GW Psychological Testing: Did I Really Lie to Conceal My Paranoia?

In its psychological test report from May 1994, the George Washington University Medical Center Department of Psychiatry made the following obersvations about me:

"Both his results on the MMPI-1 (Welsh Code of 564-82/093:7#1 FR/K:L#) and Millon instruments, which asses the severity of psychiatric symptoms, indicate no distinctive syndromes falling in the clinical range of Axis I psychiatric disorder. However, he is experiencing psychological dysfunction of mild to moderate severity that appear to reflect a pervasive pattern of personality difficulties. Both tests show elevations in the paranoid/avoidant scales, showing an enduring pattern of increased sensitivity, outright suspiciousness, expressed hostility, and self-protective withdrawal from interpersonal relationships. Although both test results reflect a valid profile, care must be taken in interpreting the results, as Mr. Freedman had reported to Dr. Pitts about his tendency to deny certain statements pertaining to his persecutory beliefs on these tests. Thus, the salience of the severity of his symptoms may need to be modulated slightly upward (emphasis added)."

http://dailstrug.blogspot.com/2009/10/psychological-test-results-gw-may-1994.html

Now, I suppose what I am about to say is what lawyers call an "admission against interest," since my claim for Social Security Disability benefits is based on my suffering from a serious paranoid disorder, but, in the interest of truth -- and I believe in the truth above all else -- I must report the following.  In fact, the test report misrepresents what I told Dr. Pitts.  The test report insinuates that I lied in order to diminish the severity of my paranoia.  That's not exactly true. 

I can remember exactly what I told Dr. Pitts about the testing, which is memorialized -- wrongly -- in the hearsay statements attributed to Dr. Pitts in the excerpt above.

1.  I told Dr. Pitts that one of the personality inventories (either the Millon or the MMPI) contained the statement: "I believe that people are out to get me."  I explained that I said I did not believe that people were out to get me.  I said that I believed that I was under surveillance by my former employer, the law firm of Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld, but that the surveillance was not being carried out with a malicious intent.  I explained that I thought that, for some reason not known to me, Akin Gump managers wanted information about me: my beliefs and statements.

So my statement to Dr. Pitts concerned one question only on the Millon test.

2.  I told Dr. Pitts that one of the personality inventories (either the Millon or the MMPI) contained the statement: "I believe that people are watching me."  I told Dr. Pitts that I answered that question affirmatively.  Yes, I believe that people are watching me.  I affirmed as true that I had that paranoid belief.  I did not deny, as GW claimed in the test report, that I had the paranoid belief that I was under surveillance.

Why did GW go out of its way to stress that my paranoia was probably more severe than I admitted on psychological testing?  We'll probably never know.  But they were a shady bunch.

Did I lie on psychological testing?

http://dailstrug.blogspot.com/2009/11/did-i-lie-on-psychological-testing-at.html

Did I have paranoid ideas about GW's psychological testing?

http://dailstrug.blogspot.com/2009/11/did-i-have-paranoid-ideas-about-yu-ling.html

Are suspicious, hypervigilant people necessarily paranoid?

http://dailstrug.blogspot.com/2010/01/ideas-of-reference-versus-ego-strength.html