Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think this serves Sidwell right for admitting the child of a woman who attended Rutgers. What did they expect?
Lol.
Anonymous wrote:I think this serves Sidwell right for admitting the child of a woman who attended Rutgers. What did they expect?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The bottom line is that affairs hurt people--ESPECIALLY innocent children who are made to accompany their mother to trysts disguised as playdates and hotel stays. And the 5 year old girls obviously knew about it, because they reported it to teachers and other children.
It's common knowledge that mental health professionals are not supposed to be sexually involved with their patients or close relatives of their patients, because it's unethical and they become biased and lose all objectivity. Instead of trying to get their jollies, the mother and the psychologist should have been focusing on the mental health of the little girl.
Suppose the "common knowledge" alluded to above is provable. Suppose (though it is not substantiated by the complaint, in stark contrast to the lurid details of the affair) that the playdates carried a mixed "therapeutic" purpose in the sense that J.H. offered his insights to the mother about the patient during those playdates. Suppose he was not paid for those insights. Finally, suppose also that J.H. referred the child to another professional upon first realizing his attraction to the mother. Would T.N.'s suit have less merit? In other words, is it possible to _ever_ terminate the patient relationship for the pursuit of love/lust/adult attraction/whatever-you-want-to-call-it with a relative? Mental health professionals (with knowledge of governing ethical codes) please step in to comment . . .
Anonymous wrote:"Terry" Newmyer and I were classmates at The Sidwell Friends School a half century ago. I last saw him in 1963. While the specifics of his lawsuit against the school are unfortunate, they serve to point out a glaring shortcoming of the school which has gone unreported and unaddressed for far too long. In 1883 Mr. Sidwell founded a school predicated upon the principles of the highest educational, moral and ethical standards. In the middle of the last century, at the urging of many of the influential parents from Washington's highest socioeconomic strata, the school undertook what can only be characterized as a concerted program of social engineering which sacrificed those same educational, moral and ethical standards to the prevailing ideology of the city's aristocracy to keep the student body populated with those whose parents were notable and whose acceptance into the nation's finest colleges and universities was assured by legacy and the "old boy network" rather than intellect and merit. Having attended Quaker meetings for my fourteen years at Sidwell Friends where we were instructed to listen to our "inner voice", I would respectfully suggest that the school listen to its own inner voice and let it guide them back to the path Mr. Sidwell set nearly 130 years ago.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This was the child's psychologist. It wasn't just an affair.
Both the mother and the school deny there was any professional relationship between the child and the psychologist. Dad has a different version. I would withhold judgement on this until the case is made in court (the dad's complaint is his version of events, not proved facts).
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
WTF?
Sidwell Friends Academy is being sued for $10 million for allegedly allowing its staff psychologist to carry on an affair with the married mother of a 5-year-old student he was treating.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/local/education/2011/05/sidwell-sued-over-staff-psychologists-affair#ixzz1M9wqrd3q
Pathetic case of an insanely jealous and vindictive man who was dumped.....and obviously deserved to be. Don't waste a minute reading about what should be kept a private matter.