Although I did not plan to post on this blog anymore, I decided to make an exception and post this statement.
I wrote a number of critical posts regarding Steven Hassan on this blog. I also criticized him in other places. However, I came to conclusion that I actually was not objective and not fair to him.
There are several people who criticize Hassan's professional work (his counseling, his books, etc.): Monica Pignotti, Cathleen Mann, Rick Ross. Some people (David Clark, Carol Giambalvo, Noel Giambalvo, Kevin Garvy, and Michael Langone) did this in the past in the book entitled Recovery from Cults. However, this book was published a very long time ago. I used some of their ideas in my criticism of him, including some posts on this blog.
However, I am not a mental health professional. There are many different opinions in the mental health field. And the anti-cult field is especially controversial. There are different approaches to mind control / thought reform theories, to exit counseling, to cult recovery. According to my observation, professionals who work in this field often disagree with one another. Well, it is hard for me to make any conclusions here because I am not a mental health professional. I just do not have sufficient professional knowledge to make objective conclusions here.
Moreover, it may be a matter of the personal preference what approaches are used. It happens in many other fields as well. For example, there are different computer operation systems: Windows, Linux, Mac OS. Some people spend much time in endless debates which OS is better, for example, Windows or Linux. Well, the thing is that it is just a matter of the personal preference. Some people prefer Windows, some prefer Linux, and that is all. Suppose a person who is not very knowledgeable about computers will read these debates about Windows vs. Linux. Will he or she be able to make an objective conclusion? Probably, not because he/she does not have sufficient knowledge.
Likewise, I just do not have sufficient knowledge to be objective regarding Hassan's (or anyone's else) professional work in mental health field. Well, I may like some ideas of some professionals, but I just do not have sufficient qualification for making any conclusions in this field. It would not be objective. In the past, I agreed with some professionals who criticized him. But the thing is that I cannot really make conclusions regarding these matters. In fact, if I agree with someone's criticism, it means that I consider this person as an "expert" and a higher "expert" than Hassan. But really I do not know.
So, I have to admit that I was not objective and fair to Hassan. I want to make clear that I have never considered him as my friend. I just want to be fair to him as well as to anyone else.
Update. I removed my critical posts regarding Steven Hassan from this blog and from my site.
Friday, March 29, 2013
Friday, June 22, 2012
My New Blog
I started a new blog: http://a-christian-blog.blogspot.com/ This blog will be specially for posts that have something to do with Christian subjects, as it is clear from its title.
I decided to start a new blog because this blog has been originally focused on the post-cult recovery and because I know that many people in the anti-cult community are quite negative toward Christianity (and religions in general).
On the other hand, I do not believe that I have to spend the rest of my life on the post-cult recovery as many ex-cult members believe. Besides being an ex-cult member, I have many other sides of my life. At the present, my being a Christian is more important for me than being an ex-cult member.
On my new blog, I shared some of the most important experiences of my Christian life:
http://a-christian-blog.blogspot.com/2012/06/regeneration-being-born-again.html
http://a-christian-blog.blogspot.com/2012/06/baptism-with-holy-spirit.html
http://a-christian-blog.blogspot.com/2012/06/divine-healing.html
None of them had anything to do with cults or thought reform.
I decided to start a new blog because this blog has been originally focused on the post-cult recovery and because I know that many people in the anti-cult community are quite negative toward Christianity (and religions in general).
On the other hand, I do not believe that I have to spend the rest of my life on the post-cult recovery as many ex-cult members believe. Besides being an ex-cult member, I have many other sides of my life. At the present, my being a Christian is more important for me than being an ex-cult member.
On my new blog, I shared some of the most important experiences of my Christian life:
http://a-christian-blog.blogspot.com/2012/06/regeneration-being-born-again.html
http://a-christian-blog.blogspot.com/2012/06/baptism-with-holy-spirit.html
http://a-christian-blog.blogspot.com/2012/06/divine-healing.html
None of them had anything to do with cults or thought reform.
Tuesday, April 3, 2012
More about My Personal Experience of Post-Cult Recovery
In my blog, I always made a distinction between secular and religious sides of post-cult recovery, though it seems that most people do not make this distinction. Usually, I used the term "psychological" for the secular aspect. I think, maybe "psycho-emotional" will be better. Also, usually, I used the term "spiritual" for the religious aspect. However, as I found out, atheists also like this term. So, I will call this aspect "religious" instead. I personally do not like the word "religion" very much because it is often used as just a set of some rituals. However, the origin of this word is much better. According to the most famous hypothesis, it is from Latin "religare" (to bind) and thus means "union with God." There are two other hypotheses: 1) that it is from Latin "relegere" (to treat carefully) or 2) from Latin "religere" (to recover). I prefer the concept of religion as a union with God.
I never liked the idea promoted by some people in the anti-cult community that post-cult recovery is practically (or actually) life-long. Unlike some people in the anti-cult community, I do not believe that every ex-cult member should get therapy after leaving a cult. I never had any therapy myself. Also, I stated in my blog that I do not consider religious aspect of post-cult recovery to be mandatory, that is, I do not consider that after leaving a cult, a person should return to their pre-cult religious beliefs or to become an evangelical (or whatever else).
Three years ago, I wrote in my blog that I think that I had finished my post-cult recovery. One person disagreed with me, stating that and that I may not know that I am not recovered and if people did not reconnect with God, they are not recovered. Other people in the past also strongly recommended me to get therapy, saying that if I do not have symptoms, I may be in denial. In another post, I wrote that two and a half years ago, I had a careful psychological and psychiatric examination. The professionals who examined me did not find that I had any disorder. Why should I get a therapy then?
For those people who believe that those who have not reconnected or reconciled with God, I can testify: by now, I have completely reconciled and reconnected with God. I have fresh and new relationship with God and I consecrated myself to Him. I do not have any spiritual problems caused by my cult involvement. Well, I guess that some people now may call me a religious bigot and claim that my consecration to God indicates that I am not recovered. Somehow, many people in anti-cult community believe that it is OK to go to church once a week and forget about God all the other time, but if a person is a devoted Christian, it is something wrong and indicates that this person is "unrecovered," "mind-controlled," and so on. There are too many opinions in the anti-cult field and they contradict one another. As for me, I consider myself recovered both psychologically and spiritually.
I never liked the idea promoted by some people in the anti-cult community that post-cult recovery is practically (or actually) life-long. Unlike some people in the anti-cult community, I do not believe that every ex-cult member should get therapy after leaving a cult. I never had any therapy myself. Also, I stated in my blog that I do not consider religious aspect of post-cult recovery to be mandatory, that is, I do not consider that after leaving a cult, a person should return to their pre-cult religious beliefs or to become an evangelical (or whatever else).
Three years ago, I wrote in my blog that I think that I had finished my post-cult recovery. One person disagreed with me, stating that and that I may not know that I am not recovered and if people did not reconnect with God, they are not recovered. Other people in the past also strongly recommended me to get therapy, saying that if I do not have symptoms, I may be in denial. In another post, I wrote that two and a half years ago, I had a careful psychological and psychiatric examination. The professionals who examined me did not find that I had any disorder. Why should I get a therapy then?
For those people who believe that those who have not reconnected or reconciled with God, I can testify: by now, I have completely reconciled and reconnected with God. I have fresh and new relationship with God and I consecrated myself to Him. I do not have any spiritual problems caused by my cult involvement. Well, I guess that some people now may call me a religious bigot and claim that my consecration to God indicates that I am not recovered. Somehow, many people in anti-cult community believe that it is OK to go to church once a week and forget about God all the other time, but if a person is a devoted Christian, it is something wrong and indicates that this person is "unrecovered," "mind-controlled," and so on. There are too many opinions in the anti-cult field and they contradict one another. As for me, I consider myself recovered both psychologically and spiritually.
Wednesday, September 7, 2011
John Knapp Leaves New York State
Last week, John Knapp left New York State for Indiana. Apparently, he went to be with his girlfriend Kimmie Deckard who lives in Bedford, Greene County, Indiana. However, in the current situation, it looks like that the real reason for his leaving NYS is different. He met Kimmie online on June 14, when he was already under investigation and it was 2 weeks after the previous registration of his license ended. So, his leaving NYS looks like another attempt to avoid punishment for his ethical violations. His other attempts were:
1) missing the time for renewal of his registration, though later he had it renewed;
2) public announcement that he is going to leave his profession, though until now he is listed in NYS board database as a registered LMSW.
Also, his recent leaving NYS for Indiana looks similar to his leaving California for NYS in mid-1990s after a conflict and split with Dr. Margaret Thaler Singer over The Margaret Thaler Singer Foundation, Inc., a non-profit of which he was executive director.
1) missing the time for renewal of his registration, though later he had it renewed;
2) public announcement that he is going to leave his profession, though until now he is listed in NYS board database as a registered LMSW.
Also, his recent leaving NYS for Indiana looks similar to his leaving California for NYS in mid-1990s after a conflict and split with Dr. Margaret Thaler Singer over The Margaret Thaler Singer Foundation, Inc., a non-profit of which he was executive director.
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
John Knapp Blames the Victim (Part 3)
Update (01/26/2012). Currently, Knapp's website does not work. So, all the links to his website are not working.
Update. Knapp made some changes on his website. So, it is currently not accessible at its usual URL http://thechsca.org/. However, it is accessible at http://184.154.238.114/. So, I added the working links to his website in parentheses in bold.
Knapp posted a new article regarding Monica on the CHSCA website: http://thechsca.org/blogs/reckless-speculation/item/145-monica-pignotti-bfw-120-days-same-subject-and-counting (http://184.154.238.114/blogs/reckless-speculation/item/145-monica-pignotti-bfw-120-days-same-subject-and-counting). This article is actually their private correspondence that took place on May 2, 2011. As usual, his comments are filled with disinformation.
All the emails below his statement were sent on May 2, 2011. The next set of their private correspondence posted by Knapp began on August 25 (http://184.154.238.114/blogs/reckless-speculation/item/139-monica-pignotti-phd-is-this-cyberharrassment??). Nothing before May 2 and nothing between May 2 and August 25. Where is "drama, going on for the last 22 months"? No evidences. Just empty, groundless, and false accusations.
Probably, first, I need to explain what he probably means here. In January 2010, he set a forum for anti-cult activists on his Knapp Family Counseling website. He invited some people to join this forum, including Carol and me. In March 2010, Carol and I became co-moderators of this forum and in April or May 2010 we became co-administrators. The three of us discussed together many things related to the forum and we voted for the decisions regarding the forum. However, Carol's and my position as co-administrators was not equal to Knapp's because of many reasons. The last word on any decisions was always up to him. Sometimes he was not available for a long time and we waited for him without carrying out our decisions. In order to join the forum, new members had to send him their personal information and this information was available only to him. The forum was located at his website, not on a service like Yahoo! Groups, Google Groups or another public service. The software used for his forum was phpBB3. Unlike, for example, Yahoo! Groups, phpBB3 has special privileges for the forum creator. Forum creator cannot be banned by other administrators and only forum creator is able to delete the forum. Eventually, Knapp did delete his forum. I could not do that and I could not remove him from the forum, although I had access to all the administrative options that may be available for a person who is not a forum creator. Carol did not have access to all those options. On the other hand, he could remove us from the forum at any time.
In May or June 2010, he began to share with Carol and me about his plans to create a non-profit which is now known as the CHSCA. Its name that he used in communications with us was the Knapp Center. Although Knapp wanted me as well as Carol to join it, I have never gave my agreement to join it. The reason for this was that I was not clear about Knapp's plans regarding this organization at all. The only thing he actually said was that he had a "clear vision" of what should be done in the anti-cult community that nobody has ever seen. This is why he was planning to create a non-profit. However, I had no idea what this "clear vision" was about. This is why I had never agreed to join his non-profit. I agreed only to listen about his plans about it, but he never actually revealed them, keeping saying that he would send us business plan which he never did.
According to Knapp's words, there was some connection between Knapp's forum and his non-profit that he was going to create. I was never quite sure about it. It seemed that he considered his forum for anti-cult activists as a part of his non-profit. Moreover, he somehow implied that since Carol and I were co-administrators of his forum, we were also a part of his non-profit. However, as for me, I gave my agreement to be a co-moderator and co-administrator of his forum, but I never gave my agreement to be a part of his non-profit. It seems that Knapp did his best to get me involved into his non-profit without my understanding of what he would be and even without my desire. This actually quite bothered me and it was at this point that I began to reconsider what kind of person he is.
So, although Knapp may claim that he gave Carol and me a vote and equal position in his then future-to-be non-profit (as he kept telling us at that time), it does not make sense since I did not give my agreement to join that project. Also, Knapp told us that he wanted to create his non-profit in order to carry out his "clear vision" of what should be done in the anti-cult field. He never shared its vision with us and I do not know what it is about. So, due to this reason, Carol's and my position in his non-profit could not be equal to his.
Although he kept saying to Carol and me that he gave us the same position as his, in his last email to both of us (sent on August 1, 2011), he made it clear that we did not have the same position. We never had the same authority as he did.
So, his statement that we "had the power to overrule" him "at any point" is simply not true.
Update. Knapp made some changes on his website. So, it is currently not accessible at its usual URL http://thechsca.org/. However, it is accessible at http://184.154.238.114/. So, I added the working links to his website in parentheses in bold.
Knapp posted a new article regarding Monica on the CHSCA website: http://thechsca.org/blogs/reckless-speculation/item/145-monica-pignotti-bfw-120-days-same-subject-and-counting (http://184.154.238.114/blogs/reckless-speculation/item/145-monica-pignotti-bfw-120-days-same-subject-and-counting). This article is actually their private correspondence that took place on May 2, 2011. As usual, his comments are filled with disinformation.
More stomach-churning drama, going on for the last 22 months!!! The same accusations, threats, and tortored logic—nearly verbatim.
All the emails below his statement were sent on May 2, 2011. The next set of their private correspondence posted by Knapp began on August 25 (http://184.154.238.114/blogs/reckless-speculation/item/139-monica-pignotti-phd-is-this-cyberharrassment??). Nothing before May 2 and nothing between May 2 and August 25. Where is "drama, going on for the last 22 months"? No evidences. Just empty, groundless, and false accusations.
Carol did not report to me. When I set it up, I gave each of us one vote. The two of them had the power to overrule me at any point. So, in some senses, I was responsible to her just as much as she was responsible to either me or Lema.
Probably, first, I need to explain what he probably means here. In January 2010, he set a forum for anti-cult activists on his Knapp Family Counseling website. He invited some people to join this forum, including Carol and me. In March 2010, Carol and I became co-moderators of this forum and in April or May 2010 we became co-administrators. The three of us discussed together many things related to the forum and we voted for the decisions regarding the forum. However, Carol's and my position as co-administrators was not equal to Knapp's because of many reasons. The last word on any decisions was always up to him. Sometimes he was not available for a long time and we waited for him without carrying out our decisions. In order to join the forum, new members had to send him their personal information and this information was available only to him. The forum was located at his website, not on a service like Yahoo! Groups, Google Groups or another public service. The software used for his forum was phpBB3. Unlike, for example, Yahoo! Groups, phpBB3 has special privileges for the forum creator. Forum creator cannot be banned by other administrators and only forum creator is able to delete the forum. Eventually, Knapp did delete his forum. I could not do that and I could not remove him from the forum, although I had access to all the administrative options that may be available for a person who is not a forum creator. Carol did not have access to all those options. On the other hand, he could remove us from the forum at any time.
In May or June 2010, he began to share with Carol and me about his plans to create a non-profit which is now known as the CHSCA. Its name that he used in communications with us was the Knapp Center. Although Knapp wanted me as well as Carol to join it, I have never gave my agreement to join it. The reason for this was that I was not clear about Knapp's plans regarding this organization at all. The only thing he actually said was that he had a "clear vision" of what should be done in the anti-cult community that nobody has ever seen. This is why he was planning to create a non-profit. However, I had no idea what this "clear vision" was about. This is why I had never agreed to join his non-profit. I agreed only to listen about his plans about it, but he never actually revealed them, keeping saying that he would send us business plan which he never did.
According to Knapp's words, there was some connection between Knapp's forum and his non-profit that he was going to create. I was never quite sure about it. It seemed that he considered his forum for anti-cult activists as a part of his non-profit. Moreover, he somehow implied that since Carol and I were co-administrators of his forum, we were also a part of his non-profit. However, as for me, I gave my agreement to be a co-moderator and co-administrator of his forum, but I never gave my agreement to be a part of his non-profit. It seems that Knapp did his best to get me involved into his non-profit without my understanding of what he would be and even without my desire. This actually quite bothered me and it was at this point that I began to reconsider what kind of person he is.
So, although Knapp may claim that he gave Carol and me a vote and equal position in his then future-to-be non-profit (as he kept telling us at that time), it does not make sense since I did not give my agreement to join that project. Also, Knapp told us that he wanted to create his non-profit in order to carry out his "clear vision" of what should be done in the anti-cult field. He never shared its vision with us and I do not know what it is about. So, due to this reason, Carol's and my position in his non-profit could not be equal to his.
Although he kept saying to Carol and me that he gave us the same position as his, in his last email to both of us (sent on August 1, 2011), he made it clear that we did not have the same position. We never had the same authority as he did.
So, his statement that we "had the power to overrule" him "at any point" is simply not true.
Friday, August 26, 2011
John Knapp Blames the Victim (Part 2)
Update (01/26/2012). Currently, Knapp's website does not work. So, all the links to his website are not working.
Update. Knapp made some changes on his website. So, it is currently not accessible at its usual URL http://thechsca.org/. However, it is accessible at http://184.154.238.114/. So, I added the working links to his website in parentheses in bold. In addition, he removed his posts from Facebook. However, they are still available at his website.
Knapp posted the same article about Carol Welch on Facebook: Carol Welch—Cyberstalker. One of his favorite manipulative technique is to play victim games and now he is doing this, trying to gain people's support. Here is a quote from one of his comments:
First of all, who is the therapist and who is the client? A client hires a therapist in order to get help for his or her (client's) problems, not in order to cure the therapist from his/her problems. From NASW Code of Ethics (which Knapp is supposed to abide by):
So, if Knapp has mental health problems, he has to seek professional help and take the necessary steps to protect his clients instead of trying to use his clients to help him to heal or trying to make them responsible for his mental health condition. This is an ethical violation on his side.
By the way, attacking Carol Welch who is his former client, he made, at least, two more ethical violation. From NASW Code of Ethics:
He did write many lies about Carol in his article and comments.
As for his legal threatenings, they are completely empty and I do not think they deserve any attention.
After his attacks on Carol Welch, he went on attacking Monica Pignotti, MSW, PhD (for her supporting Carol) and me:
http://www.thechsca.org/blogs/reckless-speculation/item/139-monica-pignotti-phd-is-this-cyberharrassment?? (http://184.154.238.114/blogs/reckless-speculation/item/139-monica-pignotti-phd-is-this-cyberharrassment??)
http://www.thechsca.org/blogs/reckless-speculation/item/140-more-carol-welch-cyberstalker-crap%E2%80%94featuring-monica-pignotti-phd (http://184.154.238.114/blogs/reckless-speculation/item/140-more-carol-welch-cyberstalker-crap%E2%80%94featuring-monica-pignotti-phd)
http://www.thechsca.org/blogs/reckless-speculation/item/141-more-carol-welch-fan-mail-from-flounders-monica-pignotti-phfuckingd (http://184.154.238.114/blogs/reckless-speculation/item/141-more-carol-welch-fan-mail-from-flounders-monica-pignotti-phfuckingd)
http://www.thechsca.org/blogs/reckless-speculation/item/142-more-carol-welch-private-fluff-and-bluster-from-monica-pignotti-phfuckingunemployedd (http://184.154.238.114/blogs/reckless-speculation/item/142-more-carol-welch-private-fluff-and-bluster-from-monica-pignotti-phfuckingunemployedd)
http://www.thechsca.org/blogs/reckless-speculation/item/143-desperate-for-attention-as-ever-lema-nal-rejoins-the-attack (http://184.154.238.114/blogs/reckless-speculation/item/143-desperate-for-attention-as-ever-lema-nal-rejoins-the-attack)
http://www.thechsca.org/blogs/reckless-speculation/item/144-monica-pignotti-bfw-can-not-stop-herself-so-i-blocked-her (http://184.154.238.114/blogs/reckless-speculation/item/144-monica-pignotti-bfw-can-not-stop-herself-so-i-blocked-her)
He actually posted the private correspondence between Monica and him and added his comments. Well, I think that anyone who reads what he wrote about Monica, will come to conclusion that he does have serious mental problems.
I noticed that, although he got a number of supporting comments under his Facebook post on Carol Welch, there are no comments from his supporters under his Facebook post on Monica. This probably means that he is losing supporters because they see that he has serious mental problems.
Also, his attacks on Monica who is a social worker are another ethical violation. From NASW Code of Ethics:
Although Knapp publicly announced that he is going to leave his profession, he is still listed in NYS board database as a registered LMSW:
License Information
08/27/2011
Name : KNAPP JOHN MATTHEW
Address : BURKE NY
Profession : LICENSED MASTER SOCIAL WORK
License No: 071643
Date of Licensure : 12/01/05
Additional Qualification : Not applicable in this profession
Status : REGISTERED
Registered through last day of : 05/14
I do not know when he is going to leave his profession and whether he is going to do that at all. Until now, he is under the obligation to keep NASW Code of Ethics. However, he violated it many times.
Regarding his post about me (http://184.154.238.114/blogs/reckless-speculation/item/143-desperate-for-attention-as-ever-lema-nal-rejoins-the-attack), I really do not have much to say. Many people use various pseudonyms and nicknames in Internet, including many people in the anti-cult community. I have never stated that I live in Chechnya, but if he thinks this way, I do not care. Only blog owners, website owners, and webmasters know how many people visit their blogs or websites, unless they make this statistics public which I did not. I already replied him that his accusation of Carol in "sexual harassment" is a defamation and I have nothing to add to this. When we talked on Skype, he said that he had studied NLP because cults use it, but did not use it himself. Now he denies his own words and changes them. Well, it is a very usual behavior for him, by the way.
Update. Carol posted an excellent response on Knapp's accusations: My statements addressing John M. Knapp's allegations & accusations.
Update. Knapp made some changes on his website. So, it is currently not accessible at its usual URL http://thechsca.org/. However, it is accessible at http://184.154.238.114/. So, I added the working links to his website in parentheses in bold. In addition, he removed his posts from Facebook. However, they are still available at his website.
Knapp posted the same article about Carol Welch on Facebook: Carol Welch—Cyberstalker. One of his favorite manipulative technique is to play victim games and now he is doing this, trying to gain people's support. Here is a quote from one of his comments:
As you know, along with many, many others, including Carol Welch, I was permanently changed by my 23 years in the Transcendental Meditation organization.
I'll never be the man I was born to be.
I suffer from intermittent depression, moderate-to-severe dissociation, and although only hospitalized once for suicidality 10 years ago, the Abyss is no stranger even today.
First of all, who is the therapist and who is the client? A client hires a therapist in order to get help for his or her (client's) problems, not in order to cure the therapist from his/her problems. From NASW Code of Ethics (which Knapp is supposed to abide by):
4.05 Impairment
(a) Social workers should not allow their own personal problems, psychosocial distress, legal problems, substance abuse, or mental health difficulties to interfere with their professional judgment and performance or to jeopardize the best interests of people for whom they have a professional responsibility.
(b) Social workers whose personal problems, psychosocial distress, legal problems, substance abuse, or mental health difficulties interfere with their professional judgment and performance should immediately seek consultation and take appropriate remedial action by seeking professional help, making adjustments in workload, terminating practice, or taking any other steps necessary to protect clients and others.
So, if Knapp has mental health problems, he has to seek professional help and take the necessary steps to protect his clients instead of trying to use his clients to help him to heal or trying to make them responsible for his mental health condition. This is an ethical violation on his side.
By the way, attacking Carol Welch who is his former client, he made, at least, two more ethical violation. From NASW Code of Ethics:
1.12 Derogatory Language
Social workers should not use derogatory language in their written or verbal communications to or about clients. Social workers should use accurate and respectful language in all communications to and about clients.
4.04 Dishonesty, Fraud, and Deception
Social workers should not participate in, condone, or be associated with dishonesty, fraud, or deception.
He did write many lies about Carol in his article and comments.
As for his legal threatenings, they are completely empty and I do not think they deserve any attention.
After his attacks on Carol Welch, he went on attacking Monica Pignotti, MSW, PhD (for her supporting Carol) and me:
http://www.thechsca.org/blogs/reckless-speculation/item/139-monica-pignotti-phd-is-this-cyberharrassment?? (http://184.154.238.114/blogs/reckless-speculation/item/139-monica-pignotti-phd-is-this-cyberharrassment??)
http://www.thechsca.org/blogs/reckless-speculation/item/140-more-carol-welch-cyberstalker-crap%E2%80%94featuring-monica-pignotti-phd (http://184.154.238.114/blogs/reckless-speculation/item/140-more-carol-welch-cyberstalker-crap%E2%80%94featuring-monica-pignotti-phd)
http://www.thechsca.org/blogs/reckless-speculation/item/141-more-carol-welch-fan-mail-from-flounders-monica-pignotti-phfuckingd (http://184.154.238.114/blogs/reckless-speculation/item/141-more-carol-welch-fan-mail-from-flounders-monica-pignotti-phfuckingd)
http://www.thechsca.org/blogs/reckless-speculation/item/142-more-carol-welch-private-fluff-and-bluster-from-monica-pignotti-phfuckingunemployedd (http://184.154.238.114/blogs/reckless-speculation/item/142-more-carol-welch-private-fluff-and-bluster-from-monica-pignotti-phfuckingunemployedd)
http://www.thechsca.org/blogs/reckless-speculation/item/143-desperate-for-attention-as-ever-lema-nal-rejoins-the-attack (http://184.154.238.114/blogs/reckless-speculation/item/143-desperate-for-attention-as-ever-lema-nal-rejoins-the-attack)
http://www.thechsca.org/blogs/reckless-speculation/item/144-monica-pignotti-bfw-can-not-stop-herself-so-i-blocked-her (http://184.154.238.114/blogs/reckless-speculation/item/144-monica-pignotti-bfw-can-not-stop-herself-so-i-blocked-her)
He actually posted the private correspondence between Monica and him and added his comments. Well, I think that anyone who reads what he wrote about Monica, will come to conclusion that he does have serious mental problems.
I noticed that, although he got a number of supporting comments under his Facebook post on Carol Welch, there are no comments from his supporters under his Facebook post on Monica. This probably means that he is losing supporters because they see that he has serious mental problems.
Also, his attacks on Monica who is a social worker are another ethical violation. From NASW Code of Ethics:
2.01 Respect
(a) Social workers should treat colleagues with respect and should represent accurately and fairly the qualifications, views, and obligations of colleagues.
(b) Social workers should avoid unwarranted negative criticism of colleagues in communications with clients or with other professionals. Unwarranted negative criticism may include demeaning comments that refer to colleagues’ level of competence or to individuals’ attributes such as race, ethnicity, national origin, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, age, marital status, political belief, religion, immigration status, and mental or physical disability.
(c) Social workers should cooperate with social work colleagues and with colleagues of other professions when such cooperation serves the wellbeing of clients.
Although Knapp publicly announced that he is going to leave his profession, he is still listed in NYS board database as a registered LMSW:
License Information
Name : KNAPP JOHN MATTHEW
Address : BURKE NY
Profession : LICENSED MASTER SOCIAL WORK
License No: 071643
Date of Licensure : 12/01/05
Additional Qualification : Not applicable in this profession
Status : REGISTERED
Registered through last day of : 05/14
I do not know when he is going to leave his profession and whether he is going to do that at all. Until now, he is under the obligation to keep NASW Code of Ethics. However, he violated it many times.
Regarding his post about me (http://184.154.238.114/blogs/reckless-speculation/item/143-desperate-for-attention-as-ever-lema-nal-rejoins-the-attack), I really do not have much to say. Many people use various pseudonyms and nicknames in Internet, including many people in the anti-cult community. I have never stated that I live in Chechnya, but if he thinks this way, I do not care. Only blog owners, website owners, and webmasters know how many people visit their blogs or websites, unless they make this statistics public which I did not. I already replied him that his accusation of Carol in "sexual harassment" is a defamation and I have nothing to add to this. When we talked on Skype, he said that he had studied NLP because cults use it, but did not use it himself. Now he denies his own words and changes them. Well, it is a very usual behavior for him, by the way.
Update. Carol posted an excellent response on Knapp's accusations: My statements addressing John M. Knapp's allegations & accusations.
John Knapp Blames the Victim
Update (01/26/2012). Currently, Knapp's website does not work. So, all the links to his website are not working.
Update. Knapp made some changes on his website. So, it is currently not accessible at its usual URL http://thechsca.org/. However, it is accessible at http://184.154.238.114/. So, I added the working links to his website in parentheses in bold.
John Knapp has a habit of blaming other people for his own wrongdoings and of completely twisting the situation. However, even knowing that, I did not expect that he would attack his former client Carol Welch whose "fault" was that she filed a complaint at him to the New York State Office of Professions and wrote about her personal experience with him on her blog. Instead of admitting his wrongdoings, feeling sorry for what happened or apologizing to Carol, he prefers to attack her in his new article entitled Beware Carol Welch—Cyberstalker (http://184.154.238.114/blogs/reckless-speculation/item/138-beware-carol-welch%E2%80%94cyberstalker). This article is just full of lies and twisting the situation.
Well, if, as Knapp states, Carol's accusations against him in her complaint were wrong, why did Knapp preferred not to defend himself? Why did he prefer not to present his side to the investigator?
Instead of defending himself, first, he missed the time of renewal of his registration. His registration expired on May 31, 2011, but he renewed it only in the beginning of August. Now, he states that he is going to leave the social work field because, according to his words, he is "ashamed to be associated with the field" and because of "the horrific state of the mental healing profession."
If, as he states, Carol's accusations were wrong, why did not he try to defend himself to the NYS Board, preferring to attack her from his website? Well, the reason is very simple. Her accusations are not wrong and she did present evidences of his ethical violations to the NYS Board. He is unable to refute these things. This is why he decided not to defend himself. It is much easier to attack Carol, posting lies about her on his website, because, of course, not all the readers of his website know what really happened. And it it much easier to use his website in order to accuse the investigator of believing Carol's "wrong accusations" instead of having the direct and open dialog with the investigator regarding the complaint.
Knapp's article is just full of his lies about Carol and other people. I think this is one of the worst one:
Well, according to my understanding, Knapp and Carol never met in person. Knapp lives in New York State. Carol lives in North Caroline. Although it may be possible to practice psychotherapy through Internet, it is definitely impossible to have sexual relationship through Internet.
In addition, there is an obvious problem of timing here. Knapp indicates it as the time "after our therapeutic relationship ended." What was this time? Knapp convinced Carol that their therapeutic relationship ended before she joined his forum and became a co-moderator and co-administrator. However, their therapy sessions continued after that, though he called them "life coaching." She continued to pay him. So, in fact their therapeutic relationship ended only with the conflict. Now, could Carol possibly "make requests for sexual relationship" with Knapp after the conflict when she was seriously wounded by him and when he cut all the contacts with her? Of course, not. Could she possibly make such requests before she joined his forum or became a co-moderator and co-administrator? Of course, she could not either. Otherwise, Knapp would not have invited her to the forum and would not have asked her to be a co-moderator and co-administrator of the forum.
So, Knapp's accusation toward Carol is not only completely false, but also completely illogical. The same is with his other accusations.
Knapp accuses Carol of defamation:
However, it is Knapp who makes defamatory statements regarding Carol, not vice versa.
By the way, since he could not "prove" to the investigator that Carol's accusations of him in her complaint were "wrong," I do not think he is really able to "prove" this in the court of the law. So, his threatens are empty. In fact, he made similar legal threatens toward me over a year ago when I posted a question regarding the point we had disagreement (it was the term "spiritual trauma") in two online groups. Although I did not mention his name there and even did not imply that I had a disagreement over this point with somebody, he accused me that I was going to defame him and damage his reputations and threatened me with legal actions against me. This was another example of his empty legal threatens.
Now, here are my responses to some of "the false claims" he listed:
What I actually stated was that the CHSCA is not incorporated in New York State where it is apparently located. I did not check the databases of each of 50 US states to see if it was incorporated in another state. I did not make statements that it was not incorporated anywhere in the USA.
I never made statements that no other people, except Knapp, are involved in CHSCA. In fact, I even mentioned some of those people on my blog.
Knapp himself admitted that he studied NLP in our last Skype conversation in the end of July, 2010. He now denies his own words.
It was not my idea. However, as a comment, I can say that one of the problems with the Internet therapy is that the software used for it (such as Skype) does not guarantee the confidentiality while it is obligatory that therapeutic sessions should be completely confidential. There are other problems with using Internet for psychotherapy as well. In fact, Knapp does not abide by NASW ethical code. For example, he made several ethical violations toward Carol which she reported in her complaint.
Well, I really do not have time and desire to get into the detailed refutation of all the Knapp's lies and misrepresentations. I think what I have written so far is sufficient.
Update. Knapp made some changes on his website. So, it is currently not accessible at its usual URL http://thechsca.org/. However, it is accessible at http://184.154.238.114/. So, I added the working links to his website in parentheses in bold.
John Knapp has a habit of blaming other people for his own wrongdoings and of completely twisting the situation. However, even knowing that, I did not expect that he would attack his former client Carol Welch whose "fault" was that she filed a complaint at him to the New York State Office of Professions and wrote about her personal experience with him on her blog. Instead of admitting his wrongdoings, feeling sorry for what happened or apologizing to Carol, he prefers to attack her in his new article entitled Beware Carol Welch—Cyberstalker (http://184.154.238.114/blogs/reckless-speculation/item/138-beware-carol-welch%E2%80%94cyberstalker). This article is just full of lies and twisting the situation.
Unfortunately, these two [Carol Welch and me] have launched an incredible campaign to discredit me and to apparently have my license to practice therapy taken away. Carol Welch lodged a complaint with my licensing board last Septmember and has made false and defamatory statements in many places on the Internet, calling those clients of mine she knows at home and making false claims, and also calling colleagues, friends, and board members. <...>
I have sufficient credentials to practice counseling and therapy. Although, because I have no intention of defending against Carol's complaint to my Board, I'm likely to lose the licensure soon. Since Carol, to my knowledge, has never presented evidence of criminal behavior or ethical breaches, I feel the Office of Professions should never have entertained the complaint in the first place. <...>
Briefly, here are the false claims I know of: <...>
I have practiced unethically and traumatized a client. (Carol Welch, ad nauseum) This is the most damaging allegation, I feel. Carol Welch has submitted a complaint to my governing licensing board. I learned of this in April. The investigator from the office of the professions would not discuss the specifics of the allegations with me. So I’m not sure what to think. This investigator could hardly contain her scorn and disdain for me, whom she obviously believed had traumatized Carol intentionally. She made flat out false assertions to me regarding Carol being my client when we worked together, the illegality of practicing therapy over the Internet, and numerous other “facts” about which she could have determined the falsity for herself. Investigators are not credentialed therapists. They are clerks. They are rarely schooled in the law. Their job is simply to gather facts. Some clerks come to believe they have power—and therefore wisdom. These are very dangerous people.
Well, if, as Knapp states, Carol's accusations against him in her complaint were wrong, why did Knapp preferred not to defend himself? Why did he prefer not to present his side to the investigator?
Instead of defending himself, first, he missed the time of renewal of his registration. His registration expired on May 31, 2011, but he renewed it only in the beginning of August. Now, he states that he is going to leave the social work field because, according to his words, he is "ashamed to be associated with the field" and because of "the horrific state of the mental healing profession."
If, as he states, Carol's accusations were wrong, why did not he try to defend himself to the NYS Board, preferring to attack her from his website? Well, the reason is very simple. Her accusations are not wrong and she did present evidences of his ethical violations to the NYS Board. He is unable to refute these things. This is why he decided not to defend himself. It is much easier to attack Carol, posting lies about her on his website, because, of course, not all the readers of his website know what really happened. And it it much easier to use his website in order to accuse the investigator of believing Carol's "wrong accusations" instead of having the direct and open dialog with the investigator regarding the complaint.
Knapp's article is just full of his lies about Carol and other people. I think this is one of the worst one:
Finally, Carol’s attacks on my character started shortly after I made it clear to her that I would not engage in a sexual relationship of any kind with her, despite her oft-repeated requests after our therapeutic relationship ended.
Well, according to my understanding, Knapp and Carol never met in person. Knapp lives in New York State. Carol lives in North Caroline. Although it may be possible to practice psychotherapy through Internet, it is definitely impossible to have sexual relationship through Internet.
In addition, there is an obvious problem of timing here. Knapp indicates it as the time "after our therapeutic relationship ended." What was this time? Knapp convinced Carol that their therapeutic relationship ended before she joined his forum and became a co-moderator and co-administrator. However, their therapy sessions continued after that, though he called them "life coaching." She continued to pay him. So, in fact their therapeutic relationship ended only with the conflict. Now, could Carol possibly "make requests for sexual relationship" with Knapp after the conflict when she was seriously wounded by him and when he cut all the contacts with her? Of course, not. Could she possibly make such requests before she joined his forum or became a co-moderator and co-administrator? Of course, she could not either. Otherwise, Knapp would not have invited her to the forum and would not have asked her to be a co-moderator and co-administrator of the forum.
So, Knapp's accusation toward Carol is not only completely false, but also completely illogical. The same is with his other accusations.
Knapp accuses Carol of defamation:
I find her tactics, as I discuss below, terroristic, defamatory, and sadistically cruel. <...>
Carol has loudly proclaimed that she does not care if she is breaking defamation or slander laws saying, “I will not be silenced!” <...>
I have waited patiently for over a year for Carol to work through this, allowing defamatory, damaging, and personally devastating statement after statement go by unchecked. I thought I owed her some time to come to grips with her pain on her own.
Today, because Carol’s cyberattacks, bullying, and defamation have not stopped—for over one year, mind you—I have reported the situation to the authorities and am seeking legal recourse for relief in the irreperable damage to my emotional well-being, family life, and professional career.
However, it is Knapp who makes defamatory statements regarding Carol, not vice versa.
By the way, since he could not "prove" to the investigator that Carol's accusations of him in her complaint were "wrong," I do not think he is really able to "prove" this in the court of the law. So, his threatens are empty. In fact, he made similar legal threatens toward me over a year ago when I posted a question regarding the point we had disagreement (it was the term "spiritual trauma") in two online groups. Although I did not mention his name there and even did not imply that I had a disagreement over this point with somebody, he accused me that I was going to defame him and damage his reputations and threatened me with legal actions against me. This was another example of his empty legal threatens.
Now, here are my responses to some of "the false claims" he listed:
The CHSCA is not incorporated or is operating illegally. (Lema Nal) Our website displays verifiable information that we are a charitable nonprofit corporation in Delaware. More US companies incorporate there than any other state. It turns out the service we used to incorporate did not register us as a foreign corporation in New York. This mistake isn’t uncommon. We are applying now.
What I actually stated was that the CHSCA is not incorporated in New York State where it is apparently located. I did not check the databases of each of 50 US states to see if it was incorporated in another state. I did not make statements that it was not incorporated anywhere in the USA.
There are no people involved in the Center other than me. (Lema Nal) The staff are listed prominently on the website. Our 15-member advisory board includes nationally and internationally known figures. (There are a number of bios yet to be added.)
I never made statements that no other people, except Knapp, are involved in CHSCA. In fact, I even mentioned some of those people on my blog.
I practice NeuroLinguistic Programing or Ericksonian hypnosis unethically. (Lema Nal) I never studied NLP, don’t know how to practice it. I’ve read academic articles on hypnotism. I don’t know how to do it. I don’t know why this individual claims I used NLP on him. My former supervisor is trained in NLP. Once or twice she invited me to a training. I politely declined. It’s not unusual that a practitioner supervises someone with a different theoretical perspective. I also have Republican friends. I wouldn’t vote for them.
Knapp himself admitted that he studied NLP in our last Skype conversation in the end of July, 2010. He now denies his own words.
Practicing counseling over the Internet is unethical. (Lema Nal, Carol Welch via New York State Office of the Professions investigator) Practicing distance counseling or psychiatry has been common for over a decade. I belong to the International Society for Mental Health Online, a professional organization and subscribe to their suggested ethical guidelines. I am a member of the NASW and abide by their ethical code.
It was not my idea. However, as a comment, I can say that one of the problems with the Internet therapy is that the software used for it (such as Skype) does not guarantee the confidentiality while it is obligatory that therapeutic sessions should be completely confidential. There are other problems with using Internet for psychotherapy as well. In fact, Knapp does not abide by NASW ethical code. For example, he made several ethical violations toward Carol which she reported in her complaint.
Well, I really do not have time and desire to get into the detailed refutation of all the Knapp's lies and misrepresentations. I think what I have written so far is sufficient.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
