Ah I was just coming on to say that the one whatevesmate put up was hers.
It’s amazing how much she has achieved in such a short time
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
It’s amazing how much she has achieved in such a short time
I found it interesting BPS were oddly transparent in acknowledging that it would take extreme malpractice for them to act, and that although they see issue with her processes which could have been improved, it's just not enough to warrant them to act
I think they must realise it's all a bad look for them
I think they must realise it's all a bad look for them
Is anyone in London - I dont if this thing has a PM function but if it does and you are in London with some free time please cna you let me know?
She's in a bit of a no-man's land in terms of being regulated. BPS aren't a regulator, her work is published outside academia where the requirements for consent are much less stringent and she's not in clinical practice so can't be reported to the HCPC. She's essentially a nobody, little more than a Social Media "personality" with a PhD and an ego. There's nobody to hold her to any professional standard, which is precisely why she uses that medium.
As someone else has said though, at this point I think issue of consent is irrelevant. Even if she did have consent, any decent human being would do everything they reasonably could to alleviate the obvious distress this is causing Sally Ann.
She’s behaving like she’s in clinical practice being introduced as a psychologist on tv not as a research psychologist with ZERO quals for clinical work but she does it anyway. It’s frightening how grandiose she comes across. Seriously harming others is her forte but she can’t see it and she’s still denying stuff despite the truth stating her and us in the face.
Fair enough to an extent. But doesn’t she herself in the guise of being some kind of professional “distance diagnose” people as NOT being mentally ill.
Yes, exactly! Hypocrisy some? It's just as much "distance diagnosing" to say "ackshully mental illness doesn't exist and I, who also doesn't know Liz Truss, can say she's in sound mental health"
I know that healthcare professionals aren’t meant to diagnose people on TV etc but whewwww the audacity of Jess to lecture anyone about professional obligations/ethics 
Firstly I will happily scrutinise Liz Truss because she is yet another appalling Tory PM we have to put up with until the next General Election. It is her job to address the nation and remain utterly steady. I wouldn’t expect it of anyone else, but it’s the PM’s job so she better deal with it.
We do know a fair bit about Liz. She is a cold hearted Thatcherite and Noddy could do a better job. She is happy to make the rich richer. She’s appointed a health minister who thinks GP’s need to work harder and nurses don’t even figure in her NHS plan. She gives her leftover antibiotics to her mates. Us nurses are balloting on strike action, having last taken strike action in the late 80’s. My views are that people should be treated with respect and dignity however I don’t agree with Dr J telling us to go soft on highly privileged politicians who are well known for helping their mates get rich quicker whilst maintaining hearts of stone. Of course Jess had to try and turn it into a ‘mental health message for the masses’. Of course she knows nothing about treating and supporting people who live with mental illness, and I’m sure has no interest in how it affects their loved ones. However, this is all good for clout.
We do know a fair bit about Liz. She is a cold hearted Thatcherite and Noddy could do a better job. She is happy to make the rich richer. She’s appointed a health minister who thinks GP’s need to work harder and nurses don’t even figure in her NHS plan. She gives her leftover antibiotics to her mates. Us nurses are balloting on strike action, having last taken strike action in the late 80’s. My views are that people should be treated with respect and dignity however I don’t agree with Dr J telling us to go soft on highly privileged politicians who are well known for helping their mates get rich quicker whilst maintaining hearts of stone. Of course Jess had to try and turn it into a ‘mental health message for the masses’. Of course she knows nothing about treating and supporting people who live with mental illness, and I’m sure has no interest in how it affects their loved ones. However, this is all good for clout.
What the duck is this??? Who on earth is going to listen to any guidelines made by her?
Attachments
Utter tosh. I’d love to know what police forces or NHS Trusts she’s apparently worked with. I really have my doubts about it. I still check the VAWG emails we get to make sure there’s no VF stuff. If there is I will escalate my concerns in my Trust and to the London Borough.
Jess: repeating "trauma-informed" ad nauseam doesn't make you an expert on actual trauma-informed therapies or, indeed, anything else
Thought she didn't believe in peer review...
What a load of old bollocks!!
You do not write national guidelines on trauma which have been "peer reviewed" in a week. Its simply not possible. Just because JT describes it as such means nothing. A meaningful and rigorous process would take several months, at a bare minimum. I love the implication that she has had to tear herself away from the urgent business of writing 2 books simultaneously because her country needs her
What qualifications does Jessica have to run this course? https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/working-with-child-sexual-abuse-tickets-227148446117
The description says:
It costs £549.
The description says:
WTF? She's not qualified to do frontline services. So how can she think she's qualified to teach others how to work with children? She has zero direct experience.
It costs £549.
Exactly. It’s just upsetting that she gets away with it. As I understand it as well as everything else we know I’m pretty sure she also has no experience of working with children, let alone those that have been victims of CSE/CSA. The grandiosity of her is astounding but again no one can touch her because she has no professional membership/registration. I’d be really interested to know what charities like NAPAC and Survivors UK think of this?
Ha, of course the implication here is only important people know what it's like to be interviewed for tv....
Who is paying for these courses and how do we find them and gently steer them in an alternative direction because goodness me what a load of nonsense.
Also who is peer reviewing? That length of supposed peer reviewed implies she assumes it’ll all be signed off with no corrections… and who are these leaders? Scout leaders? Supermarket team leaders? Sports captains? As usual she’s just using vague words to try and hide the fact that’s the substance of it is about as robust as candyfloss.
I just can’t wrap my head around this idea that people can run courses like these unregulated. It’s so dangerous! What the heck is she teaching if she can’t even manage the basics of ethics and respect?! And if someone is churning out so much stuff so quickly, how much care is actually being put into any of it? It’s so so so worrying.
Also who is peer reviewing? That length of supposed peer reviewed implies she assumes it’ll all be signed off with no corrections… and who are these leaders? Scout leaders? Supermarket team leaders? Sports captains? As usual she’s just using vague words to try and hide the fact that’s the substance of it is about as robust as candyfloss.
I just can’t wrap my head around this idea that people can run courses like these unregulated. It’s so dangerous! What the heck is she teaching if she can’t even manage the basics of ethics and respect?! And if someone is churning out so much stuff so quickly, how much care is actually being put into any of it? It’s so so so worrying.
- Status