Dr Jessica Taylor #7 Unexpected ITIM in the Bragging Area

[CuriousTherapyCat]

Yep.
One of her latest posts talking about “pills or therapy” being no good but then makes a list of all things that are types of therapy. She has no idea.

she’s also gone on a mini rant about trolls and same lies being told and “it’ll all come out”.
The lack of awareness and taking responsibility is outstanding

 

[Boogs]

All this paranoid rambling on about different thing’s definitely leads me to believe that she has lost control of something and is mad as hell.

 

[ZiggyStardust68]

All this paranoid rambling on about different thing’s definitely leads me to believe that she has lost control of something and is mad as hell.

Yeah she seems to be losing grip of reality....even more than normal

 

[empowered1]

All this paranoid rambling on about different thing’s definitely leads me to believe that she has lost control of something and is mad as hell.

I think…….She’s lost control of silencing the many women she’s vexatiously reported to police employers academic institutions etc and they’ve had enough and decided to collectively challenge it they probably thought they were the only one but now it’s clear that it’s a pattern of her behaviour she can’t control the narrative hence the rantings.

Also she’s doubled down again today on her denial SA is in her book despite her tweeting she had consent from SA and the publisher admitting that both SA and Rosie were in the book anonymised. Does she seriously think people have forgotten her own public admission that SA is in the book and that she alleged she had consent despite Sally Ann proving she hadnt given consent for a book. But yet here she’s denied it again in tweets.

 

[witchofwestbyfleet]

If Jess denies using anyone's stories without permission perhaps she should speak to her publisher about why they admitted that both Sally Ann and Rosie were featured in her books?

 

[empowered1]

If Jess denies using anyone's stories without permission perhaps she should speak to her publisher about why they admitted that both Sally Ann and Rosie were featured in her books?

Jess publicly tweeted last year that she had Sally Ann’s consent for the book after she had very publicly denied it for quite some time this was despite Sally Ann showing evidence that she had previously told Jess it could be used in a blog post with certain redactions while she was distressed and vulnerable and under the care of her local mental health team. Jess then deleted the tweet thread when the replies were not in her favour as she allegedly tweeted private emails/messages between her and SA. And now we are back to denial.

I should also add that the BPS told SA in writing that JT ”thought she had consent” and her consent process should have been more robust.

 

[MoodyMargaret92]

This has absolutely floored me tonight, I love them.

 

[BanditHealer]

Someone should introduce Jess to the concept of community/ critical psychology.

 

[empowered1]

This has absolutely floored me tonight, I love them.

Helen is my winner for tweet of the day

 

[ZiggyStardust68]

And her wife is taking a leaf out of her book. She's been ill apparently, but obviously not just any old illness, no she had to be 'exceptionally and violently ill'. And now she's banging on about how wrong it is the prize money for current women' world cup is disgracefully low as the current world cup is the most attended tournament of all time, and the women's game is now better attended and supported than the men's---bullshit! Its the highest attended tournament of the WOMEN's game, you fool. Yes it's certainly grown impressively in recent years but it really is nowhere near the level of attendance and support as the men's game. 'I'm a huge Lionesses fan'--oh give over!

 

[CuriousTherapyCat]

TBF in that tweet she is saying she didn’t use stories without consent.
unless I can’t see something she hasn’t said she didn’t use the story, this time (she’s definitely denied it many times previously).

 

[ZiggyStardust68]

If Jess denies using anyone's stories without permission perhaps she should speak to her publisher about why they admitted that both Sally Ann and Rosie were featured in her books?

Well I think she's focusing on the 'without consent' part, and obviously will rely on her get out clause that the BPS decided she 'thought' she had consent. Just reading that back sounds ridiculous, that a regulatory body can rule that 'thinking' you've got consent is enough when working with vulnerable people, but rule that they did. Of course, she spent many months denying the women's stories were in her books, before HAVING to change her story as undeniable proof was provided, yet she and her fans seem to have conveniently forgotten this. I sincerely hope somebody has reported her for that questionnaire she put out targeting girls under 18, as that was a horribly intrusive and unprofessional questionnaire that should not have been carried out online with any age, but certainly not with those under 18.

 

[Blue bunny]

Considering how quick she has gone to the press over lesser things like a temporary Facebook page (her ex went to the papers over having to do a known quarantine while going on holiday in covid).

If anything she ever said about death threats etc was true she'd have gone straight to the papers. I guess she doesn't want the paper trail and would struggle with evidence.

 

[ZiggyStardust68]

Considering how quick she has gone to the press over lesser things like a temporary Facebook page (her ex went to the papers over having to do a known quarantine while going on holiday in covid).

If anything she ever said about death threats etc was true she'd have gone straight to the papers. I guess she doesn't want the paper trail and would struggle with evidence.

But also what does she mean about this latest nonsense being 'above the police'?? It's such dramatic language, completely targeted at the more paranoid of her fans. So what's she saying exactly? That MI5 are dealing with it?? So yeah you just post on twitter about it? She's either truly paranoid OR she's just trying to get in on the conspiracy act, which is pretty despicable as it's clear that some of the people who follow her have poor mental health, stoked by these sorts of stories...

 

[nothanksbabes]

"Above the police" is just more grandiosity. But of course if we point out she's paranoid and grandiose to the point of delusional, we're pathologising a woman and blah blah blah.

Just because women are unfairly labelled as mentally ill sometimes doesn't mean that women can't be mentally ill. It's a great get out of jail free card for her though.

 

[witchofwestbyfleet]

TBF in that tweet she is saying she didn’t use stories without consent.
unless I can’t see something she hasn’t said she didn’t use the story, this time (she’s definitely denied it many times previously).

That's fair - although Sally Ann and Rosie didn't consent, and Jess's publisher says that no consent is needed because real names weren't used. So by posting this, she's either not telling the truth or is agreeing with the publisher's clearly unethical stance

And if she really did accuse Sally Ann of lying about abuse, as some of the ex-VF staff on here have said, she's a hypocrite of the first water. She either knows she's lying (in which case she should keep her mouth shut about "believing women") or she believes the story's false yet still used it in her book for profit

 

[Dike Themis]

that the BPS decided she 'thought' she had consent. Just reading that back sounds ridiculous, that a regulatory body can rule that 'thinking' you've got consent is enough when working with vulnerable people, but rule that they did.

The BPS does not have a Regulatory remit. It's a very confusing system. Unless a Chartered Member is HCPC registered (Statutory Regulation) or on the Wider Psychological Workforce WPW Register (the BPS register accredited by the Professional Standards Authority Voluntary) I cannot see how they are subject to big R Regulation.

I've come across this issue with someone misusing Accredited counsellor designation. Common words but with additional designated meanings in this profession that some misuse as it benefits them.

 

[CuriousTherapyCat]

The BPS does not have a Regulatory remit. It's a very confusing system. Unless a Chartered Member is HCPC registered (Statutory Regulation) or on the Wider Psychological Workforce WPW Register (the BPS register accredited by the Professional Standards Authority Voluntary) I cannot see how they are subject to big R Regulation.

I've come across this issue with someone misusing Accredited counsellor designation. Common words but with additional designated meanings in this profession that some misuse as it benefits them.

counsellor isn’t a protected term in the UK and anyone could call themselves that.
An accredited counsellor could mean anything really.

 

[ZiggyStardust68]

I know she slips through the net in terms of regulation, but she has repeatedly claimed that she adheres to their ethical framework, and she does have their chartered status , which surely could at least be removed if she behaves and operates in such an unethical fashion? At the end of the day she uses them to give credence and legitimacy to her 'work'. She's doing immeasurable damage to the profession and I understand that she is largely unregulated, but the BPS should jump to act when they are given an opportunity, ie when she claims to operate under their ethical framework. If people don't want to be involved in research due to her unethical and damaging practices then where does that leave research?
---

counsellor isn’t a protected term in the UK and anyone could call themselves that.
An accredited counsellor could mean anything really.

Yes, unfortunately people don't understand this. The whole system needs an overhaul for the safety of clients.

 

[CuriousTherapyCat]

Having been a member of BPS as a student I am well aware of the focus around ethics and having explicit consent, not “thought” or implied. So this whole this is exceptionally shocking.
BACP etc also have similar statements on ethics. Counsellors and psychologists worth anything would adhere to ethical frameworks and transparency.
Jess has no therapeutic training or experience and it shows.