November 30, 2015
3801 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Apartment 136
Washington, DC 20008
Tanya A. Royster, M.D.
Acting Director
D.C. Department of Behavioral Health
64 New York Avenue, NE
3rd Floor
Washington, DC 20002
Dear Dr. Royster:
I am a consumer of
mental health services provided by the D.C. Department of Behavioral
Health (DBH). I receive weekly out-patient psychotherapy from Alice E.
Stone, M.D., a third-year psychiatry resident working under the
supervision of Earl Baughman, M.D. (St. Elizabeths Hospital). I have
been a DBH consumer since mid-year 1996, 19 years. Supportive psychotherapy is inadequate for my needs. I believe I need psychodynamic
psychotherapy.
In wrongful termination litigation from the year 1993 I made an admission against interest that I require intensive psychodynamic psychotherapy, preferably with a psychoanalytically-trained therapist like Stanley R. Palombo, M.D. The District Government did not dispute my admission. See Freedman v. D.C. Dept. Human Rights, D.C.C.A no. 96-CV-961 (Sept. 1, 1998), record on appeal at 499-500 (enclosed).
Increasingly
I view my situation as precarious, desperate and futile. The failure of DBH to provide adequate
treatment for me is a terrible strain.
The District Government admits that my case is extremely serious. See Letter dated July 30, 2015 from Gary
Freedman to Barbara J. Bazron (enclosed).
Sincerely,
Gary Freedman
Friday, November 27, 2015
Monday, November 23, 2015
Letter to DC DBH
November 23, 2015
3801 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Apartment 136
Washington, DC 20008
Tanya A. Royster, M.D.
Acting Director
D.C. Department of Behavioral Health64 New York Avenue, NE
3rd Floor
Washington, DC 20002
Dear Dr. Royster:
I am a consumer of mental health services provided by the D.C. Department of Behavioral Health (DBH). I receive weekly out-patient psychotherapy from Alice E. Stone, M.D., a third-year psychiatry resident working under the supervision of Earl Baughman, M.D. (St. Elizabeths Hospital). I have been a DBH consumer since mid-year 1996, 19 years. I do not derive benefit from supportive psychotherapy. I believe I need psychodynamic psychotherapy. Is there something that DBH could do to help me obtain psychodynamic psychotherapy?
I enclose for your information a psychological profile that details my personality problems as I see them.
Sincerely,
Gary Freedman
3801 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Apartment 136
Washington, DC 20008
Tanya A. Royster, M.D.
Acting Director
D.C. Department of Behavioral Health64 New York Avenue, NE
3rd Floor
Washington, DC 20002
Dear Dr. Royster:
I am a consumer of mental health services provided by the D.C. Department of Behavioral Health (DBH). I receive weekly out-patient psychotherapy from Alice E. Stone, M.D., a third-year psychiatry resident working under the supervision of Earl Baughman, M.D. (St. Elizabeths Hospital). I have been a DBH consumer since mid-year 1996, 19 years. I do not derive benefit from supportive psychotherapy. I believe I need psychodynamic psychotherapy. Is there something that DBH could do to help me obtain psychodynamic psychotherapy?
I enclose for your information a psychological profile that details my personality problems as I see them.
Sincerely,
Gary Freedman
Tuesday, November 10, 2015
Letter to the Attorney General of the United States
November 10, 2015
3801 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Apt. 136
Washington, DC 20008
The Honorable Karl A. Racine
Office of the Attorney General
Government of the District of Columbia
Judiciary Square
441 4th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001
Phone: (202) 727-3400
Fax: (202) 347-8922
RE: Current Psychiatric Treatment
Dear Mr. Racine:
This will advise the Office of Attorney General that on the afternoon of November 9, 2015 I had a psychiatric consultation with Alice E. Stone, M.D., a psychiatry resident affiliated with St. Elizabeths Hospital working under the supervision of Earl Baughman, M.D. There is evidence that said psychiatric consultation, whose cost is billed to DC Medicaid and Medicare, was medically questionable or fraudulent.
I receive weekly psychotherapy provided by the D.C. Department of Behavioral Health consistent with a determination made by the D.C. Department of Human Rights that effective October 29, 1991, my former employer, the D.C. law firm of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld had genuine and credible reasons to conclude that I required counseling for a paranoid "disorder" that might be associated with a risk of violent conduct. See Initial Determination, D.C. Department of Human Rights (DOHR), Freedman v. Akin Gump Hauer & Feld, Docket No.: 92-087-P(N) (June 30, 1993) ("Respondent also consulted mental health professionals who advised that Complainant did in fact need counseling and may exhibit violent behavior"); See also, DOHR Final Determination (September 24, 1993) ("That concern coupled with the advice of mental health professionals that Complainant needed counseling and that according to one professional could engage in violent behavior, was sufficient grounds for Respondent’s action to terminate Complainant.").
I was administered psychological testing by The George Washington University Medical Center Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Science in 1994 and in 1996. The testing failed to disclose that I suffer from any diagnosable mental illness. I achieved a perfect score on the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (6 errors) in 1996, which virtually rules out schizophrenia and delusional disorder. See Ibanez-Casas, I. "Deficits in Executive and Memory Processes in Delusional Disorder: A Case-Controlled Study." PLoS One, 2013 Jul 2;8(7):e67341.
I have been diagnosed with psychotic mental illness -- Paranoid (Delusional) Disorder (consistent with the prior findings of DOHR) -- and receive monthly disability benefits paid by the U.S. Social Security Administration therefor. There is evidence that the only reason I qualify for disability benefits is that I believe I have been the victim of a longstanding criminal conspiracy carried out by attorney managers of the D.C. law firm of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, my former employer. There is evidence that St. Elizabeths Hospital is billing D.C. Medicaid and Medicare for the treatment of nonexistent mental illness. But see, Freedman v. D.C. Department of Human Rights, D.C.C.A 96-CV-961 (Sept. 1, 1998) (Akin Gump had genuine and credible reasons to determine that I suffered from mental illness that rendered me unemployable and a direct threat in the workplace).
In fact, Akin Gump's disability determination was based on a medically worthless psychiatric opinion, offered by a psychiatrist who did not examine me personally and who did not obtain my written consent for the opinion. See American Psychiatric Association (APA) Goldwater Rule, Section 7.3 of the APA's ethics principles. As of the filing of the complaint in the Superior Court proceedings (cited above), in October 1995, and at all times thereafter, it was unlawful under the laws of the District of Columbia for a psychiatrist to offer a professional psychiatric opinion about an individual without benefit of personal examination per APA Section 7.3. The D.C. Code in its latest revision makes it unlawful for a physician to "[fail] to conform to standards of acceptable conduct and prevailing practice within a health profession." See D.C. Code 2-3305.14(26). This provision was added to the District of Columbia Health Occupations Revision Act by D.C. Law 10-247, enacted on March 23, 1995. The Court of Appeals in Freedman v. DHR expressly found that the professional psychiatric opinion offered by the psychiatrist to the employer amounted to the diagnosis of a "disorder." See No. 96-CV-961 at 4. Under current District law the actions of my former employer, Akin Gump in soliciting an illegal act by a psychiatrist might be deemed prosecutable as conspiracy and solicitation.
Sincerely,
Gary Freedman
cc: U.S. Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch
3801 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Apt. 136
Washington, DC 20008
The Honorable Karl A. Racine
Office of the Attorney General
Government of the District of Columbia
Judiciary Square
441 4th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001
Phone: (202) 727-3400
Fax: (202) 347-8922
RE: Current Psychiatric Treatment
Dear Mr. Racine:
This will advise the Office of Attorney General that on the afternoon of November 9, 2015 I had a psychiatric consultation with Alice E. Stone, M.D., a psychiatry resident affiliated with St. Elizabeths Hospital working under the supervision of Earl Baughman, M.D. There is evidence that said psychiatric consultation, whose cost is billed to DC Medicaid and Medicare, was medically questionable or fraudulent.
I receive weekly psychotherapy provided by the D.C. Department of Behavioral Health consistent with a determination made by the D.C. Department of Human Rights that effective October 29, 1991, my former employer, the D.C. law firm of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld had genuine and credible reasons to conclude that I required counseling for a paranoid "disorder" that might be associated with a risk of violent conduct. See Initial Determination, D.C. Department of Human Rights (DOHR), Freedman v. Akin Gump Hauer & Feld, Docket No.: 92-087-P(N) (June 30, 1993) ("Respondent also consulted mental health professionals who advised that Complainant did in fact need counseling and may exhibit violent behavior"); See also, DOHR Final Determination (September 24, 1993) ("That concern coupled with the advice of mental health professionals that Complainant needed counseling and that according to one professional could engage in violent behavior, was sufficient grounds for Respondent’s action to terminate Complainant.").
I was administered psychological testing by The George Washington University Medical Center Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Science in 1994 and in 1996. The testing failed to disclose that I suffer from any diagnosable mental illness. I achieved a perfect score on the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (6 errors) in 1996, which virtually rules out schizophrenia and delusional disorder. See Ibanez-Casas, I. "Deficits in Executive and Memory Processes in Delusional Disorder: A Case-Controlled Study." PLoS One, 2013 Jul 2;8(7):e67341.
I have been diagnosed with psychotic mental illness -- Paranoid (Delusional) Disorder (consistent with the prior findings of DOHR) -- and receive monthly disability benefits paid by the U.S. Social Security Administration therefor. There is evidence that the only reason I qualify for disability benefits is that I believe I have been the victim of a longstanding criminal conspiracy carried out by attorney managers of the D.C. law firm of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, my former employer. There is evidence that St. Elizabeths Hospital is billing D.C. Medicaid and Medicare for the treatment of nonexistent mental illness. But see, Freedman v. D.C. Department of Human Rights, D.C.C.A 96-CV-961 (Sept. 1, 1998) (Akin Gump had genuine and credible reasons to determine that I suffered from mental illness that rendered me unemployable and a direct threat in the workplace).
In fact, Akin Gump's disability determination was based on a medically worthless psychiatric opinion, offered by a psychiatrist who did not examine me personally and who did not obtain my written consent for the opinion. See American Psychiatric Association (APA) Goldwater Rule, Section 7.3 of the APA's ethics principles. As of the filing of the complaint in the Superior Court proceedings (cited above), in October 1995, and at all times thereafter, it was unlawful under the laws of the District of Columbia for a psychiatrist to offer a professional psychiatric opinion about an individual without benefit of personal examination per APA Section 7.3. The D.C. Code in its latest revision makes it unlawful for a physician to "[fail] to conform to standards of acceptable conduct and prevailing practice within a health profession." See D.C. Code 2-3305.14(26). This provision was added to the District of Columbia Health Occupations Revision Act by D.C. Law 10-247, enacted on March 23, 1995. The Court of Appeals in Freedman v. DHR expressly found that the professional psychiatric opinion offered by the psychiatrist to the employer amounted to the diagnosis of a "disorder." See No. 96-CV-961 at 4. Under current District law the actions of my former employer, Akin Gump in soliciting an illegal act by a psychiatrist might be deemed prosecutable as conspiracy and solicitation.
Sincerely,
Gary Freedman
cc: U.S. Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch
Friday, November 06, 2015
Letter to DC Attorney General
November 6, 2015
3801 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Apt. 136
Washington, DC 20008
The Honorable Karl A. Racine
Office of the Attorney General
Government of the District of Columbia
Judiciary Square
441 4th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001
Phone: (202) 727-3400
Fax: (202) 347-8922
RE: Current Psychiatric Treatment
Dear Mr. Racine:
This will advise the Office of Attorney General that I am currently in weekly out-patient psychotherapy with Alice E. Stone, M.D., a psychiatry resident affiliated with St. Elizabeths Hospital working under the supervision of Earl Baughman, M.D.
I was administered psychological testing by The George Washington University Medical Center Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Science in 1994 and in 1996. The testing failed to disclose that I suffer from any diagnosable mental illness. I achieved a perfect score on the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (6 errors) in 1996, which virtually rules out schizophrenia and delusional disorder. See Ibanez-Casas, I. "Deficits in Executive and Memory Processes in Delusional Disorder: A Case-Controlled Study." PLoS One, 2013 Jul 2;8(7):e67341.
I have been diagnosed with psychotic mental illness -- Paranoid (Delusional) Disorder -- and receive monthly disability benefits paid by the U.S. Social Security Administration therefor. The cost of psychiatric treatment is reimbursed by Medicare. There is evidence that the only reason I qualify for disability benefits is that I believe I have been the victim of a longstanding criminal conspiracy carried out by attorney managers of the D.C. law firm of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, my former employer. There is evidence that St. Elizabeths Hospital is billing Medicare for the treatment of nonexistent mental illness. But see, Freedman v. D.C. Department of Human Rights, D.C.C.A 96-CV-961 (Sept. 1, 1998) (Akin Gump had genuine and credible reasons to determine that I suffered from mental illness that rendered me unemployable and a direct threat in the workplace).
In fact, Akin Gump's disability determination was based on a medically worthless psychiatric opinion, offered by a psychiatrist who did not examine me personally and who did not obtain my written consent for the opinion. See American Psychiatric Association (APA) Goldwater Rule, Section 7.3 of the APA's ethics principles. As of the filing of the complaint in the Superior Court proceedings (cited above), in October 1995, and at all times thereafter, it was unlawful under the laws of the District of Columbia for a psychiatrist to offer a professional psychiatric opinion about an individual without benefit of personal examination per APA Section 7.3. The D.C. Code in its latest revision makes it unlawful for a physician to "[fail] to conform to standards of acceptable conduct and prevailing practice within a health profession." See D.C. Code 2-3305.14(26). This provision was added to the District of Columbia Health Occupations Revision Act by D.C. Law 10-247, enacted on March 23, 1995. The Court of Appeals in Freedman v. DHR expressly found that the professional psychiatric opinion offered by the psychiatrist to the employer amounted to the diagnosis of a "disorder." See No. 96-CV-961 at 4. Under current District law the actions of my former employer, Akin Gump in soliciting an illegal act by a psychiatrist might be deemed prosecutable as conspiracy and solicitation.
Sincerely,
Gary Freedman
cc: U.S. Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch
3801 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Apt. 136
Washington, DC 20008
The Honorable Karl A. Racine
Office of the Attorney General
Government of the District of Columbia
Judiciary Square
441 4th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001
Phone: (202) 727-3400
Fax: (202) 347-8922
RE: Current Psychiatric Treatment
Dear Mr. Racine:
This will advise the Office of Attorney General that I am currently in weekly out-patient psychotherapy with Alice E. Stone, M.D., a psychiatry resident affiliated with St. Elizabeths Hospital working under the supervision of Earl Baughman, M.D.
I was administered psychological testing by The George Washington University Medical Center Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Science in 1994 and in 1996. The testing failed to disclose that I suffer from any diagnosable mental illness. I achieved a perfect score on the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (6 errors) in 1996, which virtually rules out schizophrenia and delusional disorder. See Ibanez-Casas, I. "Deficits in Executive and Memory Processes in Delusional Disorder: A Case-Controlled Study." PLoS One, 2013 Jul 2;8(7):e67341.
I have been diagnosed with psychotic mental illness -- Paranoid (Delusional) Disorder -- and receive monthly disability benefits paid by the U.S. Social Security Administration therefor. The cost of psychiatric treatment is reimbursed by Medicare. There is evidence that the only reason I qualify for disability benefits is that I believe I have been the victim of a longstanding criminal conspiracy carried out by attorney managers of the D.C. law firm of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, my former employer. There is evidence that St. Elizabeths Hospital is billing Medicare for the treatment of nonexistent mental illness. But see, Freedman v. D.C. Department of Human Rights, D.C.C.A 96-CV-961 (Sept. 1, 1998) (Akin Gump had genuine and credible reasons to determine that I suffered from mental illness that rendered me unemployable and a direct threat in the workplace).
In fact, Akin Gump's disability determination was based on a medically worthless psychiatric opinion, offered by a psychiatrist who did not examine me personally and who did not obtain my written consent for the opinion. See American Psychiatric Association (APA) Goldwater Rule, Section 7.3 of the APA's ethics principles. As of the filing of the complaint in the Superior Court proceedings (cited above), in October 1995, and at all times thereafter, it was unlawful under the laws of the District of Columbia for a psychiatrist to offer a professional psychiatric opinion about an individual without benefit of personal examination per APA Section 7.3. The D.C. Code in its latest revision makes it unlawful for a physician to "[fail] to conform to standards of acceptable conduct and prevailing practice within a health profession." See D.C. Code 2-3305.14(26). This provision was added to the District of Columbia Health Occupations Revision Act by D.C. Law 10-247, enacted on March 23, 1995. The Court of Appeals in Freedman v. DHR expressly found that the professional psychiatric opinion offered by the psychiatrist to the employer amounted to the diagnosis of a "disorder." See No. 96-CV-961 at 4. Under current District law the actions of my former employer, Akin Gump in soliciting an illegal act by a psychiatrist might be deemed prosecutable as conspiracy and solicitation.
Sincerely,
Gary Freedman
cc: U.S. Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch
Wednesday, November 04, 2015
Letter to the Attorney General of the United States
November 4, 2015
3801 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Apartment 136
Washington, DC 20008
The Honorable Loretta E. Lynch
Attorney General of the United States
Office of the Attorney General
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001
RE:
Felony Fraud Certification
Dear
Attorney General Lynch:
There
is evidence that I committed a felony against the Government of the United
States on November 3, 2015. There is
evidence that I have been engaged, since the year 1991, in a scheme to defraud
the federal government in up to a half million dollars in government benefits
(U.S. Social Security Disability and Medicare benefits). My claim for disability, filed in April 1993,
was based in substantial part on sworn statements executed by my former
employer, the law firm of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld (Dennis M. Race,
Esq. and Laurence J. Hoffman, Esq.) .
There is persuasive evidence that said sworn statements, alleging that I
had been determined by the employer, in consultation with a psychiatrist, to
suffer from severe mental illness and that I posed a direct threat in the
workplace (thereby rendering me unfit for employment), were false, perjured or medically
worthless since the assessing psychiatrist did not examine me in person or
obtain my written consent for a psychiatric opinion. See American Psychiatric Association (APA) Goldwater
Rule, Section 7.3 of the APA's
ethics principles.
I want to thank the U.S. Department of Justice for
allowing me to collect a monthly disability check since the effective date of
my disability (October 29, 1991). The
forbearance of the Justice Department has allowed me to pursue my writing
ambitions. Enclosed are two novels that
I have written during the term of my disability. My psychiatrists have concluded that I am an
individual of average intellect who suffers from severe (psychotic) mental
illness. See opinions of Napoleon
Cuenco, M.D.; Dimitrios Georgopoulos, M.D.; and Albert H. Taub, M.D.
(enclosed). Despite my obvious intellectual
and severe psychological limitations I have made an attempt to make good use of
the largesse of the federal government.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Gary Freedman
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
