Threat Of Reprisal By Psychiatrist Ms. A. Chawla To Her Unassuming Victim Rene Helmerichs

Threat Of Reprisal By Psychiatrist Ms. A. Chawla To Her Unassuming Victim Rene Helmerichs

 

By: Rene Helmerichs

Referencing: 26 Oct 2012 recording at Royal Victoria Hospital in Barrie

 

The total compensation requested from The Human Rights Tribunal following psychiatric harassment continuously ongoing from 3 September 2012 until, at current, the application by psychiatrist Mr. Gunter Lorberg dated signed 26 June 2014 at Ontario MSCSC CNCC is $700 Million Canadian Dollars.

 

The following is a sufficiently complete transcript excerpt of voice file 20121026_Voice0596, a conversation instigated by psychiatrist Ms. A. Chawla to her victim Rene Helmerichs in the group room of the Psychiatric Ward on 3NC at Royal Victoria Hospital between the hours of 2 and 3 pm on 26 October 2012.

 

The World Wide Web posting is LEGAL, despite it's defamatory nature TO the psychiatrist, because IN CANADA, The Constitution Of Canada provides that everyone have the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a fair and pubic hearing AND THAT LAW is The Constitution Of Canada itself.  The Mental Health Act is subordinate to The Constitution and plays upon a 1982 Charter Of Rights And Freedoms EXCEPTION incorporated as sections 24(2) and 33(1) of The Constitution permitting, effectively, psychiatrists to be as gods in our courts of law.

 

Luckily, The Human Rights Code Of Ontario has permitted the astute professor of Communication Skills, Mr. Rene Helmerichs, to submit application to The Human Rights Tribunal Of Ontario claiming discrimination in the social services area governed by Her Majesty In Right Of Ontario as represented by Her Ministers For: 1) The Ministry Of Community Safety And Correctional Services, MCSCS, (employing official representatives dubbed thugs with guns who service the witches); 2) The Ministry Of Health, Health, (employing official representatives called psychiatrists and dubbed pill-pushing drug dealers who are the witches); and 3) The Ministry Of The Attorney General, The Crown, (employing official representatives dubbed vipers giving venom to the witches). 

 

The beauty of The Human Rights Code Of Ontario is that it is FULLY INLINE with what The Constitution SHOULD BE, namely, that discrimination on the grounds of a perceived mental disability (mental disorder, mental illness, whatever witches will call it) IS UNLAWFUL.  Specifically, The Human Rights Tribunal Applicant Guide To Filing Applications on page 8 gives "Reprisal under the Code means that you believe the respondent intended to punish you for claiming or enforcing your rights under the Code."

 

AT THE CLOSE OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, WHICH THE READER MAY HEAR FOR HIM OR HERSELF FROM THE AUDIO RECORDING 20121026_Voice0596 available from the keeper of the blog www.luciferchristforworldpeace.blogspot.tw , is the direct reprisal:

 

Rene: So, if I go to a hearing then our deal for next weekend is out?

Chawla: Ya, because the--you're showing me that I can't trust the process we've spent the last whatever time discussing. [By challenging the current form via another hearing.]

Rene: Is that a threat?

Chawla: Is it?  Ya, I guess, in a way.

 

 

 

Partial Transcript Of Voice File 20121026_Voice0596_at_RVH:

 

---

[26 Oct 2012 conversation excerpt follows]

 

A "Confidential" Conversation

 

Chawla: What's different about you now as compared to before?

Rene: What are your perceptions of me?

Chawla: I think you're frustrated about being here.

Rene: Sad is a better word.

Chawla: Ya, you look sad.  So this is my understanding: when you came, you were high on marijuana.  And as a result of being high on marijuana you did some things.  You still have very little or no insight into--we still disagree I take it?

Rene: We disagree but we don't disagree on the symptoms I was displaying.

Chawla: We don't?  Ok.

Rene: No.  I understand questions were asked of me, I also understand that those answers could be perceived as significant of paranoia or other disorders but reasons for my answers to the questions were never asked of me so how can it be certain that I was feeling paranoia at any time?  As for the other side, the manic side or what you want to call grandiose thoughts, they're not new thoughts.  Much of the things that I've been planning are in the works for a long time.  [Culture DOES teach us to DREAM.]

Chawla: Ok, so anyone can be Prime Minister

Rene: Yes, but how many of us actually make a plan?  [I actually have very little doubt that my plan will NOT work, but it's still fun to say it :)]

Chawla: Right, anybody can be and anybody can make plans but you made a comment that, "I want to be king of Barrie"

Rene: I didn't make a comment that I wanted to be king of Barrie--

Chawla: It's documented

Rene: Then correct the documentation.  I have never at any point said "king of Barrie."  As a matter of fact, at the second hearing I correct you from your comment that it wasn't "king of Barrie", I would like to be "king of the world and the internet counts."  So at that point you have to ask yourself, "Well, how can you be king of the world and say that the internet counts because if you're king of the world on the internet then it's not an actual physical king who wears a crown."  Do you see the difference?

Chawla: What would you do as king?  What would be a responsibility?

[This question is completely unnecessary and therefore inappropriate unless the questioner is hard of hearing and completely missed the above.] 

Rene: Ah God, it's symbolic. 

...

Chawla: In the hearing you told me something to do with the churches, so that you can unite the churches and correct the misperceptions.

Rene: No.  You cannot force unity, at all.  The unity can't be gotten at by any one person dictating as in a dictatorship.  If you are perceiving my dream of whatever you want to call it as a title as being anything remotely of the form of being a dictator is incorrect.  The only way you can unite something is by pointing out the silliness of being separate.  And so if two churches are arguing about "One God" then let's talk to them about what they're arguing about God about, see if we can't correct those so that they work with each other so that we finally have--there's a pact between the five major Christian churches, or four major Christian churches at the Catholic Church--form a pact like that with all the churches don't leave out the Jehovah Witnesses or the Community of Christ people or the Mormons.

Chawla: So you would achieve that how?

Rene: That part is a DREAM.

Chawla: But how would you achieve that?  By being king?

[This is a typical example of the types of tedious circular conversations I was subjected to at the hospital during my stay.]

...

Chawla: What about the emails that followed while you were hospitalized here where you wanted to sue the police, the hospital...

Rene: I didn't say the word sue, did I?

Chawla: Well, take legal action.

Rene: Do you see how it's inferred by the reader? 

[I point out the doctor's rampant use of judgment against me, as has been her habit for 10 weeks.]

Chawla: Ok, you want to take legal action so let's have a discussion about that.  What would be the intent there?

Rene: Ok.  First, my blood was drawn twice without my consent.  I didn't feel that that was quite justified... I don't know if you recognize it or not, [our conversations] have not been therapeutic because you express things that are already in my awareness and that I needn't hear over and over again, such as Children's Aide (C.A.S.).  It's--four years ago I had a really bad run-in with C.A.S. it was/is not something I would at all like to repeat. 

[I had mentioned that the first time I pointed out her use of threatening me with C.A.S. to be inappropriate.]

...

Chawla: What do you think.  Do you think you have a mental illness?

Rene: Well, let's look at it from a health perspective because if you look at it from an illness point--and I'm thankful now that we're talking--if we look at it from an illness perspective we can always find things to justify whatever illness we're wanting to justify.  So I'll have some symptoms of bipolar, I'll have some symptoms of mania, I'll have some symptoms of whatever else but from a health perspective you could also say that all of my thinking is on the extreme fringe of normal in the category of odd or eccentric and then look at it well, "how have I functioned so far?"

...

Chawla: Ok.  So, Ah.  Are you coming around to getting that you have a mental illness or no?  You don't have an illness, or--

Rene: Well, let's look at it--

Chawla: What you have--

Rene: from a different perspective, not to call it an illness but to say that it is not normal thinking--

Chawla: Ok--

Rene: and that by somebody who's looking at it from a more narrow range of normal and defining only that range as well-being then anything out of that range would be perceived as "not well being" or "mental illness".  And so, from your perspective, I can understand and appreciate that you would consider me to have a mental illness.

Chawla: Ok.  So you have abnormal thinking.  Your thinking would not fall into the societal norm.

Rene: That's not true.  It's thinking that encompasses the societal norm but then is more.

Chawla: It's out there.

Rene: It's out there.  The difference being that I can function in normal society.

Chawla: But you couldn't.  That is the main point.  Whatever illness, you couldn't function in normal society, you were getting angry with your mom, you were having difficulties with your mom, you--

Rene: Without a voice recorder there, please don't--this is one sided because my mother has screamed at me that she hates me.  I have never, ever told my Mom that nor would I ever.  To say that I get angry at my Mom without hearing the other side of the story, the anger--my Mum is not a person that I can ever talk to.  She's very prone to blaming and likes also to point at justifications for current behaviour relative to past events.  She doesn't allow for a person to have learned anything or to have changed their behaviours or being--

[Incidentally, the "shock" of finding me in the hospital was not taken well by my family who at that point were then coming to terms with evidence that I must be mentally ill otherwise I wouldn't be on the mental ward.  It is doubtful they had awareness that the doctor was probing for reason to justify my stay, instead of re-enforcing the supportive aspect and seeing me expeditiously return home after my unwitting incarceration for some mis-represented statement which someone somewhere has taken to mean that I am of harm to another.]

...

Chawla: I think you're better but you're not back to your normal self yet.  I would be Ok if A) you took your risperidone injectable--what are your plans?  Ok, so A) if you took your medication, at least your injectable; and B) if your Mum agreed with you going home.  So what are your plans about taking the injectable, once you leave here?

...

Rene: The only reason I am taking the injections is because I am legally bound to.

Chawla: And you will be legally bound even after you leave because you will be on a CTO [Community Treatment Order].

Rene: I will continue to take it until a) I'm not legally bound or b) you or my Mum decide that I no longer need to take it.

Chawla: Ok.  So you're not going to go to court to challenge the legally bound aspect of it?  Are you planning to do that?

Rene: I don't understand how that would bear influence into the idea that I have a mental illness--

Chawla: No, I'm just trying to understand what you're--what your plans are because that will tell me whether you're improving or not.

[The need for knowing my plans is certainly understandable, but the topic of my challenging the CTO should not have come up, at all; its overall antagonistic nature removes the conversation further from one of solely therapeutic intent.]

Rene: It you put a person into an oven and turn up the temperature, is that person not going to scream at the walls and try his very best to have the temperature turned down?  We can come to a peaceful compromise.

Chawla: Which is?

Rene: Test me out in society and then see if I can't function and then wind me down from it--

Chawla: I did try.  Right?  I lifted the form and I allowed a visit with your friend even though understanding of the fact that she's been...

Rene: So what you're saying is that we have trust issues between us.  That makes this a non-theraputic relationship.

...

Chawla: So I would like to meet with your mom and give you a weekend pass and if nothing bad happens and I don't hear about emails being sent, I'm not pressuring you not to voice your opinion, you have a right to voice your opinion, but those emails and the content of that is an indication of your illness.

[What is not mentioned is that I have had no past experience with anything like this and really hadn't a clue how to start going about voicing my "opinion".  Staff at the hospital have expressed wishes that I will simply accept everything done to me.]

...

Rene: Which illness?

Chawla: You have schizoaffective disorder.

Rene: Schizoaffective disorder?  And how do you come to that conclusion?

Chawla: Because you have very paranoid out-there thoughts.

Rene: But they're not paranoid, I have no fear included in those thoughts.... Just because it's not normal doesn't mean that it's delusional. 

Chawla: No, it's an abnormal thinking process.  It's part of the illness.

Rene: So the abnormal thinking process justifies the schizoaffective disorder?

Chawla: Part of it, yes.  You're manic that's the affective part.

Rene: The manic part is justified how?  Because I was high on marijuana?

[From Wikipedia: "As schizoaffective disorder is presently defined in the DSM-IV criteria, at some point during the lifetime course of the illness, psychosis must occur continuously for at least two-weeks without any mood disorder symptoms, and the symptoms must not be caused by medication(s), substance use or another medical condition."  Marijuana use constitutes "substance use"; I do believe the doctor missed the memo on that one.]

...

Chawla: Right, Ok.  We're going off topic.  So, I want to discuss the plan.  This is my plan.  If you take your injection, after you take your injection we'll all sit down--I would like to speak to your mum first and then we'll all sit down, you'll be given a weekend pass and if the weekend is uneventful then Monday you go home.  To be followed, as an outpatient, by me--so that's another thing that's in the mix.  If by Friday the CTO is not in place then you don't go home.  As a result of the CTO, if you don't take your medication or you don't follow up, if there are any concerns, you don't have to go to emerge you will come straight to us.  That CTO allows us to get you from the community to be admitted straight to us. 

Rene: I really don't want to come back here.

Chawla: Right.  You'll have to follow the suggestions made in the CTO.  Part of that would be to take your medications.  Part of that would be to follow up with a psychiatrist which in this case is me, I don’t think I can find anyone to replace me and I don't really want to.

Rene: Despite the non-therapeutic relationship. 

Chawla: Well, the therapeutic relationship was spoilt by you not me.

Rene: Really?  We've had two hearings where we're countering each other.  You don't think that after a hearing where we're countering each other that constitutes a breakdown in communication?

...

Rene: The whole foundation of the illness, the whole criteria for the disorder are in question and if they're in question--

Chawla: Nobody's questioning them other than you.  The review board has met three times now.

[I never had a second opinion for her diagnosis.  The DSM-IV manual leads me to believe she is incorrect because of the pot use; I believe it clearly states the condition, to be diagnosed, must be free of substance abuse.]

Rene: Ok, we need to go back to that first hearing.  I would really like to listen to the recording of that first hearing... the second hearing as well.  I was not able to correct misquotes given by you in the second hearing.

Chawla: You could have.

Rene: At the end?

Chawla: Ya.

Rene: Did they say, "Is there anything else that you would like to say Rene?"  I don't recall them saying that.  That's why at the third hearing I was so adamant about wanting to correct them at the beginning.

Chawla: Well you could have told them that at the second time also.

Rene: Well thank you for now informing me of the process... The first hearing we need to go back and revisit.  The way that [name] presented me in that hearing is not at all--

Chawla: I don't think the first hearing has any bearing on the second or third, they're all considered very independently. 

Rene: Could be, but you've used them.  You've used them now as justification for your own statement that I am not mentally well. 

Chawla: Part of it, but I have also made my own assessment, talking to you, seeing you, listening to you, I've had my own independent opinion.  You looked puzzled.

Rene: I wouldn't say I'm puzzled.  I'm still trying to get you to understand that looking at a partial past of somebody and listening to another person's opinions about that person is an incomplete picture of that person.  You cannot judge all of my thinking to be as mentally unwell.  I am far more creative than the normal person, I'll give you that because my work's been telling me that for years, but it hasn't been disadvantageous until most recently when I used my creative aspect to see if I couldn't get my friend into a house for Christmas.

Chawla: I cannot go back in time and know you back then, right?

Rene: So let's look at the now.  That's why we need to work with the now.... How have my behaviours in here been at all in appropriate?  Let's talk about it.... We haven't talked about my behaviour inside the hospital at all.

Chawla: No, we have.  We have in the past and today as well.

[Clearly she and I were speaking about two different behaviours, further emphasizing the fact that we perceive simply what we want to perceive--the doctor, unfortunately, looking only for evidence to support illness and not health.]

...

Rene: I do have one request.  Halloween is before next weekend.  My Mum does not want to go out trick or treating with my kid.  Can I do like a 2-hour pass and just go out trick or treating and come back?

Chawla: I've given you two opportunities and both opportunities have backfired.  [In two months I'd only been given one pass]

Rene: I've had things to do.

Chawla: I know, I know but they say, "Fool me once shame on you; fool me twice shame on me." I'm not going to let you fool me three times.

Rene: What can I possibly do in 2 hours?

Chawla: I don't know; you are capable of many things.  So, what I would say is...

 

[Are we not culturally taught to respect the opinions of a doctor?

 

What does one do when the doctor is convinced a patient is deluded and uses intimidation tactics in attempt to force the same understanding onto the patient who suffers from a heightened state of fear which further causes the intimidation to be received in an amplified way?]

 

Chawla: ...you get your third injection, we talk to your mom, and I will see what her thoughts are about you getting out of here.  [The doctor had taken away my right to refuse medication.]

Rene: Are we having another hearing before then?

Chawla: You want to?

Rene: I put a request in the other day for it.

Chawla: Up to you, then I will take the opportunity--

It's going to go the same way as it's gone the other three times, Ok?  [After a slight pause, likely in attempt to make a recovery at realizing the slip] Most likely.  I can't say for sure.  Most likely.  [then reverting back to intimidation for having just offered me release the following weekend!] If that happens then I'm going to keep you here for 30 days.  I mean 30 days from the time your [current] form expires.  [This would mean another 55 days of involuntary stay for having been admitted high on marijuana over two months ago!]

Rene: Well, I've already put in the process to start the hearing in.

Chawla: You can always stop it.  [Incorrect as on the cancellation form I'm required to acknowledge that I have not been threatened, intimidated, or placed under fear; her statement had only served to heighten my already acute state of fear of her.]

 

Rene: You can always let me out for Halloween. 

Chawla: No.  That won't happen.  Because I have to make sure that I'm working in the best interests of you.  [I've pointed out that forced help is counterproductive and the doctor has admitted her relationship with me to not have been very therapeutic.  I've considered her partially delusional concerning me for this very reason.]   

Rene: So, if I go to a hearing then our deal for next weekend is out?

Chawla: Ya, because the--you're showing me that I can't trust the process we've spent the last whatever time discussing. [By challenging the current form via another hearing.]

Rene: Is that a threat?

Chawla: Is it?  Ya, I guess, in a way.  We couldn't just leave it at that.  Alright, so why don't I do this.  Hearing or no hearing I'm going to let the form 4 lapse [in 25 days].  I'm not going to attach that form lifting or discontinuing to anything.  So we're just going to go through the whole, whatever days it's valid for [about 25 days] and we'll have you as our guest then.  Does that seem reasonable then?

 

[Rene: Clearly not.  She had now changed her mind three times in our short discussion about the possibility of my release.  I cannot describe how frustrating it was trying to talk to a doctor who routinely used intimidation in attempt to inflict understanding over the course of my involuntary stay.]

 

Rene: You're insane!