Dr Jessica Taylor New Book

[Seiheiki]

Hi,

Is anyone else going to the Birmingham book launch of Sexy But Psycho on Sunday night?

@Siablue - that isn't the point that Sally is making. She knew that she would feature in the statistical report which is free.

Jaime told JH that she was 'fucking lying' to suggest that JT would use the information for profit.

If she has recycled the stories for her book without the participants' permission, then JT has done exactly what she has castigated others doing in the research

(I will caveat this by saying I haven't read the book, only the research).

Because she’ll just deny it. If enough people are still fan girling over her, her reputation should weather the storm. Controversy is part of her brand anyway so this just plays right into it. It’s all straight out of the narcissist’s playbook, except it’s usually men doing it.

Apparently it's not true:

I am aware that there are posts circulating that suggest someone believes that I have used their ‘story’ without permission in my books. This isn’t true, all women involved in my books have full participation, I still speak to all of them, their safety & anonymity is paramount.
twitter.com/DrJessTaylor/status/1505603872986914816?t=-HeadLc7pEnfNlK0QSHgPA&s=19

Having sought advice, I am writing this to make it clear that I have never used a woman’s story without full express permission and ongoing support and that the allegations being made are untrue and harmful to those women who are actually involved in my work.

The individual posting these things has been misinformed by someone else, and I would welcome reassuring her that I have never included information without consent and proof.

My work has to be absolutely ethical, and is put through advanced legal read before publishing.

[quote Clymene]@Siablue - that isn't the point that Sally is making. She knew that she would feature in the statistical report which is free.

Jaime told JH that she was 'fucking lying' to suggest that JT would use the information for profit.

If she has recycled the stories for her book without the participants' permission, then JT has done exactly what she has castigated others doing in the research

(I will caveat this by saying I haven't read the book, only the research). [/quote]
In Jessica's new book, she starts each section by quoting a woman who's written to her - so an email or similar, not something from research. I assume it's about one of them.

(My caveat is I've not finished the book, I don't know if she quotes research in it also)

It seems fairly unlikely to me that Sally has spoken to two separate people who have written best selling books about MVAW. And clearly she has spoken to JT or she wouldn't have had a message from her.

I know who I believe.

@Siablue

You are right that on brain scans there will be differences in relation to certain mental illnesses but that doesn’t necessarily “prove” it’s due to genetics.

Research has demonstrated that trauma has an impact on developing brains in childhood which can then go on to affect the structure and function of adult brains, hence brain scans “looking” different.

[quote Eyedropeyeflop]@Siablue

You are right that on brain scans there will be differences in relation to certain mental illnesses but that doesn’t necessarily “prove” it’s due to genetics.

Research has demonstrated that trauma has an impact on developing brains in childhood which can then go on to affect the structure and function of adult brains, hence brain scans “looking” different.[/quote]
I have Tourette’s which is genetic and autism is also highly likely to be genetic. Around 80% of people with Tourette’s also have OCD. Autism women are more likely to be abused they are not being labelled as autistic because of their trauma. There is quite a lot of neuroscience research into this too. Jess has stated that there is no evidence of a biological basis for any psychiatric conditions other than learning disabilities and dementia. I obviously know that trauma can affect your brain but so can a lot of different things.

That does clear it up about the book. The consent form asked was your responses to be used in published research it listed a range of types of possible publications. So Jess can use that data in further publications. If someone wrote to her that would be a very different thing.

Right so when Jessica's wife told Jean she was fucking lying, she wasn't?

@Clymene

Right so when Jessica's wife told Jean she was fucking lying, she wasn't?

I have no idea. As I have not and will not be reading the book but I have completed the survey .

3. There's a very popular psychiatrist who used to work at an elite American university who penned a book about the body's response to trauma. He's almost a superstar in some therapy settings - I've seen rooms of women fawn over him. I believe his work to be excellent. He's an absolute arse in my experience though - and it seems from someone I know who was in high school with him that it's a bit of a trend. "Questions" at seminars/workshops are basically opportunities for him to be praised. I've seen him speak rudely about someone in front of an extended audience..the woman in question was on the podium behind him and organising the event. Actual questions about his work or furthering it in some way were shut down - and very rudely when not on mic. He has been questioned on Mumsnet (probably in "feminism" but I can't remember), with details about his wife shared in an attempt to discredit him. I see similarities in the arrogance of him and JT

this is disappointing to say the least.

I've followed JT for a while and was very impressed for a while. Less so recently for reasons others have given. While I'm very trauma informed I still believe there's a role for medication for example. Also my two dcs display certain behaviours, one due to autism, one due to trauma. There's def a genetic autism component in my ex's family.

I think she's done a lit of good work re women, trauma, bpd etc, but the last year ir so I've been less comfortable with some of her tweets.

I don't believe Kolk is a dick in real life. He was fired from a research position and all of his team left in protest with him. That isn't the mark of a dick.

Been following all of this JT drama, and I have to say - even though she's stubborn and won't admit when she's wrong, I really can't see her using a victim's story like that. I think she genuinely cares about women and I believe her when she says it's not true.

There seems to be a lot of the same names that pop up on twitter whenever anyone has a go at her. She gets criticised for being arrogant, but some of the posts I'm seeing are just as bad!

Jess is now talking about taking legal action against other feminists, so I'm glad I'm no longer following her and glad I'm not one of the many people who've tried (very politely by and large) to talk publicly to her about where she's maybe got things wrong.

It's one way to shut down discussion I guess.

I have no idea what to think about the woman who felt her story had been used without consent. She's clearly genuinely distressed, however and is saying she's been in touch with several other women who feel their story has been used in some capacity without consent too. So we'll see.

I really don’t think Jess would share someone’s story without their permission. She isn’t stupid. It’s very possible that trauma stories are similar enough for someone to be mistaken.

Surely, surely, she wouldn't be so stupid as to do that?

I suppose my question is overall, is therapy beneficial or as a culture do we have an unrealistic expectation about what it can do? Are more people leaving therapy underwhelmed or harmed, than people who felt the benefits?

stepawayfromtheminstrels (love your name!)

I don't think talking therapy is the cure for everything. I also do not believe it is being used effectively because the overriding goal of therapies on the NHS is to offer them efficiently, hence cookie-cutter worksheets. I know it definitely can help though, when it's a) properly tailored, b) offered as an open-ended option (not limited to 6 or 12 sessions which is really 4 or 10 max when you take out the first and last ones) and c) offered as part of a bigger picture. If someone is isolated socially, doesn't have a job, family live far away, as an example, the 6 sessions of CBT are likely to have minimal effect on much of anything. If they feel supported in their community, have a job they love and family and friends around them, then 6 sessions of CBT may see a better outcome.

The problem in comparing talking therapy to medication is that neither are substitutes for the other. And as they're so often put against each other, it makes them appear like they're comparable.

Also, lots of "alternative" and "Eastern" healing involves a physical connection, and/or a personal intimate one (obvs not meaning sexual), sometimes involving touch. I often think that touch/sensation could be a very beneficial accompaniment to talking therapy - offered by a different practitioner. Ie a talking session every week/two weeks and a massage in between. Or a floatation experience, or cranial sacral therapy. I don't believe talking therapies solve everything, but in their place, used without "cost cutting" at their centre, yes, they can help radically.

@DragonOverTheMoon

I don't believe Kolk is a dick in real life. He was fired from a research position and all of his team left in protest with him. That isn't the mark of a dick.

If you have personal experience of him doing otherwise, great. I have personal experience - as in directly witnessed, not hearsay (other than the high school person) - that speaks differently.

But still, his research, including importantly, his methodology were rigorous, and I respect that as he's brought something (a lot actually) real to the table. The only reason I raised the "negative traits" was to say that people can be arses but still bring a lot of good to the world. Sometimes you need to have that character trait to push through the barriers that have stopped other people getting similar messages heard. And I did that because there was criticism of a) JT and b) comments that she is being treated unfairly on this thread: in my opinion she's being treated the same (up until that post) as he was, for better or worse.

@Sasketchewoo

Jess is now talking about taking legal action against other feminists, so I'm glad I'm no longer following her and glad I'm not one of the many people who've tried (very politely by and large) to talk publicly to her about where she's maybe got things wrong.

It's one way to shut down discussion I guess.

I have no idea what to think about the woman who felt her story had been used without consent. She's clearly genuinely distressed, however and is saying she's been in touch with several other women who feel their story has been used in some capacity without consent too. So we'll see.

I'm wondering what legal action she will take?

People can disagree with her or point out where her ideas are similar to others, without being defamatory.

I don't believe the woman who was talking about her story being used actually named her -did she?

People like JH who warned women to be careful about the information they gave to JT - that's not defamatory.

There's been unpleasantness that I wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of, but has anything been illegal?

Genuine question

If you libel or slander someone, it's defamation. I'm pretty sure you don't need to name them, necessarily, if everyone knows who you are talking about.

The courts are very much into the idea of reputation. If the words you say or write are not true and they damage another person's reputation, that's taken seriously.

@Carryonmarion

*It is sad because if she had gone into a clinical training and done the hard work she could have slogged away doing plenty of hard work with women who certainly need it,* *@Leaningtoweroflisa*

Weird take- it takes years to get accepted onto clinpsyc doctorates, lots of unpaid or low paid stuff and courses are highly competitive. It’s a very middle class profession because of all the barriers. Better to work hard at getting your message across outside that toxic system and she apparently had a bad experience with her PhD supervisory team which isnt exceptional at all. How do you know that she hasn’t got clinical supervision or peer review in place? Not being part of the academic/ nhs clinical system is not due to lack of hard work, much wider determinants exist .

I wouldn’t say the training is “toxic” because it’s hard to get into. And it means that clinical psychologists are trained to a high standard and regulated by the HCPC which means they are bound to ethical standard etc including supervision of clinical work. Dr JT may well be receiving supervision but considering she isn’t a clinician that is very unlikely!

Jessica has announced this today:

"Excited today!

We begin training new staff teams for NHS pilot in which we are working together to create an alternative to CAMHS.

A new children’s trauma service with no diagnosis, no meds and no pathologising."

There are some very good questions (none of them have been answered as far as I can see) in response to her tweet about what this means, how it will work with existing services and how children who need diagnosis and medication will be addressed. Worth reading, there are some good points being made.

twitter.com/DrJessTaylor/status/1508712161777967104?s=20&t=i49AyrM0eZPG1pCN0BcDWA

Yes, the questions are relevant, but the assumptions behind them seem hostile. There’s no reason to assume that children involved with this service will never have the opportunity for a diagnosis if they need it or that the service aims to supplant CAMHS instead of supplementing it. It seems odd to assume that. In the same way, it seemed weird to me to think that a person with a PhD had made an error as fundamental and easily documented and potentially career-ending as what she was earlier accused of.

I’m getting the impression that she’s one of those people who is very good at making stuff happen and has got the kind of personality that often goes with that. So she may have made some enemies who are overly-excited to criticise her work.

She has no qualifications for working with children. She has no clinical background.

When this comes after her tweet that she thinks some women are misdiagnosed with autism and adhd when they actually have trauma, I think this is very worrying.