Trial for psychiatrist Dr. William Ayres, accused of molestation begins

Report from the San Mateo County Times

After two years of events worthy of a prime time legal drama, embattled child psychiatrist Dr. William Ayres will finally stand trial Monday. He is accused of molesting seven of his young male patients.

Ayres, 77, was a prominent member of the San Mateo medical community and served as president of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.

He also performed physical examinations and inspected the genitalia of many of his juvenile psychiatric patients.

The once well-respected doctor was arrested in April 2007 and charged with 14 counts of lewd and lascivious acts with three victims, ages 9, 11 and 12 at the time of the alleged abuse.

The case's publicity brought forward four more accusers, bringing the number of Ayres' felony molestation counts to 20. He was freed on $750,000 bail.

The shocking story made international headlines, and the trial beginning Monday is expected to draw more public attention.

"We are exceedingly pleased that we are now on the doorstep of getting justice," San Mateo County Chief Deputy District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe said Friday.

A trial judge will be selected by Judge James Ellis in San Mateo County Superior Court in Redwood City on Monday morning.

Wagstaffe predicted jury selection and pretrial motions would take two weeks, but that the entire trial would last eight to 10 weeks.

Ayres practiced for decades in San Mateo County, seeing patients referred to him
through local school districts and the county's juvenile court, in addition to his private practice.

[...]

Police first began investigating him in 2002 after being told by a man who was a patient of Ayres in the 1970s that the doctor had molested him on multiple occasions. But the case had to be dropped after a U.S. Supreme Court ruling effectively changed the statute of limitations on such cases.

Childhood molestation can only be brought by victims who are younger than 29 or whose alleged abuse occurred after Jan. 1, 1998.

The San Mateo Police Department reopened the case in March 2006, at the urging of a friend of one of the victims to seek out other possible victims who fell within the legal statute of limitation.

That friend was New York-based freelance writer Victoria Balfour, who made it a personal crusade to unearth possible molestation victims of Ayres and help authorities build a case against him.

A search warrant was executed for Ayres' records, and a list was compiled of more than 800 patients.

Prosecutors believe they know of at least 39 former patients of Ayres who had been molested by him, but most did not fall under the state's statute of limitations.

After seven months of exhaustive and painful interviews with patients on the list, police took Ayres into custody at his San Mateo home on April 5, 2007.

Ayres' medical license was suspended, and has since expired.

On April 28, 2007, the child psychiatrist accused of molesting dozens of pre-adolescent boys in San Mateo County for decades declared his innocence of the multiple counts against him.

Now, more than two years later, the once-prominent child psychiatrist's fate will likely be left to a jury.

[...]

Ayres was known nationally as one of the country's top child psychiatrists; he was just as well respected on the Peninsula where he ran a private practice for decades.

He was probably one of fewer than 10 San Mateo County psychiatrists with a subspecialty in child and adolescent psychiatry, according to San Mateo County Medical Association Executive Director Sue Malone.

He told colleagues he performed medical examinations because that was the way he had been trained. He had done his residency in the early 1960s at the Judge Baker Center in Boston, one of the country's premier centers for the study of child psychology.

While most child psychiatrists admit that administering physical exams to patients is uncommon today, many professionals defend the practice as another instrument in a psychiatrist's toolbox.

A spokeswoman from the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, of which Ayres was president for more than a decade, told MediaNews that performing physicals on patients in a psychiatric setting can be "consistent with good medical practice."

Wagstaffe said he expected attorneys on both sides to present expert opinions on the matter.

While the passing of time between charges and trial can often damage prosecutors' cases, Wagstaffe said all their witnesses were ready to go.

"This case is more than ripe for trial," he said.

Houston Psychiatrist's License Suspened Over Cocaine Use

As reported by the Houston Chronicle

The Texas Medical Board temporarily has suspended the license of Houston psychiatrist Dr. Eli Anderson, saying he failed a test for cocaine use and his practice represents a threat to the public's welfare.

Agency documents indicate Anderson, 64, pleaded no contest to a third-degree felony cocaine possession charge in June 2005. He was placed on a five-year order of deferred adjudication, meaning that the offense would be stricken from his record if he met probation-like requirements during that period.

In February 2007, Anderson was arrested in Lubbock on outstanding warrants from Clay County. While in custody, Lubbock police lodged other charges against him, including one for possessing drug paraphernalia.

In August of that year, officials of Anderson's employer, the Lubbock Regional Mental Health and Mental Retardation Center, notified the medical board that the charges had led to his dismissal.

In June, Anderson tested positive for a cocaine metabolite.

Medical board spokeswoman Jill Wiggins said the temporary suspension will remain in effect indefinitely. Anderson may appeal the decision in state district court.

Anderson, a graduate of the Baylor College of Medicine, has practiced in Texas 29 years, most recently at 8240 Antoine Drive. He could not be reached for comment.

William Hamilton Ayres Watchdog Site

We now have a blog devoted to tracking the declining career William Hamilton Ayres

William Hamilton Ayres is a "noted" former child psychiatrist who now stands accused of molesting many young boys over the course of his long career. For those not familiar with the case, click on career milestones below the mugshot.

William Hamilton Ayres

Career Milestones

Great Background Article!

Another Good Background Article

Ayres' California Medical License

2003: Ayres Sued - Confidential Settlement

04/06/2007: Arrested

04/12/2007: Prohibited from practicing.

04/13/2007: In Jail Again.

07/24/2008: Trial in January 09

William Ayres: Unmitigated Gall

Time keeps on slipping, slipping, slipping...

The Bizarre Case of Dr. Margaret Bean-Bayog, Harvard psychiatrist

A flash back to the bizarre case of Dr. Margaret Bean-Bayog, Harvard psychiatrist, taken from a report in the NY Times on September 18th, 1992.

Psychiatrist in Sex Abuse Case Offers Her License

Dr. Margaret Bean-Bayog, the Harvard psychiatrist who has been accused of sexually abusing one of her patients and contributing to his suicide, offered to resign her medical license today.

The offer was made four days before the state Board of Registration in Medicine was scheduled to present evidence against Dr. Bean-Bayog that could have led to the loss of her license.

After meeting tonight, members of the medical board announced that they would forward the letter and accompanying documents to the administrative judge in charge of the case for a decision on whether to go forward with the hearing on Monday, as scheduled.

But Jack Fabiano, the lawyer hired by the board to present the evidence against Dr. Bean-Bayog, called the resignation attempt "invalid" and said, "I view this as a highly improper attempt to circumvent normal trial procedures."

A member of the medical board, Paul Gitlin, said there were complications with Dr. Bean-Bayog's letter proposing her resignation, which would be permanent and would prevent her from practicing medicine anywhere in the nation. In most states, however, the loss of her medical license would not prevent Dr. Bean-Bayong from practicing as a therapist.

Continues to Declare Innocence

In her letter, Dr. Bean-Bayog continued to declare her innocence and denounced the board and the way it has treated her. Dr. Bean-Bayog said the hearing would be a "media circus" staged for "purely political purposes."

Dr. Bean-Bayog, who is 48 years old, said she wished to resign rather than endure "any further pandering to the public appetite for preposterous, salacious scandal." She specifically denounced both the state Secretary of Consumer Affairs, Gloria Larson, who has jurisdiction over the medical board, and Mr. Fabiano.

"I am not resigning because I fear the potential outcome of this hearing process," she wrote. "It is the process itself, which has already taken a heavy toll on me and my family, and not any potential verdict, that I find daunting."

Confession Unacceptable

In the last few weeks Dr. Bean-Bayog had been negotiating with the board for a settlement, but in her letter she said the board's offer to suspend her license was unacceptable because, she wrote, "It required me to confess to conduct I did not commit."

The medical board had prepared a strong case against her, people familiar with the case said, and it would have introduced evidence questioning her therapy methods and suggesting that she had become sexually involved with her patient, Paul Lozano, a Harvard Medical School student. Mr. Lozano, who began therapy with Dr. Bean-Bayog in 1986, killed himself with a large overdose of cocaine in April 1991 after she had stopped treating him.

Mr. Lozano's family has filed a lawsuit against Dr. Bean-Bayog charging her with malpractice and wrongful death. Andrew Meyer, the Lozano family's lawyer, said that Dr. Bean-Bayog's resignation would tend to help the family's case. Allegations Attract Notoriety

The case has attracted enormous national attention because of the sexual allegations and because of 3,000 pages of medical records introduced by Mr. Meyer that include sexual fantasies written by Dr. Bean-Bayog. At least two books and two television movies are in the works, and some of the hearing was to have been televised on Court TV. Officials of the state Division of Administrative Law Appeals, an independent state agency that is conducting the hearing, said they had received so many requests for press credentials that they had decided to move the proceeding to the State House auditorium, with a seating capacity of 600.

Dr. Bean-Bayog and some of her friends in the psychiatric community have said she is being unfairly singled out because she is a woman. They have argued that neither the press nor the medical board would have pursued the case so vigorously if she were a man.

Another psychiatrist, Dr. William Barry Gault, who also treated Mr. Lozano, first reported possible abuse by Dr. Bean-Bayog in late 1990. But it was not until last March, after Mr. Meyer filed 3,000 pages of evidence with the court and after the press subsequently began reporting about the case, that the medical board began its inquiry.

Sexual Fantasies Documented

Mr. Meyer's evidence included sadomasochistic sexual fantasies handwritten by Dr. Bean-Bayog, allegedly about Mr. Lozano, and flashcards she gave him.

One of the cards said: "Run over these cards every day until you know them all by heart and are starting to believe them." Another said, "I'm your mom and I love you and you love me very, very much. Say that 10 times." Still another said, "I'm going to miss so many things about you, the closeness and the need and the phenomenal sex."

Dr. Bean-Bayog has argued that these are examples of an accepted therapeutic technique called transference, in which the patient is asked to imagine the therapist as his mother.

Therapists often take patients back to their childhood to discover the source of troubling emotions. But Dr. Howard Zonana, a professor of psychiatry at Yale Medical School, said: "It is one thing if you do this in a role-playing session. It's another thing if someone's reality is getting confused. Most doctors would not actually say they are the mom."

The most serious allegations against Dr. Bean-Bayog, and those that would provide the board with its clearest cause to strip her of her license, are very hard to prove: that she sexually abused Mr. Lozano and that she contributed to his death. Dr. Bean-Bayog has denied any sexual involvement with Mr. Lozano.

Nevertheless, the board appeared ready to try to prove these accusations. Its expanded list of charges, filed in June, includes one that she "improperly conducted and utilized psychotherapy sessions." According to people familiar with the case, the board will use this to introduce testimony from several other psychiatrists who treated Mr. Lozano that he had told them she slept with him and masturbated in front of him during therapy sessions.

'Somewhat Unconventional'

On the issue of suicide, the board's charges contend that "Dr. Bean-Bayog's failure to conform to the standards of accepted medical practice caused harm to Paul Lozano." The board is expected to call expert witness on that subject.

A second difficulty is that while the medical board has charged Dr. Bean-Bayog with failing "to conform to the standards of accepted medical practice," there is widespread disagreement among therapists about the boundaries of proper psychotherapy. In one of her few public statements, Dr. Bean-Bayog acknowledged that her treatment was "somewhat unconventional," but she asserted that this was necessary because Mr. Lozano was an especially troubled patient.

Exposed: Harvard Shrink Gets Rich Labeling Kids Bipolar

A column by Bruce E. Levine, as seen on AlterNet

What Dick Cheney is to the U.S. invasion of Iraq, psychiatrist Joseph Biederman is to the explosion of psychiatric medications in American children. Recently, Biederman was nailed by congressional investigators and the New York Times for overestimating just how greedy an elite shrink is entitled to be. Beyond a peek into the corruption of psychiatry at its highest levels, the scandal is an opportunity to reconsider the Big Pharma financed view of why kids become disruptive and destructive.

On June 8, 2008, the New York Times reported the following about Joseph Biederman: "A world-renowned Harvard child psychiatrist whose work has helped fuel an explosion in the use of powerful anti-psychotic medicines in children earned at least $1.6 million in consulting fees from drug makers from 2000 to 2007 but for years did not report much of this income to university officials, according to information given congressional investigators."

Due in part to Biederman's influence, the number of American children and adolescents treated for bipolar disorder increased 40-fold from 1994 to 2003, and as Bloomberg News reported (September 2007), "The expanded use of bipolar as a pediatric diagnosis has made children the fastest-growing part of the $11.5 billion U.S. market for anti-psychotic drugs."

Pediatrician and author Lawrence Diller notes about Biederman, "He single-handedly put pediatric bipolar disorder on the map." Biederman has been in a position to convince many doctors to diagnose bipolar disorder in children and to medicate them with anti-psychotic drugs. In addition to being a professor at Harvard, Biederman is also chief of research in pediatric psychopharmacology at the Massachusetts General Hospital, which publishes more than 30 papers yearly on psychiatric disorders. And Biederman himself has authored and co-authored approximately 500 articles, 70 book chapters, and more than 450 scientific abstracts, as well as being on the editorial board of many professional journals.

Biederman (and two of his colleagues in the psychiatry department at Harvard Medical School who received an additional $2.6 million from drug companies from 2000 to 2007), by failing to report income from drug companies while at the same time receiving federal funds from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), violated rules designed to police conflicts of interest, according to Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa. Grassley concluded, "Obviously, if a researcher is taking money from a drug company while also receiving federal dollars to research that company's product, then there is a conflict of interest." In one example, Biederman neglected to report his 2001 income from Johnson & Johnson (makers of the anti-psychotic drug Risperdal); Johnson & Johnson reported to Grassley that it had paid Biederman $58,169 in 2001.

In addition to his popularization of bipolar disorder for children, Biederman is one of the most significant forces behind the commonplace diagnosis of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Congressional investigators also found that Biederman conducted studies of Eli Lilly's attention deficit hyperactivity disorder drug Strattera that were funded by NIH at the same time he was receiving money from Lilly that exceeded the maximum amount permitted.

NIH rules state that researchers cannot take more than $20,000 in payments from a drug company whose drug they are funded by NIH to research and that researchers must disclose any payment received from a drug company of $10,000 or more. Apparently, for drug researchers taking federal funding from NIH, there is no law against being on the take from drug companies, but there are rules against greed.

Mental health treatment in the United States is now a multibillion-dollar industry, and all the rules of industrial complexes apply. Not only does Big Pharma have influential psychiatrists such as Biederman in their pocket, virtually every mental health institution from which doctors, the press, and the general public receive their mental health information is financially interconnected with Big Pharma. The American Psychiatric Association, psychiatry's professional organization, is hugely dependent on drug company grants, and this is also true for the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill and other so-called consumer organizations. Harvard and other prestigious university psychiatry departments take millions of dollars from drug companies, and the National Institute of Mental Health funds researchers who are financially connected with drug companies.

The corporate media, dependent on drug company advertising, occasionally reports on egregious scandals, but the corporate media is generally timid in reporting the big picture of how drug companies spread around millions of dollars to make billions of dollars.

There are certainly many troubled and disruptive American children who are sometimes extremely destructive to themselves or others. However, any attempt to understand these kids will be corrupted by financial dependency on drug companies, which have a vested interest in viewing all attentional, emotional, and behavioral difficulties as diseases that can be fixed with drugs.

There are several commonsense nondisease reasons why children become troubled and behave disruptively and destructively. For more than two decades, I have worked with annoying, disruptive, and destructive children. Many of these children had been previously diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, bipolar disorder, and other serious psychiatric diagnoses, and they were routinely given a variety of drug combinations. Their parents most often reported that drugs were prescribed after being questioned by doctors about symptoms but without any exploration of reasons as to why their children were behaving as they did.

In America's assembly-line medicine, drug prescriptions are routinely written without any exploration of commonsense reasons as to why a child might be behaving problematically. Is the child resentful over a perceived injustice? Is the child experiencing deep emotional pain? Is the child simply bored? Does the child feel powerless? Does the child have low self-worth because a lack of life skills and thus behaves immaturely so no expectations are placed on him or her? Is the child starving for attention? Has the child lost respect for his or her parents because these adults have not acted like adults? Has the child's basic physical needs -- such as proper nutrition, physical activity, or sleep -- not been met? Routinely, few if any of these areas are explored before a prescription is written.

One of the most common reasons that children behave problematically is that well-meaning parents are having difficulty relating to their child's personality. Perhaps the parents are, by nature, compliant and conformist, and their child has a nonconformist and rebellious temperament. Good parents feel guilty when they have difficulty relating to their child, but all of us -- including doctors -- are human, and we all need to admit our limitations. The reality is that children who feel that nobody "gets them" are more likely to be troubled and disruptive. In another era, if a parent had difficulty relating to his or her child, there would more likely be at least one grandparent, uncle, aunt, friend, or other adult in the community who could easily relate. In our increasingly disconnected society (see Robert Putnam's Bowling Alone for a detailed picture of the destruction of American community), there are increasing numbers of children without even one adult who they believe relates to them.

Moreover, as society demands increasing machinelike efficiency, more of us -- children and adults -- will not be able to fit in; but a corporate media cannot confront a corporate culture that produces widespread painful alienation, which in turn creates a variety of attentional, emotional and behavioral problems. The corporate media may at times report on egregious corruption of an individual or an institution, but it does not ask this question: In an increasingly homogenized and standardized society, should we drug those who do not neatly fit in -- or should we consider transforming such a society?

British Celebrity and TV psychiatrist Raj Persaud admits to plagerism, says he copied work from books

This is turning into a major scandal for psychiatry in the UK. As reported in the Times OnlineRaj Persaud, the celebrity psychiatrist, yesterday admitted copying the work of other scholars for publication in his book and in articles that he submitted. appearances on television shows such as This Morning, admitted plagiarising four articles in From The Edge of the Couch, a book published in 2003.

A hearing at the General Medical Council (GMC) in Manchester was told that Dr Persaud also admitted passing off other scholars’ work as his own in articles published in journals and national newspapers. Dr Persaud, who appeared regularly on the BBC Radio 4 programme All In The Mind, said that his actions were neither dishonest nor liable to bring his profession into disrepute. For some of the duplication Dr Persaud blamed a computer “cutting and pasting” error, the panel was told.

Jeremy Donne, QC, counsel for the GMC, said that Dr Persaud had benefited financially from the “hard work and scholarship” of other people.

“The articles, we say, speak for themselves and they all demonstrate the extent Dr Persaud has appropriated the work of others as his own,” he said. “We further allege that Dr Persaud has been dishonest. Dishonesty can be inferred from his repeated conduct in plagiarising the work of academics . . . thereby enhancing his professional reputation and standing with the public as well as enhancing himself in the press.”

Mr Donne said that Dr Persaud blamed subeditors after an article that he wrote for The Times Educational Supplement (TES) in February 2005 did not acknowledge the scholar whose work he copied. Thomas Blass, a professor at the University of Mary-land in America, complained and was told, in an e-mail by Dr Persaud, that he thought he had given him a mention.The TES acknowledged that Dr Persaud had copied the work of another scholar, Mr Donne said. “It’s quite clear that the TES were not taking responsibility for subbing errors in their apology.”

The GMC panel was told that allegations of plagiarism against Dr Persaud were first made in an article in The Sunday Times in April 2006. At the time Dr Persaud was a consultant psychiatrist for the South London and Maudsley NHS Trust, a position he still holds. He was also a director of the now defunct Centre for Public Engagement in Mental Health Sciences at the Institute of Psychiatry, King’s College, University of London. He withdrew from this honorary position after the allegations emerged.

Mr Donne said that Dr Persaud was being disingenuous by claiming that he had acknowledged the original con-tributors to his book. He revealed that Dr Persaud asked for and received permission to quote an article by a Professor Bentall for his book. “Professor Bentall gave his permission assuming that Dr Persaud . . . would know that quotations would have appeared in parenthesis and be properly attributed.” Having seen the passage Professor Bentall was astonished that a substantial portion of his paper had simply been copied into the book in what he believes was a deliberate act of plagiarism.”

Mr Donne said that the British Medical Journal was forced to issue an “unequivocal retraction” in September 2005 after publishing an article by Dr Persaud in which he failed to attribute his work correctly. The journal subsequently declined to publish another of his articles.The hearing continues.

New York psychiatrist settles malpractice lawsuit

As reported in News Day

A former psychiatrist who confided to a patient that he wanted to kill six people, and asked the patient to help him find a handgun, has settled a medical malpractice lawsuit with the man.

Richard Karpf agreed to pay $365,000 to Dennis White, a former patient who called police in January 2003 telling them of Karpf's intentions. The settlement came Monday, while a Nassau County jury was in its second day of deliberations in the civil lawsuit.

Karpf was arrested after purchasing a pistol and silencer from someone who turned out to be an undercover officer. He pleaded guilty in 2004 to illegal weapon possession and was sentenced to three months in jail. He remains on probation through next year.

Attorneys for both sides said they were satisfied with the settlement.

What's Wrong With Research In Psychiatry?

The Last Psychiatrist weblog has a decent article on what's wrong with research in psychiatry. Here are some choice bits, with more at the link:

Apart from the high fives, bravado, and binge alcoholism.

Dynastic:

There are no independent psychiatric researchers. Young academics are mentored by older academics; this isn't optional, for either person. In virtually no circumstance do they study something entirely of their own choosing, it is either an outgrowth of the mentors' research, or is the mentors' research.

Groupthink:

Academic psychiatrists are nearly all on the same page, and refer to one another as if they have a relationship, even when they've never met. ("Chuck Nemeroff is doing some good work on...") It's pointless to list the other characteristics of groupthink here, except to highlight one:

the purpose of groupthink is not to promote an ideology, but self-preservation, and this is unconscious. They don't realize that their lives are devoted to preserving the group, yet young researchers are brought on who connect with the group; peer reviewers-- and journal editors-- come from the group; grant reviewers, and NIMH people themselves came from, and support the group.

An example of groupthink preservation is the referencing of studies. Academics support their propositions with previous studies; however, no one checks the accuracy of these studies. No one has the time, and the group necessarily must trust the work of others in the group. Even if an error were to be found, it would be described as an isolated error. A cursory stroll through this site alone suggests just how "isolated" such errors really are.

Outcomes Research Is Purposefully Avoided, or Ignored:

You might think in a field with nothing but outcome studies (e.g. Prozac vs. placebo) I might not be able to make this claim, but I do.

Most studies are short term. The few long term studies that exist (e.g. Depakote for maintenance) are either equivocal (e.g. Depakote for maintenance) or show no efficacy (e.g. Depakote for maintenance.) And they are ignored.

But these outcomes are distractions. The question isn't is Depakote good for maintenance bipolar. The question is, is there any value to the diagnosis of bipolar? In other words, if you called it anxiety, or personality disorder, or anything else, and then treated them ad lib, would the outcome be different? Is there value to the DSM?

You might argue the diagnosis leads us to the treatment, but in most cases, meds are used across all diagnoses, and more often than not a diagnosis is created to justify the medication.

Are hospitals valuable? You would think that by now we'd have a clear answer to this, the most expensive of maneuvers. I can say, however, that reducing the length of stay from several months to 5-7 days has not affected the suicide rate. I'm not saying they are or are not valuable, I am saying that I don't know-- and that's the problem.

It is 2008 and there are more studies on restless leg syndrome then there are on hospital vs. placebo. You know why? See above.

A damning, valuable article

Since two-year-old children are naturally calm and attentive, the playful and unruly ones are starting to receive ADHD drugs

We have this report from Australia

Toddlers as young as two are being diagnosed with ADHD and prescribed drugs including Ritalin.

Figures obtained by The Daily Telegraph reveal 311 children in NSW aged five and under depend on controversial medication, including 58 four-year-olds and 13 three-year-olds.

Health Department figures show that, nationally, doctors have prescribed ADHD drugs to five toddlers aged only two, despite possible side effects.

The mother of one four-year-old who has been on Ritalin since the age of three said she knew there could be long-term effects but the change in her son's behaviour was worth the risk.

"At first I was hoping he didn't have ADHD and I didn't want to put him on medication but I thought I should give it a go and there has been a big improvement," the single mother of two told The Daily Telegraph.

But the disturbing figures tell only part of the story.

They cover scripts subsidised under the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme - only a proportion of the young children on ADHD drugs.

With Australia's ADHD rates among the highest in the world, the federal Department of Health said prescriptions paid for without PBS subsidies "are a significant portion of the total scripts".

It has no corresponding data for them.

The most widely prescribed drugs for the youngest children, according to the figures to March this year, continue to be Ritalin and the longer-lasting associated drug, Concerta, which was added to the PBS last year.

Dexamphetamine is the next most popular while Strattera, a longer-lasting non-stimulant, is less popular and prescribed mainly for children aged six and older.

As well as the three and four-year-olds, there are 240 five-year-olds on subsidised ADHD drugs in NSW. There are 6692 6- to 10-year-olds, 9006 11- to 15-year-old and 2584 16- to 18-year-olds.

The figures follow the State Government's ADHD review which found there was no overprescribing of drugs.

But child psychiatrist Jon Jureidini said he was disappointed at the number of preschoolers on the list.

"I would be confident that they (the drugs) are being inappropriately used in most cases of preschool children," Dr Jureidini said.

"ADHD is not a good explanation for putting these children on drugs.

"I have seen children of that age displaying very disturbed behaviour but it is usually a medical problem or significant family circumstances that are undermining their well-being."

However paediatrician Dr Michael Kohn, the treating doctor for the four-year-old, said he was not surprised at the number of children on ADHD medication.

Dr Kohn, a senior staff specialist in paediatrics at The Children's Hospital at Westmead, said the prescribing of ADHD drugs to children aged four and less was strictly controlled in NSW.

Specialists needed the permission of the state's Stimulant's Committee with the committee having to meet on each individual case.

Drug Czar Plays Politics With Mental Illness, Suicide And Marijuana

Via Furious Seasons, a report from the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy. This comment at Furious Seasons hits the nail on the head:

Yes, pot makes people kill themselves. That's such a bizarre assertion that it's embarrassing--and, indeed, claiming pot causes anxiety and suicide while perfectly legal drugs such as Paxil, Zoloft, Effexor and so on have been linked to suicidality and suicides and to cases of very extreme agitation is the very height of hypocrisy. A 2001 study published in the Journal of Clinical Psychiatry found that 8.1 percent of admissions to one hospital's psych unit in a 14-month period were due to "antidepressant-associated mania or psychosis." In fact, a Whether you like or hate pot, you ought to be against the feds making such hypocritical claims or you ought to be in favor of Walters warning parents of teens about the dangers of anti-depressant-caused psychosis. I simply don't know of any studies proving that pot causes suicide. I'm not saying it's impossible, but it's highly unlikely that such a link is very strong.

Anti-depressants are much more of a suicide threat.

The great depression swindle - British tests for depression worse that useless

As seen in the Daily Mail

The test GPs use to diagnose depression is worse than useless, according to new research. Under the latest government guidelines, doctors are paid extra to ask patients two simple questions. Your answers are supposed to show if you are depressed or not.

But, a study has found that 62 per cent of patients diagnosed as depressed weren't in fact depressed at all.

As a result, doctors and psychiatrists could be seriously over-estimating the number of people who are depressed - and prescribing drugs to thousands who are healthy, says the study's author, Dr Alex Mitchell, a consultant psychiatrist at Leicester General Hospital.

Under current guidelines, with mild to moderate depression are meant to be offered talking therapies - psychological treatments which help people change their attitudes or behaviour patterns.

Research by the mental health charity SANE has found that only [...] two per cent of patients were having cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) and more than 80per cent of patients were being treated with medication.

Anti-depressants come with a range of side-effects. About 25 per cent of patients have problems when they try to stop taking them and studies have found they can cause a rise in suicidal thoughts and actions. Patients also report a loss of libido.

Two recent studies have linked the drugs with a drop in bone density leading to osteoporosis and a dramatic fall in the number of sperm a man can produce.

Given all this, you would expect those two questions, approved by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) in 2004, to be exacting.

In fact they are absurdly simplistic and, worryingly, if you answer yes to both you could be put on Prozac.

The two questions are:

• During the past month have you been bothered by feeling down, depressed or hopeless?
• During the past month have you been bothered by having little interest or pleasure in doing things?

The GPs' two-question test isn't the only one the experts have got badly wrong. Dr Mitchell's other shocking discovery is that the latest guidelines to detect post-natal depression (PND) are even more inaccurate, but in the opposite direction.

A new three-question test fails to spot an astonishing 80 per cent of the women who actually are depressed.

"It uses the same two questions as for regular depression and then adds a third: "Do you want help?" This reduces the accuracy of the test to just 17 per cent," explains Dr Mitchell.

NICE is now in discussion with Dr Mitchell about the PND test.

According to the doctors' newspaper Pulse, many GPs are dropping the depression test because they don't believe it is good for patient care, even though they will lose income as a result. It's mainly aimed at high risk patients, such as those with heart disease or diabetes.

Many GPs say they don't have the time for longer, more accurate testing - the reason for introducing the shorter test in the first place.

The useless tests also threaten to make a nonsense of a new government initiative to make CBT available to many online.

Last year, a group of charities, including the Mental Health Foundation and Mind, called for a "large sustained cash injection to improve psychological treatments'.

They said CBT was as effective as drugs and that more than half of GPs believed it was the best option.

The internet scheme, unveiled by Health Secretary Patricia Hewitt last month, has been designed to meet criticism that, even though CBT is recognised as the best treatment for depression, waiting times can be more than a year because the health service needs 10,000 more therapists.

If you rate as depressed on the flawed test, you get eight onehour interactive computer sessions on a program called Beating The Blues with homework projects and GP progress reports - much cheaper than training 10,000 therapists.

The aim, said Ms Hewitt, was to allow patients to access the right sort of therapy "instead of just being prescribed medication".

One doctor who has been using the system in Swindon, Wiltshire, for three years was enthusiastic.

Dr Peter Crouch said: "It has significantly helped patients cope with anxiety, insomnia and stress." But, of course, how useful it is depends on how accurately people are diagnosed.

Indeed, what is the point of rolling out a programme that will be offered to hundreds who don't need it - or if it isn't provided to those who do? Soon many will be spending hours at their keyboard doing CBT exercises for no reason.

The 'good' news is that computers and the internet are likely to be much more widely used to spot who needs help - and at least these seem more accurate than the two-question test.

A recent report by researchers in Taiwan reported that an online questionnaire filled in by more than 500 people identified 38 per cent as depressed and 46 per cent as not. When they were tested by a psychiatrist, 75 per cent of the diagnoses were correct.

Soon patients may be asked to fill in longer questionnaires of this sort, while they are in the waiting room.

And if it is done on a computer the doctor could then have the results during the session. For the moment, what can you do to increase your chances of getting the right sort of help?

Dr Mitchell's research into how GPs diagnose depression also provides some useful tips. "Doctors tend to be influenced by how patients describe their problems," he says.

"If you talk about physical symptoms - how tired you are, how you can't sleep - your doctor will usually suspect a physical cause even though those are also signs of depression.

"Be clear about your main symptom. So if feeling down or low is what's really making your life miserable, talk about that."

How can you avoid being labelled as depressed when you aren't? Do what may seem like common sense and explain your problems.

What the test ignores is that sometimes people have a very good reason to feel low: you've been sacked, for example.

A recent U.S. study has found that as many as a quarter of people currently labelled as depressed are reacting perfectly normally to stressful events.

It suggested that even psychiatrists regularly miss the broad picture. Once you've ticked enough boxes for symptoms, you get diagnosed as depressed even though you may just be sad.

So if you aren't asked the obvious question about what is going on in your life, make sure you volunteer it.

VA faulted in diagnosing suicide candidates, Senators want VA's mental health chief to resign

There are plenty reports on this to choose from. Here's one from the Seattle Post Intelligencer

Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., on Tuesday called for the chief mental health official of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs to resign, saying he tried to cover up the rising number of veteran suicides.

Murray, the senior member of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, said Dr. Ira Katz, the VA's mental health director, deliberately withheld crucial information on the true suicide risk among veterans.

"Dr. Katz's irresponsible actions have been a disservice to our veterans and it is time for him to go," Murray said. "The number one priority of the VA should be caring for our veterans, not covering up the truth."

Murray and other Democratic senators said they were appalled at e-mails showing that Katz and other VA officials tried to conceal the number of suicides by veterans. An e-mail message from Katz revealed at a lawsuit this week starts with "Shh!" and refers to the 12,000 veterans per year who attempt suicide while under department treatment.

"Is this something we should (carefully) address ourselves in some sort of release before someone stumbles on it?" the e-mail asks.

A lawyer for a veterans group showed the e-mail as part of a lawsuit being heard in San Francisco that alleges the VA failed to properly treat thousands of veterans for mental illness.

An e-mail revealed at the trial said an average of 18 military veterans kill themselves each day - and five of them are under VA care when they commit suicide.

"It is completely outrageous that the federal agency charged with helping veterans would instead cover up the hard truth - that more and more Americans coming home after bravely fighting for their country are suffering from mental illnesses and in the most tragic circumstances, committing suicide," said Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa. "Anyone at the VA who is involved in this cover-up should be removed immediately."

Harkin, Murray and Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., introduced legislation Tuesday calling on the VA to track how many veterans die by suicide each year. Currently, VA facilities record the numbers of suicide deaths and attempts in VA facilities - which have increased from 492 in 2000 to 790 in 2007 - but do not record how many veterans overall take their own lives.

The new bill would require the VA to report to Congress within 180 days the number of veterans who have died by suicide since Jan. 1, 1997, and continue reports annually.

"We are looking at a real crisis among our veterans and it is high time the VA recognizes it," said Harkin. "Tracking the number of suicides among our veterans will help us to better understand the true depths of this crisis, so we may ensure we are doing everything we can to address their mental health needs."

A spokesman for the VA declined immediate comment Tuesday.

A government lawyer on Monday urged a judge to dismiss a class-action lawsuit against the VA, saying the agency runs a "world class" medical care system.

Two veterans groups filed suit against a sprawling VA system that handled a record 838,000 claims last year. A federal judge in San Francisco is hearing the case in a two-week, non-jury trial.

TV Shrink Dr, Phil pays bail for the ringleader of the 8 Florida teens arrested for beating another teenager and videotaping it

This sounds like "Doctor" Phil has gone and got himself involved in another sordid case for fun and profit.

A bondsman says TV's Dr. Phil has posted $30 thousand bond for the ringleader of the eight Lakeland teens accused of kidnapping and beating a girl in front of a video camera.

It's believed Mercades Nichols will be talking about the case on his nationally syndicated show soon.

Some parents had complained earlier this week that they could not afford the high bond set by the judge.

However, six of the eight were out of jail Saturday.

All eight teens face kidnapping and battery charges. Kidnapping carries a penalty of up to life in prison.

UPDATE: A spokesperson for Dr. Phil's show now admits that paying for Nichols bail was a mistake, stating that "certain staff members went beyond show guidelines." While it is not clear as to whether or not those staff members were disciplined, the statement says they've been spoken to.

We of course remember his statement regarding his interaction with Britney Spears

Dr. Phil has nervous breakdown during taping of his show psychoanalyzing reasons for Miley Cyrus's name change

Satire from the Spoof website:

Although Miley Cyrus's name change barely registering on the media's radar as a blip, Dr. Phil may have just finished taping his last show dedicated to examining the tidbits of the fractured life of yet another celebrity. All in a vain attempt to appease his (and our) subconscious fetish with them.

At this last taping, the studio audience must have sensed Dr. Phil's Achilles heal as they sat nervously quiet during the entire three hour marathon taping without being permitted leave their seats even to take a bathroom break behind chain locked studio doors.

"Come on people, if I have been over this once, I have been over this a thousand times today," said Dr. Phil, his wife noticeably missing from the studio and looking disheveled wearing a short sleeved shirt without his customary tie and business suit jacket. "Now I'm not letting you all out of here until you agree with me."

"Dr. Phil acted like a mad man," said Marie Hernandez, who finally was released from the Dr. Phil studio after the fire department cut the chains from the studio doors, citing the show's producers for a safety code violation. "We were all scared to death. We didn't know what to think or do. So we just sat there the entire time hoping somebody would notice that 100 people were missing for over three hours."

The show's producers attempted to explain that Dr. Phil just could not seem to get over the Britney Spears incident and in recent months had been unsuccessfully treating himself.

"In my experience, as a fully credentialed psychiatrist," said Dr. Phil. "It is not too uncommon of a practice for an individual to change their name to psychologically distance themselves away from their family and so-called friends that stab you in the back on a national morning TV show. That's why I'm taking this opportunity to announce that I have decided to support Miley Cyrus's decision to change her name by joining her in changing my name too. From now on, I'm no longer Dr. Phil. I am Dr. Punxsutawney Phil."

Dr. Phil then existed the studio stage floor as the fire department entered through the doors, but before he disappeared from sight, Dr. Phil turned back glancing over the studio once more and saying to the audience, "You won't be seeing me around here for a while. Not even my shadow."

No one has filed charges against Dr. Phil for false imprisonment; or are any expected ever to be filed because audience members all signed waivers, said the show's producers.

Psychologist files lawsuit against his couple for financial losses. Unfortunately, he's in jail for stabbing them first.

From the Flint Journal

A psychologist and former Mott Community College professor charged with stabbing a Grand Blanc Township woman is suing her and her husband, claiming they caused his financial ruin.

William L. Harshman is asking for damages of $5 million in his five-count civil suit.

Harshman also claims Kurt W. and Lisa N. Heintz caused the loss of his marriage and other woes, his attorney, Michael B. Haley said.

The Heintzes, whom The Journal has been unable to reach, have 21 days to respond to the lawsuit after they are served.

The case has been assigned to Genesee Circuit Judge Geoffrey L. Neithercut, but no trial or other dates will be scheduled until the Heintzes are served.

Harshman, 50, is charged with first degree home invasion and two counts of assault with intent to murder in a Dec. 24 incident at the Heintzes' Grand Blanc Township home.

Police and prosecutors said Harshman went to 8259 Pine Hollow and stabbed Lisa Heintz and Edward Lapine, 17, who was helping the Heintzes move from their residence.

Heintz suffered a broken arm while trying to defend herself from a knife blow. Lapine was stabbed in the back but managed to run and call for help. Neither injury was considered life-threatening.

Haley recently received approval from a judge to have Harshman examined at the Center for Forensic Psychiatry near Ann Arbor to determine if he is competent for trial and can be held criminally responsible for his actions.

"We believe Dr. Harshman was not competent or criminally responsible at the time these alleged acts occurred," Haley said.

In Harshman's lawsuit, Haley alleges that Harshman met Lisa Heintz in May 2005 when he began counseling her and providing psychological treatment.

He said the Harshmans and Heintzes became friends until last year, when mortgage and other business dealings crumbled.

He said Harshman lost $90,000 and began a string of bizarre behavior.

In days leading up to the Christmas Eve assault, Haley said Harshman began drinking heavily and popping pills, and planned to commit suicide in his garage through carbon monoxide poisoning.

Haley said Harshman's wife left, his daughter wants his parental rights terminated and he lost his job at MCC.

The Heintzes also are named as defendants in a bevy of lawsuits alleging they used straw buyers to act as fronts in obtaining bank loans, according to records in Genesee County Circuit Court. Police reports also indicate that Harshman was angry over a mortgage or real estate matter.

Harshman's criminal case is scheduled to continue March 19.

He is being held in the Genesee County Jail without bond.

The Strange Case of Marek Jantos

On November 18, we published a story from Adelaide Now regarding the case of Marek Jantos.

We have recently receive an email asking that the story be pulled, together with PDF copies of letters offered as evidence that details of the story were horrendously false with regard the matter of sexual misconduct. This was verified with a PDF copy of a letter from the Crown Solicitor who stated in part that "it was not the Registrar's case, nor a finding of the board, that Mr Jantos had been engaged, in any way, in sexual misconduct"

We note that the South Australian Psychological Board still lists Marek Jantos as having received disciplinary action. The reason stated on the government website is "Guilty of gross professional negligence, malpractice and misconduct." This makes us quite curious, and we feel it would be worthwhile to report on the actual reason for the Board's action. We imagine that there were several points of negotiation in order to get an order that Mr. Jantos could live with.

Seeing as they are in Australia, and we are in the USA, it might be difficult to serve us with a lawsuit. That said, and to be fair, we will work to replace any false information with true information regarding the cancellation of his registration. We will probably be contacting the newspaper and agencies involved in order to get more accurate data.

We supply a copy of the legal documents in question here:

Psychiatrist faces sex assault trial

Yet another child sex case involving a psychiatrist, this time from Wisconsin. As seen in the Journal Sentinel.

A psychiatrist already serving four years of probation for possession of child pornography was ordered to stand trial Friday on a sexual assault charge after a 14-year-old boy tearfully testified that the doctor molested him during a counseling session in 2006.

At a preliminary hearing to determine whether the case against Eric B. Schwietering of Milwaukee should proceed to trial, the boy testified that Schwietering questioned him during a counseling session about his sexual habits and asked him to disrobe July 10, 2006.

When he declined, the boy said, Schwietering forced him down on a couch, partially disrobed him and touched him indecently.

Schwietering, 41, was charged in October with sexual assault of a child younger than 16, a felony.

According to testimony Friday and a criminal complaint, the assault occurred when Schwietering was associated with Cornerstone Counseling, 16535 W. Blue Mound Road, Brookfield. Schwietering no longer practices at the center.

After the assault, the boy testified, Schwietering told him not to tell anyone about what had occurred and said he would hurt him if he did.

The complaint says the matter came to light in the fall when the boy, now living at a residential school in Keokuk, Iowa, told his mother in e-mail that he had been assaulted by Schwietering, who specialized in treating children and adolescents.

Schwietering's attorney, Paul Bucher, sought to have the case dismissed, telling Waukesha County Circuit Court Commissioner Martin Binn that the boy's testimony and statements to authorities were not credible.

But Binn rejected the argument and ordered Schwietering to return to court Feb. 6.

In May, Schwietering was placed on four years of probation in Milwaukee County Circuit Court on two felony counts of possession of child pornography.

Psychology Board Investigates Dr. Phil

Hollywood Tabloid show TMZ has obtained a copy of a complaint against Dr. Phil which was lodged with the California Board of Psychology, alleging the TV doc was illegally practicing without a license when he paid a visit to one Britney Spears. From their report

We've learned the person who filed the complaint is a psychologist. Dr. Phil has never been licensed to practice in California, and he retired his Texas license in 2006.

The shrink believes when Dr. Phil visited Brit in the hospital earlier this month, he was practicing psychology. A "Dr. Phil" honcho told TMZ the visit was never meant to lure Britney onto the TV show -- and that there were never plans to put her on the air.

A Psychology Board rep told TMZ if the Board finds the complaint credible, it would be referred to the D.A. for review. Practicing without a license is a felony in California.

The psychologist who filed the complaint also alleges Dr. Phil violated HIPAA laws by "discussing or divulging a patient's medical condition ... with the media," in reference to a press release issued by Dr. Phil.

The complaint also says, "A petition is being circulated to remove the "Dr. Phil" show from the air." We're told the shrink is trying to get other psychologists to sign.

As for the Dr. Phil show's response -- no immediate comment.

UPDATE: In light of all of this, apparently Dr. Phil has had the bright idea to issue an apology, which will be broadcast on his show on Monday. While we welcome such an apology, the need for one is indicative of either the character of the man, or of the corrupting influence of Hollywood, and the need for Dr. Phil to take a fresh look at his non-functional moral compass. We suspect that it might have long since lost it's magnetic bearings. MTV has this report:

Dr. Phil is sorry. The TV physician has issued a statement apologizing for his controversial visit with Britney Spears while the singer was in the hospital on January 5, as well as a subsequent press release he issued about the incident.

"Was it helpful to the situation? Regrettably, no. It was not, and I have to acknowledge that, and I do," Phil McGraw told his audience Thursday during an episode of Dr. Phil that will run Monday, according to USA Today. "I definitely think if I had it to do over again, I probably wouldn't make any statement at all. Period."

[...]

A complaint was filed against McGraw earlier this week that accused him of violating the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. The complaint alleges Dr. Phil practiced clinical psychology without a license and further violated doctor-patient privilege by discussing the pop star's case with the media.

[...]

An Open Letter to Dr. Phil

Hopefully this should be the last nail in the coffin of the Dr. Phil and Britney Spears fiasco. But knowing Hollywood, the crazy train hasn't even left the station yet. That said, this open letter by shrink Patricia a Farrell nicely sums ups some of the issues.

The news about Britney Spears and her many problems hasn’t been good and now there’s another problem and it is related to ethics, a person’s right to privacy and their legal right to decide who they want visiting them in a hospital.

Then there’s the HIPPA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability) matter where hospitals and their personnel aren’t supposed to reveal anything about any patients or even that someone is a patient there.

If they don’t follow HIPPA regs, they leave themselves open to a lawsuit. Of course that only applies to licensed professionals and you're not licensed. Numerous violations seem to have been committed, perhaps, by ignorance. So, let’s set some of the record straight.

Phil, if you look back to the time when you were a licensed psychologist in Texas (which you’re not now because the California licensing board has decided you’re an “entertainer” not a psychologist), you probably remember that confidentiality was the backbone of the field. No psychologist would reveal anything about their patients, but since you’re not a psychologist anymore, I guess talking to the media about someone’s psychiatric problems is permissible. I mean, for an entertainer it is, isn’t it?

You might also remember that after about the age of 16 (depending on the state), everyone has a right to make certain decisions free from the wishes of their parents. That might have been something you ran across when scheduling guests for your entertainment TV show.

So, Britney really should have been the one to invite you to her hospital room, or you should have asked her permission to come to see her. Didn’t you think you were blindsiding her by showing up that way and did any of your prior clinical experience not kick in?

To use a phrase of which you are quite fond: What were you thinking?

Now that the chance to really help Britney has gotten a bit more difficult and has been pushed so publicly away, give your actions some thought and forget about the entertainment value of all this. Britney doesn’t deserve to be dogged the way she is being presently and she doesn’t need to be fed up and served to an audience in all her vulnerability.

Final word: Don’t kick someone when they’re down. It’s really a cheap thing to do and shows no class.

Also of interest is this blog item reflecting on the Britney Spears case:

Actress Frances Farmer came to my mind as I was driving home. She was a famous actress in the '30s and '40s and she was haunted by how cruel the tabloid press could be. She was an easy target. Like Britney, Francis Farmer was drawn to alcohol and drugs and therefore prone to mental illness and self destruction. Farmer had a mother who used her and betrayed her according to her sister's biography. Farmer was in and out of mental institutions her whole life. The tabloid-Hollywood-press loved her tirades and pictures of her often alcohol induced inappropriate behavior garnered top dollar.

What kind of people use the personal carnage of another for entertainment without a thimble full of sympathy? We have devolved into a strange fruit indeed. During one famous episode when Frances Farmer was taken away in hand cuffs, she yelled at the police, "Haven't you ever had a broken heart?" Clearly some part of Britney's heart is broken.

Julia Roberts was recently quoted as saying she knows what it's like to be hounded by paparazzi. Regarding Britney she said, "I just want to hug her." Apparently Britney threw Dr. Phil out of the hospital room 10 minutes after his arrival. So Julia and anyone else with a heart that Britney might listen to, now is the time for the hugs.

Satire - Restraining Order Filed Against Psychiatrist Dr. Phil.

Yet another satirical piece about Dr. Phil from The Spoof:

Just moments after a representative for the Spears family, appeared on the "Today" show, accusing Dr. Phil of betraying Britney and the Spears' family trust, lawyers for the Spears filed for a temporary restraining order (TRO) in the Los Angeles Superior Court against him.

Filings ask the court to order Dr. Phil to say at least 100 yards away form anyone of the Spears family members, including the unborn child Jamie Lynn Spears is carrying to term.

According to court pleadings, the Spears family alleges that Dr. Phil has been stalking them for months now under the guise of treating their dysfunctional family for various substance additions and disorders.

"At first we welcomed Dr. Phil into our homes, hearts and minds," read the Spears' court documents. "We trusted him implicitly with all our secret drug addictions, alcoholism, underage pre-martial sex with male adults, acute stage mom syndrome, mass hysteria and delusions of grandeur, but he betrayed us."

Dr. Phil was just using the Spears family to forward his own career as psychiatrist to the stars and bring up the ratings on his show, according to the documents.

"We first began to suspect Dr. Phil of stalking us when he kept on insisting on asking us for our autographs after each and every session," stated the court papers. "He said it was his fee for his services rendered, but we knew what it was really for. He was collecting our signatures on the checks we wrote to him to sell on ebay."

Canceled checks written to Dr. Phil from the Spears family were submitted to the court as evidence for the TRO.

Even more startling is the Spears' allegation that Dr. Phil is a serial celebrity stalker. The Spears' reason that Dr. Phil was really using his professional medical training to help celebrities not just stalk them, they would have been cured by now.

"He is using his professional medical training just to get close to Hollywood movie stars, which he really has no intention of helping or curing," the Spears' accuse. "Why just take a look at us, we have been under his care for several months now, and we're worst off than before. Britney still lost custody of the kids, had a breakdown and Lynn has a bun in the oven from a guy who should be in prison for statuary rape."

We also remind people, that, as documented in Wikipedia, Dr. Phil McGraw is NOT licensed to practice psychology:

The Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists imposed disciplinary sanctions on McGraw on January 27, 1989 for an inappropriate "dual relationship" reported in 1988 by a therapy client/employee from 1984. McGraw was ordered by the Board to take an ethics class, pass a jurisprudence exam, complete a physical evaluation, undergo a psychological evaluation and have his practice supervised for one year in order to continue his private practice in Texas. McGraw admits to giving the client a "job" at his office (which is not allowed), but denied carrying on a sexual relationship with the 19 year old, who says their relationship was "sexually inappropriate."[11][2][12] As of 2008, McGraw has not completed the conditions imposed by the Board of Examiners of Psychologists and he is not licensed to practice psychology.[13]

And in something that is not satire, but could very well be, Dr. Phil tackles the toughest subject of all: Trash talk and "racism" on Xbox Live. Too bad Xbox Live has had a 95% downtime so far this year. Gamers around the world are snickering at this one, and Dr. Phil is becoming famous as the next Jerry Springer