Complaint Review: Jim W. Anderson PhD

Dear RipoffReport,

Please let this documented and written update serve as a documented and written request that the above topic be removed by RipoffReport.

There is concern that one particular incident may reflect unfairly on the rest of the institution. It is noted that the report is continuing to rank high in the Google-rankings.

Thank you for your assistance.

What some of the kooks in the repressed memory field are doing is hideous. Just look at the abuse of people who don't go along with the so-called professional's view of things...

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_n46_v13/ai_20083163

The reason I want this posted is because this population (people at-risk of falling prey to these professionals who just haven't yet been totally busted when they cross the bounds of ethical behavior, if that is the case in a particular instance) is oh-so-vulnerable to abuse. Thank goodness good attorneys are starting to go after the worst of the Freudian radical extremists, like in the Burgus case in Illinois where a Dr. Bennet Braun was put out of practice, finally.

If anyone begins to get abusive if you dare question them, there's definitely something wrong. And this goes for everywhere this stuff is promoted, be it in an actual clinical setting where people have openly come to see one of these hardcore Freudians, or if they are teaching a course outside their practices. If they don't tolerate dissent and are being psychologically abuse...red flag, folks. Red flag.

What some of the kooks in the repressed memory field are doing is hideous. Just look at the abuse of people who don't go along with the so-called professional's view of things...

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_n46_v13/ai_20083163

The reason I want this posted is because this population (people at-risk of falling prey to these professionals who just haven't yet been totally busted when they cross the bounds of ethical behavior, if that is the case in a particular instance) is oh-so-vulnerable to abuse. Thank goodness good attorneys are starting to go after the worst of the Freudian radical extremists, like in the Burgus case in Illinois where a Dr. Bennet Braun was put out of practice, finally.

If anyone begins to get abusive if you dare question them, there's definitely something wrong. And this goes for everywhere this stuff is promoted, be it in an actual clinical setting where people have openly come to see one of these hardcore Freudians, or if they are teaching a course outside their practices. If they don't tolerate dissent and are being psychologically abuse...red flag, folks. Red flag.

What some of the kooks in the repressed memory field are doing is hideous. Just look at the abuse of people who don't go along with the so-called professional's view of things...

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_n46_v13/ai_20083163

The reason I want this posted is because this population (people at-risk of falling prey to these professionals who just haven't yet been totally busted when they cross the bounds of ethical behavior, if that is the case in a particular instance) is oh-so-vulnerable to abuse. Thank goodness good attorneys are starting to go after the worst of the Freudian radical extremists, like in the Burgus case in Illinois where a Dr. Bennet Braun was put out of practice, finally.

If anyone begins to get abusive if you dare question them, there's definitely something wrong. And this goes for everywhere this stuff is promoted, be it in an actual clinical setting where people have openly come to see one of these hardcore Freudians, or if they are teaching a course outside their practices. If they don't tolerate dissent and are being psychologically abuse...red flag, folks. Red flag.

What some of the kooks in the repressed memory field are doing is hideous. Just look at the abuse of people who don't go along with the so-called professional's view of things...

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_n46_v13/ai_20083163

The reason I want this posted is because this population (people at-risk of falling prey to these professionals who just haven't yet been totally busted when they cross the bounds of ethical behavior, if that is the case in a particular instance) is oh-so-vulnerable to abuse. Thank goodness good attorneys are starting to go after the worst of the Freudian radical extremists, like in the Burgus case in Illinois where a Dr. Bennet Braun was put out of practice, finally.

If anyone begins to get abusive if you dare question them, there's definitely something wrong. And this goes for everywhere this stuff is promoted, be it in an actual clinical setting where people have openly come to see one of these hardcore Freudians, or if they are teaching a course outside their practices. If they don't tolerate dissent and are being psychologically abuse...red flag, folks. Red flag.

This applies to anyone anywhere who deals with pondering whether some areas of the social sciences are legit or laughable (the reason for posting is because it's scary that in pop psych consumer magazines, such as Psychology Today, there are ads for psychics, astrologers, and some schools of new-agey type psychology in the back (some probably not even accredited by mainstream and respected accrediting bodies), and apparently, a lot of people are falling for this pseudoscientific bunk, perhaps even some naive students just beginning to get introduced to this stuff).

While extremely pleased to have found that chairs of research university psych departments (the traditional, full-time programs, the more solid programs where the majority of the research professors work) are openly admitting to the press that psychoanalysis is on the fringe and not in the mainstream, there a ton of junk out there for lesser educated people in these consumer magazines and such.

People need to help explain to others what's real science and what's not. It can be downright dangerous to mess with someone's head and not be doing genuine, empirically-supported science. The Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation went after some Dr. Braun guy over his bogus false memory and multiple personality disorder/satanic cult type proclamations. He was apparently quite prominent in the field for a while, too! In the State of Illinois! Is that just frightening, or what?

Apologies for the non-scholarly websites, but anyone savvy with Lexis-Nexis can look up the legal details. These are just some links to use to get more info if needed...

This is a reprint from a real local area magazine, so the info was researched by a rather prominent publication...

http://www.astraeasweb.net/politics/braun.html

Please please please DO NOT overlook the study of F-R-A-U-D in this field if enrolling in a new psych program somewhere, or looking for sources for info for research. This guy was probably published IN some scholarly journals, and look at what happened. He's a cranko nutjob.

More useful consumer info in general. This link should take consumers or those with a general interest in psychology (lots of college majors would be well-informed about human nature with a few psych classes under their belts, especially if planning on going into law, which deals with regulations on behavior, as well as the criminal justice system).

Here's something very interesting on how non medical doctors (my optometrist's sister is in a psych program at Ann Arbor, so when I told her my story about the outrageous nonsense I was subjected to in this one class, she told me to find this on the Web and read it) sued their way into the system. Yep. That's right. They used the courts to bully their way into the system, so now everyone has to sort of accept them as part of the field of psychology, even though no mainstream psychologist worth their fancy sheepskin considers this psychoanalytic stuff as serious empirical science.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E0CE1DC1230F93AA2575BC0A964958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all

If there's an issue with having to register with the NYT site to view this, the article is called "M.D.'s Make Room for Others In Ranks of Psychoanalysts" by Robert Pear, published August 19, 1992.

Basically, this is what's going on. A. The entire area of psychoanalysis is ALREADY viewed as non-empirical, non-scientific, and well out of the mainstream. B. Even within the area of psychoanalysis, it used to be that they wanted real medical doctors. C. NOW, as a result of this bully lawsuit to force their way into an area of psychology that is already viewed as second rate by the mainstream, now there are even non-medical doctors who can get themselves trained and licensed to practice this stuff.

Wow. That's pathetic.

"A result of the conspiracy, they said, was to raise the prices charged to patients, insurance companies and others who pay for psychoanalysis."

You've got to be kidding me. These people already charge way too much, being that they drag this type of thing out over a long period of time and cannot scientifically prove that their methods even work outside of perhaps a mere placebo effect (hey, maybe some people really DO feel much better after 9,000 expensive sessions of delving into their dreams, their toddler years, and so-called "repressed" memory...possibly because they're already crazy and cannot tell a bunch of pseudoscientic quacks from real science). If these people truly cared about the cost to their patients, they'd be practicing something more mainstream, like CBT (cognitive-behavioral), with more empirical support for effectiveness. That's the biggest crock of baloney I've ever heard of! What a sham. But hey, they got in under the antitrust monopoly claims tactic, apparently.

What a joke.

I just had to post that for consumers.

Side note: My email got returned undeliverable (glitch perhaps), but can Ed, if he has time, please edit out the full name of Mrs. R so it's not showing up in Google search as part of the ROR title header? Apparently, the individual must really be naive and gullible to believe in this psychoanalytic pseudoscience, but I somehow think she will think twice before running around repeating possibly defamatory untruths (I can't sue for invasion of privacy, you see, because it has to be disclosure of true private facts, and my med recs are clean). Let it serve as a lesson, but please edit out the full last name. Thanks, Ed, if you can do that.

I doubt most serious consumers are going to get their info from RipoffReport, alone, but there's a link I found to a New York Times piece that I just felt was worth posting up here. It's about how top tier university psychology department chairs openly acknowledge, to the press, that psychoanalysis is not "mainstream" because it is not based on sound empiricism (translation: it ain't exactly real science, folks).

Check this piece out, although it does end with the biased (perhaps even deluded?) view of a psychoanalyst who thinks things will "swing back" to the long discredited Freud...

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/25/weekinreview/25cohen.html

I'm so happy to read that the "day school" doesn't promote this baloney as "mainstream" psychological science!!! Thank God.

Personally, I think courses with a Freudian theme that are included as psych department class offerings ought to always be labeled "controversial" (because it IS controversial if you can't prove your theories via the scientific method, which is based on empiricism), but if anyone ever runs into someone who is being harassed and hounded for business by some psychoanalyst, show them the New York Times article link.

I think some of these people may be very desperate to find new clients, because they are suffering the effects of being more and more marginalized by the more mainstream academic and scientific community, so keep on the lookout for any desperate or heavy-handed techniques from some of these psychoanalysts who may be lurking around out there.

Anyone ever read the pop psych mag Psychology Today at all? In the back, they totally have tons of ads for psychics as well as those schools of psychology, many of which are not accredited by well-respected accrediting bodies. I suspect the marketers and ad people have evidence that a lot of people probably fall for this pseudoscientific stuff, or they wouldn't be having any success constantly placing those ads, right? Be a cautious consumer if looking for either a psych program in which to study or if someone is looking for help with an eating/sleep/substance abuse disorder, or whatever. LOTS of sham "science" out there that lacks a strong empirical basis.

Oh, and the other kook in the psychoanalytic field is Carl Jung, by the way. I did a research paper on the guy, and I found that the man was totally having hallucinations! Yes, some of these shrinks are totally loopy upstairs themselves (scary). And Freud apparently did cocaine, or so I've read.

So, just a link that people may find helpful, and glad to see that the more prestigious mainstream programs certainly don't promote this stuff as real mainstream science (because if they did, that would be a total rip-off to the students).

Oh, and if one cannot accept reality, namely that this psychoanalytic stuff not more than pseudoscience, could it be that such people might possibly have some...err...ISSUES they need to work through? Jungians and Freudians? I mean, I'd be getting my tailfeathers into the mainstream of psychology if I were going into clinical psych as a career. There's something weird about people who refuse to acknowledge that they are NOT in the mainstream and cannot sufficiently prove their theories. Use caution, folks, be it as a consumer of psych services or as a student looking to learn some stuff for the field of psych or any of the other social sciences where knowledge of human behavior might be useful.

I'm no longer posting updates about the initial incident, because while I was not able to obtain a refund, it's most likely for a defensive legal reason (I think there's something related to such cases that if you openly apologize and issue a refund, it can be construed like an admission of guilt, so the poor deans are probably terrified to do so even if they wanted to. plus it's not a usual customer service gripe type issue, but one that could have very well led to massive litigation by moi, you see). Anyways, I WAS actually listened to (in person, not a dismissive yeah-we'll-discuss-it-with-the-guy type email brush-off), so I think it's gotten across quite clearly.

That said, I just wanted to add more useful consumer help type info in the event that anyone deals with some other school, especially with all of the sleazy for-profit outfits that are popping up, many online with these bogus stories about how they're "accredited," but it's not by a real accrediting body that serious employers take seriously,

Check this out. MSNBC has an article online about how many complaints on RipoffReport may, indeed, be credible (they make you provide contact info, so you'd kind of be an idiot to intentionally and falsely spew forth something untrue, right? Not that there aren't people who do that, but that's the point, that they can get caught if they're totally lying and not telling the real story).

http://redtape.msnbc.com/2006/01/web_sites_i_wou.html

RipoffReport is watched by government agencies for supposed trends! Excellent.

This way, it's less likely that the particular incident will occur again to other consumers if there's a RipoffReport on file, because others will surely run across it and ADD TO IT if it happens to them, too. That's the best part, not just that it's permanent (Magedson rarely removes stuff, according to some of the reports), but that even mainstream sources like MSNBC are running articles promoting the site.

Wonderful! This is great news.

Lots of bad stuff has happened in Illinois related to psychology...

Also, just to debunk some of the lies on the internet, Magedson does NOT spam you with email asking for money to fund their legal defense if you do not have the box checked off (I read somewhere that this was complained about). If you post a report and don't check that box off where it asks if you want to be emailed info, you won't get any spam at all. I've gotten NONE. That's how I know they actually seem legit. You'd have to have opted in to have gotten any mailings from the site. I opted out...no spammo and no problemo.

Love the site. Wouldn't post reports very often, as people do change and grow in life, so it's a harsh punishment to have a perpetual RipoffReport entry, but to me, if someone's past the age of 50, or so, and they're totally trashing reputations, then they're just beyond help and consumers need to be warned. But that's just me. Others may not be as fair-minded. Just be honest, provide info that's accurate to the best of your knowledge, and don't sleep over it. It's a legit site, as can be seen my MSNBC running legit stories praising it as helpful.

Peace to all consumers. May your money be well spent.

I'm no longer posting updates about the initial incident, because while I was not able to obtain a refund, it's most likely for a defensive legal reason (I think there's something related to such cases that if you openly apologize and issue a refund, it can be construed like an admission of guilt, so the poor deans are probably terrified to do so even if they wanted to. plus it's not a usual customer service gripe type issue, but one that could have very well led to massive litigation by moi, you see). Anyways, I WAS actually listened to (in person, not a dismissive yeah-we'll-discuss-it-with-the-guy type email brush-off), so I think it's gotten across quite clearly.

That said, I just wanted to add more useful consumer help type info in the event that anyone deals with some other school, especially with all of the sleazy for-profit outfits that are popping up, many online with these bogus stories about how they're "accredited," but it's not by a real accrediting body that serious employers take seriously,

Check this out. MSNBC has an article online about how many complaints on RipoffReport may, indeed, be credible (they make you provide contact info, so you'd kind of be an idiot to intentionally and falsely spew forth something untrue, right? Not that there aren't people who do that, but that's the point, that they can get caught if they're totally lying and not telling the real story).

http://redtape.msnbc.com/2006/01/web_sites_i_wou.html

RipoffReport is watched by government agencies for supposed trends! Excellent.

This way, it's less likely that the particular incident will occur again to other consumers if there's a RipoffReport on file, because others will surely run across it and ADD TO IT if it happens to them, too. That's the best part, not just that it's permanent (Magedson rarely removes stuff, according to some of the reports), but that even mainstream sources like MSNBC are running articles promoting the site.

Wonderful! This is great news.

Lots of bad stuff has happened in Illinois related to psychology...

Also, just to debunk some of the lies on the internet, Magedson does NOT spam you with email asking for money to fund their legal defense if you do not have the box checked off (I read somewhere that this was complained about). If you post a report and don't check that box off where it asks if you want to be emailed info, you won't get any spam at all. I've gotten NONE. That's how I know they actually seem legit. You'd have to have opted in to have gotten any mailings from the site. I opted out...no spammo and no problemo.

Love the site. Wouldn't post reports very often, as people do change and grow in life, so it's a harsh punishment to have a perpetual RipoffReport entry, but to me, if someone's past the age of 50, or so, and they're totally trashing reputations, then they're just beyond help and consumers need to be warned. But that's just me. Others may not be as fair-minded. Just be honest, provide info that's accurate to the best of your knowledge, and don't sleep over it. It's a legit site, as can be seen my MSNBC running legit stories praising it as helpful.

Peace to all consumers. May your money be well spent.

I'm no longer posting updates about the initial incident, because while I was not able to obtain a refund, it's most likely for a defensive legal reason (I think there's something related to such cases that if you openly apologize and issue a refund, it can be construed like an admission of guilt, so the poor deans are probably terrified to do so even if they wanted to. plus it's not a usual customer service gripe type issue, but one that could have very well led to massive litigation by moi, you see). Anyways, I WAS actually listened to (in person, not a dismissive yeah-we'll-discuss-it-with-the-guy type email brush-off), so I think it's gotten across quite clearly.

That said, I just wanted to add more useful consumer help type info in the event that anyone deals with some other school, especially with all of the sleazy for-profit outfits that are popping up, many online with these bogus stories about how they're "accredited," but it's not by a real accrediting body that serious employers take seriously,

Check this out. MSNBC has an article online about how many complaints on RipoffReport may, indeed, be credible (they make you provide contact info, so you'd kind of be an idiot to intentionally and falsely spew forth something untrue, right? Not that there aren't people who do that, but that's the point, that they can get caught if they're totally lying and not telling the real story).

http://redtape.msnbc.com/2006/01/web_sites_i_wou.html

RipoffReport is watched by government agencies for supposed trends! Excellent.

This way, it's less likely that the particular incident will occur again to other consumers if there's a RipoffReport on file, because others will surely run across it and ADD TO IT if it happens to them, too. That's the best part, not just that it's permanent (Magedson rarely removes stuff, according to some of the reports), but that even mainstream sources like MSNBC are running articles promoting the site.

Wonderful! This is great news.

Lots of bad stuff has happened in Illinois related to psychology...

Also, just to debunk some of the lies on the internet, Magedson does NOT spam you with email asking for money to fund their legal defense if you do not have the box checked off (I read somewhere that this was complained about). If you post a report and don't check that box off where it asks if you want to be emailed info, you won't get any spam at all. I've gotten NONE. That's how I know they actually seem legit. You'd have to have opted in to have gotten any mailings from the site. I opted out...no spammo and no problemo.

Love the site. Wouldn't post reports very often, as people do change and grow in life, so it's a harsh punishment to have a perpetual RipoffReport entry, but to me, if someone's past the age of 50, or so, and they're totally trashing reputations, then they're just beyond help and consumers need to be warned. But that's just me. Others may not be as fair-minded. Just be honest, provide info that's accurate to the best of your knowledge, and don't sleep over it. It's a legit site, as can be seen my MSNBC running legit stories praising it as helpful.

Peace to all consumers. May your money be well spent.

If (speaking purely hypothetically, mind you), an Illinois resident attends a private Illinois university and engages in protected First Amendment speech OFF campus (say, on the internet perchance?) and it "offends" the administration, who then tries to look scary and hint about the presence of a campus kangaroo court or a handbook with some type of code of conduct in which "civility" might be listed, here's a link to the Illinois Constitution to use as a reference...

http://www.ilga.gov/commission/lrb/con1.htm

"SECTION 4. FREEDOM OF SPEECH
All persons may speak, write and publish freely, being
responsible for the abuse of that liberty. In trials for
libel, both civil and criminal, the truth, when published
with good motives and for justifiable ends, shall be a
sufficient defense."

I'm thinking if anyone were ridiculous enough to discipline anyone for protected First Amendment speech OFF campus (and that is not libel), the student might also have a breach of contract issue (not a lawyer, so not entirely clear on that, but it's just some general info on a possibility). It probably depends on contract law and if state constitutional protections would override the guidelines of a private university's student code of conduct where the student was engaged in a constitutionally protected act OFF campus.

By the way, warning other consumers on a consumer complaint website probably falls under "justifiable ends" under Illinois law, regardless of what some campus kangaroo court might want to spin it as.

And if, purely hypothetically, someone actually tried to sue for libel, wouldn't it be hilarious if the person sued for libel just pleaded the insanity defense? Just for fun? Being that it involved a clinical psychologist? That would be absolutely hilarious (not that I'd get away with it, but wouldn't it just be totally hilarious).

OK, I've totally overdone it with the constant updates, but suffice it say that all of this info is for the consumer. Use it if ever needed.

Apologies to Arlene Rumbaugh for the misunderstanding, by the way. It was the other party that was the sole culprit, in my personal opinion.

This update is not because anyone at my private school actually outright threatened to do so as a result of my protected First Amendment speech on the internet (after complaining about multiple FERPA violations, they would be begging to be slapped with the charge of "retaliation" if they were silly enough to consider hauling me before some campus kangaroo court, right?

But in case anyone at some other school (maybe they have relatives at different schools besides their own, or just whatever) gets threatened (I mean for real, like something's actually put in writing so you have proof to take to the media, not just where someone sends someone to try and look scary), here are some good links related to the larger problem of outrageous goings-on in what passes for higher ed in America these days (see, I always turn negative experiences into positive ones by doing like Justice Brandeis recommended long ago and employing a little "sunlight" by publicizing whatever it was that was unjust).

From the fabulous folks over at FIRE (who reviewed my case for me recently...cheers to Greg Lukianoff for an ABA referral, by the way), here's some stuff from their site about the kooky campus kangaroo courts, where they don't seem to know what the term "due process" means...

http://www.thefire.org/index.php/article/134.html

http://www.thefire.org/index.php/article/4242.html

http://www.nationalreview.com/kurtz/kurtz091902.asp

This one's on Marxist professors...

http://www.thefire.org/index.php/article/9194.html?PHPSESSID=4889f3d6231f786eb9e2057e4441dec8

Where FIRE is suing public schools on constitutional grounds, private schools are not immune from breach of contract lawsuits, either...

http://www.thefire.org/index.php/article/5060.html

Somehow, I'm not sure RipoffReport is necessarily read by a ton of students looking for info on this stuff, but then again, you never know what will come up in keyword searches. If someone stumbles upon something useful, then good.

Please donate to the folks at F.I.R.E so if anyone is ever dragged before some campus kangaroo court on really weak charges (like being "uncivil" for merely engaging in protected First Amendment speech on the internet for example...I mean, it could happen somewhere, by some school that hasn't yet had to deal with Lukianoff's crew on that particular issue), they'll have plenty of funds with which to keep up the good work.

Just an update that it appears that what was construed as "gossip" on the part of Mrs. Rumbaugh was misunderstood.

Apparently, this individual just happened to be politely listening to what the other party was saying, not wanting to rock the boat.

Well, thank goodness. I thought my name was being negatively disparaged by someone with many many student contacts, but someone internally, who knows this individual better (has known the person longer) strongly feels that it was completely misunderstood that she had any active part in the affair aside from just being in the wrong place at the wrong time while trying to politely listen to the other party.

Will see if report can be edited to completely remove her name, as now, I do not feel that she was engaged in voluntary "gossip," but was instead just having to listen to someone else, and I happened to overhear a portion of the conversation.

Good news: Internal student affairs does listen to complaints (and no, they didn't make me say this, because after complaining about FERPA, I know they can't touch me and haul me into some campus kangaroo court...that might be construed as "retaliation," you see).

Seriously. I'll give the lady the benefit of the doubt and assume perhaps she was just in the wrong place at the wrong time when my name just happened to be used by the other party. It happens.

Just an update that it appears that what was construed as "gossip" on the part of Mrs. Rumbaugh was misunderstood.

Apparently, this individual just happened to be politely listening to what the other party was saying, not wanting to rock the boat.

Well, thank goodness. I thought my name was being negatively disparaged by someone with many many student contacts, but someone internally, who knows this individual better (has known the person longer) strongly feels that it was completely misunderstood that she had any active part in the affair aside from just being in the wrong place at the wrong time while trying to politely listen to the other party.

Will see if report can be edited to completely remove her name, as now, I do not feel that she was engaged in voluntary "gossip," but was instead just having to listen to someone else, and I happened to overhear a portion of the conversation.

Good news: Internal student affairs does listen to complaints (and no, they didn't make me say this, because after complaining about FERPA, I know they can't touch me and haul me into some campus kangaroo court...that might be construed as "retaliation," you see).

Seriously. I'll give the lady the benefit of the doubt and assume perhaps she was just in the wrong place at the wrong time when my name just happened to be used by the other party. It happens.

Just an update that it appears that what was construed as "gossip" on the part of Mrs. Rumbaugh was misunderstood.

Apparently, this individual just happened to be politely listening to what the other party was saying, not wanting to rock the boat.

Well, thank goodness. I thought my name was being negatively disparaged by someone with many many student contacts, but someone internally, who knows this individual better (has known the person longer) strongly feels that it was completely misunderstood that she had any active part in the affair aside from just being in the wrong place at the wrong time while trying to politely listen to the other party.

Will see if report can be edited to completely remove her name, as now, I do not feel that she was engaged in voluntary "gossip," but was instead just having to listen to someone else, and I happened to overhear a portion of the conversation.

Good news: Internal student affairs does listen to complaints (and no, they didn't make me say this, because after complaining about FERPA, I know they can't touch me and haul me into some campus kangaroo court...that might be construed as "retaliation," you see).

Seriously. I'll give the lady the benefit of the doubt and assume perhaps she was just in the wrong place at the wrong time when my name just happened to be used by the other party. It happens.

Just an update that it appears that what was construed as "gossip" on the part of Mrs. Rumbaugh was misunderstood.

Apparently, this individual just happened to be politely listening to what the other party was saying, not wanting to rock the boat.

Well, thank goodness. I thought my name was being negatively disparaged by someone with many many student contacts, but someone internally, who knows this individual better (has known the person longer) strongly feels that it was completely misunderstood that she had any active part in the affair aside from just being in the wrong place at the wrong time while trying to politely listen to the other party.

Will see if report can be edited to completely remove her name, as now, I do not feel that she was engaged in voluntary "gossip," but was instead just having to listen to someone else, and I happened to overhear a portion of the conversation.

Good news: Internal student affairs does listen to complaints (and no, they didn't make me say this, because after complaining about FERPA, I know they can't touch me and haul me into some campus kangaroo court...that might be construed as "retaliation," you see).

Seriously. I'll give the lady the benefit of the doubt and assume perhaps she was just in the wrong place at the wrong time when my name just happened to be used by the other party. It happens.

Forgot to add this to that general FYI update above.

A FERPA complaint was lodged (twice, actually, because Mr. Anderson was not in full compliance after the first complaint and had to be told by the dean, yet again, to comply) over this instructor repeatedly putting graded quizzes out in full view on a table (with clearly identifiable names up top, right next to the grade given, as well as any criticism he wrote on the papers).

FERPA is the federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy law that affects all schools that receive federal funds. Even with a private school, if the Department of Education is involved, FERPA applies, so allowing grades to show like that is a NO NO.

Here's the link to the info in case anyone ever has a privacy issue to complain about...

http://www.ed.gov/policy/gen/reg/ferpa/index.html

So, even aside from anyone possibly trying to scare disgruntled students who were ripped off to the tune of $1250 into shutting up, there is more protection for me aside from Illinois having some protection against SLAPP type lawsuits. If I recall correctly, I do believe that if you made a valid FERPA complaint, you cannot be retaliated against for it. Full documentation of the complaint is on file, so keep that in mind, too, should any of the two culprits in this highly offensive little affair think I don't have ammo with which to fire back at them if they want to try to shut me up after seeing their names on the internet (next time, try not invading the privacy of people you barely know and gossiping up a storm about your crank theories).

What kind of a licensed clinical psychologist is THAT lax about concern for student privacy while teaching a course anyways? Just because he's not filing electronic claims in private practice, where he has to worry about being HIPAA compiant, doesn't mean that he can just wing it and toss papers all over a table for all to see the grades that everyone got.

Maybe he's losing it?

Just on the off chance that anyone posts on a consumer complaint site and it ruffles someone's tailfeathering to see their name on the internet when it is associated with a complaint (which they should have thought of long before engaging in what may very well be actionable defamatory gossip about a private citizen with zero history of suicidal orientation whatsoever), here's something about Illinois and the SLAPP protection legislation that was passed.

http://www.ilga.gov/LEGISLATION/ILCS/ilcs3.asp?ActID=2937&ChapAct=735%26nbsp%3BILCS%26nbsp%3B110%2F&ChapterID=56&ChapterName=CIVIL+PROCEDURE&ActName=Citizen+Participation+Act.

How does this relate to a private school such as Northwestern? Simple: The school receives federal funding. If any sleazy clinincal psychologists who are employed by NU want to spread negative innuendo and engage in possibly defamatory gossip about a student they have NEVER examined in a clinical setting (the student never submitted to any type of official psychological assessment whatsoever, but merely showed up for a course in which it was assumed discussion would revolve around public figures from the readings, only), the student has a right to whine and complain about it on the internet because this school receives federal funding in many ways, even though it is a private school.

Don't let anyone bully you if this type of outrageous behavior ever occurs, and while I don't expect anyone to do anything (good luck when they KNOW what they did was just outrageously WRONG and possibly outright defamatory), this is just some general info for anyone else, in case they complain about a different school, or something.

There may very well be some protection for you if you're from Illinois (though this is not to be construed as legal advice, nor is the poster attempting to pose as a real lawyer). It's just some info, just in case it helps someone out.

Again...$1250 was spent on this class, and it turns out to be a sleazy and unprofessional class. Grrrrrrrrrr.

The guy is like the "Dr. Phil" of Illinois.

$1250 for this!! Argh.