ID: <3b41c6af.5980262@news1.bway.net>
On 03 Jul 2001 03:56:01 GMT, jimdbb@aol.com (JimDBB) wrote:
[snip]
>If I may say this, Monica, There is a
lot of misguided conjecture on the suicide situation. The LMT is being accused of things that did not
happen and some of this resulted from a camoflouge post that was put out.
What do you mean by "a camoflouge post"? Could you
explain
what you meant when you used this phrase?
>This was simply a benign attempt to protect a family with some smoke screen.
Why was there any reason at all to bring up this incident,
particularly if it was believed that the family involved needed
some sort of protection?
As I recall, Teresa Summers, Vice President of the Lisa McPherson
Trust, related this incident as part of a message she wrote solely
for the purpose of trashing someone who has been "declared" by
the LMT -- Pat Greenway.
If this incident was so sensitive as to require
"camoflage" and a
"smoke screen," why in the world did Teresa Summers, Vice
President of the Lisa McPherson Trust, Inc., include it in her
message?
Diane Richardson
referen@bway.net
... followed by the typical non-answer of
critics caught up in their lies:
On 03 Jul 2001 18:01:50 GMT, jimdbb@aol.com (JimDBB) wrote:
>>If this incident was so sensitive as
to require "camoflage" and a "smoke screen," why in the world did Teresa Summers,
Vice President of the Lisa McPherson Trust, Inc., include it in her message?>
>You have no genuine interest in this. Go
away.
It's interesting that you either will not or cannot answer my
question about this Jim.
Sometimes a non-answer is more informative than an answer.
Diane Richardson
referen@bway.net
... and of course by the usual personal
attacks so illustrative of critics' "critical thinking" skills:
>:If you have "quite a few answers," why not answer the
questions I've put to you?
>Because if you, Diane Richardson, are right these days, it's
basically an accident.
>That a question is from you is enough to discredit it as a question,
and not even bother wasting the time to look at the question itself.
>You taint all you touch.
>(I am so disappointed you aren't questioning me on my DA pack.)
Thank you for your personal opinion of me.
I fail to see how this addresses the issue at hand, but if you
feel
it serves your purpose better to attack me rather than address the
issue, I can understand.
On 4 Jul 2001 16:03:06 -0000, Cheradenine Zakalwe
<zakalwe@nym.alias.net> wrote:
>"Diane Richardson"
<referen@bway.net> wrote in message
news:3b4323e7.20011574@news1.bway.net...
>> I fail to see how this addresses
the issue at hand, but if you feel it serves your purpose better to attack me rather than address
the issue, I can understand.
>Well, actually, David is alluding to a real problem for those of us who are revolted by Scientology but who do not 100% agree with the Lisa McPherson Trust strategy for opposing it. I criticize Bob and company when I think they're out of line. I criticize you when I think you're out of line. But sometimes I refrain from criticizing Bob's position simply because it would mean aligning myself with your nastiness. I am probably not alone in this regard. And, as David says, there are issues that ought to be discussed which are not discussed simply because of your manner of raising them. I think you underestimate the degree to which your postings can be repulsive.
I would highly recommend you refrain from reading my responses
if you find them so repulsive.
There's absolutely no requirement that either you or Dave Gerard
read what I write. I'd suggest you both exercise your freedom to
ignore that which you find so unpleasant, rather than engage in
extended bouts of speculation about me.
Diane Richardson
referen@bway.net
Finally, we get the usual accusation that
Diane is "OSA" - simply for questioning...
Remember that anti-Scientologists criticize
this very behavior on the part of cultists, and yet, they engage in
the very same one right here or whenever anybody criticize or
question them. This is just a further illustration on the way
critics simply mirror the behavior of their cultic doublegangers and
are hardly better than what they criticize, probably even worst. It
also is another example on the behavior of apostates, in this case
Magoo, a fanatical Scientologists turned fanatical critic.
On Thu, 5 Jul 2001 20:42:51 -0400, "Magoo"
<magoo44@worldnet.att.net>
wrote:
>DIANE RICHARDSON: NOT RICH< BUT SHE SURE
WORKS FOR OSA (whether she knows it
>or not, but I **think** she very much does)
I don't work for OSA, Tory.
>Don't believe me?
Why should anyone believe your uninformed personal opinion of me?
You've never met me, talked to me, or even had an email exchange with
me.
>Look at this post.
>Use your "evaluation" skills.
>Think about it.
>What's the product?
>What does this communication ultimately say?
>"LMT fucked up".
>Don't mind about this man's 10 years getting fucked on an
"OT" level that creates delusion, has created more screwed up people (*or dead) than
the entire Bridge in Scientology. Just skip on by those TEN YEARS...and
BLAME LMT for what, a few telephone conversations?
I'm not claiming the LMT is responsible for Greg Bashaw's clinical
depression, Tory. That's nothing but a diversionary straw man.
>Diane...you are a Godless worm who is workiing
for OSA> Do I have proof? You are my proof, babe. End of story.
Not only don't you have any proof, you are every bit as close-minded
now as you were when you were posting here for the CoS.
You can have faith in your "certain knowledge" and believe
whatever
you like about me ... with the same assurance you once felt about your
Scientology beliefs. You were wrong when you were certain about the
CoS. You are wrong about me. Nothing anyone could say would
convince you that you were wrong about L. Ron Hubbard's foolishness
back then, and you're as righteously certain about my being evil as
you once were about Ron being good.
Whatever.
>Talk to Diane,,,you are talking to OSA>
Sorry, Magoo, but just because you say it, that doesn't make it so.
You are wrong.
>And IF you are talking to OSA>..they are doing Just what they want...getting to PASS GAS into you.
If anyone on this newsgroup is passing gas, Tory, it's you with your
bilious screed against me.
>You wouldn' let other people come crap on you,
why let "Diane Richardson"?
Trying to rally the forces, eh? :-)
>Take a look. A real Hard look. And as she so
"logically" slimes me after this...think about what I said.
At this point, I think a *lot* of people are thinking about what
you've said, Tory, and how you said it.
>Tory/Magoo~dancing in the moonlight~
(something "Diane Richardson" "Clark" and OSA
cannot stand!)
On the contrary, I wish you'd dance more and do a little less
screeching and frothing.
Diane Richardson
referen@bway.net
>"Diane Richardson" <referen@bway.net> wrote in
message news:3b38622a.1513142@news1.bway.net...
>> On Mon, 25 Jun 2001 21:12:53 -0400, Bob Minton
>> <bobminton@lisatrust.net> wrote:
>> >>On Mon, 25 Jun 2001 15:58:44 -0400, Bob Minton
<bob@minton.org> wrote:
>> >>>If someone approaches the LMT, either directly or
through a family member, and seems to need the advice or services of mental
health professionals, the LMT always does whatever is feasible to steer those
people to trained mental health professionals.
>> >>Wouldn't it be far wiser (and less of a litigation
risk) to use only trained mental health professionals on your counseling
staff?
>> >First we don't have a counseling staff.
>> Then why does the LMT website claim it offers counseling? Is
this a lie or just another one of your "jokes"?
>> >>>Any allegations made to the contrary in the last
few days on this newsgroup are made on the basis of incomplete information,
ignorance or malice.
>> >>The allegations were made based on information
>> >If you read what Teresa said, it was a somewhat general
comment.
>> Not general at all. In fact, JimDBB identified the individual
by his initials after reading what Teresa Summers wrote.
>> >>provided by Teresa Summers, an LMT staff member. If Ms. Summers is
providing incomplete information to the general public about her duties as
an employee of the Lisa McPherson Trust, I urge you to make the
situation known to the organization's President, Stacy Brooks.
>> >She's on top of it!
>> Obviously a day late and a dollar short -- unless trashing a
former friend is a higher priority objective to the LMT than
protecting the privacy of those who seek out the counseling the LMT website
offers but you assert does not take place.
>> >>>I am unable to comment on the matter involving the
recent Scientologist suicide victim as the family is dealing with their grief
and wishes to maintain privacy at this time.
>> >>Indeed, that's why I was shocked to see an LMT employee
who purports to be a counselor
>> >She does not purport to be a "counselor".
>> Her statement belies your claim:
>> "Well, the only thing I could think to do was hook the son
up with another OT VII that he could talk to. Someone who could discuss
body thetans as if they were real...at least long enough to get the
son stabilized. And it did work, somewhat. The two OTs spoke and
the son was able to be released from the hospital."
>> >>comment on the psychiatric hospitalization of someone with whom she had been in contact.
>> >She has never been in contact with the person you refer to.
>> So your "non-counselor" chose to interfere in in the
treatment of a person with whom she had never interviewed. Her treatment
plan was based only on a conversation with a family member. The more information provided about this incident you provide, the more
serious the level of ineptitude and incomptence revealed.
>> >>This is a serious breach of confidentiality and leaves you wide open for a
lawsuit.
>> >But, it's not the case so I/we are not concerned about
lawsuits.
>> >>>Bob Minton
>> >>It's odd that the President of the LMT has not
commented on this situation.
>> >What's odd about that given that the recent Scientologist
suicide victim's family is dealing with their grief and wishes to maintain
privacy at this time.
>> Your "non-counselor" staff member should have been
made aware of that *before* she chose to publicize the incident on this
worldwide forum.
>> >Being the LMT senior diplomat, I am doing the best I can
for the moment.Bob Minton
Diane Richardson
referen@bway.net
In a slip of tongue, critics have admitted of having interfered in the
psychiatric treatment of a person who later committed suicide. The
"argument" they found so far to try and wiggle out of this was
to claim the post was a "camoflouge" post, but simply failed
to answer the logical questions that naturally stem out from such a
ludicrous excuses, and instead engaged in their usual round of flames
and "OSA" accusations.
This web site is
NOT created by a Scientologist. It is created by a Scientology EX-MEMBER
who is critical of Scientology. However, this ex-member is ALSO critical
of the anti-Scientology movement. This does not make him a
Scientologist, nor a defender of Scientology.
