She's the one who believes poorly documented anecdotes reported by "wayward radish" and who supports the baseless attacks by Larry W. Sarner, Linda Rosa, and Jean Mercer.
In the past, Monica Pignotti has said she never used quack devices. Now she admits to having used at least two.
What other revelations does the future hold?
You'd like nothing better than to distract from the substance of my
criticism. People here are onto you, so let's look at more of the
abusive, quack therapies you promote. You are the one here who should
be answering questions.
> She's the one who believes poorly documented anecdotes reported by "wayward radish" and who supports the baseless attacks by Larry W. Sarner, Linda Rosa, and Jean Mercer.
>
> In the past, Monica Pignotti has said she never used quack devices. Now she admits to >having >used at least two.
No I have not. EEG and Heart Rate Variability are legitimate devices,
not quack devices. Are you really not aware of that? You only show
your ignorance, as they are used in many, many, legitimate research
programs. Again, I have never, ever used any quack devices so cut out
the lies.
Now, back to the real issues. Every time you post lies about me, I am
going to post more and more about the pseudotherapies you are
promoting and expose the reason for your attacks on me.
Peach asked about Martha Welch so that is as good a place as any to
begin. Here are some of her quotes:
http://www.childrenintherapy.org/proponents/welch.html
Every time you attack me, I will expose another of your buddies with
real, cited quotes from their own writings, not bogus blogs or
distortions like you do.
Monica
Martha Welch, in her own words, properly cited:
http://www.childrenintherapy.org/proponents/welch.html
# "In the case of a larger/older child, [mother] can lie down using
her body weight to maintain physical connection."
— “What is Holding Time?” (with Nancy D’Antonio) Attach-China/
International (2001, accessed 19 April 2007)
[During therapy session with Welch]
"Mother [lying on young daughter]: You think I’m a big joke.
Daughter: I’m not thinking you’re a big joke.
Mother: Yes. Well, that’s how I feel. Because every time I ask you
something, most of the time, when I ask you to do something, you blow
me off. You do. You know you do. Now you’ve got a smirk on your face
and you think it’s real funny. … Tell me how it makes you feel.
Daughter: Right now?
Mother: Right now
Daughter: [squirming] I can’t breathe!
Mother: I don’t care about that right now.
Daughter: Then, that’s how I feel.
Mother: No. That’s not a feeling … You’re not going to get up until we
resolve it. … I want you to talk, because I know you’re mad.
Daughter: …I’m not mad…
Mother: You are mad.…
Daughter: I’m not mad. I want to get up.…"
— Introduction to Welch Method Attachment Therapy (1999, videotape)
Yes, since the anonymous fan of Dr. Fettucini came along, I've read
quite a bit about attachment disorder therapists, and quite frankly,
it's them who come off as mad, mad as hatters. People who think that
sitting on kids, or putting them on their laps and forcing eye contact
produces beneficial results. Incredible! Astonishing! Clueless! People
so full of themselves that they can't seem to recall what it was like
being a child.
Peach
--
Extra! Extra! Read All About It!
Save some dough, save some grief:
http://www.xenu.net
http://www.scientology-lies.com
"noauth" <an...@remailer.gabrix.ath.cx> wrote in message
news:4f3a0dde0d13ecb3...@remailer.gabrix.ath.cx
Fuck off, irrelevant cunt. Plonk.
You know, Monica, perhaps these people got into the attachment disorder
business, because for some odd reason, they keep finding children who
find them somewhat non-optimal to attach to. What do you think?
: D
I think you have an excellent point -- no one can blame the children
for not wanting to attach to these sadistic so-called "therapists"
nor, in some cases the adoptive parents. I think that the sadism
inherent in this type of brutal pseudotherapy attracts abusive parents
as well as sometimes therapists with sadistic tendencies. While that
isn't true of all parents who get hoodwinked (some are good people who
are just desperate for help and willing to try anything) there are a
number of court cases where children were severely abused that it
later came out they had been reading AT books and in some cases had
even been seeing an AT therapist, such as a case in Ohio where 11
adopted children were found to be living in appalling conditions in
cages. The adoptive parents, Sharen and Michael Gravelle (the father
had a history of sexually abusing other children) gave the excuse that
the children had Reactive Attachment Disorder and the parents had an
attachment therapist, Elaine Thompson, who was disciplined by her
state board -- really got off too lightly, in my opinion. Thompson
knew about the cages and did nothing about it, while practicing bogus
therapies such as holding therapy for nearly 5 years with the children
and collecting more than $100,000 from the state.
http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061205/NEWS02/612050333
http://childrenintherapy.org/victims/gravelle.html
Monica
Most definitely. While not true of all parents who get hoodwinked into
these bogus therapies, some of the parents and the therapists clearly
have sadistic tendencies, so who can blame the children for not
wanting to "attach" to them. The Graeville case is a prime example:
http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061205/NEWS02/612050333
The attachment pseudotherapist for these children for 5 years, Elaine
Thompson, who got $100,000 from the state, knew about the cages these
children were in and did nothing about it while practicing bogus
therapies such as holding therapy with the children. Thompson
attempted to claim that the cages did no psychological harm and the
excuse, of course, was "attachment disorder". The abusive adoptive
parents and therapist claimed that these were children with severe
behavior problems. However, recent updates have shown that when the
children were taken from the Gravilles and placed in another home,
they did very well -- no behavior problems all of a sudden. All they
needed was to be taken away from the abusive environment and the
abusive pseudotherapies stopped.
Two of the older children are now suing their abusers:
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/10/23/crimesider/entry5413621.shtml
Monica
You never used an e-meter? Well, in fact, it might not strictly be
considered a quack device, since it does about the same thing as one
component of a polygraph.
Yes, your anonymous stalker is directly responsible for me reading quite
a bit about attachment therapists and the methods which some of them
espouse. And a lot of it looks extremely sadistic to me. The individuals
practicing and promulgating such treatment look like they could use a
little mental health treatment themselves. In addition, I suspect that
many a parent who has children who are within so called normal ranges of
behavior have been suckered into using services that damaged the
children and their relationships with the children who were being so
treated. But reading some of the stories has lead me to believe that a
number of the parents who seek out and use such treatment are crazy as
loons. People who should never have been allowed to adopt.
I feel profoundly sorry for the poor kids getting treated with these
bogus and harmful "therapies". The last thing that troubled kids need is
some puffed up adults who believe that they can do no wrong. Adults who
think that giving a bottle of milk to a teenager perched on their laps
with attendent forced eye-contact is not the height of emotional abuse.
It really boggles the mind.
stop replying, stop reacting, dammit! you are doing exactly what they
want. you are not the only person they are doing this to, but you are
the one who has really taken the bait.
stop! stop posting. stop obsessing, no one is believing their ridiculous
crap. stop defending yourself against totally ridiculous accusations,
dammit!
take a couple of weeks away from this group! please! i am worried for
you.
(and i'm going to post this in a couple of your threads just to make
sure you see it)
In article
<18eba217-df96-4acf...@b2g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>,
I meant that I never used a quack device as a mental health
professional. I left Scientology over 33 years ago and 20 years before
I ever became a mental health professional, so that does not count as
part of my professional history.
Monica
> I meant that I never used a quack device as a mental health
> professional. I left Scientology over 33 years ago and 20 years before
> I ever became a mental health professional, so that does not count as
> part of my professional history.
>
> Monica
Let's see now . . . 23 years old when you left Scientology plus 33 years
makes you 56 years old now. My, oh my. How come you act like somebody about
1/10 your age?
--
Gregory Hall