Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon.
Switch to the new Google Groups.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
Message from discussion Smear Campaign against Whistleblower Monica Pignotti Continues
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
Monica Pignotti  
View profile  
 More options Jun 9 2011, 7:23 am
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: Monica Pignotti <monica.pignotti....@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2011 04:23:13 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Thurs, Jun 9 2011 7:23 am
Subject: Re: Smear Campaign against Whistleblower Monica Pignotti Continues
On Jun 9, 1:36 am, John Dorsay <restimula...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 6/9/2011 12:24 AM, Dennis Erlich wrote:

> > John, I'm sure that more children are killed or injured by not wearing
> > their seatbelts than by prone restraint.  But that doesn't mean I want
> > to see bunches of seat-belt post in ars either.

> Fair enough. But I am not aware of an organized anti-seatbelt lobby
> claiming that children will be saved by not wearing their seatbelts.

Yes, exactly. Once again, Dennis could say the same thing about
Scientology. There are far more people killed from not wearing
seatbelts than from Scientology. Does that mean that it is not a valid
cause to speak out against? I doubt he would think so. It seems to me
he is being very selective here and just doesn't want to believe that
I just might be doing something of value here. And yes, the organized
lobby for not banning prone restraints does have a vested interest.
There is a whole industry built up around these so-called safety
containment trainings.

> As I said, I have direct experience with abusive, credentialed
> quacks. My abusive credentialed quack had organized naive families
> to lobby for government funding to financially support his abuse.
> Many people like Monica tried to raise public awareness, and to goad
> the health authorities into taking action to protect the victims of
> his abuse, but to no avail. By a complete fluke, I happened to work
> with the abusive credentialed quack, and I also happened to be a
> casual acquaintance of one of the closest advisers to the provincial
> premier of the day. I contacted my acquaintance, who knew me well
> enough to take my descriptions of the abuse I witnessed seriously,
> and the abusive credentialed quack was soon out of business.

That's very good to know. Congratulations.

> But *many* people who should have been much more able than I to get
> the government's ear tried and failed to do so.

That's very true. Here in the US there were many parents of autistic
children who were lobbying to get prone restraints banned in schools
by the passage of the Keeping Students Safe Act, which so far has
failed to pass. As a result, children are still being prone restrained
in schools in many states and some are being injured and deaths have
continued. As for private therapists, they are still free to do
whatever they please. The only law even close to banning this is
Candace's Law in Colorado, but all it does is ban rebirthing therapy,
not other forms of restraint. It does not ban the prone restraint
proposed by Federici in his self-published book.

>It was *only*
> because of the fluke of a personal connection that I succeeded where
> they had tried and failed. If not for that fluke, I believe the
> quack would have built a large and lucrative business that did
> little more than abuse vulnerable people behind closed doors, beyond
> the scrutiny of the authorities and with the naive support of
> desperate families.

> Unfortunately, this is not an exceptional story. Abusive
> credentialed quacks prey on desperate families and vulnerable
> individuals. The stories are as disgusting as the worst of the cult.
> Remember Raoul Lopez?

Very true. At least with Scientology, no one is credentialed or
licensed and so it is seen for what it is by all but the true
believers. What is particularly of concern is that many of the people
using these dangerous techniques are licensed and all too often their
boards seem to be looking the other way. This is a classic example of
a real-life Milgrim experiment, obedience to authority and anyone who
questions this gets hit with a smear campaign (I am not the only one,
just look at the smear campaign against others who have spoken out --
Federici sued 5 people and a non-profit). The good news, if there is
any, is that there is a growing awareness in the mental health
profession that self-proclaimed therapy gurus who believe they are
above question, are not any longer and are increasingly being
challenged. Federici is far from being the only one this applies to.

> There is a whole government-sanctioned "health-care" industry in the
> US and Canada which consists of people like Federici exploiting
> desperate families of vulnerable individuals. There is a
> particularly disgusting subgroup that preys on the severely
> autistic. Some search terms that will give you a taste are "Matthew
> Isreal", BRI, IARET. People like Israel are attempting to gain broad
> government sanction and funding for something they call "Applied
> Behavior Analysis". The presentation of ABA is quite benign. In some
> cases ABA might even be useful, I don't know enough about it to say
> that this is never the case. But at the end of the day ABA is the
> justification for atrocities such as this.http://tinyurl.com/65alj4t

> http://www.bostonmagazine.com/scripts/print/article.php?asset_idx=231327

> Please don't misunderstand me. I am not defending Monica personally,
> nor am I taking her side in your quarrel with her. But I am
> supporting the stance she has taken against Federici. You obviously
> don't have to agree. But, just as you are free to express your views
> on the matter, I am free to express mine. And I am quite sure we
> agree about that :)

Fair enough. Thank you for being smart enough to give the validity of
this cause priority over any other disagreements or conflicts we might
have had, as well it should be.

 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.