Armchair Psych Profile and Treatment

[Curious Me]

He's still her son who was treated by a doctor connected to the school. This doctor did try to get a BETA team together, but it didn't happen fast enough, and then her son still in a dangerous state received no follow up before he was "allowed", or maybe urged, to drop out of school. Consequently, her son may now spend the rest of his life in prison, or even face the DP. Tell me she can in someway sue the doctor or the school. ????????????

 

[shadowraiths]

How exactly did they lose him? He isn't dead.

Oh, but they did lose him. Which is why, the very first post in this very thread notes, and I quote:

Do not make accusations towards the family..at all. We do not know the dynamics. If this should change the rule will change with it.

The point being, this is a victim friendly site. And at this point, yes, the parents are victims. They've lost their son. He may end up in prison or a mental institute for life, or he may receive the death penalty. Regardless the outcome, we can pretty much rest assured, he will not be going home to his parents.

I cannot imagine what that would feel like, as a parent. To have brought a child into the world, kissed their booboos, dried their tears, watched them grow, watched them walk down the aisle at graduation, and all the things that we, as parents, experience and celebrate with our children. And yes, even, or especially, if our children are troubled, the heartache of not being able to take their pain away, the fear that their choices might result in their own, or other's deaths. This case is tragic on so many levels.

So, yes, they have lost him.

 

[Curious Me]

Ever notice how easily people will point fingers at the mother especially if she knew this was going to happen? Turn it around, if she didn't know, too bad she's got no recourse.

Well, I've strained my brain enough for one day.

 

[jjenny]

Oh, but they did lose him. Which is why, the very first post in this very thread notes, and I quote:


The point being, this is a victim friendly site. And at this point, yes, the parents are victims. They've lost their son. He may end up in prison or a mental institute for life, or he may receive the death penalty. Regardless the outcome, we can pretty much rest assured, he will not be going home to his parents.

I cannot imagine what that would feel like, as a parent. To have brought a child into the world, kissed their booboos, dried their tears, watched them grow, watched them walk down the aisle at graduation, and all the things that we, as parents, experience and celebrate with our children. And yes, even, or especially, if our children are troubled, the heartache of not being able to take their pain away, the fear that their choices might result in their own, or other's deaths. This case is tragic on so many levels.

So, yes, they have lost him.

Saying they haven't lost him doesn't have anything to do with instructions to not blame his family. Even if he isn't coming home they can presumably go and visit him if they want.

 

[February]

He's still her son who was treated by a doctor connected to the school. This doctor did try to get a BETA team together, but it didn't happen fast enough, and then her son still in a dangerous state received no follow up before he was "allowed", or maybe urged, to drop out of school. Consequently, her son may now spend the rest of his life in prison, or even face the DP. Tell me she can in someway sue the doctor or the school. ????????????

Questions !

Can the parents file for Full Legal Adult Guardianship of JH since JH is filing for insanity which falls under disability ? If yes, after filing for guardianship, can they file lawsuit on behalf of JH to the school or doctor just in case they are at fault?

:seeya:

 

[jjenny]

Considering all the dead and injured victims, I have absolutely no clue why we are discussing the suspect's or his family's right to sue. If anything, presumably the victims and their families could sue him. Of course with him not having a lot of finances, that would be pretty much pointless. Regardless, his doctor is very well protected from lawsuits. If she was just concerned about his behavior she is not liable. He'd have to communicate to her a serious threat of violence against specific person or persons.

"Colorado’s law states that mental health professionals are protected from lawsuits if a patient turns violent “except where the patient has communicated to the mental health care provider a serious threat of imminent physical violence against a specific person or persons.""

http://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...xperts-say/2012/08/02/gJQA1fj1SX_story_1.html

 

[CARIIS]

a psychotherapist has a duty to warn even if the actual victim(s) was not foreseeable. ....
..the therapist’s duty to warn is implicitly contained within the guidelines for disclosure of confidential information without the consent of the client:
-Duty to warn is among the few --
[/COLOR]--when there is cause for serious concern about a client harming someone, the clinician must breach confidentiality
--Explicit in the court’s decision was the principle that the confidentiality of the therapeutic relationship is subordinate to the safety of society and her members
[u....... a clinician's professional judgment is key. They have to identify whether there is a sense of urgency, and if there is a likelihood of a patient acting on the thoughts. A patient's history of violence, mental illness and substance abuse is also considered, according to the Journal of Family Practice.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/02/health/therapist-violence/index.html?npt=NP

rl]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duty_to_warn#Clinical_psychology[/url]

 

[carson456]

Oh, but they did lose him. Which is why, the very first post in this very thread notes, and I quote:


The point being, this is a victim friendly site. And at this point, yes, the parents are victims. They've lost their son. He may end up in prison or a mental institute for life, or he may receive the death penalty. Regardless the outcome, we can pretty much rest assured, he will not be going home to his parents.

I cannot imagine what that would feel like, as a parent. To have brought a child into the world, kissed their booboos, dried their tears, watched them grow, watched them walk down the aisle at graduation, and all the things that we, as parents, experience and celebrate with our children. And yes, even, or especially, if our children are troubled, the heartache of not being able to take their pain away, the fear that their choices might result in their own, or other's deaths. This case is tragic on so many levels.

So, yes, they have lost him.

It's all very sad. They've lost their son. Lots of people lose children. Doesn't mean they are owed anything monetarily. Just because she was seeing him on a professional level doesn't mean she is responsible for his behavior. She could have been concerned about him because he admitted to fantasizing about killing all of his classmates. Doesn't mean that is a threat.

What if she prescribed him antipsychotics that he chose not to take, and the voices in his head told him to commit the crime. Is she still responsible?

 

[February]

Considering all the dead and injured victims, I have absolutely no clue why we are discussing the suspect's or his family's right to sue. If anything, presumably the victims and their families could sue him. Of course with him not having a lot of finances, that would be pretty much pointless. Regardless, his doctor is very well protected from lawsuits. If she was just concerned about his behavior she is not liable. He'd have to communicate to her a serious threat of violence against specific person or persons.

"Colorado’s law states that mental health professionals are protected from lawsuits if a patient turns violent “except where the patient has communicated to the mental health care provider a serious threat of imminent physical violence against a specific person or persons.""

http://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...xperts-say/2012/08/02/gJQA1fj1SX_story_1.html

Well like everyone else, i want the victims and their families to sue who is at fault here. If another poster asked why the parents cant sue if school or doctor is at fault, i dont think it is wrong to talk about it as long as we are not accusing the parents per the admins of this board.

 

[February]

Are you feeling what i am feeling about this article?


CU Threat BETA Team Has No Guidelines
http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/31328515/detail.html
DENVER --
The team charged with identifying and preventing threats like last month’s mass shoot at an Aurora theater has no set policies or procedures on when people should report threats or when to convene the team when threats are brought forward, a CALL7 investigation found.
.....
But University of Colorado officials confirmed Thursday that the Behavioral Evaluation and Threat Assessment team has no guidelines or policies that dictate when people should report threats or when the team should convene to discuss them. Sources said the team was never convened to address Fenton's concerns about Holmes because he left school June 10.

Since 2010, when Fenton helped to form the BETA team, there have been about a dozen calls to team chairman -- currently Larry Loften -- about various threats, according to a CU spokeswoman. She declined to say whether Fenton’s calls about Holmes were in those dozen calls.

Sources say Loften was one of the people Fenton called with her concerns and questions about Holmes. CALL7 Investigator John Ferrugia caught up with Loften after work to ask him about the team's policies and procedures but he declined. But a university spokeswoman said the threat assessment has no defined policy or threshold of when the team should be convened or notified of threats.

Sources with knowledge of the investigation also told CALL7 Investigators that along with expressing concerns about Holmes possibly being a threat to others, Fenton was “gathering information to couple with what she knew to … make an educated decision about what to do concerning Holmes.”

One source said: “It’s very unusual to get a call from Dr. Fenton. (But) there was no clear red-flag thrown at the CU assessment team. It wasn’t a warning.”
Another source said: “The calls were two-fold – to gather information and to report her concerns about what he told her and that he could potentially harm others. She was trying to figure out what to do.”

 

[February]

so did DA Chambers already examine the notebook? what happen to the Gag Order? LOL...


Arapahoe County District Attorney Carol Chambers disputed news reports that the notebook contained descriptions of an attack.

Read more: http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/new...ing-suspect-be-formally-charged#ixzz22SXU5gpV

:what::what::what:

People's response number 3 on this court docs said :

contents were secured and not examine and held for potential in camera review
http://www.courts.state.co.us/userf...2-07-27 12CR1522 People's response to D11.pdf

 

[February]

IMO... this last article about the BETA Team
http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/31328515/detail.html

I think Lynne Fenton should hire now her own personal Lawyer. IMO This comment below sounds like some people could be staying away from her or i could be wrong? I dont know but am confused why would they think it is "unusual" to get a call from Fenton

One source said: “It’s very unusual to get a call from Dr. Fenton. (But) there was no clear red-flag thrown at the CU assessment team. It wasn’t a warning.”

 

[SmoothOperator]

IMO equally if not more importantly there is the below statements quoted from the CNN link upthread about Fenton and her having spoken with BETA yet did not go to LE about the student.

."Fenton made initial phone calls about engaging the BETA team" in "the first 10 days" of June but it "never came together" because in the period Fenton was having conversations with team members, Holmes began the process of dropping out of school, a source told KMGH.

Sources told the station that when Holmes withdrew, the BETA team "had no control over him."

KMGH said sources did not know what Holmes told Fenton that sparked her concern.

"It takes more than just statements," one source told the station, explaining that Holmes would have had to tell Fenton "something specific" before she would have to report it to law enforcement.

As I said equally if not more important than the info from the article alleging that Fenton told other staff that he was a possible danger.. That information snipped and quoted in a post alone and by itself out of context makes it more outraging and angering.. But if it is kept in its original context and post the entirety of what it together as a whole says and means.. Well.. IMO you get a totally different understanding of what is being reported..

So, sure snipping and quoting a mere modicum of statement that Fenton allegedly told others of her concern BUT DID NOTHING.. Causes anger and outrage.. But when the quote is in its entirety and complete context there is a much better understanding of the actual reality of why or how things were handled in the manner that they were..

Yes, Fenton may very well have expressed among the members her concern regarding the shooter.. LE were not notified and here is the reality of how these procedures work and there are absolute mandatory criteria to be present for Fenton to have been within her ethical and legal rights..

"Fenton made initial phone calls about engaging the BETA team" in "the first 10 days" of June but it "never came together" because in the period Fenton was having conversations with team members, Holmes began the process of dropping out of school, a source told KMGH.

Sources told the station that when Holmes withdrew, the BETA team "had no control over him."

KMGH said sources did not know what Holmes told Fenton that sparked her concern.

"It takes more than just statements," one source told the station, explaining that Holmes would have had to tell Fenton "something specific" before she would have to report it to law enforcement.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/01/justice/colorado-theater-shooting-psychiatrist/?c=&page=2

 

[Curious Me]

Video discussion mentioning BETA, Involuntary Detention, and Gray Areas

http://video.msnbc.msn.com/nightly-news/48474986/#48474986

 

[Curious Me]

Tough Legal Issues Converge in Colorado Shooting Case

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/02/us/james-holmes-case-raises-complex-legal-issues.html

 

[~n/t~]

VELEZ-MITCHELL: All right. So we`re trying to figure out what is the law here when it comes to a psychiatrist notifying somebody about a patient. And here`s the statute. We looked it up.

Doctors, nurses, mental health professionals and their staff are required to break confidentiality and warn of potential victim and alert law enforcement if a serious threat is suspected.

So forensic psychologist Jeff Gardere, spell that out to us in plain English. What does that mean?

JEFF GARDERE, FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGIST: It means it`s not just the talk, because somebody could be kidding at the time, or maybe they`re upset for five or ten minutes and then maybe take back the threat that they`re making to hurt someone else.

But it also has to be that that psychiatrist, a mental health professional in their mind, in their professional view, feel that this person is a legitimate threat to somebody else out there.

So it`s not just about warning the victim, but it`s also protecting the victim. And that means detaining that person who makes the threat, contacting the police, and warning the victim. And you have to try to do all three.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Do you think that there was enough information -- or just do we not know? In other words, take a look at him in court. He had the red hair. He had the bizarre expressions. We`re going to show you that in a second. Take one look at this guy, you go this guy`s off. This guy -- but is that enough? Let`s say he walked into her office looking like that and saying crazy things. Is that enough?

GARDERE: Well, using the armchair quarterbacking, looking back at that -- I wasn`t there, of course, I would say that is a definite, no pun intended, red flag that here`s a person who`s psychotic, changing his appearance and may have said that he`s losing it. He has a lot of rage.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Yes, but let me say this, there are a lot of people walking around all over the place -- and I see them on the streets every day -- with purple hair, red hair, green hair. I mean, people do dye their hair. So it`s hard to know for sure.

GARDERE: But this person was seeing a psychiatrist. So there was a mental health issue.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1208/02/ijvm.01.html


more at the link. I posted it here but there was discussion regarding Dr. Fenton, the University, lawsuits etc.

 

[~n/t~]

Ever notice how easily people will point fingers at the mother especially if she knew this was going to happen? Turn it around, if she didn't know, too bad she's got no recourse.

Well, I've strained my brain enough for one day.

Thanks for pointing that out CM. For all we know perhaps the family was the one who contacted the school so they can get him "help".

 

[~n/t~]

Colorado shooting: It’s hard to spot threats, experts say

Experts on threat assessment say it’s an inherently tricky enterprise. They say the most dangerous people do not fit a simple profile. Some of the personality traits common among mass murderers are indistinguishable from the characteristics of harmless individuals who sit quietly in their room playing video games.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...-experts-say/2012/08/02/gJQA1fj1SX_story.html

 

[Liz]

Video discussion mentioning BETA, Involuntary Detention, and Gray Areas

http://video.msnbc.msn.com/nightly-news/48474986/#48474986

In that video, a statement made by the UC Chancellor, Don Elliman, is read; and shown on screen:

"I believe, until it's been demonstrated otherwise, that our people did what they should have done."

Hmm, isn't that slightly reminiscent of what Penn State administrators were espousing, back when the sexual abuse scandal broke there? Or am I imagining that?

Elliman's little caveat, "until it's been demonstrated otherwise", is at the very least a yellow flag to me. MOO

 

[DeadCat]

I keep wondering if Fenton was really treating JH or whether the defense was calling it "treatment" in order to suppress the release of the notebook. If he'd had informal interactions with her or taken a class with her only. Just conjecture, as most of my "this case"-related thoughts are. (Hope they lift that gag order!!)