Claimant says: "This is a complaint regarding the misconduct of Emily Bliss Gerber, psychologist and director in the Kaiser San Rafael psychiatry department. On May 20, 2020, Dr. Gerber was involved in an unclear capacity with my false imprisonment and abuse within Kaiser San Rafael Medical Center. What remains at the forefront of Dr. Gerber's misconduct is that she appeared to be overseeing my abuser, a social worker (Kerry Savola-Levin), who evaluated me in the emergency room, and also appeared to faciliate/orchestrate a retaliatory,” ...Show more »

Claimant says: "This is a complaint regarding the misconduct of Emily Bliss Gerber, psychologist and director in the Kaiser San Rafael psychiatry department. On May 20, 2020, Dr. Gerber was involved in an unclear capacity with my false imprisonment and abuse within Kaiser San Rafael Medical Center. What remains at the forefront of Dr. Gerber's misconduct is that she appeared to be overseeing my abuser, a social worker (Kerry Savola-Levin), who evaluated me in the emergency room, and also appeared to faciliate/orchestrate a retaliatory, punitive, and unethical detention based on her demonstrably false evaluation report. However, Dr. Gerber's documentation, per my medical records, appears to obscure her role in this injustice. Clinicians in health facilities are required to document patient encounters and care-related decisions transparently and thoroughly, something Dr. Gerber either failed to do due to incompetence or in order to deliberately obscure her role. Deficiencies in documentation are a serious regulatory offense that can even be punishable by disciplinary action before a clinician's licensing board. Should Dr. Gerber refuse to cooperate with the open investigations into my multiple abusers from her department, I will have no other option than to report this egregious act of carelessness and omission to the California Board of Psychology. All that appears to have happened, per Dr. Gerber's notes, was she confirmed an involuntary psychiatric hold, based on information that was untrue and unsubstantiated, without ever even taking the intiiative to talk to me in person or virtually. She made a note under the After Hours Psych line/service, that she was going to make calls to see if there was an open bed available at another facility where I could be transferred, and to ultimately make an order for that to be carried out. This was against the recommendation of the emergency room physician, who was the only clinician who actually evaluated me face-to-face that day, and also ostensibly fashioned as a punishment for declining to disobey the Bay Area's shelter-in-place order. The hold was maintained immediately after I said that I did not want to stay in another person's house where I could put them at risk of infection; Dr. Gerber's direct report clearly interpreted that as non-compliance that needed to be disciplined with solitary confinement and loss of civil rights. Throughout this time, Dr. Gerber provided no evidence that she was requesting voluntary residential treatment on my behalf, which I had been asking for for over a month at that point, and instead appeared to only continue the abuse by authorizing forced confinement in an involuntary detention psychiatric facility, even though she had no evidence of me being an imminent risk for harm to myself (this is abundantly clear in Kerry's report), nor any evidence of my being in denial of my psychiatric issues and need for higher levels of care. In my view, the only reasonable explanation is that she went along with my abuser's plan without ever stopping to think critically about whether this was medically necessary, and that she was continuing Kaiser's established pattern of denying volutnary residential treatment to me while I was their patient. Dr. Gerber appears to be specialized in pediatric mental health issues, and as is the case with my abuser, there are serious concerns as to whether Dr. Gerber was even qualified (had adequate competencies) in clinical decision-making for an adult like me. Additionally, Dr. Gerber evidently creates the appearance of being a trauma-informed, sensitive provider, but in reality, she lacked the humility and the foresight to understand the devastating ramifications of her behavior. By essentially incarcerating a non-suicidal young woman, turning away from and refusing to discipline her abusive employees, and playing a role in repeated denials of appropriate care, Dr. Gerber inflicted such irreparable harm that it has destroyed my once-illustrious career, mental and emotional well-being, physical health, and ability to care for myself as I once did. On top of all of this, she indisputably failed to even describe the actions she took to allow this abuse to happen. Nonetheless, because she was in a position of leadership in connection to my abusers, and she is obligated to document her patient encounters and correspondence clearly and completely, she neglected to implement anything even remotely resembling an appropriate standard of care in this context and as a psychologist. I demand that Dr. Gerber come forward and describe exactly what she knew, when she knew it, what she did, why she did it, and how she did it. Again, it is contingent upon her continued licensure that she incude all of this information in her notes while working with patients; she refused to do so at every opportunity. She has no business working in a leadership capacity, perhaps even as a clinician at all. Her so-called interests and commitment to trauma-informed care is, based on the nightmare I experienced with her, fraudulent. She has never once expressed remorse or offered to take accountability for her role in my abuse, nor has she conceded that she took action on false information. I will not rest until this changes. To others reading this: please do not ever elect to see this provider or anyone she oversees. She is either recklessly incompetent or malicious, or she might be both. The damage she is capable of inflicting is life-ruining, and if she handles herself with you the way she did with me, she will not acknowledge the harm that she has caused.    Legal disclaimer: All information provided here is based on true and largely verifiable information that I possess or know confidently from my firsthand experience. Due to the trauma of this incident and Dr. Gerber's pathetic lack of documentation, there is other information on which I can only provide educated guesses and informed opinions with respect to her motives and behavior. My opinions do not serve to injure this person in their primary intent, because not only has Dr. Gerber not received any public reprimand or overt damages as a result of her role in this abuse, but I also have a civic duty to share this information in order to protect vulnerable people from future abuse, neglect, and mistreatment. I recognize that there may be information where the context and nuances may be disputed or seen differently, but I make all statments and opinions in good faith that they are true to the best of my knowledge, and consequently not defamatory.  *” ...Show less »

Claimant says: "This is a complaint against Chelsea Leigh Sloane, LMFT, CA License #88816. I was evaluated by this MFT in the afternoon of May 21, 2020 while receiving psychiatric treatment in the Emergency Department at Kaiser Permanente San Rafael Medical Center in San Rafael, CA. My evaluation with this MFT was traumatic, unprofessional, and has caused long-lasting mental and emotional damage. Chelsea Sloane came to my re-evaluation unprepared, biased, and eager to inflict emotional pain. I have included Chelsea's numerous violation” ...Show more »

Claimant says: "This is a complaint against Chelsea Leigh Sloane, LMFT, CA License #88816. I was evaluated by this MFT in the afternoon of May 21, 2020 while receiving psychiatric treatment in the Emergency Department at Kaiser Permanente San Rafael Medical Center in San Rafael, CA. My evaluation with this MFT was traumatic, unprofessional, and has caused long-lasting mental and emotional damage. Chelsea Sloane came to my re-evaluation unprepared, biased, and eager to inflict emotional pain. I have included Chelsea's numerous violations of the CAMFT's Code of Ethics that she committed during her encounter with met throughout this claim.   On May 20, 2020, I had a treatment session with my outpatient mental health therapist that ultimately resulted in her calling the police to my home and me being held on a 5150 hold. I had been seen via telehealth by another clinician who had officiated the hold on the afternoon of the 20th, and on the morning of the 21st, I requested to see another clinician from the Psychiatry department, as my father had arrived from out of state in order to stay with me so that I could be discharged. My ED doctor, on the morning of the 21st, reported that I would be evaluated by Chelsea at some point that afternoon, but to be aware that she had told him that she was not going to lift the hold, regardless of how I was feeling or what I said (violation of Section 10.5). Later, I found out that several nurses in the ED knew this information as well. That an MFT could be so callous and self-righteous in communicating about a mental health evaluation, and having the audacity to even insinuate that she would make a decision about my care prior to performing a scheduled procedure, clearly has to be beneath the profession of Marriage and Family Therapy. It is also indicative of an individual who may think far too highly of themselves for their given rank in a medical setting, which can lead to reckless behavior and difficulty participating on a multidisciplinary team.   Chelsea began her appointment via telehealth. Her note states that she reviewed my Patient Rights with me, which is untrue (violation of Section 3.1). This was never mentioned at the start of the appointment and never mentioned at any point afterward. I was also denied a patient's rights advocate during my hold in the emergency room, despite explicitly asking for one. Chelsea then asked me to review the circumstances that led to me being in the ED. Chelsea repeatedly omitted, misrepresented, or otherwise poorly documented my contributions to the appointment to ensure that her documentation aligned with what she had initially reported to my ED physician (violation of Section 5.3). As an example, Chelsea wrote the following: “Patient reports that yesterday she thought that ‘by saying all of the right things I'd get to go home, and if I was cooperative, calm, and seemed polite that that would work in my favor.’   It is possible that I used some of the words that Chelsea details here at some point during my hospitalization. However, throughout the entire evaluation period, Chelsea gathered her documentation by pen/pencil and paper. I am certain of this because I watched her. I am also a state-licensed, nationally certified speech-language pathologist by training, and I can assure you that to hear and immediately write down verbatim a sentence of that length and clausal density with perfect accuracy would mean that Chelsea has genius-level working memory and verbal language skills. My encounter with her and subsequent inspection of her clinical decision making skills confirms that this is not the case. Alternatively, it could mean that she recorded the evaluation, without my knowledge or consent, to obtain that quote; that a scribe was in the room without my knowledge or consent and the presence of whom Chelsea did not disclose; or perhaps, Chelsea simply just took some creative liberties when reporting my words during our encounter. The latter is what I believe is the most likely.    Chelsea Sloane knew she would be able to do this successfully because she could hide behind a screen, unheard by the security guard on the other side of the glass door of my hospital room, and neither the nurses nor the psychiatrist would question her notes. State law would ensure that she would be protected from private prosecution. Precedent would ensure that because almost everyone who is held stays the whole 72 hours, she would not be found suspicious for keeping me in the hospital (violation of Section 4.7), even though she knew I had a family member minutes from my hospital room who would be able to stay with me. Descriptions of my mood as “labile” would protect her when I reported to my nurses how she abused her power to make her job more convenient, or even that her treatment of me was upsetting. Ironically, Chelsea's mention of lability in this context only undermines her credibility and further demonstrates her lack of training in neurology, human physiology, and medicine, because she does not appear to know the word's true definition in a clinical context.    I reported to Chelsea that in my therapy appointment on May 20, I lamented that my treatment was not working. This was not surprising information to my outpatient therapist; I was feeling disappointed for weeks about it. I had called Kaiser and spoken to many of Chelsea’s colleagues, begging to be placed in a higher level of care. No one helped. I told my therapist that I didn’t know what to do, and that it was cruel to expect patients to continue doing everything themselves with respect to treatment when no one would help them. I asked her why she wouldn’t help, and why no one else would. For some reason my outpatient therapist interpreted those questions to be rhetorical. I became angry, as these were literal questions. I told her this. She continued to evade my questions. I got angrier; she was not helping. I told her that this is exactly why treatment was so hopeless, and why there was no more for me to get out of it. Things escalated from there. I explained this to Chelsea.   Chelsea’s documentation reads as follows: Patient continues to endorse intense feelings of hopelessness and ambivalence about future treatment, given her feeling that her many years of treatment have been unsuccessful. Patient's reports that her therapist called police due to a misunderstanding about a boundary that Patient set. Patient's therapist allegedy [sic] crossed a boundary by inquiring about Patient's future and trying to engage the Patient in future oriented care. Patient states that I can't go there in regards to any future talk or future planning, and expressed anger that her therapist wanted to discuss this.   Chelsea both lied and fundamentally misunderstood the situation at hand. My therapist did not do any of this. My therapist “inquired” about nothing; “engaged” about nothing. I initiated the topic; also, this would make no sense, as I, not my therapist, was the one who had attempted to officiate a higher level of care and been stopped. There are countless documents proving this, and they were visible to Chelsea at the time of my hospitalization. Chelsea’s documentation, throughout my entire hospitalization–again– includes massive violations of section 5.3: Client/Patient Records, with fraudulent and deliberately misleading claims. What Chelsea’s notes also neglect to include is that less than two weeks before this encounter, I had filed an expedited review with Kaiser to demand residential mental health treatment. Kaiser denied my request, pending an evaluation with a psychologist in another Psychiatry department in another region. That clinician then denied my request to higher levels of care as well. Chelsea should have easily seen that I was very actively pursuing more intensive care for myself, which either makes her negligent or deliberately distorting the truth. I was even trying to explain this to Chelsea during the evaluation and she repeatedly interrupted and stopped me from speaking (violation of Section 5.10). Her choice to omit this from her notes is an egregious act of misconduct. Note also that she pathologizes my hopelessness, characterizing it as a symptom of mental illness, because she ostensibly lacks the differential diagnosis skills to wonder whether this might be a normal reaction to being denied necessary care and being neglicted, then having everything blamed on you as the patient.    In addition to falsifying information, Chelsea obscured information as a tactic to not overtly lie, but to portray me as less rational or more bizarre, and maybe more deserving of hospitalization based on those grounds (violation of Sections 4.7, 5.7, and 5.9). Chelsea notes, seemingly out of nowhere, that, “Patient feels that looking into organ donation/viability and will planing [sic] are totally normal and highly valued in my family yet has little insight into how this could be seen as highly concerning in combination with her current psychiatric crisis and suicidal ideation.” I can assure you that I have, and would have had at the time, plenty of insight into just how incoherent this statement is, and in an attempt to shed light on it, I will say this: being an organ donor is something that normal people are exposed to thinking about every few DMV visits. I have been one for over 13 years. Proudly. One thing that prevents me from killing myself, though I am very depressed, is the moral offense I would commit by not donating my organs. I take it very seriously. That mindset kept me alive at various times in life. Additionally, in my family, death is not a taboo subject. They talk about it and plan for it, and avoidance is seen as naïve. Death can happen by falling off a curb or choking on your dinner. They decide early what they want– cremation vs. burial, where their ashes will go, whether they’ll have a DNR, what charity they want the remains of their bank account donated to– and tell people clearly what they need to do in order to take care of them; that’s what my family does. I may have been too upset to articulate myself exactly like this to Chelsea in the hospital, but the way she twisted my words to continue my detention is unforgiveable, whether due to ignorance or malice. Also, looking into organ viability is meaningless. I outrank Chelsea in an acute care setting as a speech-language pathologist and have far more healthcare-specific training than she does, so she is out of her scope to comment here. The idea that with my career and knowledge I would think that somehow I would be able to kill myself while simultaneously procuring my own organs for donations only strengthens the argument for keeping unqualified MFTs like Chelsea outside of emergency rooms (something I wholeheartedly endorse), and cannot be taken seriously as an imminent risk for suicide.    Additionally, Chelsea’s writing seems to imply that it is the job of the patient or mentally ill person to phrase things in such a way that they are perfectly tolerable, clear, and innocuous to the provider, and that to do otherwise is to lack awareness or perspective-taking skills. This is yet another display of Chelsea perhaps unethically taking on an assessment for which she lacked training and competence, because her assessment of insight appears to be primitive at best. I might instead argue that if Chelsea is expecting requisite caretaking behavior from her patients while in psychiatric distress, that she might be a dangerously poor fit for emergency healthcare, mental health care, or even anything in the human services field. I find her words particularly offensive because many of my own patients have an enormous variety of communication deficits, and my colleagues and I manage to care for them, holistically, just fine without blaming our misinterpretation of one thing that they may have said. If that logic was a major component of what locked me in the hospital, it was cowardly and wrong. I should hope that the field of Marriage and Family Therapy does not allow that line of thinking, because I can assure you that no other profession does. It is not my job to babysit Chelsea’s language comprehension skills; her documentation should show you that I cannot, even if I try to. ANd it should not automatically reflect poorly on my insight. This thoughtless argument went into deciding that I should be hospitalized against my will. It was also a massive violation of Sections 4.7, 5.9, and 5.11.   Chelsea omitted significant aspects of the evaluation that were highly inappropriate and felt overwhelmingly manipulative. In her report, Chelsea mentions that, “Patient would not allow this writer to reach out to her father other than to only confirm that he would be staying with her. Patient would not allow this writer to discuss thorough safety planning.” In reality, I said that I would be open to Chelsea talking to my father, but I would like to be informed of what she would discuss and how much could be kept confidential. Chelsea appeared visibly irritated upon hearing this request (violation of Section 3.1). Chelsea was evasive and vague, ultimately replying that she would inquire about the extent to which my father was familiar with my “treatment plan.” She adamantly refused to elaborate. I was certain that she had no clue what my treatment plan was in the first place, if for no other reason than because Kaiser clinicians in San Rafael were planning to meet to discuss what changes were about to be made. Also, I do not know if “patient would not allow” was meant to evoke an image of me physically threatening Chelsea if she discussed safety planning– something that, as someone who has been in treatment for 15 years, I know perfectly well– but it is pathetic to blame your failure to perform a vital part of your job on your patient. There is nothing I could have done to literally prevent Chelsea from discussing safety planning. I was mere feet away from a security guard, and Chelsea was communicating with me remotely. Chelsea also misleads in her report by placing the greatest weight on my father, when Joint Commission standards for safety planning clearly revolve around the patient. It is clear, again, that Chelsea is not competent to safety plan, may not in fact know what it entails when implemented with fidelity, and has not been trained according to Marin County's guidelines.    While I understood that limiting access to weapons, ensuring adherence to medications, supporting attendance to follow-up appointments, and general social support would have been reasonable to expect of someone who would be picking up a hospitalized psychiatric patient, I was appalled that Chelsea felt it appropriate to display this conduct in an evaluation. First, I was desperate to be discharged, and she was exploiting that (violation of Section 4.7) in order to avoid placing limits or boundaries on herself to protect my privacy and dignity with my own family member. Her irritability, complete unwillingness to consider my perspective (violation of Sections 5.7 and 5.9), and subsequent impulsivity resulted in her abruptly abandoning the topic of calling my father altogether, interrupting my earnest attempts to explain why I was concerned by her proposal. “She had just met me, and respectfully, she hasn’t seemed like she has done her homework on me at all,” I thought; “does she even know I have a psychiatrist? He works at Kaiser too and Chelsea probably knows him. Had he even been called? Does my dad need to know when my appointments are?”   Chelsea also completely overlooked the fact that my “treatment plan” was about to completely change once I won my fight for residential care, but according to her, I was in denial that I needed treatment. How could I trust her to talk to my dad, who lived in a different state, from whom I was financially independent, and with whom I did not discuss my psychiatric care? Why was she expecting that he would know details about my care? I am 28 years old– was Chelsea expecting him to have kept up with my sexual healthcare too? Did you, dear reader, share all of your intimate healthcare information with your parents at age 28? Did Chelsea think that dads still actively “parent” a 28-year-old, or that he would need to sign off on my Cymbalta prescription? Why would she think it would be helpful if she quizzed him? Chelsea was asking me to give up control of my medical information in order to regain my freedom. She exploited me, abused her power, and knew exactly what she was doing.   I burst into tears trying to decide between my dignity and my civil rights. Chelsea was showing me nothing but hostility, treating every clarifying question I asked as a gesture of noncompliance. I asked her if she would still let me go home with my dad, even if he got her quiz questions wrong. I told her that he cares a lot about me, but if she was looking to fail him on a technicality, that would be unfair. Sometimes he forgets if my birthday is on the 8th or the 9th– he’s not going to answer really detailed questions perfectly, I told her. She accused me, as she noted in her report, of trying to get a guaranteed discharge, and she tried very hard to make me seem irrational, devoid of insight, and riddled with anosognosia for asking for one.   At this point, I brought up yet another conversation topic that Chelsea failed to include in her report. Kaiser San Rafael Medical Center is in Marin County, minutes from where I grew up. As a healthcare worker myself, I am familiar with Marin’s involuntary hospitalization guidelines, and that they involve not only the state’s 5150 threshold, but also the expectation that people being held are only done so involuntarily if they are a present, immediate, substantial, physical, and demonstrable risk to themselves, in my case. Marin urges people to consider that the law states that you “may” place a hold, not “must.” I even went to the effort of pulling up the guidelines on my phone during the evaluation and briefly reviewing them for Chelsea during the evaluation, as I had not yet been informed of her rationale for maintaining the hold, particularly without even seeing me first (violation of Section 3.12).   I calmly explained that even though she may be looking to meet the 5150 threshold to keep me in the ED, I was raised in Marin County and was currently hospitalized there, and I deserved to receive the extra protections that my county provides. Suitable 5150 examples in the County are deliberate overdoses, or when someone wanders into traffic. I politely questioned what imminently impulsive act or plan she accused me of carrying out, and reminded her that she had never asked what I was doing in the hours (laundry, talking to my trauma therapist and dad, watching TV) or minutes (LA Times crossword from the past Sunday) before the police arrived. I explained that I am a licensed professional who works full-time in an extremely procedure-intensive role, also in a hospital. Chelsea looked angry and cut me off from talking. To this day, because I was evaluated via telepractice, I do not know whether Chelsea’s home region was also Marin County; she may not have been aware of the county’s hospitalization guidelines, which would be a violation of Section 6.2.   Chelsea then began attacking and belittling me, attempting to point out all of my “flaws” as a patient and, evidently, reasons that I needed to stay in the hospital (violation of Section 5.10). She claimed that I refused to create a safety plan with my therapist while working with her. She is lying; what she shoudl have said is that I refused to contract for safety, an outdated intervention with no evidence base for use in the emergency room or for therapeutic relationships like the one I had. I stated that because I’m an adult, I declined the option to contract sometimes, as is my right, because I find it triggering and infantilizing.    Chelsea then began to berate me about declining consents to releases of information to my previous therapists– again, she angrily refused to detail what kind of information she would request from them when I inquired. This was just another tactic to blame the outcome of the evaluation on me and lessen her workload. My evidence and attachments from the other complaints will very clearly present that I signed releases of information for Kaiser clinicians to correspond with both of my therapists on May 14. Chelsea would have been well within her right to contact them without asking me beforehand, and she probably should have in order to actually get accurate information about what happened. I suspect that she designed the situation that she did, and evaded my questions, in order to avoid having to call them and spend more time on my evaluation than she had to. It had the added benefit of making me look noncompliant. Chelsea also mentioned in her note that I refused to engage in thorough safety planning with her. This is a lie, as “thorough safety planning” was not offered to me during the evaluation (violation of section 3.1). If it had resulted in me possibly leaving the ED, I would have jumped at the chance.   While I admit that I cannot know this for sure, I believe that Chelsea made harmful assumptions about my experience with mental health treatments, knowledge about my diagnoses, mastery/repertoire of coping skills, and awareness of functional limitations based on my young age (violation of Section 5.7). I have been in treatment for over 14 years. Her criticism of my practice of therapy was ill-timed, unsolicited, and irrelevant to the evaluation. I can respect that she disagrees with the choices that I make for myself in treatment, but she did not respect me (violation of Section 3.1), and no choices resulted in imminent harm. I am trained to know how to respond to bombs, fires, cardiac arrests, child abductions, active shooters, and countless other disasters in my line of work; to insinuate that I lack the knowledge or ability to plan for suicidal thoughts is simply insulting and absolutely outrageous. I observe my own patients making safety plans with counseling staff in my hospital. I make plans with them too. Chelsea did not ask about any of this because she did not want to know. She wanted to portray me as someone incapable of employment, emotional regulation, and independence. And when I tried to tell her, she would not let me speak.   Chelsea then said that she had all of the information she needed, that she would consult with a psychiatrist, and return to let me know the status of my 5150 hold. I was devastated and felt completely violated. I began to panic, called my dad, and told him to tell Chelsea whatever she wanted to hear when she called. I confessed, through sobs, things about my mental health that I was nowhere near ready to tell him or anyone else in my family. I called my nurse and told her to tell Chelsea that, fine, she could call my dad and ask him whatever she wanted, however invasive. I just wanted to go home.   When Chelsea came back and reconnected via video, she told me that she recommended that I continue to stay under a 5150 hold. I begged and pleaded for her to call my dad, said that she won, that I would forfeit my privacy. I asked her how she managed to keep the hold when she had no evidence of imminent harm and hadn’t actually asked me any questions that met any of the requirements. Chelsea said that a big part of it was that I had too many “rules” and “limits” on her calling my dad (violation of Section 3.1). I told her that I had changed my mind, and that she could now do whatever she wanted. Chelsea looked annoyed, and ultimately refused. She then said that the hold was to “keep me safe.” As Chelsea stated in her note, I told her that I did not believe she cared at all about my safety, and that she was lying. I stated that it was triggering to hear, because I felt traumatized and she made me feel less safe than I had been all day. She shrugged her shoulders and repeated herself. Chelsea demonstrated that she was not fit for work in the ED, and certainly not with patients with severe PTSD, by repeating behavior that a patient stated was triggering (violation of Section 5.11).   Chelsea’s behavior and ethical infractions would never be tolerated in any clinical department, hospital, licensed profession, or healthcare association that I have ever known. I would be terrified to have her on staff in my hospital, and I am perfectly certain that my colleagues would be too. I am particularly concerned about Chelsea’s work in the Emergency Department in the future. After being her patient, and as someone who works in acute care, I believe that she lacks intellectual and emotional knowledge of the stress and lack of control patients tend to feel in the ED, and that it requires an ability to interpret behavior that is above her skill set (violation of Section 5.11). Chelsea is prone to making broad generalizations based on little information or observations, and the ED can bring about outlier behaviors in otherwise normal individuals, which may distract Chelsea or lead her to over-diagnose. Chelsea also becomes easily irritated by questions from patients and struggles to explain her plans, which is unacceptable for people who are likely already feeling some loss of control by being in a hospital bed.   I understand that everyone has tired, stressed, and just plain bad days– even those of us with jobs where we really need to check our baggage at the door to perform at our best. This was not the conduct, mentality, ethics, affect, or judgment of a good therapist on a bad day, though. This was someone dangerous– to the Emergency Department, to Marriage and Family Therapy, to mentally ill people like me, and to the State of California. This was someone without any sense of awe, weight, or humility while they kept my civil rights from me. This was someone without any compassion, empathy, or anything more than simple awareness that she was causing enormous trauma that would never heal. This was someone who was abusing her power because she knew all too well that her patients would be perceived as far too sick, manipulative, unstable, and unreliable to be trusted. This, perhaps most importantly, was someone who lied. No other individual, regardless of how sick they are, deserves to feel the kind of pain that I feel due to Chelsea Sloane’s misconduct.*” ...Show less »

Claimant says: "This is a complaint regarding Isaiah Chase, MD, psychiatrist at Kaiser San Rafael Medical Center. Dr. Chase, over the course of many months in his care, was negligent and emotionally abusive following a denial of psychiatric care and wrongful involuntary hospitalization.  In May of 2020, and the weeks prior, I asked Dr. Chase to help advocate for me to get residential psychiatric treatment, something I had been desperate to get covered by Kaiser. He proceeded to defer to other colleagues, and after I was denied cov” ...Show more »

Claimant says: "This is a complaint regarding Isaiah Chase, MD, psychiatrist at Kaiser San Rafael Medical Center. Dr. Chase, over the course of many months in his care, was negligent and emotionally abusive following a denial of psychiatric care and wrongful involuntary hospitalization.  In May of 2020, and the weeks prior, I asked Dr. Chase to help advocate for me to get residential psychiatric treatment, something I had been desperate to get covered by Kaiser. He proceeded to defer to other colleagues, and after I was denied coverage twice, he attempted to dissuade me from pursuing higher levels of care even further during a phone appointment. He also was, as far as I can recall, part of a cohort of clinicians who pledged to meet and determine how I could access a higher level of care, and to make a plan for this. Less than a week later, my therapist at the time, Lindsey Hockridge, filed a false police report that resulted in my forced incarceration in the emergency room at Kaiser San Rafael. Dr. Chase's colleagues, Chelsea Sloane Carroll and Kerry Savola-Levin, made countless false and misleading statements in my medical records in order to seclude me in the hospital against my will. Though my medical records suggest that Dr. Chase was being updated in real-time about the circumstances of the hospitalization as they unfolded, never once did he appear to advocate on my behalf. Instead, I was imprisoned for days without hearing from him; it's very possible that he made no attempts at all to explain my history, as someone very familiar with me, and help fix this disastrous situation.  Dr. Chase was well aware that I did not, thoughout my history, meet criteria for a 5150 hold. Dr. Chase was well aware that I was intent on being an active participant in my treatment and did not require force or coercion to understand that I needed help. Dr. Chase knew well that I had no specific plan or intent to end my life, yet to this day, I have no evidence to suggest that he communicated this to his colleagues. As far as I know, he sat back and watched it happen. The hospitalization wrecked me. I was never the same after that. Kaiser is notorious for providing inadequate and delayed care, and consequently it took 3 weeks after my discharge to get an appointment with Dr. Chase. He began the appointment appearing to act aloof, asking me why I had made the appointment. This felt unspeakably callous and insensitive; it was clear that I wasn't the one who made the appointment, and he knew (or should have known) exactly what it was about. I explained to Dr. Chase that I was afraid that if I did not attend the appointment, he would proceed to incarcerate me again for non-compliance. He scoffed, all but mocking me for having this concern, even though it had actually happened less than a month prior. He made no attempt to adjust any existing medications, instead prescribing me pills for sleep, and because I was taking my benzo prescription 3 times a day (as prescribed) due to PTSD symptoms, went to the effort to add use sparingly on my prescription (or something with the same meaning). He implied (I cannot speak to his intent but I can speak to his impact) that I was abusing my prescriptions while in the throes of panic and trauma. That I needed a reminder to not abuse my medication, even though I have aboslutely no history of substance abuse.  With a follow-up appoitnment scheduled for approximately five weeks from this one, and given his refusal to discuss his involvement in my abuse in the hospital, I discovered that Dr. Chase was no longer willing to provide a bare minimum standard of care, from my perspective. I was left with no other option but to pay out of pocket for another psychiatrist that would actually do his job. without being unbearably defensive about the facts surrounding my incarceration. However, after a few months, the cost became unsustainable, and I had to return to Dr. Chase's care. He refused, over and over, to discuss or even acknowledge my trauma and anger from the fact that he did not appear to advocate for me. He used to say that he didn't have the time to hear it, or my appointment was not the right occasion to bring it up. He also implied, repeatedly, that I was traumatized because I was incompetent at Dialectical Behavior Therapy (something I have participated in for many years, cumulatively), and needed to go to a class to relearn all of the skills. There is no evidence to suggest that repeating DBT treatment courses several times leads to a reduction in the symtoms of my diagnoses. Even more egregious, Dr. Chase never assured me that he would echo my reports of abuse and misconduct, on the part of his colleagues, to his management. It is possible that he heard me disclosing this abuse, and never reported it as he should have. Over time, I began to realize that I required more advanced treatment than I was currently receiving. I asked for a referral to receive ketamine treatment. Dr. Chase blew this off multiple times, and toward the end of my policy in late 2020, told me that he lacked any time to see me for an appointment. The best he did was a 10- or 15-minute phone call, in non-compliance with mental health parity laws in California. He instead continued to essentially manipulate me into taking lithium to treat my symptoms, even though he knew I had both thyroid and kidney problems (both of which can sometimes be exacerbated by lithium use). For over a year, I told him I did not think it would be healthy to take it, and for over a year, he kept pushing it.  Dr. Chase's betrayal was profound, life-changing, and simply unbelievable after my abuse. His gaslighting was persistent, calculated, and devastating. I will never forget his silence and complicity in what happened to me. I write this complaint in the service of other people who may find themselves in my position and/or his care, to warn others about what Isaiah Wattenberg Chase is capable of. Based on my experience, he can watch you get your civil rights away without saying a word to stop it. As is the case with all accounts of my abuse, I make the following statements using educated guesses, my own opinions and experiences, true facts, and approximations of facts. I pledge to modify my accounts if I learn that I am mistaken with respect to specific details, in order to continue to tell the truth about what happened to me. My goal is to help and warn others. I will not stop until I have justice for my trauma. *” ...Show less »

Claimant says: "This is a complaint against my former therapist and abuser, Lindsey Hockridge (LMFT License # 102822). Lindsey and I had a therapy appointment via telehealth on May 20, after which she made a series of false, coercive statements that led me to being wrongfully and traumatically hospitalized under Section 5150 by [redacted]. The circumstances leading to the event began due to Lindsey’s phone call to police, and yet she has failed to take any direct responsibility (that I have been able to witness) to addr” ...Show more »

Claimant says: "This is a complaint against my former therapist and abuser, Lindsey Hockridge (LMFT License # 102822). Lindsey and I had a therapy appointment via telehealth on May 20, after which she made a series of false, coercive statements that led me to being wrongfully and traumatically hospitalized under Section 5150 by [redacted]. The circumstances leading to the event began due to Lindsey’s phone call to police, and yet she has failed to take any direct responsibility (that I have been able to witness) to address her misconduct.      I did not realize that I was in an emotionally exploitative therapeutic relationship until after I was hospitalized, which is one (although not the predominant) reason that it has taken me so long to write this claim. However, having been in therapy for mental illness for nearly 15 years, I have never felt so strongly compelled to report my abuse until this hospitalization occurred. Lindsey Hockridge repeatedly misrepresented her areas of clinical expertise during our very short time working together, was shamelessly preoccupied about the liability she thought that I posed to her as a client, recommended that I invest in new programs and therapies without fulfilling her basic obligations related to care coordination and continuity, used contraindicated clinical practices to manipulate and discriminate against me, and knowingly created lies and embellishments that she knew would result in the withdrawal of my civil rights. I will attempt to illustrate our course of treatment together chronologically so as to support information mentioned in my annotated medical records, while also highlighting Lindsey’s countless instances of misconduct.    ·        In March, I called and expressed my interest in receiving mental health treatment at Foresight Mental Health, where Lindsey was working at the time of my abuse. I was told that there were no providers available in March, but I would be put on a waitlist. I agreed and waited for an open appointment.   ·      On April 3, Lindsey and I had our first appointment. On April 1, while filling out my online “portal,” I completed a release of information for my psychiatrist at Kaiser (included with my phone records) that would allow Lindsey to speak with him. My psychiatrist was clear in a previous appointment that he was interested in keeping in communication with my new therapist whenever I found one, and I had even mentioned this to the administrator who took my intake information and placed me on the waitlist. During our first appointment, I mentioned this to Lindsey and explained that care coordination would be important because my mental illnesses were complex and severe, so regular coordination about medication changes and other matters would be essential. Lindsey verbalized understanding.   ·      In subsequent appointments, Lindsey reported that she was interested in proceeding with an existential therapy approach instead of curriculum-based treatments during our work together, such as CBT, DBT, or ACT. My experience with the latter group of therapies is extensive, and reviewing them at that point felt unhelpful, so I was pleased to hear this. I was also pleased because I believed I had already gotten all that I could out of those treatments. Aside from binge eating, I did not ever feel “out of control” in the way most therapists or stereotypical suicide prevention treatments described people with serious depression and PTSD. I did not feel atypically impulsive, no longer self-harmed, and did not make decisions without thinking them through in my daily life. I did not understand what there was to gain from repeating DBT forever, like some people did. I told Lindsey this, but I do not believe that my rationale really made sense to her throughout our work together.   ·      On April 16, I had a telephone appointment with [redacted], my psychiatrist. He reported that he had not yet heard from Lindsey and asked if I had given her his contact information. I told her that I had, and that I was disappointed to hear that because she received it weeks ago. At our next appointment, I reminded Lindsey to at least initiate contact with [redacted] so that he had her contact information. She assured me that she would contact him. I reported to Lindsey that I was feeling tired, sad, and tearful at most appointments. I was in deep emotional pain. For me, that meant multiple days unable to get up from the couch, or 3 to 4 cycles of inconsolable crying and falling asleep. Again, impulsive behavior no longer interested or controlled me, and if I say that, I expect to be believed. Lindsey began asking me, at the end of sessions, if she would see me at the next one; alternatively, she would ask if I would be able to keep myself safe” until next session. Initially she smiled as she said that, saying that healthcare professional to healthcare professional, she needed reassurance that she wasn’t going to have any liability issues to deal with. Eventually, though, it became a part of every session, and it was my job to assure her that I would not inconvenience her by dying. Unbeknownst to me at the time, Lindsey believed that she was engaging, with fidelity, in the practice of “contracting for safety, yet throughout my medical documentation she also repeatedly confuses it for safety planning. The former is a ludicrous tool created in the 1970s that lacks evidence as a suicide prevention measure or assessment instrucment; the former is can be important in working with patients with suicidal ideation, but was rarely ever done. In my opinion Lindsey was asking me, will you show up next time, or will your mental illness get me in trouble? Will you promise me that you care about the longevity of my career above all else?   ·      A few weeks into April, the pandemic was still in full force in the Bay Area, and I was very depressed, experiencing bothersome PTSD symptoms, and was disappointed that my eating disorder was not improving at all. Lindsey reported that my experiences were outside of what she normally sees in her clients, because for them, she is often their second or third therapist at most. I stopped counting the number of therapists I’ve seen after 15. This deeply worried me, and also made me angry, because I did not understand why people like my psychiatrist and therapists in the recent past were hopeful about my prognosis when clearly, my illness was unusually severe relative to the rest of the population. I thought about this often during our sessions because of how inexperienced Lindsey’s other clients were. Lindsey recommended that I see a trauma therapist for EMDR. I complied immediately and saw [redacted] the next week.   ·      Several appointments later, I was furloughed from work at a local hospital and at the end of the month, my travel healthcare contract ended. I was devastated and feeling hopeless, and the thought of trying to find a new job made me miserable. Lindsey reported that she had consulted with her colleagues and decided that I needed a higher level of care. Lindsey disclosed that based on firsthand knowledge, there was only one program she was recommending in Southern California. She did not mention any alternatives that she deemed suitable at this time. The idea of trying to put my life on hold to do this program was stressful to think about, but ultimately, I was open-minded. I called the treatment center and asked them to check my insurance benefits. The center informed me that Kaiser, my insurance provider, would not cover treatment. The next ten days or so caused an enormous amount of distress as I tried to hold onto hope that I would be able to go to this one specific treatment center because it was the only one that would be effective, per my therapist. I argued with my insurance, filed appeals and grievances, called the State, made consultations appointments with attorneys, and even discussed how to win my expedited review with Lindsey. She told me that she believed that, based on her work experience at other residential centers, Kaiser would be considering an inferior facility, so she coached me during a session on specific points to mention to Kaiser in an attempt to convince them to cover the treatment.   ·      On May 8-9, I was notified and received a letter from Kaiser denying coverage for residential treatment on the basis of lack of medical necessity. I found out right away and told Lindsey. Kaiser requested that I be re-evaluated by a psychologist in my local psychiatry clinic over the phone to determine next steps. The idea of waiting only a few days until that appointment was so painful; I truly believed that because my therapist said I needed a very specific residential treatment urgently, I was deteriorating with each day that passed in outpatient treatment. Lindsey offered to call me and check in over the weekend while I waited for the appointment. I accepted her offer, thinking she was doing so to be kind and supportive. I was shocked to hear her say in her first call that if I did not respond to a missed call from her within 30 minutes, she would have no choice but to call emergency services. At the time, I was in no imminent danger, had no access to weapons, and we did not discuss any other “safety planning” during those calls, as was implied in my medical records. I would have never agreed to be bothered with something so infantilizing and selfish over the weekend after I had been denied treatment I was fighting for. Lindsey should have also had enough sense to know that, like most people in quarantine at the time, I was going to be indoors– in bed, reading, or watching TV. She offered to call at whatever times worked for her, and there were times that I declined or said that I would be busy, but make no mistake– I accepted these calls under the impression that she was checking in to be supportive, and because she felt badly that I had failed at trying to get help. She was wrong and abusive to threaten to call the police simply for me missing a call, and had no evidence I was imminently suicidal at the time. If Lindsey continues to call these “safety checks” to make me sound more impulsive, dependent, unpredictable, fearful of my own self-destruction, or resistant to performing my own independent emotional regulation, I will stop at nothing to have her disciplined for providing those services without my informed consent.   ·      On May 14, I had an evaluation with [redacted], and an appointment with my psychiatrist later in the day. Despite my very direct plea to [redacted] via email to recommend residential treatment coverage, she did no such thing, and said that she wanted to wait and have me do some outpatient group therapy. I then spoke to my psychiatrist, who said that he was surprised that I was in such distress about my eating disorder because he had never heard from Lindsey. I was furious. Lindsey also called that day to ask about the results of the evaluation. I briefly told her that it sounded like I would not be getting the care I needed, even though I was close to demanding it during the assessment. Lindsey did not say much beside the fact that we would talk in our next session. The next day, May 15, [redacted] finally reached out to request that I sign releases of information for Lindsey, meaning that they had finally made contact.   ·      On May 20, I felt angry and defeated. I could not believe Lindsey waited so long to contact my psychiatrist, that there was no plan for treatment, that my psychiatrist had hung up on me without making a follow-up appointment, and that Lindsey seemed to enjoy treating my psychological distress seriously when it came to her liability, but not when it came to actually advocating for me to get more help. Lindsey and I discussed whether therapy is actually effective, and how many different types I will have to try over the course of my life, in what one could reasonably characterize in an existentialist manner. As a speech-language pathologist, one thing I cannot stand about therapy is the lack of transparency about how often it is not effective. There have to be people who do not benefit. At the time, I thought about the rest of Lindsey’s clients and wondered if I was wasting my time, if counselors were going to lie to me for the rest of my life about what would work for me, and if I would still be suffering decades from now. There were contractors at my house that day, so while I was doing teletherapy, I was also having to multitask slightly in case they needed something. Lindsey knew about this ahead of time. I was alert, yet calm and focused.   ·      Lindsey, at one point, admitted that she thought there was a possibility that I could not find the exact right treatment until my 50s or 60s. I was seething. For someone who had stood back and watched while I tried relentlessly to help myself, I thought that that comment was unforgiveable. It also does not coincide with the beliefs I have developed in adulthood; in numerous countries around the world, people believe that the pain and suffering of individuals with serious psychiatric illnesses may not always be treatable, manageable, or endurable, and the latter would definitely coincide with experiencing mental and emotional anguish for 10 or 20 years. When I heard Lindsey discuss searching for the right treatment until my 50s or 60s, I thought of how unacceptable I find that expectation. In some countries, several of which I have visited personally, serious psychiatric illnesses may make someone a candidate for assisted suicide or euthanasia. As I have traveled, I have learned that not all cultures, religions, or life philosophies teach the ideas that all life is sacred, that all lives are worth living, or that all people are obligated to live the entirety of their natural lives. That does not mean I keep stockpiles of ropes and sharp knives in my house– it just means that my personal ideology does not allow space for the martyrization of mentally ill people experiencing senseless suffering with no end in sight, and nobody to help them.   ·      I stepped away from my computer to help the contractors during my session and then returned to speak with Lindsey. I remember that at one point I expressed that I was angry about not hearing from any providers since the 14th about what services I will receive from Kaiser. As I remember it, Lindsey said that [redacted] had mentioned something about maybe being able to get me into a program within a few weeks, but she did not know anything more than that. I am sure it is an immature thing to think, but I blamed Lindsey for the mess I was in, for my shattered expectations, and for my being directionless with respect to treatment. I questioned why I was even continuing to see her if I felt like this in my sessions; my EMDR sessions made me feel frustrated and ashamed, so I told Lindsey I was thinking of switching providers. I knew things were not working, and I had been in therapy long enough to know that you try a new therapist in most instances if things are not working.   ·      During the session, I continued to feel hurt. I thought that Lindsey must have an incredibly low opinion of me if she was comfortable setting me up to fail this badly. I wondered if she would care if I stopped seeing her. I did not want to keep carrying the weight of my mental illnesses by myself without any help, and I did not know how much longer I could commit to doing that. I also thought it was an unreasonable thing to commit to– why do I have to accept another “few weeks” of waiting for some unknown plan that may or may not happen? I could not believe I was being treated like the crazy one in this situation, and I wished I were dead; that was always something I was perfectly allowed to say in therapy for 14 years. I told her this. Lindsey knew that I wanted to be dead, but that I would feel too guilty because it would hurt my parents. I started to think out loud about what I could ever give them to console them, to make it hurt just a tiny bit less. I’m a typical 28-year-old, and all I have to my name is a car and a bank account. I guess I could try to make sure they could keep my car because my mom has always liked it, and my parents once made me draft a will with an attorney, so maybe I should just find it and sign it. It would be pointless, but no one cares about helping me, so I’m trapped. I just kept talking, shrugging and staring into space, so hurt that I considered letting Lindsey know that if I were ever as lazy as her when I worked, I would be fired, but clearly everyone else could get away with doing nothing because I did not matter. Lindsey did not realize it because a normal person would never do this, but as someone with very severe PTSD and depression, I was just daydreaming about how worthless I was because I was very angry at her– one “I would” or “I guess I should” statement after another, all hypothetical. I remember getting off that topic and thinking about how guilty I would be if I ever killed myself because I was an organ donor, and as a healthcare provider I would always want to fulfill that duty. I thought about a documentary I had watched days before about football players with CTE (chronic traumatic encephalopathy), many of whom killed themselves by shooting themselves in the chest so that their brains could be used for CTE research after their death. I wondered aloud if anyone would gain anything from posthumous analysis of my brain– speech-language pathology covers plenty of neurology, but its overlap with psychiatry is very limited, so I do not know too much about the neuroanatomy of mood disorders or PTSD. I was genuinely curious. I realized I was not explaining myself very well, but at that point I honestly did not care what Lindsey thought, and I figured that like so many past appointments, no matter how clearly I expressed my pain, all she would care about is how much trouble I would cause her.   ·      There was a brief silence. Lindsey then said that she was going to need to consult a colleague because of what I said, and then probably call the police so that they can come and do a welfare check at my house. I thought it was such an unusual thing to say that I did not know how to respond; no therapist had said anything like that before. I just stared. She said it again in different words. I thought about whether she was actually paying attention when I had told her, at least once, that I had started new medication (topiramate) and had been very clear about the side effects, which included impairments to communication (specifically language) and processing speed. [redacted] prescribed it, so she likely would have been informed from him, and even if all she remembered was the name of the medication, she could have researched it to verify the side effects. I remember discussing this with her because of my profession and the irony of a speech therapist having language issues. Because making a legitimate 5150 report for a situation like mine requires a record of what the person said, I feel very strongly that Lindsey did not remember or deliberately withheld information about whether the medication could have had any impact on what was going on in the session. What I do know for sure is that Lindsey did not care to ask any clarifying questions. Lindsey did not seem even remotely interested in whether I had any intent to kill myself, whether I had plans, or whether I had means; she does not have the skill or training to make an actual safety plan, so obviously she did not attempt to do that with me. She simply informed me that she was consulting with a colleague and asked if I would like to be called once she makes a decision. I said that it was up to her, still feeling very calm yet confused as to why Lindsey would be so haphazard and opportunistic in her procedures to call the police. I did not even believe that she would do it, because with nearly all past therapists, I had always been told that I was safe to express thoughts like those I mentioned, and that it was the therapist’s job to clarify how imminent the risk was at the end of the session. Lindsey then asked if I would be able to “keep myself safe until Friday.” I said yes. She also asked if she would see me for my appointment on that day, to which I also replied yes. Again, these were typical liability mitigation questions for her.   ·      After the phone call, I was still angry at Lindsey, but phone records will show that I spoke to my dad and trauma therapist, as well as helped the contractors as they finished up their work. I then started a crossword puzzle on my computer and watched TV, completely forgetting that Lindsey had threatened me with a welfare check by law enforcement until officers knocked on the door. The 5150 report is in the medical record, and Lindsey accuses me of stating that I had established plans “to commit suicide,” and that I was resolving to “leave property behind. Lindsey accused me of having researched how long organs are viable after a cardiac event during suicide, and said that I am still developing a plan. How bizarre, creepy, and embarrassing, for someone with my acute care experience; why on Earth would there be any kind of established protocol for organs procured in that manner? If anyone reading this is wondering why California's mental health system is failing, it's not simply an access problem; MFTs like Lindsey are given far too much power and credibility when they have no science or medical training, so they clearly do not actually think through the implausibility of that scenario. Lindsey also erroneously stated that she has seen me for treatment since March, and told the officer that detained me that because I was highly educated, I would say the “right things” to avoid a 5150. Lindsey cannot simulataneously say that I am intelligent enough to be deceptive, while also stupid enough to think that I could preserve my own organs after cardiac death. It's one or the other.   ·      Though I very well could have been experiencing difficulty formulating certain ideas quickly at the discourse level during my session due to my medication, it does not cause difficulty with cognition or comprehension. Additionally, I am a nationally certified and state-licensed expert in language and communication. In states of heightened emotion, it is not uncommon for individuals to misinterpret or misremember what they hear, and they will often remember sentences and phrases as more intense or passionate than what was actually said. I am the client, this is my life and my feelings, I was the one wronged by inadequate care when I needed it most, and I have no reason to lie now that the hospitalization has already happened. I will repeat that I am also an expert in communication and language, and it is absolutely impossible that what Lindsey heard was in the past tense, for one (e.g., was resolving, researched) and none of it could have been a planned, past action. Lindsey fabricated these statements because she feared for her own liability, as was typical for her each session, and perhaps she had just had enough of me and did not know how to end our relationship the right way. After all, she admitted that she had limited experience with someone with my psychiatric history, and her inability to manage care coordination suggested that she may have been far too overwhelmed. She may have also been experiencing her own unmitigated countertransference due to my anger and feelings of apathy about continuing therapy with her. Perhaps, like many Americans, she was experiencing psychological distress due to complications from the pandemic. What I do know is that for some reason, Lindsey snapped, and she was not interested in having someone come to my house to make sure I was OK; she wanted me confined and punished in the most restrictive environment possible.   ·      Lindsey appears to deliberately make no mention to any clinicians about my attempt to access higher levels of care for myself, and as a result, I end up looking as though I am trying to avoid treatment. With this omission and the final statement of the 5150 from the officer, Lindsey succeeded in creating a narrative of someone in denial about their mental illnesses and who refuses help. Lindsey also lied repeatedly about her “safety checks,” which were really just liability checks, and insinuates that they had to occur every 12-18 hours because I could not control myself. In reality, phone records show that Lindsey made 5 phone only calls during our entire therapeutic relationship, and one was to find out the results of [redacted]’s evaluation. Lindsey also preemptively accuses me of intending to lie to officers and clinicians to avoid a 5150; wouldn’t an ethical, caring therapist be more concerned that an officer find their client safe and comfortable at home? Lindsey simply would not take no for an answer while I was with the officers and remained on the phone with dispatchers, demanding that the officer write the 5150 based on her observations instead of his and his partner’s. Perhaps what is most bizarre to me about that is that if she were doing a thorough risk assessment, Lindsey would be able to state what my plan was if I actually said that I had a plan, because ideally she would have asked, and that would have been able to be included in the 5150 report.   ·    Because Lindsey insisted that I was not to be believed because I was bound to deceive everyone to avoid being detained, my psychiatric evaluations were abusive, ableist, biased, and humiliating. In my first, the evaluator literally reported that I had no imminent risk factors, and then later in her report, she wrote that I was an imminent danger to myself. Lindsey’s lies were the primary source through which she could raise enough suspicion to justify a hold, and to this day, I do not know why Lindsey was so forceful in her words and actions in demanding that I be held against my will. All I wanted was to get help without it having to be painful. Now, because of Lindsey’s abuse, I am without any help, and the master plan she devised to have me institutionalized continues to cause pain to this day.   ·    For the rest of my life, I will have to worry about how this hospitalization will hold me back. I know that I will be asked about it, or someone will run a background check and find it, or that I will need to disclose it. It will be a skeleton in my closet and a stain on my record. I have done countless things that I am not proud of. But because I have been serious about my career in healthcare for some time now, an occasional speeding ticket is all that I have allowed as far as civil encounters with law enforcement. Every time I have pressed my foot too heavily onto the gas pedal has been indisputably my fault, and there have been objective data to back it up; luckily, I have been able to pay my ticket, do some traffic school, and go on with my life. In general, people do not think less of me for it. I cannot say the same for my hospitalization. In the months since all of this happened, Lindsey might be quickly forgetting who I am and what she did to me, but I am still crying and suffering as though it happened yesterday, devastated by all of the new things she has made me ashamed and afraid of.   ·    When Lindsey and I worked together, I thought that I understood what it meant to have severe post-traumatic stress disorder; as it turns out, I had no idea until she decided to have it control my life. I can no longer watch a TV show where someone gets arrested, because if I hear the noise of handcuffs tightening around someone’s wrists, my heart starts racing and I burst into tears. I felt fortunate to be back at work in a hospital for a while, but I had flashbacks every few days when I evaluated a patient with a food tray that looked too much like the one I had in the emergency room. Sometimes I became so disoriented that I had to leave and come back later. There are times when, without warning, I panic because I start to worry that someone will forcefully take me from my home. I am not sure Lindsey is aware of this, but I never received any follow-up therapy, because all Kaiser offered was a virtual version of an outpatient group program that I tried in January but was not effective for me. Lindsey was the first one in this house of cards to make everything fall apart. All of my providers abandoned me. I have no one. None of them were sorry to hear about what I went through, and none want to help.   ·   I cannot rest until Lindsey Hockridge is recognized for who she is: a reckless, selfish alarmist who has the potential to cause more harm. It may not look that way to an untrained eye, particularly because we normally think of abusive and exploitative therapeutic relationships in the context of romantic and sexual misconduct, but this is classic emotional manipulation and exploitation. No client, especially who was suffering like I was, should have to take care of their therapist’s emotional needs by assuring them that they will not kill themselves, for the sole purpose of lessening the therapist’s stress over professional liability. No client should have a therapist that could not care less if they feel calm and cared for, and only wants them in handcuffs on the way to solitary confinement, where no one will listen to or believe them. No client deserves a therapist who makes a client believe that they must attend a program just because the therapist personally endorses it, placing undue pressure on the client to gain access to that program and ensuring certain disappointment if the client cannot attend. No client should be told that they should have hope for treatment because they may one day get better decades from now, or should be called a suicide risk when they refuse to unconditionally commit to suffering for 10 or 20 years. No client should have to learn that their therapist lied about them behind their back while they were powerless in an emergency room, when what they really needed was an advocate.   Lindsey Hockridge is not a true therapist. I am a testament to the fact that she is an abuser. She has hurt me in ways words could never describe.  *” ...Show less »

Claimant says: "I am unhappy because the new doctor that does not know me and the extensive time spent on getting the correct treatment does nothing but chop me off what was working well.  6 years spent on moving to recovery quality of life smashed by one person opinion  assumptions and presumptions ! !”