Posted by Mary_Bowers on October 15, 2004, at 13:59:20
In reply to Re: A civil venue for accusations » Mary_Bowers, posted by NikkiT2 on October 15, 2004, at 12:55:11
> You do realise, that your "action" would quite possibly see this site being shut down.
>
> So, in theory ofcourse, those of us here that will suffer, terribly, through the loss of Psychobabble would be able to bring a class action suit against you for the being cause of the shut down? And thus the cause of much suffering. Do I understand US law correctly?
>
> Thankyou for your timeIf people would suffer from the site being shut down, that suggests a clinical relationship in which the site is operated to relieve suffering, and primarily to relieve the suffering of those with various mental disorders that otherwise present at a psychiatric clinic or other source of psychopharmaceutical advice.
Administrative or court interventions might not lead to the site being shut down. More likely, considering causes of action would lead to changes in the way the site is administered. If there were to become a case in controversy, a court would weigh Robert Hsiung's right of free speech, and yours, along with any evidence and testimony presented about why somebody, or some group of people, might be need to relieved of suffering the site is causing them.
Courts are reluctant to intervene in the practice of medicine, and most medical disciplinary boards would rather only deal with egregious violations. Action isn't likely, but it is a standard against which we measure this site. My purpose in presenting that information when I did had more to do with showing someone injured by participation in the site that there are a variety of venues to which one may pray for relief.
Among Internet forums such as this one that are associated with clinical settings and that are admininistered by clinicians, my preference, which I believe some of my associaties share, is for the majority, which unlike this one are administered within a chain of command. Effective clinical supervision assures compliance with stated purposes and methodically prevents adverse liabilities among all clients. When the doctor serves images of himself grinning into the web cam while clients post fantasies about wrestling with him in his underpants, somebody is failing to monitor potential liabilities.
In this case, the doctor claims not to be clinically involved with the clients, asserting neither a clinical nor therapeutic intent. But at the top of each page, links suggest further reading about "E-therapy" and "the clinical potential of the Internet." Clearly, to some reasonable persons, that could suggest this message board is a clinical experiment or a practice in E-therapy. That suggestion could easily lead to an expection of the administrative protections available to those who present in a clinical setting symptoms of a personal disorder. A private practice in large virtual group E-therapy does not easily afford those protections.
poster:Mary_Bowers
thread:403360
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20041012/msgs/403411.html