Who Is Ford’s Unknown Therapist? By Jim Geraghty

[mystery-ak]

   Who Is Ford’s Unknown Therapist?
By Jim Geraghty

October 5, 2018 10:14 AM

The Missing Therapist and the Withheld-Therapist’s Notes

Earlier in the week, I started doing some digging into the therapist described in the account of Christine Blasey Ford. It’s a little surprising that the name of the therapist hasn’t leaked, isn’t it? The therapist could be the very best in the profession, or the therapist could be a quack who specializes in “recovered memories.” There’s been intense debate about the reliability of recovered memories among psychologists, and new research raising questions about the reliability of memories in investigating long-ago crimes:

    Contrary to what many believe, human memories are malleable, open to suggestion and often unintentionally false. “False memories are everywhere,” she says. “In everyday situations we don’t really notice or care that they’re happening. We call them mistakes, or say we misremember things.” In the criminal-justice system, however, they can have grave consequences.

Until Ford chooses to disclose the therapist’s name, we are likely to never know. And unless Ford gives the therapist permission to discuss what was said in therapy, it is likely we will never hear from the therapist.

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) and California state law put tough restrictions on when a therapist can discuss a patient without the patient’s consent — basically, they can discuss their records only when the patients are threats to themselves or others. It is extremely likely that the Fords’ therapist believes he or she cannot come forward and verify (or contradict!) Ford’s account without serious professional and perhaps legal consequences.

A therapist who currently lives in Oregon sold her house to the Fords, and when asked if she was the therapist who treated them by a reporter for RealClearPolitics, refused to say. A few observers interpreted that as confirmation, but I don’t think that’s accurate. (For starters, this therapist appears to have moved to Oregon before 2012, which is when Ford said she discussed it in therapy.)

You may recall that when Ford began her testimony, she said, “My motivation in coming forward was to be helpful and to provide facts about how Mr. Kavanaugh’s actions have damaged my life, so that you could take into a serious consideration as you make your decision about how to proceed.”

And yet . . . she won’t turn over even excerpts of the therapist’s notes. Those notes could be helpful. Or they might contradict her account more than we already know.

There was this odd exchange during the hearing:

    Block FORD: She [presumably, the therapist – Jim] helped me go through the record to locate whether I had had record of this conversation that I had remembered.

    MITCHELL: Did you show a full or partial set of those marriage therapy records to The Washington Post?

    FORD: I don’t remember. I remember summarizing for her what they said. So I’m not – I’m not quite sure if I actually gave her the record.

    MITCHELL: OK. So it’s possible that the reporter did not see these notes.

    FORD: I don’t know if she’s – I can’t recall whether she saw them directly or if I just told her what they said.

    MITCHELL: Have you shown them to anyone else besides your counsel?

    FORD: Just the counsel.

    MITCHELL: OK. Would it be fair to say that Brett Kavanaugh’s name is not listed in those notes?

    FORD: His name is not listed in those notes.

(A question that I wish Mitchell had asked: Do those notes list any other names?)

Ford spoke to the Post sometime between July 10 and September 16. The article ran September 16. The hearing was September 27. Why was it so difficult to remember whether she had given a full or partial set of the therapist’s notes?

The Post wrote in that initial article:

    The therapist’s notes, portions of which were provided by Ford and reviewed by The Washington Post, do not mention Kavanaugh’s name but say she reported that she was attacked by students “from an elitist boys’ school” who went on to become “highly respected and high-ranking members of society in Washington.” The notes say four boys were involved, a discrepancy Ford says was an error on the therapist’s part.”

Ford said, “I can’t recall whether she saw them directly or if I just told her what they said.” If it was the latter, then the Post was mischaracterizing what they had seen.

A couple of years back, I saw a therapist for a while. Thankfully nothing traumatic to deal with, just a sense of being overwhelmed and never having enough hours in the day to be the father, husband, worker, son, brother, and friend to everyone that I wanted to be, and always feeling like I was leaving somebody important shortchanged. I don’t think I said anything unbearably embarrassing in there, but I can completely understand being reluctant about putting a therapist’s notes out for public consumption . . .
Comments   

But if I needed those notes released to strengthen my case to prove that a crime occurred, then it would be worth it, wouldn’t it?

https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/christine-blasey-fords-unknown-therapist/

[truth_seeker]

This New Left, uses Rape and Racist as accusation against which there is not a satisfactory defense to them.

Identity politics, post-modernism, Marxism, social justice, intersectionality.

Empirical, science-driven fact finding and evidence, are rejected outright.

It is "her truth," and to challenge her over it, is not in their rule book.

Ford may have been hypnotized, may have practiced, repeatedly, may have "gamed" her testimony.

The Senate testimony was carefully framed by the Left, to shield he from Cross-examination.

How dare you question my client for preparing; you evil uncaring rapist enabler."

First they came for the racists, and I was not one.


Next they came for the rapists, and I was not one.

Then they came for the people with money and property.

[Sanguine]

That's the point: if the notes supported her case, she would have come up with them.