Re: a complaint letter/ any thoughts?

February 7, 1999

wrote:

Original Article: /list/12-step-free/?start=2078

> Feedback anyone? I managed to obtain a copy of the 12 page " intake

> interview " (compiled after only an hour by a nurse!) and it pretty

> much enraged me and caused me to quit the program immediately. This

> is what I'm planning on sending them. I only wish that it could

> solve/change my permanent medical history. It's situations such as

> this that have caused me to eliminate therapy from my life altogether

> even though I've *many* abuse issues still unresolved.

>

> Thanks for reading it (if you do!),

>

> banshee

>

>Great start! Find if any of the people who you have a complaint against are

licenced by a professional board or belong to any related associations like ASAM

or APA or your state licencing body. Get ahold of the ethics policy of the

various associations that they belong to and read them. You'll find that they

will have violated their own ethics policy. File complaints. Write letters to

these boards hitting these people over the head with their own ethics policies.

Be persistent because they will try to derail you. The more conviction and

determination you show the more violations you'll uncover. The bastards will

violate their own ethical standards as you've seen by lying and distorting the

facts to paint you in the worst possible light. A sick and diseased person who

is out of control. I know it's happened to me. If you need help, get help. Try

Stanton Peele or Jack Trimpey at Rational Recovery.

Good Luck

------------------------------------------------------------------------

February 7, 1999

---

Banshee,

Yes!! Do everything possible to expose & challenge the fraud in the

recovery " Treatment For $$$ " industry!

I know exactly what you mean about them distorting facts and outright

inventing things to make you look as messed up and desperate for their " help " as

possible. I too was shocked to see my " Diagnostic Summary and Referral " letter

to the treatment facility from the EAP (when asked my drinking habits I said I

have a couple on my days off without experiencing any problems; he wrote " Admits

to abusing alcohol every weekend " ; later in the report he made reference to the

fact of my getting private treatment for depression as follows: " Client's

therapist has not recommended treatment or self-help for alcoholism, but did

recommend an antidepressant, which client has not taken due to alcohol abuse " --

absolute fiction! and he refused to ever even consult with my Dr., who has far

more qualifications than he!) and also my intake form at the treatment facility,

which stated that I displayed " withdrawal symptoms " of anxiety, depression, and

appetite loss. This brilliant medical appraisal of " alcohol withdrawal " was

made by a social worker (in recovery of course!) with no medical training.

I couldn't pursue a medicaid or insurance fraud claim because it was paid

for by neither. My " treatment " was paid for directly out of the operating

budget of my agency, which is heavily subsidized by the state treasury. I

suppose I should write to various politicians, but do they care a fig? People

like us who claim incompetence/fraud in addiction treatment aren't seen as

having any credibility anyway, we're just in denial.

Anyway, your complaint letter was great. Hopefully you'll get some

results. Keep up the good work!

~Rita

--------------------------------------------

>Feedback anyone? I managed to obtain a copy of the 12 page " intake

>interview " (compiled after only an hour by a nurse!) and it pretty

>much enraged me and caused me to quit the program immediately. This

>is what I'm planning on sending them. I only wish that it could

>solve/change my permanent medical history. It's situations such as

>this that have caused me to eliminate therapy from my life altogether

>even though I've *many* abuse issues still unresolved.

>

>Thanks for reading it (if you do!),

>

>banshee

>

>To (a well known and " respected " substance abuse pgm in the NorthEast

>US):

>

> To be up front about this correspondence, I'm getting a bit more

>than simply disturbed at your putting words in my mouth, or making

>false interpretations on what I say to you in confidence.

> I have read your (so called) " Intake Review " of me (I have copies)

>and find not only absolute falsehoods (possibly subject to further

>litigation by the parties they represent), but interpretations of what

>I might have said that can be construed only as a justification of

>your existence as an institution that wishes to continue to be

>successful in billing third party agencies such as Medicare, et.al.

>This justification at the expense of " patients " present and future

>lives is unconscionable at best and possibly even illegal in the eyes

>of the Federal Government. To add to this topic, Medicare is being

>contacted about the treatment and subsequent report which in my

>opinion was manipulated to server your ends falsified.

> For starters, your use of the word " denies " (pertaining to my

>comments about my life is misleading at best, and couched in language

>that can only be interpreted as completely subjective and

>interpretive. This multi-page document's " facts " are based on less

>than a once hour " consultation " . Additionally it is signed by a

>physician which whom I never saw, nor was even given the courtesy to

>be introduced to. How you ever had the audacity of having a physician

>sign a document relating to my history when this individual never saw

>me is beyond my comprehension. Is this to aid in your billing

>purposes? To add to this topic, I found that your " group sessions "

>being led by completely unlicensed individuals deceptive, especially

>as you advertise yourself as one of the better treatment centers for

>substance abuse.

> On page 4 of your " Intake Interview " you sate that I have " 3

>stepbrothers who you list as " unknown alcoholics " . Why? Your wording

>of this, however you might justify it, is extremely misleading. The

>use of the word " unknown " leaves much to interpretation. For the

>record, NONE of them are what you could term " alcoholic " and how you

>had the audacity to put this information on a medical evaluation form

>is beyond me. After relating this information to one of my brothers I

>can only say that he is outraged and unless this situation is solved,

>might consider legal action against your corporation. Please keep in

>mind that at no time did I eve supply you with information such as

>this. This is your subjective interpretation of my statements to you.

> The page (or form) called " DIAGNOSTIC CRITERIAL FOR ALCOHOL

>DEPENDENCE / PSYCHOACTIVE SUBSTANCE: " which contained the leading

>phrase " Must have at least three of the following: " (on page 7 of your

> " Intake Document " have only 2 items checked (one of which I have

>serious questions about its accuracy). If this is part of what you

>base your treatment at your (I'll call it the NoChoice) facility for

>substance abuse then why did you make the decision to treat me at FW's

>and subsequently proceed to bill Medicare for such treatment.

>Doesn't' treatment based on such criteria border on Medicare Fraud?

>for your information, I am forwarding a copy of this information to

>Medicare for their investigation. In short, part of your own

>selection criteria seems to determine that I am not an alcoholic, yet

>you planned on continuing to treat me as such and in the process, bill

>Medicare for the full cost of treatment.

> On page 2 of your " Integrated Summary " : " Problems with primary

>support " . Where on earth did you obtain this information from? I

>have very close friends who have helped me through some extremely

>trying financial and emotional times and have even offered to pay both

>my expenses (including my rent) and to be there when I need them. You

>were told of this quite clearly. Your comment is absurd to put it

>mildly, and an out and out lie to put it bluntly.

> On page 3 of your " Integrated Summary " : Again the issue with

> " problems with primary support " . (this is also mentioned on page 4).

>Please see the above paragraph for an explanation of your comments.

> However it is the " Discharge Summary " that really wins the award

>for the manipulation of the truth. Never could I have been construed

>as being " angry and hostile " as you claim. Nor did I exhibit any

> " paranoid behavior in groups " . To explain why you came to these

>erroneous assumptions about me might be futile (as they were already

>clearly explained to you in person) but I will attempt to do so again

>for the benefit of any authorities that might read this.

> My first " group session " found me in the midst of a heated

>discussion on a breach of confidentiality by one of the members. He

>had admitted that he had mentioned personal and intimate information

>to friends on the street (and thus outside of the group) about other

>members of the group. Needless to say, this did not make me feel

>comfortable with sharing personal information with the group. Would

>it make anyone comfortable? I seriously doubt it. I had a normal

>reaction to this situation. In no way could it be labeled as

> " paranoid " as you so named it. A term btw that within my medical

>records can permanently effect me.

> Your completely unfounded and outrageous comments about my

> " thinking that members were talking about my sexuality " is simply

>that. You are making up things to justify your position. The only

>time that I mentioned anything to this effect was when I discussed

>that within a group setting with other women that my past might make

>them uncomfortable and it might be best for all concerned that I not

>take part in groups. This was not paranoid. I simply considered

>caring for other's feelings and their ability to be comfortable in a

>therapeutic environment a primary factor, apparently something that is

>beyond your ability when viewing a " patient's " viewpoint.

> In summation, I want this information corrected immediately and

>the results sent to all parties that they were submitted to. I would

>also like copies of the corrected documents sent to me for

>verification purposes. Failure to do this will result in further

>action.

>

>Yours truly,

>

>xxxxx

>

>--------------------------------------------

-----== Sent via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==-----

http://www.dejanews.com/ Easy access to 50,000+ discussion forums

------------------------------------------------------------------------

February 7, 1999

Rita,

Each time I click on one of your posts, I know I'm in for a treat of

good old fasion common sense.

Thanks,

Tommy

>From 12-step-free-return-1664-tgperkins Sun Feb 07 23:35:31 1999

>Received: from [209.185.96.158] by hotmail.com (1.1) with SMTP id

MHotMailB887DD955F087D101708FD1B9609E416B238; Sun Feb 07 23:35:31 1999

>Received: from [127.0.0.1] by mh.findmail.com with NNFMP; 08 Feb 1999

07:35:44 -0000

>Mailing-List: contact 12-step-free-owneregroups

>Precedence: list

>X-URL: /list/12-step-free/

>X-Mailing-List: 12-step-freeegroups

>Reply-To: 12-step-freeegroups

>Delivered-To: listsaver-egroups-12-step-freeegroups

>Received: (qmail 26658 invoked by uid 7770); 8 Feb 1999 07:35:28 -0000

>Received: from mcfs.whowhere.com (209.1.236.44)

> by vault.findmail.com with SMTP; 8 Feb 1999 07:35:28 -0000

>Received: from Unknown/Local ([?.?.?.?]) by my-dejanews.com; Sun Feb 7

23:35:16 1999

>To: 12-step-freeegroups

>Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 07:35:16 -0000

>

>Message-ID:

>Mime-Version: 1.0

>Cc: