365 Responses

  1. Lucy Wightman
    Lucy Wightman at |

    There is so much to this story that has not yet been told.

    Reply
  2. Lucy Wightman
    Lucy Wightman at |

    I do understand that you were not accusing. I like your thoughts on what others may want to know and only wish that it was this neutral curiousity I was dealing with rather than such hostility

    Reply
  3. Susan Ovans
    Susan Ovans at |

    I am trying to reach Lucy Wightman for a story we are running this week about the indictment. Since your number is unlisted, Ms. Wightman, please call me at 781 925 9266. Thanks for your time. Susan Ovans, Editor

    Reply
  4. Susan Ovans
    Susan Ovans at |

    Sorry, I should have included the name of the paper: It’s The Hull Times. Thanks.

    Reply
  5. Lucy Wightman
    Lucy Wightman at |

    I agree Ken about being a blip on the radar – what happens if we google Lucy Wightman? Thank you for your posting.

    Reply
  6. Lucy Wightman
    Lucy Wightman at |

    I would like to respond to your first question by sharing the first part of this storyline which is that in November of 2004 I received 3 emails from unknown AOL screen names threatening to go to Fox 25 and expose my past… and to go to the AG’s office since I used a business name with the word “psychology” in it… and to also warn me of leaving the office at night.

    Reply
  7. Susan Ovans
    Susan Ovans at |

    Actually, I did find this site, among many others, by using Google for “Louise Wightman”. The “blip” on my hometown paper’s radar screen was not the Princess Cheyenne tagline, but a press statement from the Attorney General’s office that a local resident had been indicted. They do it all the time. In fact, the day before we had been notified by Reilly’s office about a local contractor who had been fined for failing to clean up an environmentally sensitive site. Don’t you think it’s kind of ironic, Ken, that you’re assuring Ms. Wightman that you’re oh-so-sensitive to her situation when, in fact, you’re the one who posted the headline “Princess Cheyenne, stripper, practiced as unlicensed psychologist” and are urging her to “bare all,” so to speak, for your readers? I put out my name and the name of my paper on your blog because I think it’s only fair to use as many sources as I can to give Ms. Wightman an opportunity to make a statement, if she so chooses, particularly since she lives in this small town. Whether she chooses to respond, or not, I can assure her that she needn’t lose any sleep thinking that, come Friday morning, her hometown weekly will have posted such a crass headline.

    Reply
  8. erin
    erin at |

    It seems to me, as I read all the comments, that Susan Owens is just trying to get an exclusive story. The way she is going about it is to put down this blogger for being curious and wanting to hear Lucy’s side of the story. She is trying to convince Lucy that she cares about her and how the story comes off when really, just like any other journalist, she would like to get the scoop first for her paper. Susan, you are very transparent. But that’s just my opinion.

    Reply
  9. Susan Ovans
    Susan Ovans at |

    If I didn’t care about Ms. Wightman’s right to privacy, I would hop in my car, drive about five minutes, and go knock on her door and ask for a statement. This is a very small town and I’ve been a reporter here since 1979. I know where she lives. Transparency is not a bad thing, Erin. I’m trying to do my job in an ethical way and being fair to the subject of the story in trying to contact her for a comment without sticking my nose [and my camera] in her face. When I saw that she had responded to Ken’s postings, I thought perhaps it would be a way to let her know we were trying to reach her without being too invasive. But I guess that doesn’t fit your stereotype of “just like any other journalist”…

    Reply
  10. erin
    erin at |

    that’s all fine and good but you are putting down this website and it’s creator Ken for the tagline that was used. Did he know anything but what had already been written on this story before Lucy started commenting? No, probably not. So do you find it hard to beleive that he could now have compassion for this woman that he has exchanged comments with? He is also just putting it out there that if she wanted to tell her side of the story she is more than welcome to do it here. I don’t know if you’ve noticed but this isn’t some bigtime operation he has running here, it’s just somebody’s blogging site that you happened to find.

    Reply
  11. Lucy Wightman
    Lucy Wightman at |

    I am grateful to any other voices that speak to the many issues raised by recent events. There are layers upon layers of meaning and expressions of the way we exist together here in this world that come about from the components like… politics, objectification, first dibs/scoops, sensationalism, right to privacy, beastly media power, justice, but mostly care and love lost in empty disconnection.

    Reply
  12. Lucy Wightman
    Lucy Wightman at |

    and I wanted to respond to Susan by saying thank you for not showing up for a front door ambush as Channel 7 did (at which point Hull police did a respectful job moving them on and away – thank you, AND at which point a most compassionate and open minded neighbor brought me a scary mask and rainbow clown wig. I will be curious what the HEADLINE will read should you choose to report. I will be watching for it. Along the lines of your sensitivity, Susan, to privacy, what would you think if I told you that hundreds of past and present patients were COLD CALLED by the AG’s office (apparently they weren’t “flooded”)???

    Reply
  13. Al
    Al at |

    That’s what I’d like to know. I find it incomprehensible that under the pretense of protecting the public, an institution can violate the public’s right to privacy so flagrantly. The Machiavellian tactics underscore the real intent and over arching agenda of this case. Is the state AG really protecting us or serving their own interests by dredging up yet another cheap morality play to be acted out on the 6 o’clock news and in the daily rags? I feel it’s the latter and once again our tax dollars are being spent to create a smoke screen; it’s a ruse to get politicians elected. Tom Reilly and the state AG certainly do benefit from all this publicity. But the whole story is indeed not being told. On the surface, Ken’s indictment above is so easy to get one’s mind around. It’s all packaged up and delivered to you in easily understandable terms. His assumption that all strippers use their sexuality in whatever they do, past present or future, and, moreover, draw all career and professional goals from that sexuality is precisely the assumption the media wants you to make. Because it sells papers and has the added boon of getting Reilly into another term as the moral defender of “family values.” It’s BS and it’s the only scam I can see being run in this whole damn story. Lucy is the real deal. It’s the taudry relationship politicians and the media have that is the scam. Susan, be a journalist now and not a newspaper reporter and get the *whole* story!

    Reply
  14. Lucy Wightman
    Lucy Wightman at |

    Al’s concise and pointed summary, while not “in my own words,” per se, is.

    Understandably I have to be cautious and as much as “busting it wide open” has been an urgent temptation from the start of all this, right now other’s voices mean more and keep me protected from what I as yet, cannot understand.

    I hope that the larger concerns and mysteries continue to spark dialogue here and as I can, while still taking care of myself, I will comment.

    Meanwhile it is Talbot’s or Ann Taylor for my day in court.

    Reply
  15. Lucy Wightman
    Lucy Wightman at |

    The 20th of October at Suffolk Superior

    Reply
  16. C~
    C~ at |

    Lucy is the real deal and I am behind her 100%.

    All that is happening is for the publicity of the AG’s office to get Reilly elected again…Frankly it makes me sick. Aren’t there “real” fights to fight out in this world that would really make a difference? Too bad the AG’s office doesn’t have a brain or a backbone to fight a real fight.

    On a side note, LW…I’d go to Ann Taylor!

    Reply
  17. Lucy Wightman
    Lucy Wightman at |

    thank you C~ and thank you Al for being supportive.

    How DID they get all those names and numbers??? The investigator told one woman “from your insurance company” !!!

    Hey!!! What happened to HIPAA??!!! All those forms we have to sign saying we read the reams of small print about our PRIVACY??? And the sharing of private information??? So I guess TUFTS must have let their guard down? Or was somebody being dishonest and MISREPRESENTING the TRUTH??

    Reply
  18. Fired Up
    Fired Up at |

    This whole thing has me so FIRED UP!!!! She was a stripper???? Say it isn’t so….
    Last time I checked we all have a past. It is very unfortunate that Lucy’s past is being brought up and as a result her name being dragged through the mud. I for one don’t give a rat’s a** about her past. What I know about Lucy Wightman is simply this. She goes above and beyond to help those who want to be helped. She put’s in 110% all day every day. She is kind, caring, and compassionate. She is a real person, who give’s great feedback. She is knowledgeable and witty. She is strong, and a true inspiration to me. She has shown me when the world throws lemons make lemonade. Maybe she should bring some lemonade to her court date and share some with those who are throwing the lemons???? Just a thought. This is a cruel world and it pisses me off that one of the good people in this world is being scrutinized and made out to be bad. I for one don’t get it. I do and will continue to stand by her all the way.

    Reply
  19. Al
    Al at |

    Susan, I left you a message at the number above. The whole story is not being told. Be Tom Wolfe with me for a minute and see what this thread reveals.

    Reply
  20. Parental Input
    Parental Input at |

    I have never submitted a blog entry before, being of the baby boomer generation it is a new concept. However, I feel compelled to weigh in on this discussion. My daughter has been a patient of Lucy’s for the past four years. She is one of the “children” with an eating disorder. In contrast to what the Boston Globe article implies, my daughter has been very much helped by Lucy. She has a clear understanding of who my daughter is and has been and continues to be a great help to her. One of the facts that the articles have conveniently left out is that Lucy completed four years of academic work in psychology at the doctoral level at the Massachuetts School Of Psychology When my husband and I interviewed Lucy, she was honest about what her schooling was and we accepted the fact that she was not licensed nor did she have a doctorate in psychology. There really are so many layers to this story that it is difficult to decide which to write about. There is way more to talk about but this is a start.

    Reply
  21. claire
    claire at |

    Can we get beyond the stripper and shady background of Lucy Wightman? We all have a history and can understand why she would want her past to be private. Let’s move onto the indictment charges. The issue here is fraudulant behavior. Ms. Wightman has been calling herself a doctor when she does not hold a valid phd (in psychology anyhow). She has been treating patients who have been told that she is a psychologistand has signed off on legal and insurance forms as holding a phd. Ms. Wightman purchased her “phd” from a diploma mill. Why is this? Something is not right. If you have all of the required course work and experience, then why not have a legal phd document from an accredited school? What’s the story?

    Reply
  22. Susan Ovans
    Susan Ovans at |

    I told Al today that I would post my story on this site as soon as we went to press. So here it is. I also thought that doing so might assuage Ms. Wightman’s worry about what her hometown paper will say.

    Local resident charged with posing as a psychologist
    By Susan Ovans

    A Hull resident was indicted last week by a Suffolk Court grand jury on Attorney General Tom Reilly’s charges that she practiced as an unlicensed psychologist.
    Louise Wightman, also known as Lucy Wightman, 46, was charged with six counts each of filing false healthcare claims and insurance fraud, 26 counts of larceny over $250, and a single count of practicing psychology without a license. She will be arraigned on the charges Oct. 20 in Suffolk Superior Court.
    Massachusetts law requires that psychologists possess a doctoral degree in the field from a state-recognized program, and that they be licensed with the state Division of Professional Licensure. Wightman has never applied for nor received a license to practice as a psychologist, according to a statement released last Thursday by the AG’s office, although for five years she has owned 99-percent interest in a company called South Shore Psychology Associates, LLC.
    The company had offices in Hingham and, later, Norwell, and is currently named South Shore Psychotherapy Associates. Psychotherapists need not be licensed in Massachusetts.
    Wightman earned a bachelor’s degree from Emerson College and a master’s in counseling psychology from Lesley University. Although she reportedly completed several years of study toward a PhD at the Massachusetts School of Professional Psychology, she didn’t complete the program.
    The indictments allege that Wightman paid $1,299 to receive a doctoral degree in psychology from Republic of Dominica-based Concordia College & University, an online institution that is not recognized by the state of Massachusetts.
    Wightman and a former classmate formed South Shore Psychology Associates in 1998 and developed a patient base that specialized in children’s issues, particularly eating disorders among young women, but also dealt with adult issues like anger management and marriage counseling.
    The indictments allege that Wightman helped some patients obtain reimbursement for her services from six different health insurance providers by fraudulently representing herself as a psychologist and as possessing a psychology degree.
    The indictments further allege that Wightman stole money from 26 patients and their families by enlisting them to sign on as patients under the false belief that she was a licensed psychologist.
    Wightman’s Hull telephone number is unlisted, and she could not be reached for comment. Hull police, reportedly acting on Wightman’s request, this week removed a Boston TV news crew from her doorstep, according to the police log.
    However, a person who represented himself as one of Wightman’s patients called the Times today to dispute the AG’s charges.
    “Lucy [Wightman] never misrepresented herself to me as a psychologist,” the male, who asked not to be identified, said. “Any insinuations to the contrary are really sickening.”
    The man said he was angered to have been contacted by the state Attorney General’s office in connection with this case, and alleged his rights to have his medical history remain private had been violated by his insurance carrier.
    According to the AG’s statement, the case was referred to Reilly’s office by BlueCross/Blue Shield of Massachusetts.
    Questions surrounding Wightman’s credentials first surfaced in a Fox 25 Undercover news report by Mike Beaudet that aired Feb. 20.
    In the TV segment, Fox Undercover producer Jonathan Wells used a hidden camera for an interview with Wightman, during which she allegedly told him she was a psychologist.
    Beaudet also revealed that Wightman – then Lucy Johnson – in the 1970s had been a celebrated exotic dancer who performed as Princess Cheyenne at various Boston clubs and, later, at The Foxy Lady in Providence; had once been engaged to singer Cat Stevens before the musician converted to Islam; had hosted a radio talk show and appeared in Playboy; and competed as a bodybuilder and won a state title – all before she went back to school to earn her master’s degree and pursue a career in counseling.
    It was insight gained from her diverse background, Wightman’s anonymous patient said today, that makes her “a gifted and knowledgeable” therapist.
    “She totally transformed herself,” he said. “I think that’s a very noble thing.”

    Reply
  23. claire
    claire at |

    Susan, Thanks for letting us preview the article. It was fairly written. We will always find someone to be on both sides of the argument. I happened to see the Fox25 interview when Lucy was asked if she were a psychiatrist and she responded that she was a psychologist. I also have paperwork signed by Lucy Wightman, Phd, and Psychologist. This paperwork is for insurance purposes as well as legal purposes. Is this fraud? I also believe that because many of Wightman’s patients were children, she should expect hostile reactions from parents. I can parallel it to seeing a physician for years only to find out they are cpr trained and bought their degree in the Dominican Republic since no one else would honor their course work.

    Reply
  24. Lucy Wightman
    Lucy Wightman at |

    I agree with “Claire” regarding your presentation, Susan and I hope your work is recognized as going above and beyond the yellow journalism game of telephone tag that has been played.

    Reply
  25. legal haven
    legal haven at |

    you HEARD WHAT on FOX25??? With a hidden camera? Wait.. was this a consenting interview Ms. Wightman gave to the show or a hidden camera???

    Reply
  26. claire
    claire at |

    The point is that she lied.

    Reply
  27. claire
    claire at |

    Ken, If you go to http://www.fox25.com and go to the Fox Undercover link on the left you will find the written story (posing as a psychologist) with her interview.

    Reply
  28. C~
    C~ at |

    Claire….you state you have “legal and insurance papers” signed from Lucy Wightman, PhD and Psychologist which leads us to believe you (or a family member) saw Lucy Wightman…….so tell us Clarire……..are you one of the 26?

    Reply
  29. claire
    claire at |

    I am not one of the 26.

    Reply
  30. legal haven
    legal haven at |

    The point is wiretapping is a FELONY.

    Reply
  31. legal haven
    legal haven at |

    Another point is Claire SHIRKED the concern and like most people comes to conclusions without a logical and stepwise analysis of all the facts.

    We are all more comfortable once we think we know it all.

    Reply
  32. lucy wightman
    lucy wightman at |

    Interesting. Maybe Claire went to grad school with me for those 7 years??

    Reply
  33. claire
    claire at |

    How did I SHIRK the concern? So give me the facts. Did she lie or not?
    No on the grad school. I only vacation in the Domincan Republic.

    Reply
  34. claire
    claire at |

    And while we are on the subject of SHIRKING, did it occur to legal haven that Ms. Wightman did some shirking of her own? Perhaps shirking the fact that she called herself a doctor?

    Reply
  35. C~
    C~ at |

    Clarie….when you have a PhD, (which Ms. Wightman does) you can call yourself a doctor!

    Reply
  36. claire
    claire at |

    Your point is???? I never claimed to be a doctor. A PhD? Wow. Congratulations!! Could you share the source?

    Reply
  37. C~
    C~ at |

    Let’s try to say this a bit more elementary then for those who can’t seem to understand or grasp a point…….When an individual earns a PhD, that specific individual now has the honor and privledge of calling themselves Dr.

    Reply
  38. claire
    claire at |

    Thank you, C, for clearing that up. I can now get a grasp on your point. However, the point I cannot seem to grasp is where the supposed PhD came from. Perhaps you could help me to understand, in a more elementary way, that is. And did she have this PhD (I am assuming in psychology?)while she was treating all of her patients?

    Reply
  39. erin
    erin at |

    Can someone clarify the fact that she was turned in by BCBS for credentialing issues. This would mean that they realized that she really doesn’t have a state recongnized license to practice psychology in Massachusetts. Do health insurances pay claims for their patient when they see a psychotherapist as Lucy states she is? Again, I’m just trying to get clarification from someone that knows. If they don’t then I’m not sure how she would defend submitting claims to health insurance companies and receiving money. Does anyone know the answer to that?

    Reply
  40. C~
    C~ at |

    I have BCBS insurance and they do not and have never asked me if my therpist is licensed or if she has a PhD. I submit my claim and get paid. They don’t even require the signature of my therapist on the form.

    Reply
  41. claire
    claire at |

    I have submitted claims to insurance that were signed by Lucy Wightman and she was later called to question her licence #. The insurance company (not BCBS) finally did pay some claims but assuming the claims were for a psychologist as they were signed.
    I do not know if the insurance would cover a therapist that was not in their group. I will bet that BCBS will change their policy.
    A question for “C”: If Lucy Wightman does indeed have her PhD in psychology, then why was she indicted by the grand jury? If her lawyers produced her PhD, she should have been easily cleared. Perhaps she should get a new legal team?

    Reply
  42. claire
    claire at |

    I understand and respect the legal issues. However, the silence speaks for itself. I am only asking for proof of her supposed PhD.

    Reply
  43. claire
    claire at |

    Ken, I look at your response #16….Can it GET any more warped than this????

    Reply
  44. claire
    claire at |

    Ken, I notice your beautiful child on this blog site. Suppose you had a serious issue with your child and were referred to a psychologist for help. After a year or so and several thousand dollars in payments, you find out that this psychologist was a former stripper. Ok. You can get past this. However, you soon find out that this psychologist is not really a psychologist but has been faking her PhD. In fact she purchased her PhD on line from a diploma mill in a foreign country. How would you and your wife respond? This is your child you are talking about.

    Reply
  45. semantics
    semantics at |

    OK OK. Claire sure is “fired up” and clearly to take the time to keep obsessively watchdogging a blog and commenting (13 posts in one day) there is some hidden agenda.

    Being a linguist in trade I notice a pattern of not following up on questions asked such as the audio question. The descriptives like “shady background,” “diploma mill,” “I only vacation in the Domincan Republic,” and “silence speaks for itself,” are consistently about only 1 possibility – yours. More than one episode of cutting sarcasm and an almost hysterical, urgent need to convert the masses to your narrow, and if I daresay, naive perspective.

    You make very definitive accusations like “she lied,” “does not hold a valid phd (in psychology anyhow,)” “I also have paperwork signed by Lucy Wightman, Phd, and Psychologist. This paperwork is for insurance purposes as well as legal purposes,” (and what are those exactly?),and “has been faking her PhD.”

    Use of multiple exclamations is a way to get the reader’s attention, and then some…. and then some more.

    Asking questions when one already has their own private answer like, “Is this fraud?” is a strategy used to trick others into wondering along with someone who is actually not wondering at all.

    Your appeal to, say Ken’s fatherhood, as a softer, more vulnerable, therefore accesible entry point for your rather stubbornly toxic campaign comes on the heels of not getting the response you would like from C~. If one tracks your response timeline, the pace picks up quite a bit if you are not responded to (immediately gratified) by the readers in a timely fashion. You then return to re-read the posts again to enlist others in your descriptive term “warped.” When this recruits no one, you go for the soft underbelly.

    Speech analysis alone is fascinating and it goes without saying that we can never muster the right balance of objectivity to be our own analysts. I am of the ilk where one waits until “the fat lady sings.” Until that point I am a collector of data. Therefore I am on neither side of the pass, just observing.

    I am sorry, Claire, that you seem so troubled by something that in reality is not your trouble at all. Maybe you just enjoy a good go-round.

    And Claire, maybe you could teach me a thing or two about the term “diploma mill.” What is the functional meaning of this?

    Reply
  46. Al
    Al at |

    Susan,
    You are a journalist. This thread reveals still more. And I never thought I’d say this, but I agree with semantics. Obeservation is a blessing.

    How we carve up the world into names matters and we fight over that naming and sometimes sink into petty battles over that naming that have nothing to do with the external world. Names are good, but it’s verbs that really define who we are.

    Lucy is the real deal and, claire, you really have nothing to worry about.

    p.s. I am a psychologist. I hold no degree that annoints me as such. Not even close. There. Come prosecute me, thought police!

    Reply
  47. claire
    claire at |

    Semantics and Al, Thanks for the complimentary therapy session. I will take the time to absorb your words and reflect as needed.
    Yes, we shall wait and see what happens.

    Reply
  48. semantics
    semantics at |

    There we go again! No answer to the question. Ah well.

    Reply
  49. B.Z.
    B.Z. at |

    I recently came across this blog, and I felt that I should share my thoughts.

    I know Lucy personally, and there is no need to say if I am a patient or not.

    I think that these charges are ridiculous. I bet that if the Fox 25 Episode didn’t air, none of this would be happening. Lucy would be continuing to help her patients as she helps me. Personally, I don’t give a shit if My therapist is licensed. I do care that she has some experience and knows what she is talking about. Lucy went to many years of school, studying Psychology and the way the mind works. She is always there for me, and she is one of the kindest and caring people I know.

    It makes me cry, thinking of how all of this is affecting her. Not because of business, but emotionally as well. This is a human being we are dealing with. Who dedicated her life to helping the lives of others. Who spent hours and hours every single day, trying to figure out and help treat the issues that others were trying to overcome. It is truly amazing how she did all of that, while at the same time having a life and family of her own.

    I understand, how people who do not know her can assume what they read is all there is to this story. But I ask you all, do you remember high school, and rumors and gossip. This is exactly like that. Hey, some of it may be true, but what about the other sides of the story. Give her a chance to speak her side. There are so many cases out there, that turn out to be false. And the suspects remain innocent. And even cases where the suspects are charged, convicted, and punished, for crimes that they did not do.

    No matter what happens, I will stand by Lucy through all of this, because she stood by me when things weren’t going well for me. I know you can get through this Lucy. I know you can. You are such a good person and I want to thank you for still standing up for yourself. In the end, I hope everything turns out well. You don’t deserve this at all.

    Stay strong and don’t give up.

    Reply
  50. Chris
    Chris at |

    Unfortunately, we shall all have to wait to see what happen. In the meantime, this is a waste of Lucy’s valuable time and energy, which could surely be better utilized treating her patients. She already seems to work 24/7, and now she has to defend a frivolous case, and Claire’s attacks!

    Frankly, it makes no difference to me or my family what credentials are/were listed on her business cards, company sign, or any insurance forms. What is more important is that Lucy is an intelligent and highly capable counselor, who we choose to see without support of insurance reimbursement. We have not been as lucky with individuals that our insurance company has referrred us to.

    Lucy, you know you have our support. Also, I would probably go with a Jones New York suit and Talbots blouse, but I am the queen of conservative (which I’m working on)!!

    Reply
  51. Calvin
    Calvin at |

    I’m curious, if Lucy was found guilty on all charges, what would the punishments be?

    Reply
  52. legal haven
    legal haven at |

    Sentencing guidelines (the grid) are just that: guidelines. That supposes that a deal is not made, which, given the devestating effects of the defamation, is most likely. Most public defenders would encourage a deal before defending through a trial.

    If one does choose to defend, I cannot imagine that all the witnesses (patients) would acquiesce to the requirements of not only a trial, but the various pre-trial interviews, discovery and so on.

    Sadly, those who have the funds, have the best counsel, unless their is high profile value to the case.

    Reply
  53. semantics
    semantics at |

    oh dear.
    claire appears to have left us.
    the protagonist has taken the weekend off.

    Reply
  54. claire
    claire at |

    I am here, patiently awaiting responses. Semantics, I am not sure what questions you needed answered. Am I looking for a good “go around?” Sure, what the heck. As you accuse me of being consumed by this blog, what is your interest in counting the number of times I responded in one day and analyzing my punctuation??????
    You seem to be a bit antagonistic yourself.
    And where did “C” go?

    Reply
  55. claire
    claire at |

    Sorry to reply again so quickly but here is the elementary diploma mill as found in Websters.com
    n. Informal
    An unaccredited institution of higher education that grants degrees without ensuring that students are properly qualified.

    Reply
  56. C~
    C~ at |

    Claire……Why are you so concerned as to where I am?

    Legal haven….I doubt Lucy will plead…I’m sure she wants to defend herself and get her side told since you can’t do that with the grand jury. It would be horrible and I feel bad for what Lucy is going through…she does NOT deserve this. If and when it goes to trial, I can’t wait for the “famous 26″ to be investigated and have their lives turned upside down….Geez…I hope none of them have secrets….Mmmmm we will see and you can bet, they will all be revealed!

    Chris…I too am behind Lucy 100% and you are right, she is a BRILLIANT Individual and a FANTASTIC therapist. One thing I don’t agree with…No Talbots…Ann Taylor is much better…..however, I do agree with a Jones suit…that’s ok…. :-) Kudos to you for saying outloud you are “working on your being conservative!! Good job!

    Reply
  57. claire
    claire at |

    C, I was just curious as to why, when I asked you questions, you did not answer. Such as, if Lucy holds a valid PhD, where is it from? I was also enjoying the banter.

    I agree with C (imagine that) that it is doubtful Lucy will make a deal. She is too much of a fighter for that.

    Will the 26 people be required to testify at court? It will be interesting to see who they are. Does anyone know what percentage of those 26 had children as clients of Lucy?

    Reply
  58. Greenarrow
    Greenarrow at |

    I don’t care about Claire, unless she is the underhanded sneak who created this mess in the beginning. Someone brought this undeserved story to Fox in the first place and clearly did it in a vindictive manner with the clear intention of harming Lucy without the least connection to any concern for the ‘protection’ of the public.

    The fact that Fox and Tom Rielly, formly known as the Middlesex Pursecutor, jumped all over this cheap headline says more about their ethics than it does about Dr. Wightman’s.

    There is a long history of numerous and various titles being used in the field of pyschological therapy and much confusion as to their application and utilization over the years. I defy any ten non-professionals to come up with the same definitions of pyschologist, psychotherapist, psychological counsulor, and half a dozen others.

    One interesting point is that it was only in March of this year that the state of Massachusetts determined to enforce a dictum that a ‘Psychologist’ had to be state liscenced in order to refer to themselves as such. It was never deleniated in our leading schools of psychology that such was required nor is this the universal practice in other states. Futhermore, the state never made any attempt to notify anyone practicing psycology in Massachusetts that they were intending to enforce this new requirement. Nevertheless, the publicity loving AG’s Office jumped all over this ‘news story’ as if they had discovered Al Queda in Hull.

    Lucy Johnson studied hard and worked harder to aquire the ability and skill to help others. Her long list of grateful and satisfied clients attests to her commitment and ability. The people she helped, and for the reasons they required help, are not in the position to make their lives public by marching to her defense.

    These indictments are as useless and unnecessary as most of the things Tom Reilly does with his office. All that reasonable oversight of psychological practice in Massachusetts required in this case was a reminder from the state that now only licensed persons could use the word psycologist in relation to their practice and that insurers must establish that the providers of services that they are covering under the heading of psychology must hold a license from the state.

    The facts of this case make Reilly’s prosecution malicious and totally unwarrented. It is a waste of public resources and public funds and is clearly intended for nothing but the enhancement of his desire to be the next Governor of our state. I state with utmost confidence that Lucy Wightman was far from the only unlicensed psychologist praticing in Massachusetts and without the ‘Princess Cheyenne’ headline-hook, she, like all the others, would not be facing court dates, personal and financial hardships, unwanted publicity, revisiting of previous life experiences, and the disruption of the helpful service to her neighbors that she has trainned and worked to provide.

    Reply
  59. Calvin
    Calvin at |

    I don’t even know Claire, yet I still want to jump out of her computer screen and give her the “bitchslap” that she deserves.

    Reply
  60. claire
    claire at |

    Wow Calvin. It appears that you have some anger management issues.
    Do you care to elaborate on your comment? What is it that gets under your skin?

    Reply
  61. Calvin
    Calvin at |

    Your sarcasm & viewpoint on this case. And how is that anger managment? I said i WANT to, do you see me hurting you? No. I didn’t think so. What do you have against Lucy anyways? We are all dying to know. It seems that you want her to lose so bad. You obviously do not know her as well as I do, to take pride in the fact that she does not deserve these charges.

    Reply
  62. semantics
    semantics at |

    Greenarrow – I am not worthy! Your eloquent and succint passage is written with such measured passion and stepwise logic. Your presentation brings vague theories to concrete understanding. Are you an attorney? A speech writer? I hope that if you are a lawyer, that you will represent Wightman.

    Reply
  63. danny
    danny at |

    Lucy(Princess Cheyenne)was profiled by a couple of news magazines about 15 years ago. In those profiles, I got the impression that she was an intelligent,skilled, and warm person. Claire, people lie or embellish their credentials all the time. As a matter of fact I bet at least once in your life you might have embellished something yourself. But perhaps I’m wrong-maybe you’ve never done any thing wrong in your life. This lady,Lucy, from what i’ve read here is a damn good therapist!!! I’ve gone to therapist who have absolutely sucked!! I have a damn good one right now, and I wouldn’t trade her for anything. Claire, she’s a social worker. Her credentials aren’t plastered on her wall. All I know is she’s damn good!! I don’t give a rat’s ass about credentials as do you Claire. Are you with Fox 25,or one of the insurance companies, or are you a lawyer in Tom Reilly’s office?

    Reply
  64. claire
    claire at |

    Gee, this sure is fun being beat up constantly. Calvin, I assume your anger since you jumped into the blog with one question and suddenly you want to “bitchslap” me for my opinions.
    I am a mother of children who were treated by Lucy. Imagine my suprise when one snowy Sunday afternoon as we gathered with friends to watch football, a commercial for Fox25 news comes on showing Lucy, their therapist, as a stripper. Yes, my children were the viewers, as well as our friends. So we addressed the situation with our children and with Lucy. After the initial shock value (and I absolutely agree that the shock value is 100% the fault of Fox25 and the woman responsible for the story). It took some time, but we were able to understand Lucy’s past. She insisted that she was the real thing, that she had her degrees in order and would prove herself worthy of her PhD. However, to later find out that we were again betrayed by her schooling, denied the truth of her credentials and allowed doubt of our children’s treatments….this is where our anger creeps in.
    Danny, sure people embellish. I am quite sure that I have embellished in my life. Did it interfere with other’s lives tho? I tend to doubt that.
    Lucy is a very intelligent and yes, a witty person. She can make you think, make you laugh out loud, make you pissed off at the world in order to do something about it. Guess what? I am pissed.
    I am not at all sorry that I am making you all angry with my opinion. Are you all holding a support group or something?
    Greenarrow, you write with knowledge and grace. I appreciate that.

    Reply
  65. ruth
    ruth at |

    Not embellishing and telling the truth is a good thing. A parent once called me, knowing I taught where Lucy went to school to ask about the truth in terms of her education. This parent had been told the truth, as it is told in the media, but can you filter through the sleezy presentation? The parent was told that as disappointed as Lucy was to have withdrawn from MSPP during year 5, she submitted everything to this online degree program and was granted a PhD knowing it was not license eligible. This is not lying.

    Claire you sound mad about a lot of things and you sound very intelligent as well. I am guessing you never returned to the source, your children’s therapist, to process any of this. It is never too late.

    Reply
  66. ruth
    ruth at |

    in other words Claire, you never did say how you came to this “truth” other than the media and gossip as B.Z. mentions. She said she was the real thing, that she would stand behind her training and education yet you never gave her the chance, letting the ledia win out.

    Reply
  67. erin
    erin at |

    I think the thing that is going to cause the most problems for Lucy is that she allegedly submitted claims to health insurers using a false Massachusetts lisence number to receive payment as a psychologist.

    If all her patients knew that she was a psychotherapist then I don’t think she will have a problem on that charge. It seems that she was upfront with them about that.

    I feel real strongly if she committed insurance fraud she should really be penalized for that. A crime like that is one of the reasons why healthcare is so costly.

    Reply
  68. C~
    C~ at |

    Claire… Because of the media coverage only, YOU ALLOWED the doubt to come into play on Lucy treating your kids. Too bad you didn’t trust Lucy when she told you she could prove herself. You trust her before, too bad you took the media’s side. Its a shame ….your kids lost a smart, intelligent and compassionate therapist.

    Also Claire..you said you “were pissed”…what are you so pissed about? You asked Lucy about her past etc. and she told you the truth. Yet, you made the decision from what the media reported that Lucy wasn’t telling the truth. You are asking all of us to give you the proof that Lucy is legit…..Claire, what proof do YOU HAVE (not the media reports) that she isn’t?

    Reply
  69. C~
    C~ at |

    Erin…I’m curious to know where you got your information that Lucy used a false license number to receive payments? This is the first I ever of it.

    Reply
  70. erin
    erin at |

    It was my impression that this whole thing was brought up becuase of some credentialing issues with a health insurance. Bluecross Blueshield. A credentialing issue would involve a problem with the medical provider’s license number or their actual ability to show credentials. In Massachusetts a psychologist would be assigned a Massachusetts lisence number showing they are able to practice in Massachusetts. A health insurance like BCBS would not issue payment to a psychologist without that psychologist showing that they are lisenced in Massachusetts. I thought the real issue here was that Lucy was submitting claims to insurance companies as a psychologist? You can tell me if I’m wrong.

    Reply
  71. parental input
    parental input at |

    When I requested coverage from Tufts Health Plan for Lucy for my daughter’s visits starting in 2001, she had already been issued a provider number. When I received a letter confirming approval for visits, it was to Lucy Wightman and her stated degree was a masters degree. There was no reference to doctor. I had a long conversation with the mental health department at Tufts about Lucy and there was never any mention of her being a psychologist. I had to get special approval since she was not one of their providers. They definitely approved her back then for insurance coverage without a PhD or a license. I have the insurance letter to prove it.

    Reply
  72. erin
    erin at |

    Easy now big Ken. I happen to work in an insurance related field and we deal with provider numbers and credentialing in my company.

    If Lucy was not giving say BCBS the impression that she was a psychologist then why did they report her?

    I guess I just want to know more about that part of it. Ken.. get on it. Call BCBS and find out what the story is over there. You call yourself a blogger!

    Reply
  73. C~
    C~ at |

    I have BCBS and they have never asked me (or Lucy) to provide a license number or prove she held a PhD.

    Reply
  74. erin
    erin at |

    Well they wouldn’t have asked you C. How would you know if they asked Lucy? Do you have to submit your own bills to the insurance for visits with Lucy? How do you say without a doubt they have never asked her for a license number?

    Reply
  75. claire
    claire at |

    Hey C. Talk about hearsay. Some person writes a blog asking me if I followed up with Lucy, (which I did) and you are suddenly accusing me of believing only the media and perhaps neglecting my duties as a parent? Nice. I’ll have you know that I am an outstanding mother.
    I followed up closely with the story and with other professionals. Lucy assured me that she had her Phd. and that she was a psychologist. Seems she would not be in this position were this true. HAD Lucy told us from the start that was a therapist, we could have made a decision to continue seeking treatment with her. Honestly, I think we would have stayed with her regardless of her credentials. My point is that she did not tell us her background and all of the papers she signed for us lead us to believe (without the help of the media) that she was fraudulent.
    I suppose the proof will be shown in court.
    Let’s let our lovely legal system decide the rules.
    What about the other therapists/counselors/psychologists….what-ever their titles are, who left Lucy’s office due to this fiasco?
    I also fought with insurance companies to get covered. I fought on our behalf as well as Lucy’s, insisting that she was a psychologist as she told us. Lucy told us that the reason she was not licensed was due to our own privacy issues (not ours exclusively, but those of her patients.)

    Reply
  76. claire
    claire at |

    Erin, Yes, we all submitted our own insurance forms, signed by Lucy. We paid upfront and then we personally were reimbursed by insurance if it were approved. That is how it worked for us, anyhow. Our forms were always signed by a PhD.

    Reply
  77. Fired Up
    Fired Up at |

    Claire said “(and I absolutely agree that the shock value is 100% the fault of Fox25 and the woman responsible for the story).” It was a guy Mike Baudet, but at least you agree with something.Claire said “Are you all holding a support group or something?” Is that suppose to be funny? I think that is in bad taste. Oh and the answer to that would be No.

    Claire I’m sorry you feel that Lucy betrayed you in some way, but did she help your children at all? I’m just curious. That would be enough for me to see past the media crap and know that there are some really bad people out there in this field and that you have found a good one. Just try to look at all angles of the story. I don’t disagree with you feeling pissed about this situation. When I found out I too was pissed,and scared. When I did eventually calm down. I tried to look at both sides. I decided for myself that Lucy was a hell of a lot more than the media reports. It was then I decided to stand by her and will continue to do so.

    Reply
  78. erin
    erin at |

    Your forms were always signed PhD even though her PhD was not recognized in the state of Massachusetts. She is having YOU submit claims to a Massachusetts health insurance? Seems a little fishy. Again, these are just my views on it. I don’t really know what BCBS or any other health insurance has in their system about Lucy. I just know that a report was filed by a health insurance stemming from credentialing issues.

    Reply
  79. claire
    claire at |

    Fired Up, It was Mike Baudet who reported this story. I believe it was someone else who gave him the heads up. Mike was only doing his job, and obviously did it well to get such a grand response.
    This seems to be a groupie blog, which is why I made the comment about a support group. I did not mean to offend and I apologize if I did. Just trying to lighten up a bit.
    I have looked at both sides. Perhaps it is because we are dealing with our children and the emotion of messing with your kids can really fire one up. I feel that we were not told the truth and therefor have the right to be pissed. Had it been only me seeing Lucy that may be a different story, I can’t say.

    Reply
  80. C~
    C~ at |

    Claire…Chill out…I never said you were neglecting your kids or that you were a horrible mother. You read into things a little to much and put your own spin on it. Which is exactly what you’ve done with this. By the way Claire…which “other professionals” did you follow up with to determine that Lucy is a fraud? I’d like to know…share your SOURCE.

    Erin…I too submit my own claims to BCBS. Heck, my dentist even makes me submit my own claims (and just for the record…my dentist just signs her name…she doesn’t even put her title down)!

    Also Erin, since you are in the “insurance business”, why don’t you call BCBS and get to the bottom of this for us, eh?

    Reply
  81. C~
    C~ at |

    Yes, her arraingment is Thursday.

    Reply
  82. claire
    claire at |

    I believe her arraignment is this week and a trial date to be decided later. Probably will be a while.
    Perhaps we could all wear nametags. hahahaha

    Reply
  83. erin
    erin at |

    Let me get on that for ya C!

    Ken.. my question to you is what are you supporting? If you went to her arraingment, what is it that you support her for?

    Just Curious.

    Reply
  84. C~
    C~ at |

    Imagine this…I agree with Claire :-) in the fact that I too believe her trial will be aways away.

    Reply
  85. Fired Up
    Fired Up at |

    Claire,
    I appreciate your willingness to apologize.

    Reply
  86. claire
    claire at |

    C, I followed up with a lawyer, our pediatrician as well as a psychologist.

    Reply
  87. C~
    C~ at |

    Oh…so they all know Lucy and told you that she isn’t legit? Just curious, why would call a lawyer and who referred you to Lucy anyway?

    Reply
  88. erin
    erin at |

    I understand that her past doesn’t have anything to do with the issue and I do agree with you there Ken.

    What I don’t agree with is saying you support someone when you know nothing about the validity of the charges that will be brought against her. (I’m no expert myself)

    Do you support insurance fraud and larceny? I know, it is innocent until proven guilty. What then?

    Reply
  89. claire
    claire at |

    I thought it best to consider a lawyer to protect ourselves should that be necessary. The professionals that we consulted did not know Lucy….that would certainly defeat the purpose of getting an objective opinion. For personal reasons, I cannot share our referral to Lucy.

    Reply
  90. claire
    claire at |

    Fired up, I appreciate your comment.

    Reply
  91. on her behalf
    on her behalf at |

    Lucy never used a license number because she was not and is not licensed.

    Reply
  92. erin
    erin at |

    Thanks for clearing that up Lucy. So what would be the problem that an insurance had with you? Probably can’t answer that I understand. These are just some of the questions that come to my mind because of what I read in Susan’s piece in your hometown newspaper.

    Reply
  93. semantics
    semantics at |

    Claire again you evade the question directly about following up as Ruth wondered.

    Reply
  94. on her behalf
    on her behalf at |

    actually its haven

    Reply
  95. on her behalf
    on her behalf at |

    CLAIRE writes: “to later find out that we were again betrayed by her schooling, denied the truth of her credentials and allowed doubt of our children’s treatments….this is where our anger creeps in”

    what was the first betrayal? that she took her clothes off in her 20s and then used that money to go to grad school?

    if she represented her competencies and education accurately, to include where her degree came from, how were you denied the truth?

    whose responsibility is it that doubt crept in? Lucy’s?

    Reply
  96. ruth
    ruth at |

    Claire
    I understand as others do parts of your being angry. You say that “Some person writes a blog asking me if I followed up with Lucy, (which I did) and you are suddenly accusing me of believing only the media and perhaps neglecting my duties as a parent? Nice. I’ll have you know that I am an outstanding mother.” Again you sound angry and defensive about much more than you let on to here and for whatever reasons want to hold onto that anger.

    Why?

    Reply
  97. ruth
    ruth at |

    and when you followed up, what did Lucy show you? from what I understand, Lucy invited patients in, not at a cost, to meet quietly with them, hear their responses and address their concerns. additionally to show them proof of her education and training. did any of you do this that saw or see Lucy? Did you Claire?

    Reply
  98. semantics
    semantics at |

    the definition of a diploma mill – thank you is:

    An unaccredited institution of higher education that grants degrees without ensuring that students are properly qualified.

    Concordia is accredited, grants degrees based on the competencies of its students. Equals = NOT A DIPLOMA MILL

    Reply
  99. erin
    erin at |

    Haven.. then my question to you is how do you know for a fact that no license number was ever given?

    Reply
  100. legal haven
    legal haven at |

    By the way
    Claire stated she heard audio of Wightman saying something during the hidden camera incident (aka intangible rape) – were you a liar or just an embellisher?

    Reply
  101. on her behalf
    on her behalf at |

    worked in her office

    Reply
  102. danny
    danny at |

    Claire,

    I can understand your anger, and I’m sorry you feel beat up. I know I don’t like to feel that way. I do have one question though-we’re your kids helped by Lucy? I was not helped at all by PH.D psychologist for 2 years, and then I found my social worker.
    It sounds like your kids were not hepled by Lucy, which happens, but it seems like she had the qualifications to treat your kids even though she was not a PH.D psychologist. If there was a mistake she made it was that she didn’t call herself a psychotherapist.
    Although things can get more convoluted-I went to someone who was a PH.D but called herself a psychotherapit. I liked her initially when I first went and then later when I went i din’t at all. I felt like smacking her. But I know thT’S NOT THE WAY TO APPROACH THINGS.
    cLAIRE, i HOPE THINGS WORK OUT FOR YOU AND lUCY.

    Reply
  103. erin
    erin at |

    Well, I guess Lucy has nothing to wory about then if she is not registering herself with any insurances as being a psychologist.

    Reply
  104. C~
    C~ at |

    Lucy did invite her patients to talk with her and she did have information on her education etc. available.

    Reply
  105. legal haven
    legal haven at |

    and why is anyone believing that it actually WAS BCBS??? Here we are scrutinizing the media like experts and we miss that the only damn information we have at hand (unless we know Wightman and have SEEN evidence) (oops – or if, like Claire, we HEARD some interview) are thoughts and words – as Al said – SEND OUT THE THOUGHT POLICE!!! Ooooo yes, the information on the AGs website must be accurate! Not. Notice the link is the “media center.” They can lie and have lied to interviewees saying they got names from insurance companies etc… critical thinking skills are needed. If someone intentionally commits fraud (this is, btw, the only way to commit fraud, is with intent) don’t you think they do a better job of hiding it, especially for someone as bright as you say Wightman is.

    She has been caught up in a maelstrom

    Reply
  106. legal haven
    legal haven at |

    The word psychologist is the smoke screen here. The reality is the word licensed.

    Look in the Mass Psychologist Newspaper where the advertise for “MASTERS LEVEL PSYCHOLOGISTS” or look at any damn university where professors and researchers are called PSYCHOLOGISTS or look up Oregon case law where a case was recently won entitling the use of the term “psychologist” as an element of free speech.

    Wightman has had the training and education above and beyond a masters, holds a PhD in psychology and has all the grit to go with it (assuming she does) then the problem seems to be more about what Greenarrow says, notification -

    hey but lets pick on someone and turn them into a poster child – that way we don;t have to pay for advertising! make it a public stoning and then it becomes public knowledge!

    Reply
  107. legal haven
    legal haven at |

    Or look at our very own Commonwealth who not so long ago APPOINTED PSYCHOLOGISTS for DMH and DMR even when they did not even have a Bacherlor’s degree.

    Reply
  108. legal haven
    legal haven at |

    now I am FIRED UP along with FIRED UP.

    ERRRR!!! Oh sure, NOW we ALL know that psychologists have to be licensed because of the evil Wightman – and before this I would put my first born on it, NONE OF YOU KNEW this was a law because it was NOT ENFORCED UNTIL NOW. Not only is it PR for Reilly but also for the new board of reg muscles.

    Reply
  109. erin
    erin at |

    Haven.. you seem to have a lot of knowledge on this subject. Esepcially the fraud aspect of this. You worked in Lucy’s office? hmmm… interesting.

    Unless directly involved I think everyone will have their outsiders opinion on the subject (as I do). It’s because I’m an outsider on this that all I can form is an opinion with the information provided. That’s because I’m human and that’s what we do.

    I just wish we could know what is factual and what is not.

    Reply
  110. legal haven
    legal haven at |

    where do I go to get a license to call myself HUMAN? and how much does this cost?

    And when I go see Wightman for therapy and want to use my insurance to seek reimbursement do I need a mental illness dignostic code to justify it? And will I then be refused life insurance? Or higher insurance plans?

    Reply
  111. Susan Ovans
    Susan Ovans at |

    I have a question and a comment. According to the AG’s office, Ms. Wightman formed her company with a former schoolmate, although she owns 99% of the firm. Is that partner a licensed psychologist and, if so, did he or she sign off on the healthcare forms or use his or her license to become credentialed for health insurance reasons? That may be one reason why the AG only charged Ms. Wightman with one count of practicing psychology without a license. Does anyone know what ‘practicing psychology’ means, as opposed to ‘practicing psychotherapy’?
    A comment: The level of vitriol directed toward Claire surprises me. She seems angry and hurt that her child’s therapist was not honest with her and, I think, may feel foolish to have entrusted her vulnerable family to someone whose credentials are alleged to have been falsified. Trust and honesty are supposed to be the basis for therapy, after all, and then to have had to fight to have your child’s insurance bills paid adds insult to injury. Whatever Reilly’s motivation in pursuing this case, he apparently has 26 individuals, or their families, who feel they, too, were duped, along with six insurance companies who may or may not have covered the services of a psychotherapist, as opposed to a psychologist. The point is that while many people who have contributed to this conversation say they don’t care what Ms. Wightman’s credentials are, other clients apparently do. Those feelings have to be respected. After all, people consult mental health professionals to deal with confusion and vulnerability and other problems, not to have their therapist add to the angst.

    Reply
  112. on her behalf
    on her behalf at |

    erin – I know, no hard feelings and you sound really nice, like you are a reasonable person open to all the possibilities. it is just awful the pain this has caused, believe me, so much more pain than the anger like someone like Claire. only one person has been hurt here – Lucy. She hides it and manages it well. puts it aside. the 26 are looking for money – nothing more. If lucy folds they will get money. I do know there have never been any complaints, lawsuits etc.. Lucy has bought supervision for ten years and followed the ethical codes. I think we know the facts pretty much, and that it is more interpretation. there are 26 people – looking for their scratch ticket and who were not looking for this until they were lured into the AG’s plan with money possibly. Where are the other 500 patients?

    Reply
  113. PI
    PI at |

    Susan
    Ask Karen Beason Patrick or Karen Shaw or Karen Beason (she has changed her name several times) who works I believe at Brandeis and is still on the LLC and who initially worked with a Blaire Barone in Hingham and see (this is for you Erin) if Blaire or Karen ever filed claims for Wightman.

    Reply
  114. claire
    claire at |

    legal haven, do you still work in her office? Where are the others who left?
    Ruth, I had no interest in returning to the direct source. Enough was enough. I went to other sources to get the information I needed to form our own thoughts and opinions. We are entitled?
    Of course I am being defensive because I believe in what I feel.
    I have never been quoted so much before…

    Reply
  115. erin
    erin at |

    This is a reply to the 124th comment which was from legal haven. Unfortunately you don’t need a license to be human and I think everyone can attest that they have met people that wouldn’t be granted one if it were the case.

    Another unfortunate thing is that the reply to all of your questions about diagnostic codes and higher insurance rates is yes. That’s the country/world we live in now. It’s not right but that’s the way it is.

    Reply
  116. legal haven
    legal haven at |

    Susan… you are assuming…

    ‘She seems angry and hurt that her child’s therapist was not honest with her (WE DO NOT KNOW THIS TO BE TRUE UNLESS WE WERE IN THE ROOM WHEN WIGHTMAN AND CLAIRE SPOKE)

    and, I think, may feel foolish to have entrusted her vulnerable family to someone whose credentials are alleged to have been falsified. (MAYBE SOME OF THE ANGER THEN BELONGS TO THE MEDIA TOO) (AND TOWARDS HERSELF FOR NOT RETURNING TO WIGHTMAN TO SEE FOR HERSELF – INSTEAD FINDING OUTLETS LIKE PROFESSONALS THAT DO NOT KNOW WIGHTMAN AND STOPPING THERE)

    Trust and honesty are supposed to be the basis for therapy, after all, and then to have had to fight (WE ARE ASSUMING SHE HAD TO FIGHT) (AND THIS WAS LIKELY HER CHOICE WHEN SHE STARTED AS WIGHTMAN MAKES IT CLEAR THAT SHE CANNOT BILL INSIRANCE FROM WHAT HAS BEEN SAID HERE – ANYTHING TO THE CONTRARY?)to have your child’s insurance bills paid adds insult to injury.

    Reply
  117. claire
    claire at |

    Susan, Thank you for understanding my side.

    Legal Haven…..Lucy has been the only one hurt here? Not quite. Would people feel such passion here if they were not hurt?

    Reply
  118. ruth
    ruth at |

    Claire
    you had not interest in returning to the direct source and have formed your opinions and while I would like to share more with you
    really all I think I will say before I leave this blog is to invite you to come with me Claire, to leave the blog because, you, like me, have our opinions so really being here is a waste of time.

    Reply
  119. claire
    claire at |

    I felt for a while that I was wasting my time. By leaving, I feel that I would be submitting. Thanks for the invite, but I am learning quite a bit about the other side.

    Reply
  120. legal haven
    legal haven at |

    to #131
    Claire – you feel like lashing out, being mean, getting revenge while taking nothing of yourself, your situation into account. You want company in this I can see and it is your extreme and rigid position that will get in the way of not getting what you need (whatever that is). Maybe you should become #27 and this would right things for you? I am still unclear where your damages are as they remain unamed and I do not even wish to know since I feel it is after the fact and therefore would be contrived. You feel betrayed and I am sorry. Your unwillingness to face the perpetrator as one does in a court of law shows me something I would want to label cowardice but I will hold out and assume it runs far deeper than this. You would not be here fighting the masses to be heard if you were content with your sources, opinions and feelings. Europe has far less crime – why? only one opinion but because there is civil and reasonable dialogue, respect and safer forums to resolve conflict.

    Reply
  121. ruth
    ruth at |

    OK. I understand that but I guess get confused by your presentation which seems
    to say one thing and then your actions say another. It reminds me of not being in the popular group or sticking by what my family convinced me to believe.

    btw – everyone actually did not leave Lucy.

    Reply
  122. ruth
    ruth at |

    also Claire, sounds like you might have gone through some heavy times therapy-wise in terms of what brought you in to begin with.

    I encourage you to examine the fallout from that but also the transference to the circumstances Lucy is in.

    Reply
  123. claire
    claire at |

    I am aware that not everyone left Lucy’s office. I was just wondering who (or how many) did? Curious.
    My actions or lack of action is again due to our personal accounts of “enough is enough.” Perhaps we should revisit our thoughts and call the AG. I have plenty of information for them and no, I am not looking for money.

    Reply
  124. ruth
    ruth at |

    Claire – have fun at the trial then!

    Reply
  125. legal haven
    legal haven at |

    I agree with Greenarrow.
    Either you are the psychopath that started this to beging with OR I agree with I think it was C~ that you already are one of the 26 OR you work at the AG’s office.

    Reply
  126. PI
    PI at |

    It is possible that individuals actually filing their claims got help, signatures, then lied to their insurance companies saying that yes, the treating person was licensed and made up a number.

    It is also a “known” possibility that at least one person double dipped – filed health insurance claims, received reimbursement and then also filed with our Attorney General’s office under a special fund for victims of crime where they are reimbursed for all the services whether it be counseling, funerals, respite etc.

    Bottom line is that all of this will be investigated should she not plea. The 26 will be interviewed 4 or 5 times, there lives will be investigated thoroughly, as will many other things – providing the attorney does his or her job.

    Reply
  127. Susan Ovans
    Susan Ovans at |

    I’ll follow up on that. Thanks, PI, for the info.

    Reply
  128. claire
    claire at |

    Sorry Legal, I am neither the psychopath, one of the 26 nor do I work at the AG’s office. Would my opinion make more sense if it were true?
    I think that Lucy keeps records of all of the people who filed for health insurance and with the AG’s office. So if she had to sign both pieces of paperwork, did she know that these people were double dipping? I believe the AG’s forms ask for the quite a bit of info, including what has been reimbursed by the insurance company. If the person(s) did double dip, shame on them for using up resources that are out there for the honest victims.
    Does anyone know who the person was who called Fox25? What is their status? (besides your obvious thought of psychopath)

    Reply
  129. Greenarrow
    Greenarrow at |

    Dear Claire

    I regret that I included the comment about the person who vindictively started this mess. It was addressed to that person on the assumption that he/she could not resist this blog. I do not believe that person is you. Nor do I think that paracite would have the integrity to write in. Indeed, I believe that you are another victim of this person who is using the system and an irresponsible AG to gain some personal revenge. Sorry about the harsh words you have been receiving. All of this noise and publicity has likely troubled you because a parant always wants to do the best for their child and can never be sure if they are doing so.

    Here are a few things of which I am sure:
    Not all therapys are suggessful. That is a given. However, Lucy Wightman would never due anything but her best for your child or any other client. She did not study for five years for a easy way to make a quick buck. She is a caring, consciencous, and compssionate provider.
    Lucy has a PhD in Psychology. After five years of study, internship, and supervised practice – for personal life issues, she was not able to finish the degree at the highly regarded school [MSPP] where she did the vast bulk of the graduate work. That does not mean she did not do the work nor that the work was not done satisfactorally. {Ted Kennedy got his degree from another school after his time at Harvard, after all.]
    The accedited school which granted Lucy’s PhD is not acceptable for a license under the rules of Massachusetts. That is far from saying it is a ‘Diploma Mill’. Lucy knew this and never claimed otherwise. She NEVER claimed to be licensed in Massachusetts or anywhere. [Just for interest sake: With the exact same credentials, she could and can be licensed in several states.]
    Lucy NEVER made insurance claims because she was not licensed [period] Some patients’ insurance carriers were willing or able to pay for treatment from a therapist without regard to license. As it was not Lucy who was dealing with insurers, she atested to the treatment given for those who wanted to make claims to their insurers. Under these circumstances, she has every right to sign PhD or not. She is a PhD. It was up to the patient and their insurers if the claims were paid. They were never paid to Lucy and she never told a client that they would, or would not, be paid. If one wants to make a case of insurance fraud, it will need to be apportioned between the insurer and the claimant – neither of which were Lucy.
    There is another confusion cropping-up in the blog. There are such things as license numbers and something else know as Provider Numbers. Anyone who, at any time, provides a billable service to the state is issued a Provider Number. [Heck, I had one for no other reason that the state bought my newsletter on disability.] Therefore, please do not confuse the existance of a Provider Number for Lucy’s business with a claim to a license number. There is no relationship. Clear?

    Now to the issue of support that several writers have raised. Yes I support Lucy. Why? Because I have known her for many years, watched her work very hard to acquire and hone the skills she unquestionably has, spend many hours discussing her hopes and aspirations for the work she has choosen to do, and talked with a number of her faithful and grateful clients who express the belief that they have found a valued professional and life-long friend. Damn right I support Lucy! I will take Lucy’s ethics and professionalism over those of the editors of Fox25 and the Attorney General’s Office each and every day of the week.
    I have secondhand knowledge of the ‘investigative’ tactics of the AG’s Office and can well understand how they created confusion, fear, and anger in the patients and family members they tracked down and harassed. The wonder is the majority who faced these attacks from the state and stood tall for Lucy. It is not the few who caved in to the notion that if the government was blowinng smoke there must be fire. Too many citizens let themselves believe that if there wasn’t something wrong, the government would not be investigating or idicting. They do not know Tom Reilly. Other than the grief this has caused Lucy, and yes, Claire and other innocent people – the only real problem here is a totally unethical Attorney General.

    Reply
  130. B.Z.
    B.Z. at |

    All I really have left to say is, Imagine being in Lucy’s position right now. All the stuff she is having to deal with. It is amazing how she keeps it all together. In my opinion, if this was all a lie, she wouldn’t be fighting this hard to gain her respect back. It makes me happy to see that some of the people in here are supporting her 100 %.

    Reply
  131. Greenarrow
    Greenarrow at |

    Just as an afterthought folks. If you want to do something about this type of government by inquisition – think about sending a few bucks to the Committee to Elect Duval Patrick Governor. You can send a message to Tommy and help return honest and ethical government to Massachusetts. After Massachusetts we can think about reclaiming the United States too.

    Just a thought.

    Reply
  132. Lucy W
    Lucy W at |

    I apologize that I can’t participate in the conversation until all this is over and likely a faded memory for most of you but please just know how your words and care and passion will not EVER fade from my memory. This blog has meant so much, on so many levels. When I can properly and freely express my gratitude I will find a way to do that. Thank you, this comes from all of me, thank you.

    Reply
  133. semantics
    semantics at |

    After such a gentle and thorough letter with the investment of heart and time coming from Greenarrow, directly to Claire, it floors me that there was no response from Claire.

    Claire is a cover.

    You have been found out Claire.

    Reply
  134. claire
    claire at |

    Oh semantics, you taunt me so….
    Is Concordia University, the one where Lucy bought her PhD, accredited in Massachusetts?
    If so, why the indictments?

    Reply
  135. semantics
    semantics at |

    I think, Claire, that you could research this yourself and then report back! By the way, which accredidation agency will you choose? She obviously knew she could not take the psychology licensing exam here for licensure so accredidation “in Massachusetts” was a moot point. But please, do educate me as to the various boards of accredidation.

    Reply
  136. C~
    C~ at |

    Semantics…..I agree with you, Claire is a cover! She is actually becoming transparent and monotonous in her blogs.

    You lose Claire!

    Reply
  137. C~
    C~ at |

    Lucy……no need to apologize. We understand. Remember all our words of support, praise and encouragement. You have MORE people WITH you than you do against you. Take our strength and incorporate it with yours. It’s a shield of armor in which no one can break. You’ve been our rock….now let us be yours!

    Reply
  138. claire
    claire at |

    You are right C, this is getting monotonous. If I am the “loser” then why am I getting such a harsh response? I have my own opinion, based on my personal experiences and research.

    From the AG’s office:
    “Wightman received a bachelor of arts degree from Emerson College in 1985 and obtained a masters degree in counseling psychology from Lesley University in 1996.

    The indictments allege that Wightman has not received a doctoral degree in psychology as is required by state law. Wightman allegedly paid $1,299 to receive a doctorate degree in psychology from Republic of Dominica-based Concordia College & University, an online institution that is not recognized by the state of Massachusetts.”

    I am curious as to why Wightman left MSPP.

    Reply
  139. C~
    C~ at |

    Claire…..there you go again putting your ownn spin on something I said…..For the record, I didn’t call you a “loser”….I said “you lose”!

    All you do is quote the media….give me a break!

    And if you were curious as to why Lucy left MSPP……you should have asked her…..she would have told you.. OH that’s right…you didn’t hear her out and get the “real” truth and answers….

    Reply
  140. claire
    claire at |

    I said THE loser, not A loser.
    semantics ought to give you a lesson too.
    whatever.
    Your opinion differs from mine, so I think we should be done.

    Reply
  141. hoping this helps clarify
    hoping this helps clarify at |

    FROM THEIR WEBSITE……
    http://www.concordia-college.net

    Can I ”buy” a Concordia College degree with little or no required coursework?

    No. Unlike clients of so-called diploma mills offering unaccredited or self-accredited pieces of paper which they call ”degrees” for a price, Concordia College and University applicants have to demonstrate college-level proficiency in their requested major by evidencing prior coursework, competencies, and professional skills. The college’s assessment of such professional and educational achievements may or may not result in the college’s letter of admission, sometimes qualifying the applicant to earn a legitimate university degree with recognized accreditation through several Government Ministries and Departments of Education around the world. There is no price to pay for this assessment.

    Are your government accrediting authorities in the official list of World Recognized Accreditors?

    Yes. Please review and verify the list here. Concordia College is properly accredited by an ever growing number of Government Ministries of Education to award university degrees for a person’s knowledge gained from lifelong learning and demonstrated professional experience, as promoted and endorsed a.o. by the U.S. Department of Labor and as described in a variety of adult education guides (U.S. Library of Congress). Should you be admitted to our program and decide to enroll, your Concordia degree will be the deserved reward for your own hard work and demonstrated achievements in the past. Your degree always remains verifiable from Concordia College, while our accreditation can be verified from all Government agencies recognizing your degree. You can also have your Concordia College degree’s U.S. Regional or National Accreditation Equivalency attested to by the National Academy of Higher Education in Washington DC through an individually ordered U.S. degree attestation report, as well as by several other credential attestation bureaus listed in the ‘About’ section of our website.

    What is a Ph.D.? Is it a practioner’s degree?

    Unlike a DA or MBA, a Doctor of Philosophy degree aka Ph.D. and D.Phil. is not a practioner’s degree but a Research Doctorate, awarded to adult researchers after 3 or more years of relevant or renewing research in their field of expertise, demonstrated and evidenced by submitting a combination of accredited prior coursework, peer assessment reviews, and or original publications. Holding a Ph.D. in Gerontology does not make you a gerontologist, but a credentialed researcher into then subjects.

    Is Concordia College accredited by the United States Government?

    The United States Department of Education does not accredit any individual institution of higher learning, but leaves the U.S. accreditation process in the hands of privately operated professional, regional, local and national accrediting agencies. Concordia College and its experience-based degree program are accredited by the National Academy of Higher Education, Washington, DC (non-governmental accreditation and degree evaluation body established in 1974, registered with UNESCO).The U.S. Government is a member of UNESCO.

    Is Concordia College’s program legal and legitimate?

    Concordia College & University is legally empowered to award university degrees. Several verifiable copies of our official government certificates, evidencing the legitimacy of our institution, will be included in your graduation package.

    Is my degree legal and can I include my new title on official documents?

    Your title is completely valid and legitimate. It can be included on any official form such as your driving licence, telephone directory listings, website, loan or mortgage applications and passport.

    Why do some traditional academics consider Government supervised degree granting institutions ‘diploma mills’?

    Mainly, as the British Department of Education indicates, because they refuse to understand the concept. Most traditional academics attended colleges for 4 to 12 years during the nineteen sixties and seventies only to find out that, in recent times, qualifying self-taught adults demonstrating a college-level proficiency gained from acquiring equal competencies and prior learning may also qualify for Department of Education accredited degrees, awarded in only a few weeks but based on years and often decades of self-paced learning and relevant experience. Understandably, some of these ‘experts’ whose expertise goes back to pre-digital times now belittle the concept of accredited prior learning certification available worldwide to adult learners and resist accredited higher learning establishments embracing that same concept.

    Concordia College & University Inc. is not a U.S. entity and does not claim to be. Concordia College & University is a legally registered telematically conducted degree granting international institution in Roseau, COD, West Indies.

    Reply
  142. C~
    C~ at |

    Again…My point Claire was I said “lose”, not “loser”…..you still don’t get! HA
    Oh…..I’ll be childish too….Whatever!

    Reply
  143. claire-a-fy
    claire-a-fy at |

    ear Mr. Beaudet :

    We acknowledge receipt of your verification
    inquiry in respect of Dr. Louise Wightman,
    Condordia Student ID# 2001-05-15/037/PhD-MA.

    Louise Wightman has been conferred the degree
    Doctor of Philosophy with a major in Psychology
    by Concordia College on May 15, 2001 following
    a combination of Concordia College’s portfolio
    assessment requirements, accredited extra muros
    course curriculum, and thesis defense.

    Concordia College’s international programs and degrees
    are accredited by : the National Academy of Higher
    Education in Washington DC (UNESCO/United Nations
    Educational and Scientific Organization registered accreditation body), the Government Ministry of Education in Bandung, Indonesia and the Republic of Liberia’s Ministry of Education, Monrovia.

    For U.S. professional licensing purposes, Concordia
    College official transcripts can be attested to
    their USDOE recognized equivalency through E.C.E.
    which is the American Council on Education’s evaluator
    of accredited non-residential degree programs (www.eceinternational.com).

    Sincerely
    Elizabeth C. Marley / Assistant Registrar
    Concordia College and University

    Reply
  144. claire-a-fy
    claire-a-fy at |

    Dear Dr. Wightman :

    > Mr. Beaudet, I want to know, how did he
    > communicate

    He has sent us an e-mail asking ”please
    verify the legitimacy of Louise Wightman’s
    credentials, she says she has a Ph.D. from
    your school”.

    And that is what we did. We confirmed your
    credentials to him, with a copy to you,
    explaining that Concordia C&U offers a
    legitimately accredited on-line program.

    Mr. Beaudet did not communicate with us in
    any other way.

    Don’t worry about tabloids : our name has
    been all over them when we conceived Concordia
    College back in 1999 and, contrary to what
    these people wanted : the louder they shouted,
    the more Government and IGO/NGO conducted
    education authorities accredited us in the
    course of the following years. Today, these
    wannabe journalists have all gone speechless.

    Getting a bad name from a bad gazette is very
    good for business, Dr. Wightman. It is like getting
    a quality label !

    Sincerely
    Admissions / Ronald Pridgen
    CONCORDIA COLLEGE & UNIVERSITY

    Reply
  145. claire-a-fy
    claire-a-fy at |

    So…

    I am just now informed that

    there will be yet another story

    about me by Mr. Beaudet who

    says that you are a diploma

    mill. Is this true? You stated

    that…

    “We confirmed your

    credentials to him, with a copy to you,

    explaining that Concordia C&U offers a

    legitimately accredited on-line program.

    But then how can my career

    be ruined after almost seven years

    in graduate school if you are what

    you say? I believed what I was

    paying for was a review of all

    my materials from school and

    if accepted, a degree. Look,

    I live alone with my daughter and

    am losing everything, but what is

    it that you can say to them?

    Mr. Beaudet did not communicate with us in

    any other way.

    Don’t worry about tabloids : our name has

    been all over them when we conceived Concordia

    College back in 1999 and, contrary to what

    these people wanted : the louder they shouted,

    the more Government and IGO/NGO conducted

    education authorities accredited us in the

    course of the following years. Today, these

    wannabe journalists have all gone speechless.

    This man, Mr. Beaudet will have done now three

    stories – on me – and there is nothing to

    protect me, my well being, or my daughter’s.

    It appears that the journalists are not

    speechless – can you not be speechless too?

    Getting a bad name from a bad gazette is very

    good for business, Dr. Wightman. It is like getting

    a quality label !

    I am not quality if I am perceived this way.

    I am done.

    Reply
  146. claire
    claire at |

    Thank you for sharing that Lucy. I have read the Concordia info in the past. I am sorry that you have had to go thru this all. It has not been my point to attack you, get money from you or report you to the press. Had it been my point, I would have done it already.
    It is a confusing issue and one that we all have our opinions on. I read things at perhaps a different angle than others. It is personal for me and my family. Period. We have been hurt and have taken steps back for our own well being.
    For me, Susan Ovans explained it well when she wrote
    “The point is that while many people who have contributed to this conversation say they don’t care what Ms. Wightman’s credentials are, other clients apparently do. Those feelings have to be respected. After all, people consult mental health professionals to deal with confusion and vulnerability and other problems, not to have their therapist add to the angst.”

    Reply
  147. clair-a-fy some more
    clair-a-fy some more at |

    What about the anchor woman from Fox25 who went on line to Concordia and submitted transcripts unrelated to a psych degree but paid and received her PhD in a matter of weeks? I am sure that she embellished, but why not?

    Reply
  148. claire-a-fy
    claire-a-fy at |

    “Claire”
    the last thing I ever wanted was to hurt you or anyone that has worked with me and I think you know that – you came because of being hurt. of all the pain and sorrow and stress I have experienced lately, it is knowing that individuals who have entrusted me with so much feel betrayed. adding angst is an awful by-product of this mess. this is the sadness for me, and then being helpless to make it better fast enough. i would have gladly taken on more humiliation and fear and confusion had it meant no one else would have felt these things.

    i have said all along (when i talk to myself as i often do) “come after me but leave them be.” but of course your being hurt and angry was part of the master plan.

    i agree with Susan as well. i think everyone should absolutely care that I represent myself, my competencies, training and education honestly. i think when people say they don’t care about credentials it is meant more as a supportive statement rather than their being overly enthusiastic consumers who throw caution to the wind. and perhaps too it has something to do with the nature of the therapy relationship.

    the tawdry underpinning here, after we all say out loud it is not about the past, is that no one wants their daughters to grow up to be strippers, no one wants to think of their trusted and truly good, real, whole and genuine therapist as being a stripper, because that, in and of itself creates such massive dissonance one knows not what to do with it. frankly, at this point, not even I know what to do with it. it was a phase of my life that i grew out of (obviously), and at the time taught me lessons i needed to learn. now it is not staying where it belongs, in MY past, and the story is no longer my story, but is being written in front of me, my hands tied and my mouth taped shut.

    Reply
  149. claire-a-fy
    claire-a-fy at |

    as for perky F**2* anchor roboton/doll – we don;t know what she sent and we dont know what the lies were or if there were phoney transcripts and references etc

    all i can say is i sent what i had done. period. in good faith. shame on her.

    Reply
  150. claire-a-fy
    claire-a-fy at |

    ps
    concordia has made changes to
    their website since this started

    Reply
  151. Carole Goodlander
    Carole Goodlander at |

    I personally can tell you that this woman has caused incredible pain and torture to innocent people when she represented herself falsely as a therapist and also as a guardian ad litum.

    Her testimony in court influenced the outcome of someone I know very well. As I was told about this case it was apparent to me right from the beginning that Lucy was not acting professionally. She was not following the mandates of her position, and at times appeared downright unbalanced. This seemed perplexing at the time, but now makes all the sense in the world.

    Her “client” in Hull is undoubtedly the same man who knew she was a stripper all along, but acted in concert with her because he pretty much knew the outcome of his case was pretty much assured because he could have revealed her secret at any time.

    No one should think this woman is interesting or have any sympathy for her what-so-ever. She is a heartless criminal who hasn’t even grasped the pain her horrible scam has caused innocent people.

    This woman should be put in jail where she belongs. Once there she might want to consider the damage she has caused with her false rerepresentations. This will be a slam-dunk case. She will be found guilty because her lies and false representatioons are documented in court papers.

    And who will pay back the people who paid her for her faked professionalism? Her services as a guardian ad litum cost thousands of dollars. They weren’t worth toilet paper either. Does Lucy care?

    Not one bit. She’s a heartless con artist in my book.

    Lucy needs help. She’s a very mean person.

    Reply
  152. SARA QUILL
    SARA QUILL at |

    ???

    Reply
  153. Greenarrow
    Greenarrow at |

    One of the unavoidable aspects of our judical system is that very often the losers are unhappy and bitter.
    Ms. Goodlander appears to be one of these. I am quite sure that Al Capone was also very hostile to the people who testified against him.
    However, from Ms. ‘Goodlander’s tone perhaps she should move to Salem immmediately where she will find comfort in the historical aura of the witch trials. As she was told about this case? Obviously a secondhand account from a loser. Valuable testimony indeed.
    She did not agree with Dr. Wightman’s professional opinion, which a court clearly agreed with, and therefore, she must be unprofessional. OK we understand that but it is a pretty slim basis to believe that Lucy belongs in jail. “Mean person? Is the pot calling the kettle black? Read your own words and consider the meaning of ‘mean’.
    By the way, if you indeed know anything whatsoever about what is in the ‘court papers’ I would love to know how you do. If you do know anything, and were willing to come clean, that is a crimial indictment we would all be happy to support. Therefore, you are either a liar [advertant or inadvertant] or are yourself a criminal.

    Reply
  154. B.Z.
    B.Z. at |

    Carole must be a pretty heartless bitch to write something so terrible. If she even knew how much time and money Lucy put into helping other people, it would be a smack in her face.

    Sure, she made a small mistake in naming her company. BIG DEAL. And who are you to say that she is a heartless criminal?

    You have no idea lady. NO idea. I know her enough to say that she has put everything into her work. And it wasn’t even all for the money either. She enjoyed making other people happy. She spent her own money buying games, testing materials, furniture, and unnescessary materials that added to the joy in being in her building.

    It wasn’t a scam. At all. She took a lot of time out of her life to study and get her phd. Whether some of you believe that it is real or not, she has it. I can’t believe you (Carole) could say such mean words.

    Grow up! Oh my god she was a stripper!! Wow let’s make a huge deal out of it. She had a nice body & pretty face. Just because you might not doesn’t mean you have to make fun of her for it. It has NO relation to this case. It’s history. past. We shouldn’t be living in the past.

    If you saw Lucy, and didn’t recieve the help you needed, you should’ve left. And what kind of pain did she cause people huh? I understand a small amount from people seeing the news story and hearing about her past and that she is not licensed. Not, as you put it “terrible pain and torture.” But she didn’t tell people she was licensed. How could you say that she deserves jail time for that? She has a family and life too. You are acting like the victim Carole, but your cruelty is just sickening.

    How do you think her daughter and rest of her family feels about all of this. And if her daughter ever came across this blog, which im not doubting she has, I’m sure it made her feel even better. Lucy has been through enough already. And if you knew her as well as I did, you would understand that.

    And lastly, I can’t believe you called HER mean. Read over what you wrote and tell me who is the mean one.

    Lucy, Stay strong in this you have my support

    Reply
  155. Fired Up
    Fired Up at |

    I would hope if Lucy’s daughter ever came across this blog she would know that her mom has helped out countless people, and that there are people who love and will stand by Lucy through this trying time in her life.

    I for one think the world of Lucy. Lucy you have my support too. This whole thing is just a very sad situation.

    Reply
  156. B.Z.
    B.Z. at |

    I just watched the news and Lucy, you’re suit looked very nice!

    You looked so sad though. I hate that you have to go through this.

    Reply
  157. Carole Goodlander
    Carole Goodlander at |

    It’s clear to me now that you all must be Lucy’s friends–or maybe she’s paid you?

    Either that or you all have no respect for the laws that protect innocent people from quacks like her.

    Your defense for her illegal activity is based purely on emotions. Saddam Hussein’s daughter thinks he’s a real good guy too and a great father. And maybe he was to her but that doesn’t excuse anything he did that was against international laws.

    This blog is nothing but a support group for poor poor poor Lucy. Should we feel sorry that she spent money on things like “testing tools”? She had NO right to be testing anyone. Her questionable “Phd” alone didn’t give her that right.

    To blame her victims is really claasic. Your off-handed way of dismissing the illegality of what this imposter did reveals a lack of ethical and moral responsibility. How could anyone possibly condone what she did? It was totally against the law, unethical to the max, a miscarriage of justice to those whose lives she influenced wrongly and illegally.

    Alos, please don’t think I give a damn that she was a stripper. I have had several friends who were exotic dancers in order to pay their way through a REAL college.

    “Dr. Wightman” hurt 26 people very badly. Whether you care about that or not is your business.

    Finally, I doubt if any of those people thought they might get any money from this woman. The minute she was revealed to be a con artist it was pretty plain she was probably a person with very little money.

    I do feel sorry for her daughter, but Lucy should have thought about that when she passed herself off as something she was not. What kind of mother would jeopordize her kid’s happiness and security like that anyway?

    A very bad mother in my book.

    Reply
  158. Fired Up
    Fired Up at |

    unless you see how she is with her daughter I don’t think you should judge her as a parent. If you want to talk about the alleged charges than that’s one thing, but leave the parenting to her.

    Reply
  159. B.Z.
    B.Z. at |

    Well, I love how you are comparing her to a terrorist. That is very classy, shows how intelligent you are.

    And No, she did not pay me. Apparently we differ in our opinions of the word “friend”. I am her friend, but she doesn’t pay me for it.

    And you shouldn’t be so sure that her PhD isn’t accepted until the trial.

    I’m not blaming her “victims”. I am saying that no one seemed to have a problem with her until money was involved. And if they didn’t like her treatments then they shouldn’t of continued with her. It seems that More patients are with her than against her. If the media wasn’t involved, I’m sure things would be different. If she was never a stripper, there would’ve never even been a story. Every headline says something involving that.

    How is spending 7 years or more in college studying Psychology not real school? She did the work. And she has proof. You just wait and see.

    And also, I understand the legal portion of this. The trial will determine the verdict of that. In my opinion, she has plenty of proof of her education and she will be just fine in the end.

    And this isn’t a support group. Ken posted the story, it wasn’t a very opinionated story either. It was basically what was on the news. And now people are sharing their comments.

    Well lets see, if she was a con artist and supposedly stealing peoples money, then why would she be a person with “little money”. That doesn’t seem to fit very well. Oh hey, maybe it’s because she wasn’t conning anybody and she spent a lot of her profit on things for her office. Who would go through all those years of school and all that money renting out an office and buying things for it in order to scam people? That seems pretty pointless.

    As for misrepresentation, From the years I have known her, she has told me she was not licensed. And that there was not that much of a point in doing that. As long as her patients knew she had completed her education and obtained a phD, they would know she was as educated as they expected.

    I saw Lucy and her daughter recently and she is behind her mom the whole way. So don’t even try and call her a bad mother. Why don’t you figure out your own life before you critcize someone elses. You obviously need something fixed because you are COLD.

    Reply
  160. semantics
    semantics at |

    “Her “client” in Hull is undoubtedly the same man who knew she was a stripper all along, but acted in concert with her because he pretty much knew the outcome of his case was pretty much assured because he could have revealed her secret at any time.”

    uhhhh… ? you poor dear sounding so disorganized and thinking you are making any sense.

    Reply
  161. piggyback to B.Z.
    piggyback to B.Z. at |

    “And who will pay back the people who paid her for her faked professionalism? Her services as a guardian ad litum cost thousands of dollars.”

    this was you too :”Finally, I doubt if any of those people thought they might get any money from this woman.”

    Reply
  162. Greenarrow's piggyback
    Greenarrow's piggyback at |

    I agree with your observations but doubt the grasp is within reach to the intended

    Reply
  163. Carole Goodlander
    Carole Goodlander at |

    I find this blog tedious and over emotionally attached to a person I hold in deep disregard, so I will have this last post and go back to enjoying a life without Lucy W. in it.

    Some of her “clients” you know were forced to use her because she was court appointed. They believed she was a real therapist. They paid her a lot of money for her “expertise”. The results of her tests were given to the court and judges made decisions based on her testimony AS A THERAPIST, yet she wasn’t even licensed to give those tests. SHE WASN’T LICENSED AT ALL. She certainly didn’t tell the court that she wasn’t. Why? because money was involved right? She wanted the money, so she she took a chance no one would ever find out.

    I do understand loyalty and applaud you for being loyal to your friend, if that’s what you are, but you really do not know the facts in this case & seem to remain blind to the most important point. That her degree did not legally allow her to represent herself as a bona fide therapist in a court of law no matter what you think.

    By the way, you were the one bemoaning the effect this would have on her daughter. I only agreed that it was a terrible, awful thing to have to face. It will be even worse when she is found guilty. I really do feel so sorry for her daughter.

    Lucy W. wants everyone to see her as a victim. She’s obviously very skilled at manipulation.

    You said “more of her clients support her”? Funny but there doesn’t seem to be too many of you posting here. Only a couple. Where are all those other clients you mentioned who loved her treatment so much? I know there are at least 26 people whose lives were damaged by her misrepresentation.

    Suffice it to say you were duped if you think this woman is anything but a skilled, manipulative fraud.

    If being rational and logical and knowing the law and stating it & expecting people to be held responisble for breaking it then yes–I guess you could say I am cold.

    But I am not cold enough to hurt innocent people who trusted me and paid me for services that I had no business offering–now that’s downright icy I’d say–

    That’s my last comment. Time will tell.

    Reply
  164. claire
    claire at |

    Wow. You people are brutal. OK, so Carole is a bit on the passionate side (makes me look like a lamb which I appreciate.)
    Carole, don’t let these bloggers get to you. They love to re-quote you and analyze your writing for some strange reason…Give them something to think about.
    One thing I do agree with is that Lucy and her relationship with her child should be kept from this blogging creation. That is a personal matter and none of us are qualified to analyze it. We can all find fault with other’s parenting and we do what works best for us and our styles, not as others would wish us to be. Just my opinion.

    Reply
  165. B.Z.
    B.Z. at |

    I’m still laughing at the part where you said that she caused “incredible pain & torture”.

    Reply
  166. claire
    claire at |

    incredible pain and torture have different meanings to each of us. do not take light of people’s feelings.

    Reply
  167. B.Z.
    B.Z. at |

    I understand Carole is angry, but I have no sympathy for someone who can’t even look at the story from a different perspective.

    Reply
  168. claire
    claire at |

    That is a funny statement, coming from you, BZ.

    Reply
  169. SARA QUILL
    SARA QUILL at |

    IT IS UNFORTUNEATE THAT THIS HAS TURNED INTO A NATIONAL ENQUIRER AND THAT PEOPLE’S SINCERE FEELINGS HAVE BECOME OVERSHADOWED BY VERBAL ABUSE, SLANDER, MISINFORMATION AND VIOLENCE.

    A COMMON TACTIC USED BY SOCIOPATHS IS TO – AS GREENARROW POINTS OUT – CALL THE KETTLE BLACK. THIS PERSON CAROLE ANN BORGES AKA “GOODLANDER” IS CONFUSED THAT MORE SUPPORTERS ARE NOT HERE.

    I WILL TELL YOU WHAT – NO ONE ENJOYS THE AMBIENCE OF ABUSE AND CONTROL, ADD TO THAT STUPIDITY AND POOR GRAMMAR – LYNCHING (LOOK IT UP IN THE DICTIONARY CAROL ANNE BORGES) IS SCARY.

    MY SUGGESTION WOULD BE FOR THE REST OF YOU WHO ARE DECENT, EVOLVED, AND AWARE HUMAN BEINGS, TO LEAVE THIS BLOG SINCE THE SOCIOPATH FEEDS OFF OF PEOPLE’S GOODNESS.

    ]GOTCHA!

    Reply
  170. SARA QUILL
    SARA QUILL at |

    This blog has become a national Enquirer replete with

    Reply
  171. SARA QUILL
    SARA QUILL at |

    VIOLENCE ABUSE CONTROL AND POWER

    Reply
  172. SARA QUILL
    SARA QUILL at |

    well meaning, evolved, reasonable, introspective human beings with the capacity to observe their own place in this world are now subject to barbaric sociopathic tactics which of course ruin the forum for adult, mature conversation so why would any one else come here to comment?

    Reply
  173. SARA QUILL
    SARA QUILL at |

    the sociopath loves a good lynching (look that up Carole ann Borges)

    Reply
  174. SARA QUILL
    SARA QUILL at |

    and feeds off people’s good qualities, then takes over in order to WIN

    Reply
  175. SARA QUILL
    SARA QUILL at |

    the power of a bully is something we all know about

    Reply
  176. SARA QUILL
    SARA QUILL at |

    it is my strong suggestion that this site be abandoned to let the predators feast upon themselves – enough good has been shared, enough care, leave the toxic wasteland to the few that need that to feel important, alive and real.

    Reply
  177. SARA QUILL
    SARA QUILL at |

    “Goodlander” or Carole anne Borges from Hull, did a generous thing by showing, not just telling, what this entire scenario is really about for Lucy as we can all see now how much one abusive individual can effect so many.

    good always shines in the long run.

    no need to stoop to the newer, crasser, tackier and classless communications in order to connect.

    better to leave the carnage to rot of its own accord.

    Reply
  178. CAROLANNBORGES
    CAROLANNBORGES at |

    gotcha}}}

    Reply
  179. hoping this helps clarify
    hoping this helps clarify at |

    i must be dense, but i don’t understand what sara quill is talking about – is she talking about goodlander or lw in her comments about sociopaths, abusive individuals etc….these last entries are so confusing as to leave those of us who dont know to what quill is referring wondering what is being implied. to not be clear is not doing a service to anyone. please clarify….

    Reply
  180. A former patient
    A former patient at |

    I am a former patient if Lucy, and I dont think that anyone can understand the damage she has done to countless teens and their families. If she is so stupid that she dosnt even realize what she has done, then I pitty her.My prayers are with her other victims, and I hope they get peace from seeing Lucy Wightman get the book thrown at her. She deserves it.

    Reply
  181. hoo noze
    hoo noze at |

    cindy peralta loses custody of her girls because of 2 ouis with girls in car

    Reply
  182. SARAH QUILL
    SARAH QUILL at |

    CAROL ANN BORGES

    Reply
  183. Rx
    Rx at |

    It is so interesting to me that an individual, who misprepresented herself to vulnerable patients, continues to be “supported” by some on this blog. Defending questionable behavior, decisions and judgement, instead of apologizing and admitting wrong, has brought down a past President… is there no lesson here?
    It does not matter if she is a good person, nice, or if she was hard working. Standards exist in order to protect the public from unqualified folks to practice. Most of us who are credentialled do it the legal way, and penalties exist if one chooses to shade the truth. Regardless of one’s past, this is the issue. We all make choices each day, and thinking of the consequences to ourselves and our loved ones is what keeps most of us operating within legal limits, if not an inner conscience.
    If the alligations are true, that this person stretched her credentials, it is simply wrong in my book…

    Reply
  184. PhD
    PhD at |

    I sat in class with LW at MSPP. I am from another country where in two years after college one is called a psychologist. We were taught to never say one was licensed if one was not and that the term clinical psychologist could not be used without a license. As long as the truth is told what is all your american squawking about? if you look in the MA Psych newsletter you will see help wanted ads for “master’s level psychologists” so for all of you who have your cemented opinions remember that you do not hold the truth, only pieces of a story as I do. The part I add and come from is that i KNOW she sat there for 4 years as I did and i heard what she did. the law just changed people. give it a rest. especiallyu you RX – you sound very uptight and high and mighty and i am hoping you are not a licensed psychologist

    btw allegations is not like an alligator

    Reply
  185. Grateful_mom
    Grateful_mom at |

    I’ve been reading this board since the beginning and feel that I need to add my two cents worth so here goes ……

    1.) Our story;

    My son is one of Lucy’s patients. She has helped him deal with a severe case of Anxiety Disorder. This occurred after he lost both his dog and his only grandparent within a few months of each other. He couldn’t even leave the house to go to school. I had to stay at home with him, because he couldn’t tolerate being left alone. He was 17 at the time, no longer a small child.

    He’s also borderline ADHD and had all of the social problems that go along with that. One of the previous “Professionals” (on paper at least) (that we went to for the ADHD) was a man with years of experience. His idea of helping was to overmedicate my son and literally “yell” at him and/or me, if my son wasn’t taking his medicine or being compliant.

    Our pediatrician recommended Lucy, who counseled him. She would come to our house and went through a long process of counseling in order to motivate him to go out with her to book stores and places like that. She’s managed to build up his self esteem as well as have him go through an anger management program, which has done wonders to help us all.

    She had a Psychiatrist make house calls, since he couldn’t leave the house. (Yes that person is licensed!)

    She even went so far as to give us two concert tickets, and suggested that, I take him to a concert at the Tweeter Center. It was quite an experience, let me tell you! We finally made it into the Center somewhere half way through the concert. (It took that long for him to leave the car!)

    He’s much better now. He was able to finish his last year of High School. He’s going to a Junior College now and has a part time job.

    Her methods may be unconventional, but that is probably due to her varied background. She’s not going by some book, but is instead using her imagination, (which is lovely by the way) in order to help people.

    2.) Why there aren’t more patients writing to this board;

    Well, there could be many reasons, along with them not being computer/Internet users!

    Another thing is that seeing a therapist, is best left as a private situation and not something that you share with the news media. You can see just how “subtle” they have been about reporting/analyzing Lucy’s past/present.

    There are still many people who automatically think it best to stay away from you , if you’re someone who needs a therapist. An medieval outlook perhaps, but they’re out there.

    3.) Just what *are* the legal facts? Is there anyone out there who can clarify these facts for us? Someone who *knows*, not just speculation please.

    4.) My son is the one who told me about the upcoming news story about Lucy, on T.V. Since he’s prone to exaggeration, I decided to “wait and see” the story myself before commenting on it to him. I can see how this broadcast would upset people. I know that I wished that my son had never seen it. And he’s not even one of Lucy’s younger patients.

    He’s able to understand that our goals in life may change as we mature. What looked like a good idea at 20 may look pretty silly to us at 40.

    I feel that the Television station was being irresponsible by showing that film footage to the public. They were irresponsible by ignoring the damage they could do to the Families (like Claire’s) . I can’t imagine sitting in front of the set with friends and children and having that broadcast. Especially *before* the case has been tried!

    The reporters are condoned for “doing their job” no matter how they hurt people and make things look. I always thought people are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty.

    5.) When I received an email mentioning this board, I replied to the sender that “I’ve been on online, mailing lists for about five years or so. I’m aware that all kinds of characters come out of the woodwork; including the “spelling and grammar” police.

    This holds true for this board as well. I wouldn’t write to just any blog, and have my thoughts analyzed and shredded, but I feel that I should, make an exception, in this case!

    (I used MSWord and it’s spell check, so I hope that helps, at least ;-)

    Reply
  186. another grateful_mom
    another grateful_mom at |

    Thank you grateful_mom for sharing your story. My daughter also suffered from “anxiety” and was referred to Lucy several years ago. Without going into detail, Lucy helped my child tremendously. My daughter now functions very “normally” as a teenage girl…(Mom’s of teenage girls, you know what I mean!) I’m not saying it’s easy, but at least the “anxiety” has been pretty much eliminated. I commented to Lucy a few weeks ago that the three of us(my husband, Lucy and I) have done a nice job so far.

    Which brings me to my husband and I. We found ourselves in need of help several months back and we both agreed that we should see Lucy as a couple (based on our/her past success with our child).

    We knew about Lucy’s past from the stories earlier this year. Actually, my husband suspected years ago when we first started seeing Lucy. He and his friends used to go to shows in town in their youth (oh horrors, he must be a pervert!) No, he’s not, and no Lucy is not either. I know that if he asked Lucy about her past years ago, she would have been truthful; however, “her past” had absolutely nothing to do with “our present and future”, and it was as irrelevant then…as it is now. My point is that Lucy was not keeping a secret (we just didn’t ask). None of us should have to be ashamed of or have any reason to apologize for previous (or current) career choices. We have no right to judge others.

    Once again, Lucy has been very effective in helping us with our concerns. No, she is not paying me to support her. To the contrary, we pay her and it’s money well spent. I tend to doubt that any individual that was allegedly “forced to use Lucy by the courts” paid a single penny out of their own pocket for their sessions. In any event, I will continue to “invest my money well” and continue to seek Lucy’s expert guidance and advice.

    Reply
  187. herbert enos
    herbert enos at |

    My main concern is for Lucy’s young and impressionable patients.
    My daughter considered Lucy to be a reliable friend. When she had problems, she would say to me, “I need to talk to Lucy,” and she would email her or make an appointment to see her.
    She hasn’t mentioned Lucy’s name once since she found out about her past and she has become cynical about all therapists.
    By not being forthright, Lucy has done children like my daughter a disservice that may prevent them from seeking psycological help in the future.

    Reply
  188. Rx
    Rx at |

    To Phd:
    Don’t like the message, attack spelling?

    The topics of this dialogue are related to Ethics, Standards and Professional Practice(Course Ps 800 at MSPP), which addresses these topics … in this country.

    What a shame any teen has to be subjected to TV footage of his therapist’s past, but again, where to place the responsibility?
    Easier to blame the media or board.. why not blame the school for a requirement to complete requirements for graduation.. as being “uptight”.

    The public has a right to expect we honestly represent ourselves in regard to credentialing and status for reimbursement.
    That is rather basic, and this unfortunate story has brought angst to way too many to be defended.

    Reply
  189. legal haven
    legal haven at |

    Grateful Mom – the *legal* issues are complicated by many factors. I can only speak generally, and with some redundancy as Greenarrow has outlined most clearly what is likely the factual and legal motivation/story. The law on the books (112 S 122) amended in 1996 (c. 270 s1) says that any person not licensed to practice psychology who does so will be punished by fine of no more that $500. This law, like many, was not enforceable until March 29, 2005. We all know there are hundreds, thousands of laws that are not enforced due to there being no one to do so. Once the Board was given power to do so (December 2004, enacted March 29, 2005) this unknown law became known, at L Wightman’s expense, so in effect, she is the “poster child” of a new law. We all know not to park on a double yellow line, to the degree that if we do, and we forget, or do not see the yellow line, or do not look down, we are still charged. This is called “strict offense liability” and these do not require there be intent. Insurance fraud, larceny, and use of term ALL REQUIRE INTENT.

    amen

    Reply
  190. PhD
    PhD at |

    It is all in how the parent models for the child and how the parent speaks to the child about events. How would you imagine a child could possibly manage the conflict, the media image and the feelings of the parents? This is too much to expect. By not being forthright…? should the therapist then disclose his or her entire past? would this be forthright? no – of course not – it would be a serious boundary crossing! What has now made her an unreliable friend? And how does a child become cynical other than imitating learned behaviors or by using this as a defense against intolerable conflict. If there is a disservice done, it is the opportunity missed by any parent to do anything other than allow for some reasonable process to occur. Idealizing and demonizing is an oversimplified way to live. Teaching a process of inquiry, logic, fact-finding and possibility is.

    Reply
  191. semantics
    semantics at |

    legal haven – this clarifies a lot

    Reply
  192. Grateful_mom
    Grateful_mom at |

    Legal haven,

    Thank you for your reply!

    So it’s like I thought, another case of people jumping to conclusions, without knowing the facts. That’s why my motto has been/always will be, to wait and see before making a judgment.

    I still think that the whole problem here is the way that the media goes about reporting things “as they see them”.

    Mom

    Reply
  193. Grateful_mom
    Grateful_mom at |

    Herbert Enos,

    I agree with you in that it’s difficult to explain things to our children. Who can/can’t they trust in this society of ours. Which values are good, and which aren’t.

    I don’t think that the fault lies with Lucy though, I think the fault lies with the news media. Did they think about what kind of affect their story would have on this Doctors’ clients? No!

    I think that Lucy has a right to privacy just like anyone else.

    Grateful

    Reply
  194. H.Enos
    H.Enos at |

    If I had a well-adjusted, happy, confidant child, I wouldn’t have had to seek the services of a therapist. My daughter was angry and unhappy and distrustful of the world around her. She certainly is not one to sit down with her parents and have a chat about anything. When the news about Lucy’s past came out all attempts at discussion led to a door being slammed in my face.
    I thought Lucy helped my daughter. My daughter seemed to enjoy her appointments. She gradually stopped seeing Lucy as she became busy with school activities and college applications.
    Now my daughter (who is in college and growing out of her anger) says that Lucy never helped her, that she never confided in Lucy. She recently saw a newspaper photo of Lucy as Princess Cheyenne and ridiculed her and refused to discuss her. They had been friendly and I found this sad.
    Obviously my daughter (like many of you) is confused by Lucy’s past.
    There are legal issues and there are personal issues.
    There are (on the personal level) sins of omission and sins of commision. Lucy’s whole personality, style and way of talking and running her paractice was one that implied she was offbeat yet thoroughly honest about herself.
    I agree that her case probably wouldn’t be ‘newsworthy’ if she hadn’t been a stripper. I can also agree that the stripper part of her life was in her past and should ideally remain in the past.
    But she is an intelligent woman. People with a colorful past are found out. She was a ‘local’ and most of her patients probably know someone who saw her perform.
    I suspect most parents were shocked to find out about her past and would not have chosen her to treat their children had they known about it.
    They, like my daughter, feel (at the least) confused and (at the most) angry & betrayed.
    Life isnt’ fair, and sometimes choices we have made in the past preclude us from paths which we would like to take in our later years-like the teenage drinking incident which I believe can keep one out of the FBI.
    In short, given the world we live in, Lucy’s past was bound to come out and to deeply disturb some of her clients. If she couldn’t anticipate this and find some way to prepare her clients for this, she shouldn’t have had a therapy practice. This is my personal opinion and obviously has nothing to do with the indictments against her
    As for the legality of her practice-this blog raises all sorts of issues and is becomming (to my mind) very petty.
    All I know is that she called herself Dr. Wightman so I assumed she was a psychologist (and she may very well be one). There was never any question about whether or not she was licenced. I never asked. I paid up front and she filled out insurance reimbursement forms which had her tax ID number on them and on which she circled the word “psychologist.”
    The AG office called me to ask if I would make a statement and I declined, saying that I had mixed feelings and that I wanted to protect the confidentiality of my daughter. They were very polite and respectful and I saw no reason to be alarmed by their call. I assumed they got my name from the insurance company.
    I personally like Lucy a lot. But my fierce devotion to my daughter leads me to wish I had never used her as a therapist. I am not claiming that this is rational or fair.

    Reply
  195. on her behalf
    on her behalf at |

    I have worked as an admin person in service oriented offices before – medical as well – and have never EVER seen a place to “circle” the word psychologist

    Reply
  196. on her behalf
    on her behalf at |

    AND I fielded phone calls for Lucy to and fromn insurance companies and ALWAYS replied that she was NOT licensed -

    Reply
  197. on her behalf
    on her behalf at |

    “Enos” I appreciate the honesty for what is underneath some of the reaction – the past. And maybe Lucy “should” have thought of this but honestly after ten years why would she think this would come up – to be fair. I like also that you are wearing it on your sleeve and qualify this as not really rational or fair. And I cannot emphasize enough that in my experience, Lucy was exactly as you describe – friendly, offbeat, intelligent, also caring and deeply authentic about her work – she was honest, very, and when confronted by her past dealt with it honestly.

    Reply
  198. on her behalf
    on her behalf at |

    one more thing ENOS – what a noble thing to protect your daughter’s confidentiality!

    Reply
  199. claire
    claire at |

    There is a difference between claiming to be licensed and signing off as a psychologist. I do not believe that H. Enos believed her to be licensed.
    Many of us have chosen to remain “uninvolved” in order to protect our own privacy as well as the privacy of our children and family.
    Enos has some excellent and well thought out points. Thank you.

    Reply
  200. PhD
    PhD at |

    saying that because someone danced well in the 70s and 80s precludes them from any kind of life at all is hysteria – so, if someone drank too much and had a wild time of things but did not harm anyone or commit any crime does that erase their possibilities??

    Reply
  201. H.Enos
    H.Enos at |

    a reply-
    1- On my insurance forms there are spaces for provider’s name, address and discipline.
    Lucy used a stamped ID which gave her name as ‘Lucy Wightman, PhD’.
    The discipline choices were1) MD/DO- 2)Psychologist-
    3)SW/MH Counselor- and 4)RNCS/RN Other-.
    She circled Psychologist (although technically there were spaces provided to check off one’s discipline).

    2- I never thought about whether or not she was licenced. I didn’t know one could practice without a license.
    The subject never entered my mind as one to ask about.
    Even now I don’t know the significance of licensure in psychology. But I am sure I would have asked her why she wasn’t licensed if the subject had come up. Perhaps I would have accepted her explanation. If this had come up I would have checked her credentials. I feel stupid and irresponsible that I accepted a recommendation to Lucy from a dietitian and never actually questioned her about her qualifications, degrees etc.

    3- In reply to comment #215, I have a friend in the CIA. Along with his background check he had to take a lie detector test to see if he ever was drunk (at any age).
    Apparantly the CIA felt that someone who ‘had a wild time’ was indeed precluded from working for them.
    I mention this simply because it is one instance that comes to mind when I ask myself the question, “Should Lucy’s past be such an issue for me?”
    and I hope there will be no snide comments comparing state secrets to therapy.

    I have been QUESTIONING MYSELF- not judging Lucy- ever since reading about her in the newspapers.
    I question my fairness, my moral values, my belief in the value of education and personal growth, my (presumed) liberal values, my ability to intelligently assess people…everything….

    I have commented on this blog because I hoped talking with other clieints of Lucy’s would help me sort things out.

    However I now realize that a blog is no help to me.
    I feel criticized (perhaps even when I haven’t been).
    For example, comment #213-are you being sarcastic?
    (Sorry if it was meant kindly.)

    and comment #215- am I an hysteric?

    I think I give up

    Reply
  202. a mom
    a mom at |

    Enos, I am finding a clear pattern here of concerned parents. Perhaps because as a parent, we are so fiercely protective of our children, that when things go awry we immediately blame ourselves and question our actions. I believe that our concerns are indeed valid. Our daughter was seeing Lucy (referred by a pediatrician) for a sexual abuse issue. We were of course unnerved when we discovered Lucy’s past (on Fox25). It is our feelings that if Lucy had explained things before the program aired, we could have looked at it in an objective manner. Would we have continued to see Lucy if we had known her past up front? I am not sure…
    As for her being licensed, Lucy in fact told us that she was not licensed and used privacy issues as an excuse. Obviously there are no privacy issues if the AG’s office is calling up people and asking them to testify. We never looked into her credentials (shame on us and a lesson learned) but if we had, she most likely would have showed us her Concordia University degree (I assume) and who were we to know any different? We did file for insurance reimbursement and the forms were signed by a psychologist. We did not question that.
    Fortunately for us, this entire fiasco came at a time when we were winding down therapy and not in the middle of our crisis time. We were able to make a break and move on, on our own.
    Did Lucy help us? I want to say yes, but have no comparisons. It has damaged relationships within our family as they now can discredit the therapy work we did because as far as they are concerned, Lucy is a fake. Truth or not, it has had a great affect on us.
    Enos, I hope that you will find peace with your feelings and be able to trust your instincts.

    Reply
  203. H.Enos
    H.Enos at |

    Thank you for those comments.

    This has not had a ‘great’ effect on my family.
    But as I mentioned earlier, I wonder if my daughter will seek out/respect a therapist in the future (if one is needed) because these revelations came when she was so young, inexperienced and judgemental.

    Reply
  204. gotta clue
    gotta clue at |

    To ruth #74- about lucy “withdrawing” from MSPP during year 5. Didnt u mean kicked out?

    Reply
  205. ruth
    ruth at |

    gotta clue
    to #219
    what was she kicked out for?

    Reply
  206. on her behalf
    on her behalf at |

    #213 was meant sincerely

    Reply
  207. roots
    roots at |

    I am curious, having had nothing at all to do with any of this, but researching the impact of disconnection, communication, values, media and community. It seems there is a gap between those who still maintain relationships with this woman and those who do not. How do you make sense of this? I am not willing to accept it is power of manipulation or being “a fake” as a true “fake” (ha ha) would not be allowed to work, would have run away to go hide under some rock, and would not choose to fight. I am also struck by what is believed to be fact all along when no one has really stepped back to come up with, say, a collective groups of facts that can be filtered for hearsay or media information. In other words, collectively, what is really known, for real now, and that “semantics” person maybe could help pick up on filtering because we have to understand how our lives are so easily shaped by compliance with the larger group, the media being that voice, and then the easier, sewn up explanation.

    ideas?

    Reply
  208. claire
    claire at |

    Sounds remarkably like a LW statement.
    How can we filter through things? Perhaps this is impossible to do until the trial when Lucy and her attorney are able to speak. Any other ideas? It seems that some of us have indeed disconnected in order to move on.

    Reply
  209. roots
    roots at |

    a show stopper?
    so often when we are called to
    gather factual data we are stopped in our
    movements and can’t find the banister amidst
    all of the feeling and opinion/.

    Reply
  210. J.J.
    J.J. at |

    I’m not involved in this at all–not that any of you will believe me.

    One thing I know for sure is that there are people claiming that LW helped them and people claiming that she didn’t.

    And for the people who claim that she somehow caused them (or someone they know) misfortune, I think their claims will be proven or disproven based on two things. First, show me the money. Anyone who follows up with a civil claim is full of kaka. Second, let’s see who goes back to court to have their “court-appointed” GAL report discredited. If the majority of the 26 victims that Tom Reilly rounded up are satisfied that LW had the book thrown at her and seek no handouts, then their motives were pure and nobody should question them. On the other hand, anyone following up the criminal proceedings with civil ones of their own is the lowest form of freeloading pond-scum and deserves an life-long battle with head lice, IMO. And those who seek to have their failed custody grabs overturned can spend anoter few grand going through the same process and probably losing again, so at least they have that going for them.

    Reply
  211. claire
    claire at |

    J.J.
    Pond scum is a bit severe, yes? What about the people who (and if) have the court decide in their favor. That LW had done a dis-service to them. Isn’t it OK for them to ask for their money back? The money that they paid her?

    Reply
  212. claire
    claire at |

    Oh, and ask LW how many court battles she has received money from…..

    Reply
  213. J.J.
    J.J. at |

    Claire,

    Fair enough. Money back–sure. Reimbursement for their co-pays and future MH visits no longer covered by insurance, if she used up all of their units–sure.

    But a money grab is bad karma and calls into question ones motives, IMO.

    And nobody is happy when a GAL finds against them in custody situations. The process is inherently antagonistic, which is why a GAL is appointed in the first place.

    If people have an beef with the woman, let them participate in the criminal process and do what they can to ensure that justice is served. Using the criminal court and AG’s office to fund a family room and Aruba trip would remove all legitimacy from their claims, however, IMO.

    Reply
  214. a mom
    a mom at |

    I have a few things to add:
    1) on several occasions during our issues with our daughter, Lucy encouraged us to go to the press to expose the offender. We did not because we knew that we would be exposed as well as our daughter. It was also not necessary.
    2) we were also encouraged (by lucy)to sue the family of our daughter’s perp. as lucy said, that is what insurance if for. again, we did not.
    I wonder now that the media is on her (fairly or not), would she do the same thing?

    Reply
  215. claire
    claire at |

    What is a GAL or IMO?
    I am not familiar with these terms.
    JJ, I agree with not going after money for purposes other than reimbursement, however enticing it may be…

    Reply
  216. J.J.
    J.J. at |

    Claire,

    Sorry. “IMO” is geek for “in my opinion”. “GAL” is a standard legal abbreviation for “guardian ad litem”.

    It was written above that LW functioned at least once in the GAL role. Courts appoint this GAL (anyone can serve, but they’re generally some professional mental health worker) as a proxy for the judge. This person interviews and observes individuals on each side of a court case and makes a written assessment (usually with recommendations) that carries more weight with the court than the antagonists’ direct testimony.

    And contrary to what was implied above, the parties in question must approve the individual appointed. And the report is only another piece of evidence for the judge to consider.

    Reply
  217. semantics
    semantics at |

    encouraged
    suggested
    recommended
    thought
    said

    I can’t understand your wondering there “a mom”

    Suggesting options to re-empower you and your family seems reasonable and the action of omission here is – WHAT ELSE WAS SUGGESTED? I gather there were also many recommendations that were acted on and that worked. Good for you.

    What does the media’s assault on LW have to do with your bold and brave revelations? For her to expose the media to the media?
    Or to sue the Commonwealth or Fox25? I don’t understand.

    Reply
  218. hedgetrimmer
    hedgetrimmer at |

    JJ
    Your thinking perked my ears up – I had never thought of this, the motives. Right. Remember that this all seems to hinge on knowing factually about what is the truth. In other words, did this person Go to school, get training, supervision all that ethical good stuff. If not, and the person bought the service based on education and experience, then isn’t it sort of complicated? Unless she had nothing – zip, nada. So like I pay a hedgetrimmer who says he or she knows about hedges and went to Hedging School in Great Britain, they trim my hedges which turn out just fine, but then I find out that INDEED NOooooo, there was no school. The folks still performed a service.

    An aside. These will not be individual cases won or lost BTW – this is the Commonwealth winning its case or not. The individuals are only witnesses and may never know if “their” case was or was not. Am I correct here?

    Reply
  219. et al Ken
    et al Ken at |

    yes, back up the statement. how could a clinician win money in court??? I am really confused.

    I appreciate some of what i have learned through J.J, and at least these are facts.
    thank you and I will stick with pond scum given what one might imagine L has gone through

    Reply
  220. FOXhound
    FOXhound at |

    What is your opinion:
    what did Mike Beadet and the blond news person send into Concordia to get the degrees besides a check.

    I have some ideas…

    Reply
  221. a mom
    a mom at |

    Semantics, I do not think that I was having any “revelations,” just making some comments. Since many here seem to blame the media, I am simply making a statement that Lucy encouraged us to go to the media in the past.

    Reply
  222. semantics
    semantics at |

    So who is blamed when we don’t listen the first time a child whispers?

    Reply
  223. lucy wightman
    lucy wightman at |
    Reply
  224. lucy wightman
    lucy wightman at |

    thank you Ken
    Maybe now is the time
    I learn to understand
    blogs, websites, RSS and
    the like.

    Reply
  225. lucy wightman
    lucy wightman at |

    I might still ask. You are a pretty great guy (pass along to your wife when needed)

    Reply
  226. erin
    erin at |

    I know he’s a great guy, thank you Lucy for the nice comments.

    Reply
  227. B.Z.
    B.Z. at |

    Lucy,

    If you need any help with HTML or website stuff, let me know!

    Reply
  228. Aerosmith
    Aerosmith at |

    Hi

    Reply
  229. http://lucywightman.squarespace.com/
    http://lucywightman.squarespace.com/ at |
    Reply
  230. J.J.
    J.J. at |

    Bloggertruth,

    If it’s not about the money, then these cats won’t all sue the woman. My guess is that they do, and if so, they show what their true motives are. If not, then she has to deal with whatever the court says.

    We’ll find out.

    Reply
  231. Chris
    Chris at |

    You’re right BloggerRuth, this dialogue is no longer productive, so one wonders why you would comment at this point when there wasn’t an entry in weeks! I guess that’s what the blog world is all about. I also wonder why I’m responding, but I have to comment on your remark…”mad at the world”. Lucy, you have to be kidding me. You are so far off, it just made me laugh.

    Reply
  232. ken
    ken at |

    I have just read the article in today’s Globe on Lucy Wightman and I feel I have to say a few things. What someone did in their past should stay in the past for that is something you can not change. What a person is doing with their life today is what counts. Lucy has been helping people with their problems and making a positive impact on their lives. I feel she should be allowed to continue to do what she has been doing and that is helping people not hurting them. She has a gift. Let her use it for good and help the people that seek her out. I support her and hope that she wins her court battle and is allowed to continue doing good for people. I would definatly do anything to help her in her fight which I know will be a long and hard battle. Keep up the good work Lucy and know always there are people who do support you. Remember always the past is dead dont dwell on it live for today to build for a better tommorrow.

    Reply
  233. Lucy W
    Lucy W at |

    Dear Ken

    thank you for helping me with your strong and kind words

    Lucy W

    Reply
  234. Nurse
    Nurse at |

    Lucy:

    I knew you many years ago when you bought bicycles from the store at which I worked. I could tell then that you were a charismatic and caring individual. I have no doubt that you have put your natural talents as a listener, your interpersonal skills, and your life experience and wisdom to good use as a therapist. Should I feel the need for counseling, I hope you would be able to find time in your schedule for me.

    It has been argued that professional licensure, while theoretically designed to protect the public, often protects the revenues of the practioner (by creating a monopoly). I doubt that most patients (prior to your story) would have understood the distinction between psychologist and psychotherapist. Furthermore, the doctoral degree (from any institution) does not ensure quality counseling; nor does it ensure quality teaching or research at at university (I have had many good professors and (sadly) almost as many professors that should consider other professions for the sake of their unfortunate students.)

    I wish you the very best, and I hope that you can find a way to alleviate the “suffering” of those who feel they have been wronged by you. Those feelings are legitimate, but they (and the patients) have been exploited by the media and office seekers.

    Please find a way to continue to practice.

    Reply
  235. Chazzz
    Chazzz at |

    Dear Lucy -

    I read the article in the Globe today and the blog entries. OK, so ‘you done wrong’ as they say. In psychology it’s 3/4 experience and personal characteristics and 1/4 training that makes one effective. And from what I read, I’d rather have your experience and understanding than I would that of many of my PhD puke-colleagues.

    It’s not like you don’t have psychology training, both a BA and an MA from accredited institutions and supervised training …at least as far as I can gather. Truthfully, the difference between a PhD and an MA for your purposes is small. Likening it to a fake doctor practicing medicine is pure hyperbole.

    Yes, you should have more fully represented your background and credentials. It might have even made you MORE successful. And patients do deserve truth in advertising.

    I hope the State of MA goes easy on you and that you are allowed to continue to practice in a context that is legal. And if it’s a PhD that you need/want, maybe this will give you more incentive to complete formality. I’m sure you would dignify any school you attend.

    Go keep doing good work Lucy! The secret is out …so you’re free.

    Chaz

    Reply
  236. Chris
    Chris at |

    Dear Dr. Wightman,

    I’m curious what you think about the photos in your article because they scared me a bit. Although it was very nice, I don’t think the current photo captured your personality. I’ve never seen you without a smile on your face. The old photo scares the shit out of me (wow!). Oh yeah, I’d like to recant my challenge to an arm wrestle!

    Reply
  237. Susan Ovans
    Susan Ovans at |

    Hi Lucy, and others. I hadn’t checked in on this site since soon after I filed my own stories [in October], then saw today’s article in the Globe. So I went on Google and found a posting in Science Daily that says that you pleaded guilty to 39 counts of fraud and impersonating a psychologist. The article was dated Oct. 21. See http://www.sciencedaily.com/upi/index.php?feed=Quirks&article=UPI-1-20051021-16120700-bc-us-stripper.xml.
    Did I miss something?

    Reply
  238. Ken Blatt
    Ken Blatt at |

    Lucy keep your chin up and you will continue to be a winner.the fight will never be lost and i know you will come out on top. you have done so much good for people and will continue to do the same in the future. it’s the narrow minded people who want to judge someone by their past not by what they are doing now.to hell with them believe in yourself and stand tall you will be the winner not them.i support you as many others do. wishing you much success and happiness for the future. your the best and dont ever let anyone tell you different.

    Reply
  239. Shelby
    Shelby at |

    There is a reason for following the rules in our society. Sometimes they do not make much sense but still hold a purpose. The point here is not the background of Lucy Wightman (though it does make a good headline) but the fact that the woman did not follow the rules and had a practice that implied that she was a psychologist. Correct me if I am wrong, but I do not believe that her Phd was or is accepted in MA as valid, so what she did was wrong and fraudulent. Her works may be good as many attest to, but she should not have referred to herself as a doctor.

    Reply
  240. greenarrow
    greenarrow at |

    The article was interesting and generally favorable but not very imformative. After all the time the author spent, both his and many others, he wrote a very superficial story which avoided the real civic questions. Those are the law and the law enforcers.
    While some may understand Dr. Wightman better now, does anyone understand the motives and reasoning of the Commonwealth one iota? This side of the story would have been a greater exercise in journalism.
    I might suggest that the reason Lucy’s current picture is not as appealing as it should be is the strain this inquisition has put on her and the natural skepticism she should have of the press at large. She may have had hopes that this article would air some of her viewpoint on this affair – but you can never be too sure with the media today. Objective journalism is a very rare commodity in our preseent world.
    Let us just hope that the free-fall that Tom Reilly is seeing in his campaign for Governor will encourage him to stop the needless pursecution of ordinary Mass
    citizens for his own self-agrandizement.

    Whith some luck Lucy, this may mark the beginning of the end of this ordeal.

    Reply
  241. Lucy W
    Lucy W at |

    Dear Nurse:

    Yes, I would make time in my schedule and would be honored to do so.

    I read your thoughts with interest – of course my feelings about licensure have been changed by recent experiences but overall I agree with you.

    And yes, perhaps the professional distinctions up until recently have been too blurry. I have always believed it is a good thing to know what you are paying for and always invite those seeking services to consider the “intake” a time to also interview me. Making a distinction between licensed and not licensed is an ethical and practical matter as it impacts financially in terms of self payment.

    Hoping I can find a way “to alleviate the “suffering” is a high hope that I do hope to someday be able to live up to. As I agree with you that the feelings are legitimate… At the same time I believe I do not have that kind of power or ability to alleviate anyone’s pain but my own.

    I find comfort in your words, and something vital. Thanks for being there along the way.

    Reply
  242. Claire
    Claire at |

    I suppose that yes, we are naive for not asking if Lucy was a psychologist as her signage, website, business cards, signature, paperwork, etc, etc indicated.

    Is it necessary to ask bus drivers if they hold a valid license before climbing aboard or is their experience enough for us to trust they are good drivers? Should we ask our physician for a copy of their license for our records before they do an exam or procedure? Of course, if they have experience…..

    Reply
  243. Nurse
    Nurse at |

    Claire:
    “yes” to all of your questions. I believe that we have all read reports of child molesters driving school buses and various other reports where flaws are uncovered too late in the regulatory system. Caveat Emptor…especially in the current political administration.

    Furthermore, as I have said before, licensure does not guarantee quality. Need I remind you of reports of licensed surgeons who walk out in the middle of a procedure to make an ATM deposit, or licensed surgeons who remove the organ / limb from the wrong side?

    Life is all about taking chances, Claire (i.e. there are no guarantees in life other than the perverbial death and taxes). But I am willing to argue that you would be hard pressed to find a better therapist than Lucy. See if you can find it in your heart to forgive her for her mistakes, no matter how egregious you find them to be. I know that you are hurt and I don’t blame you. That forgiveness would be a true sign of healing.

    Reply
  244. Lucy W
    Lucy W at |

    Claire is not naive at all – but sounding hurt and angry yes. I was hurt and angry too but that got tiresome and stole time.

    There were no questions TO ask. For those that found some, I answered honestly, always.

    It was always important to state that I was not licensed. My 5 years of education and training beyond the Master’s degree was regretfully not completed in a way that allowed for licensure as a psychologist. I knew this when I got my doctorate. It was a huge loss to leave myself out of the mainstream, again.

    It was my choice to forego licensure for many reasons at a Master’s level – something I could have attempted while in my doctoral program – and looking back from where I am now – should have.

    There is a lot I could share here about the use of the term etc but cannot at this time.

    I was the one the was naive.

    I took for granted that while my past informed me (and still does) were someone to decide to use it against me it was all too easy.

    I am deeply sorry for all this has caused.

    Reply
  245. Lucy W
    Lucy W at |

    By the way, MSPP (Mass. School of Professional Psych.) was not always accredited and only recently did Haravrd’s program become so.

    Reply
  246. Lucy W
    Lucy W at |

    oops

    Harvard

    Reply
  247. Louis
    Louis at |

    Dear Princess,
    This is clear misrepresentation.
    It is like someone seeing a drug and alcohol counselor,being told that some AA (Alocoholics Anounymous)would help,and be listening to people who are DRUNK expaining how the stay SOBER!!!
    Trust is the deal.If the story is a lie,everything else is perpetuating a lie.
    Your the person probably in need of some psychological help.
    Borderline personality is probably a good place to start.

    Reply
  248. Rick Muraida
    Rick Muraida at |

    I for one believe that Lucy is probably better equipped to pursue a career as therapist than most. There are many bad/ineffective licensed therapists in practice, therefore maybe free-market forces should have more of an impact here.

    In my estimation, gaining perspective and acumen as a therapist is experiential and not as much grounded in intellectual pursuits, although technical knowledge about the human psyche is essential it is entirely over-rated

    (In the interest of disclosure, I remember seeing Princess Cheyenne at the “I” while a student at BU in the 70′s and was quite impressed.)

    Reply
  249. Nurse
    Nurse at |

    Louis:

    Please don’t throw stones. This is a great site for constructive, not destructive dialogue. Please try to keep that perspective. Oh, and are you a licensed Psychologist and able to diagnose “borderline personality”? If so, please provide your credentials.

    Reply
  250. Rick M
    Rick M at |

    Unfortunately not a very good analogy, but I understand the point. However, I would posit that all of us have experiences in our background that inform and shape who we are and that people can and do change over time. At worst, maybe I can see a sin of ommission, but at best someone who is committed and clearly helping people in need of guidance.

    Reply
  251. Lucy W
    Lucy W at |

    I appreciate some of the insights but I won’t be back. I know who I am, what I am and how I am. My job is to stay grounded in care, clarity and my own life. I will not get defensive or tangle with those who want to vent or be abusive. As I have said, a few good men have taught me the value of silence.

    Reply
  252. Robin
    Robin at |

    Being a licensed therapist myself, I have to support Claire’s point of view. When you put your trust and your children;’s trust in a therapist,and then it is broken, this is NOT and NEVER will be considered GOOD TREATMENT. We as therapist buy malpratcice insurance where we have to state what discipine we are. We then have to sign that all of our answers are truthful.Either she lied on this form OR she never bought malpractice insurance which is a serious serious professional liability. So, she helped some people thats great. BUT to deceive pople and use “Psychology Associates” which is a lie is not good honest professionsl practice. She wanted her degree to help people, thats the bottom line. She lied to be able to do that. Also the colleagues that I have talked to have come under much scrutiny because of her actions and left her practice.The whole practice became under serious scrutiny because of her. What about those patients who were seeing the other therapists there?? Don’t they have a right to not have their “safe” therapy place protected??

    Reply
  253. Robin
    Robin at |

    Wea as therapists are held to certain professional responsibilities…we sign many many documents stating what our level of professional education is. She had to lie over and over and over again. This goes directly against our professionsl code of ethics. So those that want to defend her have their opinion, but as another therapist who has to work,provide good honest treatment and be professionally honest about my credentials, this is an absolute unprofessional,unethical,unexcusable pre-concieved decision she made. She does NOT have the support of the majority of therapist in the South Shore who keep a very honest professional practice .

    Reply
  254. Adam
    Adam at |

    ** comments removed for slander and author was notified to clean it up and did not respond. **

    Reply
  255. TruthSeeker
    TruthSeeker at |

    Adam – how do you know all of this and why have you not spoken up earlier? How are we to believe you above others? Some of us are consumers and need to know what is and what is not the truth. How to tell?

    Reply
  256. *edit*
    *edit* at |

    posing as a male named Adam… fascinating and goes to show the psychopath who does not win never ever gives up its prey

    *this comment’s name has been edited. Nancy did not make this post.*

    Reply
  257. Claire
    Claire at |

    I am confused…who is posing as a male named Adam? Nancy?

    “Adam’s” story does sound solid and I suppose it would be easy enough to follow up with the names if you were so inclined.

    Ken, you seemed to be so gung-ho to believe Lucy Wightman. Why is this so and if Adam’s story proves to be the truth, how do you feel about that?

    Reply
  258. simple
    simple at |

    a lot of slander going on around here – I am sure MSPP, Schwartz, even the Dept of Corrections is slandered – yikes! the Patriot Ledger got that in print – then to go on with assaultive language towards seasoned media takes chutzpah. when the named individuals see the slander against them “Adam” could very well be in a bit of hot water. By the way “Adam” your identity is not protected – do you know what an IP address is?

    Reply
  259. Chris
    Chris at |

    Everyone is entitled to their “opinion”, and individuals have presented various views on this blog over the past months.
    That being said, this is not the appropriate media (nor is there any such place) to post totally slanderous comments. LW, I hope that you will not be responding to Adam’s allegations. You do not need to defend yourself against Adam or the world. It’s my “opinion” that you should be primarily concerned with your family, friends, and patients, and they already know the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth! Although I am not walking in your shoes right now, and I’m sure it’s tempting to want to set the record straight. Just remember what the wise folks suggested about the power of silence.

    Reply
  260. Adam
    Adam at |

    While watching this debacle unfold – what prompts my posting is rooted in our loss of integrity. It’s a powerful word.

    If we were to pose as:

    Doctor (MD) without credentials – you’re put in jail, fined and will never practice again
    Lawyer – without a Juris Doctorate – is a lawsuit, fines and other financial implications
    Police Officer – you’re arrested – it’s a felony
    Teacher – posing without credentials is fired
    Child Care – without proper accreditation is closed, shutdown and fined
    Misrepresenting credentials – i.e., Bachelors – Masters or other degree
    – is cause for dismissal and professionally your name is good for nothing

    The intent of these laws are to subscribe to a higher level of trust, skill and reverence for the particular profession.

    First and foremost we must trust our doctor, lawyer, police, teachers and other professionals to be the experts they present themselves to be – that they have gleaned a level of knowledge that is unique to their profession.

    Are we so callous as to turn our heads away when someone poses as a child psychologist and guardian ad litem? Why – because someone made you feel better or sympathized – it’s OK to break an even greater trust?

    Perhaps integrity does no longer have value.

    Gotta go – gonna try to stay away now.

    Reply
  261. Claire
    Claire at |

    Why would someone pose as Nancy Dizio and post a comment like that? I was told that it was Nancy who turned Lucy into Fox 25. Is someone accusing Nancy of being Adam?
    What constitutes Adam’s story as “slander?” If it is true, is it still slanderous?

    Reply
  262. church mouse
    church mouse at |

    I can’t keep this information to myself at this point. An article..Job stress takes a heavy toll on officers
    By Jesse J. Smith , Freeman staff
    ©Daily Freeman 2006

    the individual interviewed for this is mentioned in “Adam’s” posting … read on

    Few jobs are as stressful as police work, and the toll it can take is reflected in higher-than-average rates of suicide, substance abuse, divorce and stress-related health problems among law enforcement professionals.

    “People are by nature diurnal animals,” said psychologist Terrence Lynn, a former Boston housing police officer, now a professor at LaSalle College in Newton, Mass. “They were not meant to work midnights. You miss family functions, you miss parties, you end up cranky and irritable all the time.”

    Reply
  263. church mouse
    church mouse at |

    excerpts from website owned by Terence Lynn the “ex Boston Cop” and “psychologist”
    Terence Lynn with members of CIA, DEA, FBI, USMC(EOD), MSP, and ATF attending Bomb School
    (C4 explosion in background). KBR instructor PSYOPS Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay, Kabul.

    Terence Lynn is available to consult on forensic psychological issues involving police officers, federal agents, and correctional officers worldwide. He is an expert witness on forensic psychology under Federal Rules of Evidence 702 and has consulted on criminal and civil cases involving law enforcement personnel.

    He has testified in many jurisdictions at the federal, superior, and district level. Testificadum at grand jury and deposition. Former police department prosecutor in Littleton District Court for Sugar Hill Police. Former undercover DEA task force agent. Graduate Massachusetts Criminal Justice Training Council 65-90, and 110th New Hampshire State Police Academy. Graduate Explosive Device Training School, Drug Unit Commander, DEA Narcotics, Organized Crime, Massachusetts State Police Advanced Narcotics, Boston Police Academy Community Police School. Graduate and Post-Graduate degree work completed in Boston, and Cambridge. Independent clinical licensure in Massachusetts. Over 500 narcotic investigations, and 700 psychiatric evaluations completed. Available for hire by Individuals, Prosecutors, Plaintiff Attorney, Defense Attorney, Union Officials, and Corporations. If you are an officer, attorney, or interested party and are seeking an experienced and recognized expert in the field of police psychology please contact this office. Also available in trial consulting utilizing kinesics, proxemics, and other features that may assist in providing services to client. Case Review/Trial Prep/Comprehensive Reports/Brandeis Briefs/Expert Testimony at Deposition and Trial.

    Special Training:
    Attended specialized training courses offered by the DEA, ATF, Massachusetts State Police, University of North Florida, United States Army, United States Marine Corps, New Hampshire Police Standards & Training, Massachusetts Criminal Justice Training Council.

    Professional Affiliations:
    Member Massachusetts Teachers Association/Higher Education Faculty, Member American College of Forensic Examiners, American Counseling Association, Past member International Brotherhood of Police Officers, International Narcotic Officers Association, Massachusetts Narcotic Officers Association.

    Teaching Experience:
    Adjunct professor for Assumption College, Bay State College, Bridgewater State College, Cape Cod Community College, Curry College, Framingham State College (Graduate), Lasell College, Newbury College, Quincy College, Western New England College, Worcester State College. Academic advising for students at associate degree level, thesis advisor (graduate student work researching serial killer), designed, created and teach forensic science and forensic psychology (Assumption College), Academic project advisor.

    College Courses Taught:
    Introduction to Psychology, Psychology of Criminal Behavior, Psychology of Women, General Psychology, Psychological Testing, Research Methods, Statistics, Forensic Psychology, Forensic Science, Social Psychology, Cultural Psychology, Drugs & Behavior, Adjustment Psychology, Lifespan Psychology, Abnormal Psychology, Stress Management, Police Supervision, Criminology, Constitutional Law, Criminal Law, Corrections, Interviewing and Interrogation.

    Workshops/Seminars:
    Conducted and Instructed workshops on drugs and behavior, stress management, police psychology, suicide awareness, drugs of abuse, terrorist psychology, Interrogation and Interviewing for Weymouth Public Schools, New Hampshire Police Standards and Training, Franconia Police, Justice Resource Institute, Habit Management, U.S. Government.
    Attended basic and advanced narcotics, drug unit commander school, explosive device school, organized crime, accident reconstruction, Marijuana Investigation.

    Consultant:
    Forensic consultant International Advisory Board
    Calamus International University.
    Consulted on psychological and psychometric issues for civil and criminal cases at the federal, superior, and district court level.

    Court Qualification:
    Qualified as an expert witness or as an expert involved in forensic psychology, psychology, psychometrics, and trauma. Recognized as an expert by involvement and/or performance of forensic psychological evaluations. Written and prepared psychological briefs per Daubert (1993). Testified before federal and state grand juries on narcotics and weapon cases. Testified before courts regarding M.G.L. 123 Section 9 on deviant sexual offending. Extensive experience testifying before all court jurisdictions on violations of criminal law. Department prosecutor, Littleton District Court, NH.

    Reply
  264. church mouse
    church mouse at |

    and i do apologize for the smokescreen here, however, this Terence Lynn is NOT someone’s radar screen I would like to be a blip on… a little scary

    Reply
  265. church mouse
    church mouse at |

    lastly… from the Massachusetts Board of Registration
    Licenses fitting search criteria:
    Profession equals Psychologist
    Last Name beginning with lynn
    First Name beginning with terrence

    There are no licensees fitting this criteria.
    Your search has resulted in 0 licenses

    Licenses fitting search criteria:
    Profession equals Psychologist
    Last Name beginning with lynn
    First Name beginning with terry

    There are no licensees fitting this criteria.
    Your search has resulted in 0 licenses

    Licenses fitting search criteria:
    Profession equals Psychologist
    Last Name beginning with Lynn
    First Name beginning with Terence

    There are no licensees fitting this criteria.
    Your search has resulted in 0 licenses

    Reply
  266. Ken Savage
    Ken Savage at |

    Interesting.

    Reply
  267. Chooses to remain anonymous
    Chooses to remain anonymous at |

    And yet, if one does a search on the Mass Division of Professional Licensure web site for

    Profession equals Mental Health Counselor
    Last Name beginning with lynn

    up pops LYNN TERENCE F.
    license # 4998

    There is no reason to assume that “Adam” is Terence Lynn (in fact, in post 279, someone says Adam is “posing as a male”), which would be the only way for what Church Mouse says to be relevant.

    I do not know Terence Lynn, I do not know what his involvement in this case may or may not be, but let’s not attempt to draw attention away from someone who has absolutely no license at all, and yet held herself out to be a psychologist, to someone who does not claim to be a psychologist and has the license he claims to have.

    Reply
  268. Chooses to remain anonymous
    Chooses to remain anonymous at |

    I’d like to correct myself. I realize now, after rereading the posts and Terence’s web site(including the one by Adam that was deleted ~ I printed it out long ago) that the only one who is calling Terence a psychologist is Church Mouse. Therefore, everything Church Mouse said is irrelevant.

    Again, let’s not attempt to draw attention away from someone who has absolutely no license at all, and yet held herself out to be a psychologist, to someone who does not claim to be a psychologist and has the license he claims to have.

    Reply
  269. church mouse
    church mouse at |

    interesting that investigating Mr. Lynn who, in print, did indeed represent himself to be a psychologist, an “expert” in so many areas, has disassembled his web sites – an agency investigation also
    discovered Mr. Lynn never to have been a Boston Police Officer, or a DEA agent, and there is no record of his being an expert in any court in the state of Massachusetts.
    There is no evidence that Lucy
    has lied. Only hearsay. Whereas
    here we have a fellow who
    thinks he can bully
    someone else and draw attention away from him. When it is in print, I am afraid there is little defense.
    The guy sounds a bit scary.

    Reply
  270. church mouse
    church mouse at |

    I bet that Mr. Lynn will be exposed on the up and coming website “notapsychologist.com”
    right alongside Lucy. His profile will weigh in with far more incriminating evidence
    however – impersonating a cop, misrepresentation all over the place. I hope he is running and hiding.

    Reply
  271. church mouse
    church mouse at |

    http://www.smarthunt.com/resume.cfm?portfolioid=26516

    OBJECTIVE
    I am a Ph.D. candidate. Two graduate degrees, college profeesor with experience in teaching police/intelligence. Former DEA Task Force Agent (NOT), Former Police Officer (NH) and Massachusetts.

    RELOCATE
    MD MA RI VT

    Terence F. Lynn, M.Ed., C.A.G.S., L.M.H.C.

    Professional Statement:

    An experienced college professor in the art and science of psychology, and epistemological discourse of adult learning styles. A former decorated DEA narcotics agent (NOT)
    and graduate of the New Hampshire State Police Academy and Massachusetts Police Academy.

    An expert witness under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 on psychology (CAN WE BE AN EXPERT WITHOUT EVEN HAVING AN EDUCATION IN THE FIELD??) and psychometrics. Academically published on the field of psychology.

    Qualifications:

    Licensed Clinical Therapist- Commonwealth of Massachusetts #4998

    Diplomate American College of Forensic Examiners #21862Boston President ACFE

    DEA Task Force Agent Graduate (THOUGHT HE WAS DECORATED)

    Massachusetts Police Academy Class (WHICH POLICE EXACTLY? THE ONES THAT WORK IN THE HOUSING AREA) 65-90

    NH State Police Academy Class 110 (CURIOUS HE DID NOT BECOME A POLICE OFFICER)

    Plethysmograph Trained

    Education:

    2000-Present Doctor of Philosophy in Education. Lesley University All But Dissertation (THIS IS SO RIDICULOUS AND HE SHOULD BE ASHAMED)(MAYBE LESLEY SHOULD SEE THIS TOO)

    2005-Present C.A.G.S. Educational Leadership Suffolk University

    1997-1999 C.A.G.S. Counseling Psychology Suffolk University

    1995-1997 Master of Education in Clinical Psychology. Cambridge College (IS THIS THE NIGHT SCHOOL)

    1992-1995 Bachelor of Arts in Psychology. Boston College (CAN SOMEONE CHECK INTO BC?)

    Experience:

    2003-Present Visiting Lecturer. Bridgewater State College (Research Methods, Psychology of Criminal Behavior, Introduction to Psychology.)

    2003-2004 Visiting Professor. Lasell College (Psychology, Criminal Justice, Forensics, Psychology of Adjustment.)

    2001-Present Visiting Professor. Assumption College (Psychology, Deviance, Criminology, Forensic Science, Forensic Psychology.)

    2000-2002 Visiting Lecturer. Framingham State College DGCE Graduate Psychology (Psychometrics, Statistics.)

    1999-Present Visiting Professor. Western New England College (Police Program). (Psychology, Interviewing, Police Stress, Psychology of Women, Cultural Psychology, Abnormal Psychology, Social Environment and Psychology, Forensic Science.)

    I also have taught Psychology at Cape Cod Community College. Drugs and Behavior at Worcester State

    College. Communications, and Gender Communication at Curry College. Abnormal Psychology

    at Springfield College. Psychology, Criminal Justice, Criminal Law, Corrections, and Civil Rights at

    Bay State College.

    2000-2000 Forensic Evaluation Team (Plethysmograph Analysis) at the Massachusetts Treatment Center for the Sexually Dangerous.

    1998-2000 Psychiatric Evaluator. South Shore Mental Health. (HOW CAN ONE BE A PSYCHIATRIC EVALUATOR WITHOUT HAVING AN MD?)

    1997-1998 Therapist C-Team (Psychology). Massachusetts Treatment Center for the Sexually Dangerous. (OH YES – WITH NANCY DIZIO – SAY WASN’T SHE GRANDFATHERED IN?)

    1996-1997 Acting Chief of Police. Sugar Hill Police Department, NH. (SOMEONE CHECK THIS OUT)

    1991-1995 Undercover Police Officer. Boston Housing Police Department. OHHHH

    1989-1991 Federal Task Force Agent U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (Cape Cod). NOPE

    1989-1989 Police Officer. Yarmouth, MA Police Department. Promoted to Drug Task Force.

    1985-1989 United States Marine Corps.

    Professional Training:

    New Hampshire State Police Academy Class 110

    Massachusetts Police Academy Class 65-90

    DEA Task Force Agent School

    Boston Police Academy Community Police Training

    Advanced Gang Investigator School

    Drug Unit Commander School

    Massachusetts State Police Basic and Advanced Narcotics School

    Explosive Device School

    Glock Armory School

    Weapons Expert

    MTA Member

    MCCC Member

    Mass State Higher Education Union Member (Bridgewater Chapter)

    Forensic Sex Crimes and Typologies

    Designed Forensic Science Course

    Designed Forensic Psychology Course

    NH State Police Weapons Expert

    MA Police Weapons Expert

    DEA Weapons Expert

    Chapter President American College of Forensic Examiners

    Over 500 Narcotic Investigations

    Over 700 Psychiatric Evaluations (WOWIE – AS A NON PSYCHIATRIST??? DONT THINK SO)

    Erotic Crime

    DEA Asset Crime School

    White Collar Crime School

    Publications:

    Lynn, T. (2002). Police Suicide. Law Enforcement Executive Forum 2(4). 173-185

    Ettinger, R. & Lynn, T. (2005). Understanding psychology (1st Edition). Horizon Publishing ISBN# 1-59602-209-4

    Trooper News: Police Suicide (9 part series)

    Big Crime: Little Culprits

    New York Daily Freeman: Police Stress (OH YES – HERE IT IS – THE ARTICLE WHERE MR LYNN STATES HE IS A PSYCHOLOGIST)

    Reply
  272. church mouse
    church mouse at |

    wikipedia..
    Terence Lynn
    I originally prodded this as Very little of this seems verifiable from independent sources. The cited site is basically advertising his services.. It has been cleaned up substantially since then and the prod tag removed but verifiability and notability remain issues.
    • Delete as per my nom. Dlyons493 Talk 08:51, 25 March 2006 (UTC)]]
    • Keep. Good article.User:ViniVediVici
    • Delete pending verification. (Google gets nothing for “Terence Lynn” with Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo.) Bucketsofg 09:20, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
    • Delete. Doesn’t sound notable by his own merits. He’s been involved in notable events, but there’s nothing to make he himself notable. –Icarus 10:03, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
    • Delete as non-notable. –Ed (Edgar181) 11:47, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
    • Delete, nn. –Terence Ong 13:43, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
    • Keep. (Google notes “Terence Lynn CIA”.) Author appeared on Good Morning America in book “Under” Sarge Baldy 13:17, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
    o [11] gives me nothing except his own site. Am I missing something? Dlyons493 Talk 21:53, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
    • Delete, nn Bridesmill 22:31, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
    • Delete nn. ¡Dustimagic! (T/C) 00:18, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
    I vote to keep, he is referenced pretty clearly om web and in print media.
    • Delete per above. –Khoikhoi 04:27, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
    • Delete. — Necrothesp 20:10, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
    • Delete per above. ProhibitOnions 23:26, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
    • Keep. Seems quite a lot of people are aware of this person. JeffBurdges 16:38, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
    • Keep, collectively notable. -Sean Curtin 19:49, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
    • Delete; I think this person’s media mentions are more along the lines of “guy involved in a news story” rather than any personal notability. MCB 07:49, 27 March 2006 (UTC

    Reply
  273. church mouse
    church mouse at |

    ACCORDING TO LESLEY ???
    Terence Lynn, Psychology. Massachusetts Criminal Justice Training Council, Barnstable Police Academy; New Hampshire State Police Academy; M.Ed., Cambridge College; C.A.G.S., Suffolk University; Ph.D., Lesley University.

    Reply
  274. ken
    ken at |

    lucy has donne so much good for her patients why not leave her alone and let her continue the good work she is doing.i remember her from many years ago when i work in the Zone she was sweet sweet caring lady back then and i am suree is the same today.leave the woman alone dont drag her past out now judge her by what she is doing now now by what she did in the past.i back her 150% now, so let her be.she is now and was back then a wonderful,caring sweet LADY

    Reply
  275. A. Bored Reader
    A. Bored Reader at |

    Ken,

    Don’t you think that this discussion has come to an end? I can’t even discern what everyone is talking about.

    Might be a good time to retire this whole subject. Or is the title too good to give up, because it draws readers to your website?

    A. Bored Reader

    Reply
  276. Ken Savage
    Ken Savage at |

    I’m not replying someone else is named Ken. If you don’t want to read it anymore don’t reply. Some people are getting something out of this website.

    Reply
  277. Claire
    Claire at |

    http://www.capecodonline.com/cctimes/capetherapist3.htm
    A friend of mine sent me this link regarding a woman in Mashpee who has been practicing as a pyschologist for 10 years without a degree or license. She was “posing as a psychologist” as well.

    Reply
  278. claire
    claire at |

    I am not sure how they get around the insurance companies. With Lucy, we always paid up front and then sometimes were reimbursed by the insurance company.
    This other woman in Mashpee has practiced for 10 years without being noticed. Amazing.
    If she helped some people, does it make it ok?
    This story was a featured in the paper and she did not even have an interesting past…

    Reply
  279. his name is terence lynn
    his name is terence lynn at |

    and now more of the story will be told as things emerge and unfold naturally.

    Reply
  280. his name is terence lynn
    his name is terence lynn at |

    watch how his website changes, how his web archives are no longer available (“blocked”) but I have them ALL, how last week he was so many things and now he is not. Did any of you catch the video he fabricated? I think he finally took it off his web site given he used TV stations etc. Oh. I have that too.

    Counter-stalking? Is this like countersurveillance?

    Reply
  281. his name is terence lynn
    his name is terence lynn at |

    Ken,
    Notice the scary talking person on his site
    today is named Ken (he will change it now)

    Reply
  282. his name is terence lynn
    his name is terence lynn at |

    yes he has changed it now – cool -

    Reply
  283. his name is terence lynn
    his name is terence lynn at |

    at one point his website said “you don’t know what lengths I will go to when Prof Lynn has been upset by you. See you soon Princess.” All on tape. All saved to disk etc.

    Reply
  284. his name is terence lynn
    his name is terence lynn at |

    policestress.com is his website

    Another phase of relief where I no longer need to fight being in a closet!! It is me, the me who has known how all along the story would emerge to tell the truth.

    Reply
  285. claire
    claire at |

    I have no idea what is being said regarding Terence Lynn. The pertaining information was edited out so unless you happened to make a copy of the blog (I have better things to do) then you are in the dark. If Mr.Lynn is indeed a fraud, then he should be found out as well. It is wrong.
    Perhaps Lucy should start her own Terence Lynn blog and keep things there.
    Enough with the cryptic messages.

    Reply
  286. his name is terence lynn
    his name is terence lynn at |

    terence lynn has a web site not a blog Carol.

    Reply
  287. his name is terence lynn
    his name is terence lynn at |

    Prof. Terence F. Lynn Professor

    Assumption College
    Worcester, Massachusetts

    Employment History

    Teacher2
    Assumption College – Worcester, Massachusetts

    Lecturer In Psychology2
    Assumption College – Worcester, Massachusetts

    Professor1
    Bridgewater State College

    Professor1
    Western New England College

    Teacher2
    Western New England College

    Lecturer In Criminal Law2
    Bay State College

    Faculty3
    Bay State College

    Adjunct Lecturer In Psychology2
    Bay State College

    Lecturer In Psychology2
    Worcester State College

    USCS

    Police Officer and Task Force Agent1
    United States Drug Enforcement Administration

    Chapter Coordinator1
    American College of Forensic Examiners

    Agent1
    Drug Enforcement Administration

    Massachusetts Treatment Center for the Sexually Dangerous

    Visiting Lecturer In the Department of Psychology2
    Framingham State College

    ATF

    Boston Housing Police

    Police Officer and Undercover D.E.A. Task Force Agent2
    Cape Cod Drug Task Force

    Visiting Lecturer In the Criminal Justice Program2
    Curry College

    Massachusetts State Police

    MBTA Police

    Yarmouth Police Department

    Board Membership and Affiliations

    Member2
    Emerald Society of the Boston Police Department

    licensed clinical therapist1

    Education

    DEA Task Force Agent Training School

    Master of Education, Psychological Studies and Counseling Psychology2

    C.A.G.S., Counseling Psychology2

    M.C.J.T.C. Class

    Doctor2
    Lesley University

    Reply
  288. his name is terence lynn
    his name is terence lynn at |

    Terence Lynn is an expert witness in police psychology and has testified at the state and federal level on such issues. Terence has worked undercover with DEA, ATF, MSP, BPD, USCS, and many other agencies during his police tenure. In addition, Terence is an expert witness on psychological operations and terrorism psychopathology. Terence has been involved in over five hundred narcotic cases during his career. He has conducted over seven hundred emergency psychiatric evaluations. He is an expert witness on human deviance, narcotics, weapons, psychology, and psychometrics.

    Professor Lynn is available to consult on police psychology.

    Reply
  289. his name is terence lynn
    his name is terence lynn at |

    Professor Lynn also is afiliated with a PSYOPS Team for an Intelligence Agency of the US and travel is frequent.

    Reply
  290. his name is terence lynn
    his name is terence lynn at |

    This summary was created using information submitted by this person.

    Board Membership and Affiliations

    President Boston Chapter
    American College of Forensic Examiners – Boston, USA

    Certifications

    Lmhc
    Division of Professional Licensure

    Education

    Ph.D., Cags, Cags, Master of Education, Psychology, Education
    Lesley University

    Biography

    Former police officer, federal agent, and government trainer.

    Reply
  291. his name is terence lynn
    his name is terence lynn at |

    “People are by nature diurnal animals,” said psychologist Terrence Lynn, a former Boston housing police officer, now a professor at LaSalle College in Newton, Mass. “They were not meant to work midnights.

    This, Lynn said, is where the biggest source of police burnout – boredom – comes into play.

    According to Lynn a study conducted by the Massachusetts Criminal Justice Training Council found that 70 percent of police recruits who were married or in long-term relationships when they entered training were separated from their partners within 18 months of starting the job.

    Lynn said the qualities that make cop effective on the street can be disastrous when applied to home life.

    “As a police officer on the street, you expect that when you give an order it will be obeyed,” he said.

    Lynn and other police stress experts, however, contend that while critical incident teams can be effective in dealing with immediate trauma, the employee assistance programs meant to deal with more long-standing issues are rarely as airtight as officers might believe. Officers who go to employee assistance program social workers with serious problems, such as drug addiction or violent impulses, may find that word leaks out and they end up branded a “rubber gun,” a cop who can’t be trusted on the streets, and may be quietly assigned to desk duty for the remainder of their careers.

    According to Lynn, many police officers, mindful that a reputation for mental instability is fatal to a law enforcement career, are justifiably reluctant to take advantage of any department-sponsored counseling service.

    “My advice to cops, and this is unfortunate, is that if you need help, go outside the department, go outside the area, go outside the state if you have to, and just pay cash,” he said.

    Reply
  292. his name is terence lynn
    his name is terence lynn at |

    Expert witness Terence Lynn, a former undercover agent for the Drug Enforcement Administration who has studied psychology and criminology, testified that Woodall was not trained to deal with the psychological pressure of undercover work, was not rotated out of undercover duty and did not have direct supervision for two years before his arrest.

    Reply
  293. claire
    claire at |

    What does ANY of this have to do with Lucy Wighman?

    Reply
  294. his name is terence lynn
    his name is terence lynn at |
    Reply
  295. his name is terence lynn
    his name is terence lynn at |

    Ken – if you run into problems you know how to be in touch – there were some threats to you on a quickly vanishing blog this morning – if you live in a town that starts with D then Terry Lynn has you pegged and targetted – perhaps all talk – but I have copies of these as well – so do the police. Only way to stop a bully is to be strong.

    Reply
  296. Offshore
    Offshore at |

    Claire, it has everything to do with Lucy. You see, if she can distract people enough with the red herring of Terrence Lynn, two things will happen:
    1. They’ll forget that the question is about whether Lucy acted illegally or immorally.
    2. They’ll think that if other people did the same illegal and immoral things without getting punished, then Lucy is somehow OK for having done them.
    Note the information that Lucy has posted about Lynn. First, there’s a large amount of it. This is intended to make people think that there must be some truth in her accusations — she’s presented so much evidence that she must be right. And with so much, how many people will really read it all, or look carefully at it to see if it is in fact evidence against Lynn? (Bear in mind that if it were evidence against Lynn it still wouldn’t be evidence for Lucy.) But if you do look carefully at it, an astonishing thing appears — it doesn’t show anything bad about Lynn at all. It says things such as that he’s taught psychology, or that he’s testified as an expert witness in forensic psychology. At no point does he call himself a psychologist. To make her posts more convincing, Lucy’s highlighted each time the word “psychology” or “psychologist” appears. Again, it’s unlikely that readers will go through the whole thing, and will just see they highlighted words pop out. The one time Lynn is called a psychologist, it’s by someone else. Compare this with Lucy, who called herself that.
    So what it has to do with Lucy, Claire, is that Lucy’s trying to fool us into thinking that she did nothing wrong. Let’s not be fooled, OK?

    Reply
  297. claire
    claire at |

    Oh I am not fooled at all. In fact my point in question regarding Terence Lynn was “who cares?” Of course Lucy is trying to smokescreen herself. If you look at her website, it continuously references witchhunts and the media. Blah, blah, blah. She did something wrong, she is deceitful and is trying to make Terence Lynn out to be a monster. Maybe he is. Not my problem since I have no idea who the guy is. If he is doing something shady, well he will probably be turned over to Fox25 news shortly. The continuous lengthy notes regarding him are tedious and you are right, I do not read them. No interest there. Perhaps Lucy is finding a lot of time on her hands.
    If she wanted to contact Ken about a potential “problem” she could have done so privately. Of course, this is all about the drama. Please.

    Reply
  298. lucy torri wightman's mother
    lucy torri wightman's mother at |

    thank you for your support. our daughter died yesterday at age 16.
    all of you judgemental cold people form your own god damn club. i will stick to what matters. mind games. the truth will come out.

    Reply
  299. lucy torri wightman's mother
    lucy torri wightman's mother at |

    the TRUTH ABOUT THE MIND GAMES and what has caused a human life to be lost – go away all of you – go to hell and rot

    Reply
  300. Annie
    Annie at |

    To the people who continually post: Let it go…stop sensationalizing over these stories!
    To Lucy: You have my heartfelt, deepest sympathies about the loss of your daughter.

    Reply
  301. Offshore
    Offshore at |

    Lucy –

    I am so sorry to hear about your daughter. No parent should have to go through that.

    Reply
  302. Chris
    Chris at |

    I thought I believed in the saying, “what goes around, comes around.” I no longer do. Just a few weeks ago I asked my (very wise) therapist, do you believe in the saying, to which she replied, not necessarily, why? I said because I’m going through some shitty stuff right now, and I don’t know what I did to deserve it. The answer is, I didn’t do anything to deserve it and surely neither did Lucy to deserve such horrific pain and suffering. All of our troubles pale in comparison. I agree with Annie, Let it go.

    Reply
  303. claire
    claire at |

    Lucy, I am truly sorry to hear about the loss of Torri. No one should ever have to endure that pain. It is every parent’s worst nightmare. I am so sorry.

    Reply
  304. Old friend of Torri's
    Old friend of Torri's at |

    i knew Torri through the middle school years when she lived in my town. it saddens me to hear about her death, and although we were never truly close, it still hurt. i wish we were closer through those years, and even though we weren’t i knew she was one of the most carefree and quirky girls that i would know throughout my life. i just saw her about a month ago when i was out to dinner and it’s just weird to know ill never see her again. i hope you’re happy where you are Torri, and you will be missed, you’re on our minds in Hanover, Rest in Peace, and stay beautiful

    Reply
  305. TORRI IS MY DAUGHTER
    TORRI IS MY DAUGHTER at |

    NOT TO LET ANYONE OR ANYTHING ROB US OF BEING FULLY PRESENT IN OUR CHILDREN’S LIVES NO MATTER HOW COMPLEX OR FRIGHTENING OR COMPELLING… MY CHILD … TRULY NO PERSON THING PLACE OR EVENT CAN TOUCH ME WITH PAIN NOW… A PERSPECTIVE NOW NO PERSON SHOULD HAVE TO SHARE PLEASE NOW LEAVE ME ALONE IF YOU WANT TO HARM ME BECAUSE YOU CANNOT

    Reply
  306. for torri
    for torri at |

    and to the individual who needed to say this on my blog: “Lucy, I met you briefly years ago and determined rather quickly that you have borderline personality disorder. The things you’ve said and done since that time have only proven my initial impression to be dead-on accurate.
    May 22, 2006″

    Reply
  307. for torri
    for torri at |

    Internet Address: lifespan.lifespan.org/204.17.80.4

    i am too tired to care who this person is who took on the challenge of trying to hurt me MORE but perhaps others are… others who could not imagine what kind of monster could bring him or herself to feast on a grieving family whose perfect daughter is gone.

    Reply
  308. for torri
    for torri at |

    ken – i gave the investigative teams copies of the blog entries, my hard drive, all of it. when I can get a copy I will send it to you, openly. what I will say is terence lynn posted this blog briefly, not knowing that his every move on the computer is monitored, but no longer by me. it is handed over to people who know what they are doing. please be careful.

    Reply
  309. a man named NANCY
    a man named NANCY at |

    torri knew enough to have this on her my space… she knew

    Reply
  310. Lucy
    Lucy at |

    Terence Lynn stepped over the line one too many times. He announced a new website called “torielivesinhell.com.” There will be a hearing on July 26 at 10 am – Hingham District Court to determine if criminal harassment charges are in order.

    Reply
  311. J.J.
    J.J. at |

    Even as a parent of three, I can’t possibly understand what losing a child is like. I know that the possibility exists, and it scares the hell out of me.

    I once maintained the “follow the money” philosophy regarding the topic that begun this page. I did overlook the fact that there are some people who become so obsessed with others that they can become dangerous. Seems like we have someone like that involved. Not good.

    At the risk of sounding cliche’, I hope that some of the people involved gain some perspective.

    Reply
  312. Jerr
    Jerr at |

    WHoever has that website has NO CLASS.

    way to go shithead I hope you’re tracked down and prosecuted.

    Reply
  313. me
    me at |

    Lucy, that is sickening – I hope you did take him to court, I hope he is charged with harassment. It’s beyond having ‘no class’.

    Really SICK.

    Reply
  314. Lucy
    Lucy at |

    Ken,
    I wanted you to be aware of this…
    hookerstalker — Comments

    Page 1 of 1

    Sunday, 14 May 2006

    Hi everyone
    Now Playing: Dr. Maggie is here
    Hi, I wanted to start this blog

    Posted by crazy/freepsycadvice at 12:21 AM EDT

    Post a Comment

    Sunday, 14 May 2006 – 12:59 AM EDT

    Name: crazy fan

    man, I saw this show years ago…she is the bomb

    Reply to this Comment

    Sunday, 14 May 2006 – 1:33 AM EDT

    Name: joint crawler

    what a cooter…NICE, but that was 1984, probably a bit aged by now…maybe not…

    Reply to this Comment

    Sunday, 14 May 2006 – 1:07 AM EDT

    Name: Emma
    E-Mail: bebopaloobop

    What the fuck man, I have been in this from the start, I dated her, I am fuckin with some dudes head he fucked me over years ago

    Reply to this Comment

    Sunday, 14 May 2006 – 1:05 AM EDT

    Name: hit me baby one more ime

    Do people want to know where on Forest Park, Ken lives with family? How the hell does some moron think that they can remain hidden. Who the hell does one think they are to have some false information posted about someone from an ex-hooker. Did you not realize you put the life of a person’s family in danger? Did you not write about the sanctity of keeping a family safe. I would suggest you revise your blog babycakes.

    Reply to this Comment

    Sunday, 14 May 2006 – 1:14 AM EDT

    Name: DD Fitz

    hi

    Reply to this Comment

    Sunday, 14 May 2006 – 1:20 AM EDT

    Name: meemie
    E-Mail: hh@didkt.com

    no, but some one wanted to know if it was hingham?? I think near Norwell

    Reply
  315. ex DOC
    ex DOC at |

    my father just retired from DOC. i just graduated from college, and i took one course from this creep terry lynn. my father knew terry lynn and nancy dizzio and lucy wightman where he worked. he says that lucy wightman was one of the most well-respected interns there and that she was not fired. she was forced out because this guy terry lynn and nancy dizzio spread information about her former dancing career and he saw the picture nancy was passing around. they all sat around laughing about it. terry lynn didn’t even work there at the time anymore. but my dad says he and this nancy person were obsessed, for very different reasons. so here was lucy all of sudden exposed in a building filled with sex offenders, nearing the end of her two years internship. most any of us would never have seen the merits of working with all those rapists etc to begin with, never mind stay after such a betrayal. my father says lucy has gotten a raw deal and has been witch hunted by weak and evil people. and that terry lynn was an odd duck, never had expression, was cold. he threatened her daughter, my father showed me the guys website before she was killed…

    Reply
  316. ex DOC
    ex DOC at |

    look at the threat he makes to ken>>> the guy is a creep and i hope he never finds ken or his kids

    Reply
  317. Lucy
    Lucy at |

    Ken – I like your style. A lot. You know how evasive the internet can be, but yes, I am sure. Although he is clever enough to have it not stand up in court. One stupid thing he did do was to use one of those email anonymizers to email me about 12 times at once. What he failed to realize was that the footer at the bottom of every page said “P.S. This is a fake email address from IP ….” and that was what the police finally got him into court for. Now he has smartened up I am sure and goes to various “places” to do his cyberstalking. I would imagine the possibilities they both have given their prison experience and contact is endless in terms of who might owe favors etc.

    Reply
  318. Lucy
    Lucy at |

    and who is this DOC person?

    Reply
  319. sarah
    sarah at |

    I dont understand all of this. I mean i Know all of these people you all are soo called trashing but its not true what you say. You all hear this one side of the story why cant we all hear all the sides instead of trashing everyone

    Reply
  320. sarah
    sarah at |

    people are saying that there is trash talking and such going on yet im reading all of this and that is what im seeing. maybe i dont know as much as i think about this whole thing but i know that people are saying things on this page that others are doing yet ……on other websites that i see yall are doing the same things back.

    Reply
  321. patience
    patience at |

    With patience the law will uncover all of it. In fact, the law is watching this website and finds it very helpful.

    Reply
  322. Lena
    Lena at |

    I was a patient of Lucy’s in 2000 and 2001. I thought she was nice until she started charging my credit card for appointments we never had. I am angry over this finding and it explains why she is money hungry. I want everything I paid to her back!

    Reply
  323. Joanne Brown
    Joanne Brown at |

    I am attempting to get a message to Lucy. Approximately fifteen years ago I was a patient at a psychiatric facility. I was in a trauma recovery program suffering from issues as a result of sexual abuse I endured as a child. Lucy was an intern there at the time. Lucy, if you read this I have thought of you so many times over the years. Do you still have the painting I did for you? Remember of the ocean with the sand castle and lighthouse? Maybe bringing up the painting I did for you will trigger a memory of me for you. I came to depend on you while I was in that program. You were always so kind and caring to me. You helped me immensely. Do you remember the day I had a flashback and came running to you. You were so sensitive and knew that touching me was not the appropriate thing to do under the circumstances. You held one end of a towel and gave the other end to me to hold. You tugged it, helping me to feel a connection without invading me. I kept that towel for many years. I’ve thought of you so much over the years and wished that I could locate you. I wanted to get in touch with you to see how you were and let you know of my progress. I wear amber-patchouli oil! I always loved that scent you wore. I learned of the situation you are in on the news tonight 5/4/07. I searched more on the internet. I was surprised to learn what I did. To be honest I trembled inside for many hours. I guess that in first learning of your past and my past with the history of sexual abuse the two didn’t really tie in together very well. After speaking with friends I am calming now. I’m hoping that somehow you will see this. I want to say that we all do things in our past that maybe we shouldn’t have. Or that maybe others won’t think are proper. Something I have learned over the years and you were one of the people that helped me to learn this is that “we can’t change our pasts. We can only move from them and move forward.”. I will continue to appreciate everything that you did for me. I would really like to be in touch with you. If somehow you find this please do respond. I’m doing well and you are one of the people to help me get where I am. Take care of yourself Lucy. My thoughts and prayers are with you. Sincerely, Joanne Brown

    Reply
  324. Ken Savage
    Ken Savage at |

    Look what’s getting dragged up again. Enough already people.

    Good luck to Lucy and how do we get some of those Torri bracelets?

    Reply
  325. George
    George at |

    I am shocked there were not more (for that matter, now that I remember, there was not one) witnesses for the Commonwealth stating she charged for non-existent services! Usually behaviors like this have patterns. My therapist charges me when I don’t cancell within 48 hours unless he fills the spot left by my thoughtlessness. Of course in an emergency, he is understanding.

    Reply
  326. Joanne Brown
    Joanne Brown at |

    My heart goes out to Lucy. Her past is not our business. The Lucy I know is a kind, caring, nurturing, giving human being with a lot to give. I really don’t know much of the charges she is facing. I cannot believe Lucy would set out to hurt or take from anyone. I think that there is so much written about her out there that may put doubts in peoples minds, but don’t be fooled. Lucy helped me to see that we can’t change our pasts we can only learn from them and make a better future. She was doing this, she had done this! She helped me to be able to do it! I thank you Lucy.
    It’s a terrible shame that due to the ignorance of others she was not able to complete her education. There are murderers and rapists out there! There are corrupt politicians and drug dealers! Damn, let her be!!
    We are only here once and for a short time. Lucy has been helping others so that they, too, may lead better lives. Don’t take any more time away from her. Hey, give her the oppurtunity to finish her education. She can’t do this because she did things in her past that isn’t considered proper? Take a look in your own closets.
    Lucy was there to support me and now is my turn to support her. I urge all of you that she has been there for to show your support. Put your words out there and help people to know who Lucy Wightman is!

    Reply
  327. Rhonda
    Rhonda at |

    Lucy
    Will be praying for you as will Torri as it will be a very hard day for you.We all know you did help so many people.After reading their stories i have to agree you did no harm to anyone. Good Luck with everything. PS. You know you have a very special Angel watching over you through all this.

    Reply
  328. Joanne Brown
    Joanne Brown at |

    Louise Wightman, 47, of Hull, was given a suspended six-month sentence and five years probation. Suffolk Superior Court Nancy Staffier Holtz also barred Wightman from counseling.

    Reply
  329. Joanne Brown
    Joanne Brown at |

    I’m happy that she does not have to serve time in prison. I find it a shame that she is barred from counseling. My thoughts and prayers remain with you Lucy.

    Reply
  330. kplarian
    kplarian at |

    I am happy she does not have to serve time in prison too. But licenses are licenses– and in order to maintain the integrity of an act that is performed (whether it is plumbing or surgery or driving a car), people who want the priveledge of performing those acts need to do what is required to get their license. Or don’t call themselves that title that requires licensure.

    I agree that Lucy was good at what she did. That is why it is such a shame. But if we were talking about a surgeon who didn’t graduate med school, or a day care center that wasn’t licensed to take care of children, or an airline pilot who dropped out of school when it was learned he had worked at the golden banana before college….it wouldn’t matter HOW GOOD these people were at what they did…

    Reply
  331. Joanne Brown
    Joanne Brown at |

    I do understand what you are saying…but should the pilot have had to drop out of school because he had worked at the golden banana?

    Reply
  332. kplarian
    kplarian at |

    No he shouldn’t. and he wouldn’t. and if you believe that that is why Ms. Wightman dropped out of school then I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn. Come on, Joanne–think it through with logic, not with some lie you have heard. This was a psychology school..and presumably she was a good student with a good performance record almost finished with her education. Psychology is predicated on the belief that a person has the capacity to change. Do you REALLY think this free-thinking school that cares about human development would have not worked with her if this was her reason for wanting to leave? I hope she won big in the lawsuit if that was really the reason….for being harrassed or not getting transferred to a new rotation or not getting protected by her supervisors or not getting a modified plan for finishing up or not being allowed to take time off and then return…. Or in the very least, I sure do hope she got her money back–for having been admitted in the first place if there was a rule that you couldn’t be there if you were ever a stripper. And I hope some heads rolled in admissions for THAT oversight–yeah. How could they have forgotten to tell Ms. Wightman that anyone could apply to their school except strippers???

    Reply
  333. George
    George at |

    The possibilities are endless. Fact is – Ms. WIghtman testified on her own behalf, under oath. She was the only witness for her defense to speak of. The prosecution did not allow for much else. Not once was she tripped up on cross – she was telling the truth which was obvious to us and to the jury. This is why she was found not guilty on the weightiest charges. I should re-write this as she was NOT GUILTY on the WEIGHTIEST CHARGES. The coloring from her past colors how we fill in the gaps to the story. Her testimony was not found to be in contempt. You must let it stand on its own. Ms. Wightman stated she was working in a small private practice under the supervision of several licensed individuals to include Robert Fox LICSW and Karen Beason Patrick, a licensed psychologist with whom she formed a business, who was also a graduate of MSPP. Ms. Wightman further states that she was trying to finish her dissertation, had collected ALL of the data and had completed ALL of her coursework (yes it was admitted into evidence), and was railroaded, caught off guard, when she was confronted with being in private practice and as having been a stripper – the conclusion was made that she was therefore being sexually inappropriate with patients! She had to sit in a room with seven “psychologists” or people in the “helping profession” who were nothing short of humiliating. She was not the only person in the school to have a private practice. In fact, she mentioned a Danielle Detorra from Stow, Massachusetts, who was also being supervised by Karen Patrick, and who was STILL working as a stripper in Providence. Wightman had allegedly guided her so she could pay her tuition bills. She was not harassed. In listening to Norbett Mintz, Wightman’s advisor, on the stand, he contradicted himself blatantly! Maybe if Wightman had a more experienced attorney the Commonwealth’s witnesses could have been shown more obviously to not be telling the truth. The story is far from over, and is less about one woman than it is about human behavior, scapegoating and cultural norms and assumptions, not to mention the politcal process.

    Reply
  334. Ken
    Ken at |

    Anyone know whatever happened to Lucy?

    Reply
  335. Ken
    Ken at |

    Or what happened in her case?

    Reply

Leave a Reply


+ 4 = eight