Letter to D.C. Attorney General

                                                                       December 18, 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:  Admission of Possible Felony Fraud

Dear Mr. Racine:

This will advise the D.C. Office of Attorney General that on the afternoon of December 14, 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. 

There is ample and persuasive evidence that I do not suffer from severe (psychotic) mental illness, diagnosed as paranoid schizophrenia by Dimitrios Georgopoulos, M.D. (1996) and Albert H. Taub, M.D. (1999) (St. Elizabeths Hospital) and that the D.C. Department of Behavioral Health is therefore billing D.C. Medicaid and Medicare for the treatment of nonexistent mental illness.  But see Freedman v. D.C. Dept. Human Rights, D.C.C.A. no. 96-CV-961 (Sept. 1, 1998) (my employer, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, had genuine and credible reasons to determine that I was unemployable because I suffered from a psychiatric “disorder” that rendered me a direct threat in the workplace based on a (medically-worthless) psychiatric opinion offered by a consulting psychiatrist).

My psychiatric treatment provided by the D.C. Department of Behavioral Health for apparently non-existent severe mental illness raises a possibility that I am fraudulently using said psychiatric services to bolster a fraudulent Social Security disability claim, which would constitute a felony.  But see Freedman v. D.C. Dept. Human Rights (I became disabled effective October 29, 1991 based on a (medically-worthless) psychiatric opinion solicited by my former employer).

Comprehensive psychological testing performed by the George Washington University Medical Center Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Science in 1994 and 1996 disclosed that I do not suffer from any diagnosable mental illness (see attached).  But see Freedman v. D.C. Dept. Human Rights, D.C.C.A. no. 96-CV-961 (Sept. 1, 1998) (my employer, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld had genuine and credible reasons to determine that I was unemployable because I suffered from a psychiatric “disorder” that rendered me a direct threat in the workplace based on a (medically-worthless) psychiatric opinion offered by a consulting psychiatrist).

I urge the D.C. Attorney General to institute a fraud investigation into this matter and/or make a criminal referral of this matter to the FBI.

Sincerely,

 Gary Freedman

cc: Tanya A. Royster, M.D.; The Honorable Leslie R. Caldwell

Letter to Dr. Stone

November 16, 2015
3801 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Apartment 136
Washington, DC  20008


Alice E. Stone, M.D.
Mental Health Clinic
D.C. Department of Behavioral Health
35 K Street, NE
Washington, DC  20002

RE: Note Regarding the Idealizing Transference

Dear Dr. Stone:

I have formed an idealizing transference with my primary care doctor that complements my negative transference to you.  An examination of my psychological background reveals that my transference reactions to my primary care doctor and you, respectively, appear to be a derivative of my childhood experiences and my early psychological relations with my parents.

I have isolated out of my life history all of the relationships, events, and experiences that can give rise to intense primitive idealization in adulthood.  We are left with the following summary:


1. Pre-Oedipal:


a. Subject experienced his mother as engulfing. Subject experienced his father as distant and disappointing.


b. Subject experienced physical trauma in early childhood. His father beat him as an infant and in early childhood. He suffered a serious injury to the oral cavity at age two-and-one-half. Mother negligently failed to protect subject against these traumas (see 3, below).


2. Oedipal:


Subject directed intense destructive (aggressive) impulses against his parents during the Oedipal stage. Subject hated his parents.


3. Latency:


Mother negligently failed to protect subject against narcissistic aggression by family members. (see 1(b) above).


Subject experienced functional libidinal object loss in latency.


4. Adulthood:


Subject is defiant and oppositional.

Subject struggles with the effects of pathological mourning.
 
Theoretical Implications

    Pre-Oedipal:

a. Relationship with Engulfing Mother and Distant Father


Subject’s object hunger, his idealizing merger needs are fixations on archaic pre-oedipal forms deriving from deficits emerging out of his relationship with an engulfing mother who used subject for her own selfobject needs and in his frustrating relationship with a father unavailable for idealization. Cowan, J. Blutbruderschaft and Self Psychology in D.H. Lawrence’s Women in Love in Self and Sexuality (2002). Subject’s idealization of males is a defense against being swallowed up by a woman. See Shengold, L. Soul Murder: The Effects of Childhood Deprivation and Abuse (see especially the chapter, “The Parent as Sphinx”). Subject’s psychology parallels Kohut’s analysand Mr. U who, turning away from the unreliable empathy of his mother, tried to gain confirmation of his self through an idealizing relationship with his father. The self absorbed father, however, unable to respond appropriately, rebuffed his son’s attempt to be close to him, depriving him of the needed merger with the idealized self-object and, hence, of the opportunity for gradually recognizing the self-object’s shortcomings. Cowan, Self and Sexuality at 59 quoting Kohut, H. In adulthood, subject views certain males as perfect, without any shortcomings.

Subject’s failure to resolve the dyadic father idealization that emerged at the earliest stages of development has had significant, even profound, reverberations in subject’s adult life. Subject’s dyadic father attachment was never subjected to a sufficient or lasting resolution during his adolescence, namely, at that period in life when the final step in the resolution of the male father complex is normally transacted. Blos, P. “Freud and the Father Complex.” The Psychoanalytic Study of Society Vol. 37: 425-441 at 434 (1987).


Emotional reverberations of the subject’s unresolved father attachment in the subject’s adult life can be seen in his idealization of certain male figures. Blos at 434-35. Subject’s father idealization suffered a catastrophic shock at his father’s death, Blos at 436, when subject was 23 years old; subject succumbed to severe depression and ultimately attempted suicide 16 months later.


Subject’s unresolved father attachment is probably related to his fears of maternal engulfment and misogyny. The role or function of the early father is that of a rescuer or savior at the time when the small child normally makes his determined effort to gain independence from the first and exclusive caretaking person, the mother. Blos at 428-29. Subject’s continuing need for the protecting presence of the father is a residual effect of both his failure to resolve his early father idealization as well as fantasied and objective dangers emanating from aggressive female objects (and a disturbed male) in the subject’s developmental environment.


1. Pre-Oedipal


b.  Trauma (Beatings and Physical Injury)


Subject suffered a physical trauma (an accidental injury in the oral cavity) in childhood (aged 2.5) as well as childhood beatings; theses traumas and their aftermath may have led to an ego attitude of justified rebellion in subject and a distortion in ego-superego interaction that interfered with normal superego maturation. The tendency to massive superego externalization, normal in early latency, may never have been outgrown and may have resulted in a character disturbance in subject termed by Freud, “the exceptions.” Fernando, J. “The Exceptions: Structural and Dynamic Aspects.” The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child. Vol. 52: 17-28 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1997).

These traumas and their aftermath may have led to a lifelong fate neurosis (repetition compulsion) whereby subject has a tendency to repeat the feelings and reactions of his trauma (including the parents’ attempts to evade their own guilty feelings about the accident by blaming subject), which feelings and reactions may have become structured into a portion of subject’s superego. Fernando at 20.

Subject displays two attitudes–submission and rebellion–toward his fate and toward that portion of his superego into which the strictures of this fate became structured. The circumstances of the accident and the double attitude subject developed because of them are important factors in subject’s ego disturbance. Fernando at 21. Subject has become a victim of fate, destined to have his excited, rising hopes dashed by one circumstance or another. It is at the point where he feels himself badly mistreated by the fate that had crushed his hopes that he assumes the character of an “exception,” until his hopes begin to rise again and he enters the next phase of the cycle. Fernando at 22.

Subject’s development foundered on his inability to accomplish one of the major tasks of late adolescence: the integration of previously unresolved traumas into the character structure, or what Blos calls the “characterological stabilization of residual trauma.” Fernando at 22.


Subject’s superego–or, more correctly, that portion of it into which the demands and treatment of his unfair fate became internalized–did not undergo the usual progressive neutralization of its energies, integration into the personality, and distancing from its origins. Fernando at 23. The relative lack of superego maturation and integration in the subject affects the ego ideal and its integration into the personality as a substructure within the superego system, a process that normally takes place definitively in late adolescence. Fernando at 24. As a consequence subject finds it impossible to relinquish his attachment to the idealized images of his parents and instead attempts to recapture his ideals in concrete form in idealized surrogates, or parental derivatives. Fernando at 24. Subject’s social interests may be largely limited to such persons. Fernando at 18.


cf. Blum, Harold P., “Picasso’s Prolonged Adolescence, Blue Period, and Blind Figures.” The Psychoanalytic Review: Vol. 100, No. 2, pp. 267-287 (2013) (trauma in Picasso’s childhood had reverberations in later life).


2. Oedipal Stage


A common daydream which in spite of its frequency has received very little attention to-date is the fantasy of possessing a twin. It is a conscious fantasy, built up in the latency period as the result of disappointment by the parents — and retaliatory destructive impulses directed by the child in fantasy against the parents — in the oedipus situation, in the child’s search for a partner who will give him all the attention, love and companionship he desires and who will provide an escape from loneliness and solitude. The same emotional conditions are the basis of the family romance. In that well-known daydream the child in the latency period develops fantasies of having a better, kinder and worthier family than his own, which has so bitterly disappointed and disillusioned him. The parents have been unable to gratify the child’s instinctual wishes; in disappointment his love turns to hate; he now despises his family and, in revenge, turns against it. He has death-wishes against the former love-objects, and as a result feels alone and forsaken in the world. Burlingham, D.T. “The Fantasy of Having a Twin.” In: The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child. Vol. 1 at 205 (1945). A further element in many daydreams of having a twin is that of the imaginary twin being a complement to the daydreamer. The latter endows his twin with all the qualities and talents that he misses in himself and desires for himself. The twin thus represents his superego. Id. at 209.     

See also, Coen, S.J., Bradlow, P.A. "Twin Transference as a Compromise Formation." J. Am. Psychoanal. Assoc., 30(3): 599-620 (1982).  Twin transference, together with all twin fantasies, subserves multiple functions, including gratification and defense against the dangers of intense object need. In this formulation, the twinlike representation of the object provides the illusion of influence or control over the object by the pretense of being able to impersonate or transform oneself into the object and the object into the self. Intense object need persists together with a partial narcissistic defense against full acknowledgment of the object by representing the sought-after object as combining aspects of self and other.








3.  Latency


Subject experienced an abrupt, defensive internalization of the maternal object in response to her negligent failure to protect him against the narcissistic aggression of family members.


In cases in which internalization of the ambivalently-cathected maternal object (that embodies the combined functions of negative sanction and endowing approval) occurs abruptly and prematurely, without adequate neutralization of ego-ideal and superego precursor, shame and castration anxiety do not become integrated into a smoothly operating unconscious guilt mechanism. Pathological guilt, shame and castration anxiety together with a tendency to intense primitive idealization will be seen in pathological manifestations. Freeman, D.M.A., Foulks, E.F., and Freeman, P.A. “Superego Development and Psychopathology.” The Psychoanalytic Study of Society, vol. 7 at 121 (1976) (Gertrude R. Ticho, M.D., contributing editor).

Subject experienced functional libidinal object loss in latency, that is, his premature and abrupt internalization of the ambivalently-cathected maternal object.  Subject's idealization of his primary care doctor can be seen as a manic defense against destructive impulses.  The idealization may be related to the idealization (and splitting) seen in mourners, where the deceased is seen as all-good (manic denial by the mourner of destructive impulses) and the mourner depicts himself as unworthy to have been associated with the deceased.  “She was too good for me.”  The manic subject tends to downplay the power of the object, to disdain it, while at the same time maintaining maximum control over objects. Manic defenses are typified by three feelings, namely control, triumph, contempt. Klein, Melanie. (1940). Mourning and its relation to manic-depressive states. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 21 : 125-153.

4.  Adulthood — Oppositional, Defiant and Rebellious Behavior (see also 1(b) above (Preoedipal trauma giving rise to rebellion).


The rivalry feelings of subject with his father (and father derivatives), the expressions of competition, oppositionalism, and defiance, in action and thought, which are directed against the father (or father derivatives), have to be largely comprehended as the result of an incomplete detachment from the early father and his protective presence in the subject’s life–a presence either actual, construed, or wished for. Blos at 426.


Subject’s defiant behavior (toward father derivatives) is a cognate of his idealization (of certain male figures):


Subject had a statistically significant score on MMPI Scale 4 — the Psychopathic Deviate Scale.


In the workplace subject has experienced workplace mobbing in basic assumptions groups.  Research shows that basic assumptions groups target as scapegoats persons who harbor intense aggressive impulses against groups. Hafsi, Mohamed. “Experimental Inquiry into the Psychodynamics of the Relationship between the Group’s Dominant Basic Assumption Type and Scapegoating Phenomenon.” Psychologica: An International Journal of Psychology in the Orient vol. 41, no. 4 (December 1998): 272-84. 1/


Compare 2 above: subject harbored intense destructive impulses against his parents during the Oedipal period.


So we see that my feelings about my primary care doctor are a condensation of a host of life experiences that give rise to idealization.


Subject’s idealization of his primary care doctor does not simply reflect his loneliness and isolation, but is a symptom of a severe narcissistic defect, a defect of self.


Sincerely,


Gary Freedman


_________________________________


1/  Hafsi, M. "Experimental Inquiry into the Psychodynamics of the Relationship between the Group's Dominant Basic Assumption Type and Scapegoating Phenomenon."

The present study constitutes an attempt to investigate experimentally the conditions leading to the phenomenon of scapegoating. Applying Bion's concepts of "basic assumptions", and "valency", it was hypothesized that 1) scapegoating was more likely to occur in groups characterized by the valency constitution of fight as defined and measured in the present study, 2) that the scapegoated members display a negative attitude towards the group that predispose them to the scapegoat role. Based on their valencies as measured by the Reaction to Group Situation Test Nara University (RGST-Nu), the subjects (N=100) were divided into 20 homogeneous (having a same valency) groups of 5 members each. There were thus 4 “fight” groups, 4 “pairing” groups, 4 “flight” groups, 4 “dependency” groups, and 4 cooperation tendency groups (groups characterized by work group). The results supported the first hypothesis that fight groups were more likely to resort to scapegoating than other groups. Moreover, the results revealed also that, as hypothesized, the scapegoated member displayed in fact the most negative attitude towards the group.

The prime polarity in regard to one’s orientation to a group is alienation versus belonging. One is either a member of a group (belonging) or an outsider (alienation). The corresponding anxieties are a fear of alienation (the fear of being an outsider) versus anxieties attached to belonging, specifically with regard to the need to subvert one’s individuality. Alford, C.F. Group Psychology and Political Theory.

Most people want to belong. Most people fear alienation. Far more rare is the individual who fears losing his individuality, who is anxious about belonging because he doesn’t want to pay the price of admission — loss of personal identity and the assumption of a group identity.

Subject experiences little anxiety about being alienated but experiences intense fear of loss of individuality.

Subject's idealization of  his primary care doctor, a mirror-image object, expresses his need to preserve his individuality. He craves a connection to people who will not require that he give up his identity. Emotional investment in like-minded people preserves his individuality.

Subject's difficulties in the workplace grow out of his anxieties in relation to belonging to a group whose values differ from his own. And since he don’t fear alienation, he doesn’t feel he is losing anything by not belonging. But the cost is assuming the outsider role which can include being subjected to group aggression.
One of the functions of groups is to divert aggression away from group members onto outsiders. Subject assumes the role of the outsider. He is a a prime candidate to be a victim of job harassment. Subject's victimization in a group setting is insidiously and inevitably related to my need for mirror image objects (like his primary care doctor) that allow him to preserve his individuality.

email Message to Amtrak

Dear Customer,

Thank you for contacting Amtrak. We respond to online inquiries 7 days a week between the hours of 8 am and 11 pm (ET). E-mails are answered in the order that they are received. We will respond as soon as possible.
Please do not reply to this message. 

Sincerely,

Amtrak Customer Service 




 
Amtrak.com | Routes & Stations | Deals | Plan a Trip | Help
Amtrak is a registered service mark of the National Railroad Passenger Corporation.


----- garfreed@netscape.net Wrote -----
Subject: New Reservation Questions


Name: Gary Freedman
Email: garfreed@netscape.net
Address1:
Address2:
City:
State:
Zip/Postal:
Country: United States
Phone Number: 2023627064 - home
Amtrak Guest Rewards #:

Reservation Number:



Message:
1. My former employer determined in October 1991, in consultation with a psychiatrist, that I was potentially violent. That determination was affirmed as genuine and credible by the D.C. Court of Appeals. Freedman v. D.C. Department of Human Rights, D.C.C.A. no. 96-CV-961 (Memorandum Opinion and Judgment) (Sept. 1, 1998). 

 2. My former direct supervisor determined that I might carry out a mass homicidal assault on the premises of my former employer in October 1991. The D.C. Court of Appeals declined to find my supervisor's determination evidence of unlawful animus. 

 3. The D.C. Office of Attorney General determined that my coworkers formed genuine and credible fears that I might commit an armed mass homicidal assault on the premises of my former employer in August 1989. The D.C. Attorney General determined that my coworkers had genuine and credible fears that I might become armed and extremely dangerous in August 1989. Brief of Appellee District of Columbia, Freedman v. D.C. Department of Human Rights, D.C.C.A. no. 96-CV-961 (Memorandum Opinion and Judgment) (Sept. 1, 1998). The U.S. Capitol Police advised me in August 1998 that the federal government had placed my name on a national registry of potentially violent offenders. 

 My Question: Will I have a problem boarding Amtrak?. 

 Gary Freedman
Washington, DC

email Inquiry Submitted to TSA

7:52 PM December 5, 2015

1.  My former employer determined in October 1991, in consultation with a psychiatrist, that I was potentially violent.  That determination was affirmed as genuine and credible by the D.C. Court of Appeals.  Freedman v. D.C. Department of Human Rights, D.C.C.A. no. 96-CV-961 (Memorandum Opinion and Judgment) (Sept. 1, 1998).

2.  My former direct supervisor determined that I might carry out a mass homicidal assault on the premises of my former employer in October 1991.  The D.C. Court of Appeals declined to find my supervisor's determination evidence of unlawful animus.

3.  The D.C. Office of Attorney General determined that my coworkers formed genuine and credible fears that I might commit an armed mass homicidal assault on the premises of my former employer in August 1989.  The D.C. Attorney General determined that my coworkers had genuine and credible fears that I might become armed and extremely dangerous in August 1989.  Brief of Appellee District of Columbia, Freedman v. D.C. Department of Human Rights, D.C.C.A. no. 96-CV-961 (Memorandum Opinion and Judgment) (Sept. 1, 1998).

The U.S. Capitol Police advised me in August 1998 that the federal government had placed my name on a national registry of potentially violent offenders.

My Question:  Will I have a problem boarding a plane.

Gary Freedman

Response:

 
Thank you for contacting the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) Contact Center regarding your Federal watch list status.

TSA can neither confirm nor deny whether an individual is on a Federal watch list because this information is derived from classified and sensitive law enforcement and intelligence information. This protects the operational counterterrorism and intelligence collection objectives of the Federal government as well as the personal safety of those involved in counterterrorism investigations. Federal watch list remain effective tools in the government’s counterterrorism and transportation security efforts because their contents are not disclosed.

If you believe you are on a government watch list, we suggest contacting the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Traveler Redress Inquiry Program (DHS TRIP). DHS TRIP is a single point of contact for individuals who have inquiries or seek resolution regarding difficulties they experience during their travel while screening at transportation hubs, such as airports and train stations, or while crossing U.S. borders.

For more information, please visit the DHS TRIP Web site at http:\\www.dhs.gov\dhs-trip.

We hope this information is helpful.

TSA Contact Center NOTICE: The information contained in this message and any attachments is privileged and confidential and therefore protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent who is responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Senture does not accept liability for changes to this message after it was sent. The views expressed in this e-mail do not necessarily reflect the views of the company. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying via e-mail to this message and deleting this information from your computer.

Letter to Dr. Royster

December 7, 2015
3801 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Apartment 136
Washington, DC  20008

Tanya A. Royster, M.D.
Director
D.C. Department of Behavioral Health
64 New York Avenue, NW
Third 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 had a weekly out-patient psychotherapy consult with Alice E. Stone, M.D. on Monday December 7, 2015.  Dr. Stone is 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.  

Increasingly I view my situation as precarious, desperate and futile.  The failure of DBH to provide adequate treatment for me is a terrible strain.

I have formed an idealizing transference with my primary care doctor,.  Unfortunately, my primary care doctor is not a psychiatrist and psychotherapy with him is not feasible.  I yearn for a psychotherapeutic relationship that will address my psychological needs.

If the truth be told I am not suited for the practicalities of life; my mind floats in otherworldly dreams, more preoccupied with the potential of the spirit than with everyday vicissitudes. I love language, books, and music, and the most splendid moments of my uneventful existence have been the few operas I have attended, or the books I have perused in isolation from my fellows. I treasure every detail of the times I have spent in isolation. As I read I imagine every sentence, every page and every chapter as a mirror of my life, my passions and my afflictions. I take refuge in this extravagant, romantic atmosphere whenever I feel weighed down by the vulgarity of life.

I am an artist, really. Or at least I am an individual with an artistic temperament. My moments of highest joy are those I have spent alone. And that is the triumph and tragedy of my existence. Despite the gratifications afforded by my splendid isolation I still long for the Other in my loneliness: the Other who might complete me. Failing to find that Other I live in perpetual disillusion and frustration.

I am a rebel individualist divorced from established dogma and institutions, a lonely incorrigible seeker of new norms. For me life presents itself as a struggle for individualism; I experience my life at times as humorously petulant and at other times as a mystically yearning estrangement from the world and the times. I sometimes feel, in my grandiose moments, that I belong to the highest and purest spiritual aspirations and labors of our epoch.

My spiritual and emotional struggles can be traced to my alienation from my family in childhood. The roots of my estrangement from established institutions and settled norms began in the peculiarities of my early family life. Like most parents mine were no help with the new problems of puberty to which no reference was ever made. All they did was take endless trouble in supporting my hopeless attempts to deny reality and to continue dwelling in a childhood world that was becoming more and more unreal. I have no idea whether parents can be of help, and I do not blame mine. It was my own affair to come to terms with myself and to find my own way, and like most well-brought up children, I managed badly. My parents seemed wedded to some vague suggestions of old-world, Victorian morality with its belief in the inherent sinfulness of man, in the necessity of breaking the will of the individual, and with its uncompromising renunciation of all that is of this world. My family was the first of many social structures which were to rouse the rebel in me.

I was a hypersensitive, imaginative, lively and extremely headstrong child, and proved to be a constant source of despair and annoyance to my parents and my teachers. School held as little attraction for me as it did for any incorrigible. Hardly had the fourth year of high school begun before I became delinquent and was almost dismissed.

College and law school were meant to end the morbid estheticism into which I had allowed myself to drift. I hoped thereby to become an established, respected member of society. This hope was never realized. Except for the first few years, my law school education did not alleviate my feeling that life is essentially meaningless, nor could my idyllic retreat into academia long contain my inherent restlessness. By 1984, upon completion of my LL.M. program at American University, the life in the law had lost any meaning at all. It had become quite apparent to me that I could not be both a creative dreamer and a "solid citizen," a Phantasiemensch and a Burger, as the Germans would put it.

I am but a gifted misfit. My life has long been restive and discontented. I am unable to bear a comfortable, established mode of existence for any period of time. My life is grim and I live in endless mental agony.

I live the life of a romantic vagabond, forever exhausted and distraught in my quest for solitude. Before life can ever become meaningful for me, I must find and come to terms with myself. I am forever taking painful stock of myself and devote myself assiduously to solitary pleasures. I live like a hermit in my emotional and financial poverty and for years now, I have rarely left my apartment for more than routine outings.

In 1993 I began a writing that was to occupy me for the next ten years. That writing would be my autobiography, “Significant Moments.” The writing reflected my relentless quest for my self, and it assumed a fresh impetus and a new stylistic direction from my restless spirit during those years. I became an uninhibited and exciting innovator. The autobiography was really a tense psychological study and reflected the intoxicating emotional release of a Buddha-like search for the basic unity and meaningfulness of life. I am sure if it were ever to be published it would be greeted with a curious mixture of awe, bewilderment, antagonism, and disgust. My own uninhibited self-exposure would no doubt trouble even the staunchest of my supporters. I must remind you that my new literary venture was not an irresponsible deviation but a necessary culmination in my self-quest. It has always been my belief that repressions had to be exposed, even at the price of unpleasant notoriety.

The letters I have written to you are actually an article of faith and not a document of despair. Yes, I wallow in despair but I live in faith, a faith in the ultimate meaningfulness of life. For me, life has never become the perplexing absurdity it was for Franz Kafka or the Sisyphean monotonous senselessness it was to become for Albert Camus. As I like to say, there is always tomorrow.

I am oppressed by my personal life, but also by the times we live in. Our era is for me one of moral depravity and intellectual mediocrity; of surface glitter, smug comfort, sham conventionality, and foolish optimism. Man has lost his soul in the world of money, machines and distrust. He has exchanged his spiritual peace for physical comfort. All vital rapport with God and nature has been lost, reason has supplanted faith and society has forgotten the individual. I’m starting to sound like His Holiness, the late Pope John Paul II!

But the fact remains that the middle-class core of our civilization has never ceased to be the butt of my ire. The bourgeois represents all that is negative. A stalwart and stodgy nonentity, he is governed in all his ideals and pursuits solely by the impulse of self- preservation. He fears individualism, and deliberately sacrifices the precarious but precious intensities of life for comfort and security. He is the characterless Philistine who epitomizes mediocrity, cowardice, compromise, irresponsibility, and servility. He is the strapping, insensitive, physical specimen who enjoys health and wealth but lacks all culture. He has a sound appetite but no taste, a good deal of confidence but no ideals. He possess a surfeit of zeal and diligence but has no lofty aspirations or worthy goals. It is to him that the world belongs, while persons like me -- the sensitive worshipers of beauty and the earnest seekers after truth and the meaning of life -- are misfits and outcasts.

Every day for me is an effort. A seemingly senseless effort to survive. So much of my day is marked more by strained effort than by spontaneity, more by futile persistence than by passion, and more by recollection than by new horizons. I relive the past day-by-day.

There has always been a very close relationship between the circumstances of my life and my artistic aspirations. Each represents a different stage in my struggle with myself and with life at large, and each reflects a correspondingly different phase in both the substance and the form of my art. My writings are replete with uncertainty and vague presentiment. I live as a sensitive outsider who cannot cope directly with my particular problem of existence. I resort instead to fantasy and withdraw into the realm of beauty there to indulge in the extremes of late esthetic gratification. My world is one of perfumed melancholy. It is characterized by exclamatory remarks and rhetorical questions, by sensuous adjectives and adverbs in languid cadence.

The form of my autobiography is loose: a random succession of vignettes and dramatic monologues, held together primarily by their common spirit of decadent romanticism. A Hoffmanesque fusion of fantasy and reality, which is both cynical and morbidly intimate. You, no doubt, would call it the work of a talented beginner whose world of experience is still too limited, and whose imagination is entranced by the facile flow of beautiful language. In the absence of discipline and restraint, I fear that the whole is sacrificed to the part, and what is meant to be art fails to become more than picturesque patter.

In the last year, in my extreme isolation, my writing has become more human and less shadowy; inertia and desperation yield to movement and humor. My prose has achieved a more narrative style, and my language has become leaner, crisper and more forceful.

And yet, despite the emotional gratifications of my splendid isolation in the past year, I was forced to face the overwhelming accumulation of tensions. I was compelled to realize that in my desire to make existence less painful I had been avoiding a close look at the true nature of my inner discord, and had blindsided myself to the morally and spiritually impoverished world around me. In my imagination I left the comfortable fold of the bourgeois world, which had never afforded me the security I had hoped it might, and accepted the more difficult existence of an outsider. Did I have a choice in the matter? In a desperate and determined effort to find myself, I began systematically to diagnose my inner conflicts, to go my long-shunned inward path. Only now did I finally come to grips with the intrinsic problems of human existence -- and of my place in the human world.

In my isolation escape became quest, and in quest my inner problems resolved themselves into the basic malaise humain, into the tension between the spiritual and the physical. For the past year I oscillated between these poles, acclaiming first one, then the other, then neither. I never ceased hoping for a harmonious accord, though well aware that for me this was impossible. I acclaim spirit, stressing self-knowledge and self realization with a Nietzschean emphasis upon the superior being. But spirit as a guiding principle of life can only mean greater individuation and more painful isolation. I still lack the firm conviction and the inner fortitude necessary to endure these consequences. The immediate reaction has been as extreme as the initial impulse. My assertive Nietzschean activism has yielded suddenly to a Schopenhauer-like passivity, a restless quest to a quietistic acceptance, and self-realization to a yearning for self-obliteration.

In the sober tone of acceptance which is evident in the present letter, I realize that despite all efforts to the contrary, my existence will probably continue as a restless tension, a constant oscillation between life's opposing poles.

My path to myself has reached its climax in a fascinating confusion of symbol and irony, fantasy and realism.

It is only now that I at last have found the peace of sincere self-affirmation and life affirmation. The individual must take and continue along that path which the predominant aspect of his nature impels him to choose. Each, whether given to the senses or to the spirit, must be prepared to suffer the lot of his kind; to attempt in curiosity or desperation to do otherwise is to foster a perpetual dissension of the divided self.

My center is the individual, opposed to society, its mores, and its institutions. And that individual is myself. I recall, nostalgically, the simpler years of childhood. I re-experience youth with its excruciating years of awakening. I think about modern man, the intellectual and the artist in particular, within the framework of a declining culture.

It is in this, its intimately egocentric nature, that my artistic temperament bears the stamp of its age, an age of cultural decline, of spiritual and moral distress, and of extreme loneliness.

I am predominantly an esthete who lives only in dreams, hopes, and anticipation, and who shrinks before realization. I am a self-preoccupied, temperamental artist who vainly seeks a kindred soul. I am paralyzed by chronic indecision and indulge in romantic morbidity. I am an outsider consumed by my own hopelessness and loneliness -- a misfit, to whom the art of life and the art of love are foreign, a timid soul who asks too little of life and expects too much of it. I live in perpetual frustration and disillusionment. 

Sincerely,

Gary Freedman

cc: The Honorable Loretta E. Lynch; The Honorable Karl A. Racine

December 2015 Fraud Certification

December 4, 2015
3801 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Apartment 136
Washington, DC  20008

The Honorable Karl A. Racine
Attorney General of the Distyrict of Columbia
Office of the Attorney General
One Judiciary Square
441 Fourth Street, NW
Washington, DC  20001

RE: Monthly Felony Fraud Certification

Dear Mr. Racine:

The U.S. Department of the Treasury on December 3, 2015 made a wire transfer of $1407 to my bank account per my claim of disability paid by the U.S. Social Security Administration based in large part on the determination of the Office of Attorney General that I became disabled, a direct threat in the workplace and not suitable for employment effective October 29, 1991.  See Freedman v. D.C. Dept. Human Rights, D.C.C.A. no. 96-CV-961 (Memorandum Opinion and Judgment, Sept. 1, 1998) ("the [employer]. . . learned [upon consulting a practicing psychiatrist] that [Mr. Freedman's] behavior was indicative of a disorder known as 'ideas of reference,' which is sometimes accompanied by violent behavior.').  

There is ample evidence that I do not suffer from severe (psychotic) mental illness.

There is a possibility that my claim for disability benefits is fraudulent and that I committed a felony on December 3, 2015.  There is a possibly that I have been engaged over the past twenty-four years in a scheme to defraud the federal government of up to a half million dollars in public monies.

Let me make it perfectly clear what I have not done.

1.  On no occasion did I fabricate evidence of severe (psychotic) mental illness as did Dimitrios Georgopolous, M.D. (in February 1996) and Albert H. Taub, M.D. (in February 1999).  Both doctors diagnosed me with paranoid schizophrenia despite persuasive evidence that I did not suffer from psychotic mental illness.

2.  On no occasion did I file evidence of a medically-worthless psychiatric opinion with a state human rights agency alleging that I suffered from a psychiatric "disorder" that rendered me unemployable and a direct threat in the workplace as did Dennis M. Race, Esq. and Laurence J. Hoffman, Esq. of the law firm of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, my former employer.

3.  On no occasion did I file pleadings with the D.C. Superior Court or the D.C. Court of Appeals, as did the Office of D.C. Attorney General,  stating that my coworkers had formed a genuine and credible fear that I might become armed and extremely dangerous, thereby tending to establish that I posed a direct threat in the workplace and tending to establish that a prospective employer might justifiably invoke the "direct threat" exemption of the Americans with Disabilities Act to deny me employment.  See Brief of District of Columbia, Freedman v. D.C. Dept Human Rights, D.C.C.A. no. 96-CV-961 (Sept. 1, 1998) (citing as evidence of genuine and credible coworker fears of direct threat the malicious and defamatory statement of a coworker: "We're all afraid of you.  We're all afraid you're going to buy a gun, bring it in and shoot everybody").

4.  On no occasion did I acquiesce in the filing under oath of a medically-worthless psychiatric opinion tending to show that my employer had a genuine and credible fear that I suffered from a psychiatric disorder that rendered me unemployable and a direct threat in the workplace as did Margie A. Utley, Esq., former Director of the D.C. Department of Human Rights, an individual later disbarred by the District of Columbia and the State of Georgia for engaging in acts involving moral turpitude.

Sincerely,

Gary Freedman

Letter to DBH

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