 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / General / February 2006Civil Rights
"Chief Justice Earl Warren argued that separating school children on the basis of race ~ 'generates a feeling of inferiority as to their status in the community that may affect their hearts and minds in a way unlikely to ever be undone.'" ~ The Center for History & New Media http://chnm.gmu.edu/courses/122/hill/hillframe.htm "So does ignoring abuse." ~ Twittering ~ * ~ Blog, I'll warrant ye, or dog? Who knows. Pass the grog! But if ye see me lost pup, please bring that scurvy dog home! I got Leon a brand-new bone, with a chest full a' booty. _________________ http://journals.aol.com/virginiaz/DreamingofLeonardo NYU Medical Center ~ You abused my legal rights My name is Virginia H. Hooper. I live in New York City. _____ Cc: [Former!] Robert Cancro, MD, Chair, Psychiatry Department, New York University Medical Center; Mark Brady, Chief Compliance Officer, New York University Medical Center Medical Patient Privacy Issue July 8, 2004 Dear Dr. Lenard Adler, MD: I write you now under strictest confidence, which the NYU Medical Center community and Federal government guarantee me. Today, July 8, 2004, I contacted the NYU Ethics Consultation Service regarding my concerns that my medical confidentiality has been violated; Esther Chanchkes, Ph.D., Social Work Department, advised me to contact the relevant treating department directly, as well as the patient representative department. Because my issue concerns the NYU Adult ADHD center, you appear to be the relevant contact person, as you are Director. If this is incorrect, please advise me to the appropriate department within the NYU Medical Center. I am a female adult, with a diagnosis of adult ADHD. In September 1999, I visited the NYU adult ADHD service, then located at the Hospital of Joint Diseases. I received excellent care from Dr. Matthew B. Smith. I still see Dr. Smith in his private practice, and I have always been exceptionally pleased with his medical care, sensitivity, and expertise; I intend to continue seeing Dr. Smith in the future, as he provides excellent care. However, I am contacting you now regarding a different healthcare provider. In April 2002, for psychotherapy, I began seeing a psychologist in your department. Although I have seen her in her private practice office, rather than the NYU offices, she gave me the standard "NYU School of Medicine NOTICE OF PRIVACY PRACTICES ACKNOWLEDGMENT" form from the Neurology ADHD Program, 530 First Avenue, Suite 5A, New York, NY. Therefore, I believe that this is an NYU Medical Center issue, and I am pursuing this issue through appropriate NYU Medical Center channels, as well as appropriate Federal channels. Further, all written correspondence with the treating psychologist has been within the domain of the NYU Medical School e-mail server. I have serious concerns that my private medical information -- regarding sensitive material I divulged in psychotherapy with my psychologist, as well as my ADHD diagnosis -- has been divulged and my privacy has been violated. As of May 2004, for a variety of reasons, I have formally terminated treatment with the treating psychologist. I am also an official volunteer member of the NYU Medical Center community, active since spring 2003. In my formal professional career, I earn my living as a medical writer. Accordingly, as a volunteer, I work for the NYU Child Study Center, contributing articles for the Aboutourkids.org website. I enjoy this work immensely, and I have immense respect for all professionals in that department. From the beginning, in 2003, I reported to Robin F. Goodman, Ph.D., and Anita Gurian, Ph.D.; since the departure of Dr. Goodman from the Child Study Center, in early 2004, I have reported directly to Dr. Gurian. It has been a great pleasure working with both, and I have no complaints or concerns about either Dr. Goodman or Dr. Gurian. I do, however, have serious concerns that my private medical information -- regarding material I divulged in psychotherapy with my psychologist -- has been passed along to Dr. Goodman and Dr. Gurian. If this has occurred, I consider this a serious breach of my medical privacy, as protected by Federal guidelines. I consider my mental health information an extremely personal issue, which I guard due to professional concerns. Public knowledge of an ADHD diagnosis can potentially impact my professional career in many adverse ways, affecting my earning ability and credibility as professional. I do not make this information public, nor will I in the future. My work for the NYU Child Study Center, while performed on a voluntary basis, is an important aspect of my professional career as a medical writer. This Volunteer Service commitment is list on my CV/resume; I refer potential clients/employers to the website to review my work; and if appropriate, I utilize Dr. Goodman and Dr. Gurian as professional references. Further, because I work in the medical communications industry (eg, continuing medical education, pharmaceutical advertising, medical journalism, etc.), it is not uncommon for members of the NYU medical community to overlap with my professional contacts in the medical communications industry. It is standard procedure for me to consult regularly with medical opinion leaders in diverse therapeutic areas. Therefore, it is crucial that my medical privacy be maintained within the NYU volunteer community. Understandably, it is imperative -- and within my rights -- that the Child Study Center community regard me in the same untarnished light as my formal professional colleagues; additionally, it is my Federal right that my medical mental health information remain unavailable to both communities. It is my understanding that, despite the fact that I am an official NYU Medical Center volunteer, my private medical information -- divulged in psychotherapy -- should remain private, should remain unavailable to my reporting chain of command within the NYU Medical Center volunteer structure. I understand that I am protected, without fear of reprisal or retribution, to pursue this issue for clarification, under NYU Medical Center compliance guidelines, as well as Federal privacy protections for medical information. It is also my understanding that my decision to clarify this issue will not further affect my medical privacy or affect my standing as an official NYU Medical School volunteer. Once again, I remind you that the NYU Ethics Consultation Service (212.263.5018) directed to the department head of the relevant department, which in this case, appears to be you, Dr. Adler. If this referral is incorrect, I appreciate your guidance and attention in directing me to the appropriate venue within the NYU Medical Center. Thank you for your respected attention and assistance. Please note that I am also copying this correspondence to Robert Cancro, Psychiatry, Chairman, and Mark S. Brody, CHIEF COMPLIANCE OFFICER, NYU. Sincerely, Virginia Hooper > NYU Medical Center ~ > > You abused my legal rights (snip) > Sincerely, > Virginia Hooper Virginia, patients have rights *and* responsibilities. I believe you have not complied with the medical regimens offered by at least two doctors you say you like and respect, Drs. Pfeffer and Seiden. Suppose you just take the meds they recommend for three months? Isn't it worth a try before you kill yourself? Aren't all the docs you visit reaching the same conclusion? Aren't they all recommending a trial of antipsychotic medication? Isn't that why you jump from doc to doc? Why not just give it a try? PATIENT RESPONSIBILITIES Patients have the responsibility to provide accurate and complete information about current and past illnesses, medications, and other matters pertaining to their health. Patients have the responsibility to follow the treatment plan recommended by their practitioner or express concerns regarding their ability to comply. Patients are responsible for their actions if they refuse treatment or do not follow the practitioner's instructions. Patients have the responsibility to arrive as scheduled for appointments and to cancel in advance appointments they cannot keep. Patients have the responsibility to become informed of the scope of basic services offered, the costs, and the necessity for medical insurance and to actively seek clarification of any aspect of participation in Student Health Service programs and services (including cost) that is not understood. You have the responsibility to help your health care provider assess your needs with respect to pain and to work with your health care provider to develop a pain management plan. Patients are responsible for their actions if they refuse treatment or do not follow the practitioner's instructions. PATIENT RIGHTS Patients have the right to be treated with consideration, respect, and dignity. Patients have the right to have consideration shown to the psychosocial, spiritual, and cultural variables that influence their perception to illness. Patients have the right to expect the Student Health Service staff, within the capacity, stated mission, and applicable law and regulation, will provide a reasonable response to patients request for service. Patients have the right to privacy during medical care and confidentiality of communications and records pertaining to their care. Patients have the right to approve or refuse the release of information from their medical record except when release is required by law and to have access to the information contained in the record within the limits of the law. Patients have the right to information regarding diagnosis, evaluation, treatment, costs, and prognosis to enable them to participate in decision-making regarding care, including the right to assistance in preparing an advance directive. When it is medically inadvisable to give such information to a patient, the information is provided to a person designated by the patient or to a legally authorized person. Patients have the right to be advised of any human experimentation or other research affecting their care and to refuse to participate in such research programs. Patients have the right to request a health care provider of their choice or to change their health care provider as well as to request a second opinion or referral. Patients have the right to appropriate assessment and management of pain. "I believe you have not complied with the medical regimens offered by at least two doctors you say you like and respect, Drs. Pfeffer and Seiden." ~ OHush I never said I liked either one of them. > "I believe you have not complied with the medical regimens > offered by at least two [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > I never said I liked either one of them. I think your brain is simply very active. try this 'notice the edges of various nearby objects... the edges only...then notice the empty space between the objects.. then later include the empty space between yourself and these objects' Do this for a few seconds at a time throughout the day...longer if it starts to be enjoyable or feel good. To escalate the approach just expand the space .. just notice these empty spaces..you dont have to do anything else. This drill breaks the habit of fixating on objects, including mental objects then reacting compulsively to them. Peace tends to ensue after a few days as you get good at doing the drill. Let me know how it goes if you like. Phil Scott > "I believe you have not complied with the medical regimens > offered by at least two [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > I never said I liked either one of them. Okay, fine. I think I recall you telling me you liked one of them in an e-mail -- said she was hot :) So anyway, isn't each of your parade of psychiatrists in turn recommending a trial of antipsychotic meds, and when you refuse, aren't they refusing to treat you further? From where I sit it seems that you then find a new psychiatrist who after a few weeks recommends antipsychotic meds and refuses to prescribe your amphetamines unless you comply, and you suddenly think it's time for you to find a new shrink. You typically accuse them of abandoning you and wail about it on usenet for weeks. Can every single psychiatrist you see be wrong? And all of your friends and family? Why not just try it for a few months? Why not just try it for a few months? ~ O Hush Because you do not treat abuse with antipsychotics. You take legal action, to ensure abuse does not continue, and harm both yourself and other vulnerable people in the future. And you prosecute anyone who breaks the law, eg, Medical Fraud, misconduct, etc. Antipsychotics do not solve the problem. I have ADHD, and for the rest of my life, I will need a prescribing psychiatrist for ADHD medication. That is a fact. I was the victim of abuse. That is a fact. Abuse is illegal. That is a fact. Prosecuting abuse is difficult. That is a fact. I am seeking support to make sure that happens. I am seeking an ADHD doctor, because I don't have one. Fraudulent medical records and a therapist rubbing his dick in therapy are unaccepatable. Pschologically abusing a patient is unacceptable. Those are facts. NYU Medical Center endangered my life. That is a fact. I have reported these facts. Now I seek to make sure I receive financial damages for what these abuses took away from my life. That is is a fact. My past impacts my present life. That is a fact. I can't wait until my brain heals to seek financial damages, because I ran out of money. The abusers took my money. I want them prosecuted for abuse. My name is Virginia Hooper. I live in New York City. I want to make sure the law grants severely traumatized adults the same legal protection as a child. I think it should be mandatory for a medical professional to report abuse, in the same way, in NY State, a professional must report suspected abuse of a child. Because once an individual is abused, a cycle begins, and that person is even more vulnerable for subsequent abuse. GET YOUR OWN DAMN SELF OUT OF IT is not effecive therapy. Trust me ~ Someone said that to me, and I almost died. 2 years later, I am losing my home. I call that a net loss, not a gain. Although the experience was very gross. > Why not just > try it for a few months? [quoted text clipped - 60 lines] > My name is Virginia Hooper. > I live in New York City. Perhaps the ideas you've expressed here above are a result of disordered thinking. Prove me wrong -- try the antipsychotics for a few months. Why not? --Patti Perhaps the ideas you've expressed here above are a result of disordered thinking. Prove me wrong -- try the antipsychotics for a few months. Why not? --Patti Try rat poison, Why not? > Perhaps the ideas you've expressed here above are a result of > disordered thinking. Prove me wrong -- try the antipsychotics for a [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Try rat poison, > Why not? Rat poison = antipsychotic meds? Do you think every psychiatrist in NYC is involved in a conspiracy to injure you? IMO that sounds kind of like a delusion. I have a bipolar friend on one of the newer antipsychotics who has virtually no side-effects aside from perhaps a very fine tremor in her hands. She takes it for rather benign hallucinations including smelling smoke and seeing polite strangers in her yard, and sometimes small animals scurrying about in her periphery. Your condition has had you housebound for close to two years now and you can't work. How many psychiatrists have refused to treat you further unless you take the antipsychotic meds? The logical next step would be to try them. If you do, probably the worst thing that could happen is that they could be wrong and the meds won't help you. I suppose you could develop side-effects, but they would resolve on stopping the meds and would be uncommon on the new meds anyway. I think it's the one thing you haven't tried. --Patti "Rat poison = antipsychotic meds? Do you think every psychiatrist in NYC is involved in a conspiracy to injure you? IMO that sounds kind of like a delusion." ~ O Hush "As my former psychologist used to say ~ Sometimes Paranoia is merely based on the facts Of REALITY." ~ Twittering "O, c'est Cabal ~ Those shrunken turds Are right norming the means And being average still ~ ! Just ask Fob." ~ Fobby "Heck, yeah ~ ! Fob knows everything." ~ Twittering "I have a bipolar friend on one of the newer antipsychotics who has virtually no side-effects Aside from perhaps a very fine tremor In her hands." ~ O Hush "Does she weight 300 pounds, Experience bone loss, And recently developed diabetes?" ~ Twittering "She takes it for rather benign hallucinations Including smelling smoke And seeing polite strangers in her yard, And sometimes small animals Scurrying about in her periphery." ~ O Hush "O, yes, I do know Mortifieddotcom. How is she ~ ?" ~ Twittering "I suppose you could develop side-effects, But they would resolve On stopping the meds And would be uncommon on the new meds anyway. I think it's the one thing you haven't tried." ~ Patti "My problems are legal, Not halucinagenic." ~ Twittering > "I have a bipolar friend on one of the newer > antipsychotics who has virtually no side-effects [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > And recently developed diabetes?" > ~ Twittering No. She's healthy. She's been on the meds for 6 years. > "She takes it for rather benign hallucinations > Including smelling smoke [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > Not halucinagenic." > ~ Twittering How can you be sure? > Perhaps the ideas you've expressed here above are a result of > disordered thinking. Prove me wrong -- try the antipsychotics for a [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Try rat poison, > Why not? Warfarin, rat poison, _is_ a medication. It's called Coumadin, and it can save your life if you need it. If nothing else works, try praying to God to tell you what to do, who to trust. Even if everybody is evil, the drugs still work. They're dangerous but they do work. God loves you and you can trust the world, its solidity, even if people are false. They will help you, not because they care about you, but according to God's plan. Warfarin, rat poison, _is_ a medication. It's called Coumadin, and it can save your life if you need it. If nothing else works, try praying to God to tell you what to do, who to trust. Even if everybody is evil, the drugs still work. They're dangerous but they do work. God loves you and you can trust the world, its solidity, even if people are false. They will help you, not because they care about you, but according to God's plan. teRATigen bullshit God is Deade. >Why not just >try it for a few months? >~ O Hush > >Because you do not treat abuse with antipsychotics. True. You treat the victim with counseling. >You take legal action, >to ensure abuse does not continue, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >And you prosecute anyone who breaks the law, >eg, Medical Fraud, misconduct, etc. True. >Antipsychotics do not solve the problem. > >I have ADHD, and for the rest of my life, >I will need a prescribing psychiatrist for ADHD medication. Most people outgrow ADHD during puberty. You may be one of those who has not. >That is a fact. > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >Prosecuting abuse is difficult. >That is a fact. It's not difficult if there is evidence, and the victim is willing to testify. >I am seeking support to make sure that happens. > >I am seeking an ADHD doctor, >because I don't have one. Does one need a specialist for ADHD? I honestly don't know. >Fraudulent medical records and a therapist rubbing his dick in therapy >are unaccepatable. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >I have reported these facts. You've reported few facts. For example, there is nothing available to us that supports your claim that NYU Medical Center endangered your life. Perhaps you offered that evidence in an earlier post, and I didn't read it. >Now I seek to make sure I receive financial damages >for what these abuses took away from my life. > >That is is a fact. What, exactly, did they take from you? >My past impacts my present life. >That is a fact. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >I want them prosecuted for abuse. If they took your money, they should be prosecuted for theft. >My name is Virginia Hooper. >I live in New York City.  SignatureKent No todos los que ven tus obras ven tus virtudes. Kent, Will you accompany me to lawyer's office and advocate for me? Because I am willing to testify, but I have read that any victim should have a friend or relative present, for many reasons. I am not a lawyer. I am a medical writer. >Kent, >Will you accompany me to lawyer's office >and advocate for me? We live in different states, so that would prove difficult at best. >Because I am willing to testify, >but I have read that any victim should have a friend >or relative present, for many reasons. While speaking with your lawyer? While I don't see how it could hurt, I don't see it being of any real value. >I am not a lawyer. Nor am I. >I am a medical writer. I'm a history teacher. SignatureKent No todos los que ven tus obras ven tus virtudes. I'm a history teacher. ~ Kent YOU BLAME EVERYTHING ON YOU PAST! GET OVER IT. I'm a history teacher. ~ Kent YOU BLAME EVERYTHING ON YOU PAST! GET OVER IT. I don't blame exactly EVERYTHING on my past; I also blame Victoria Rivamonte, a neuropsychologist who said that sh.t to me ... & Geeeez, it honestly made me climb out my 16th fl. window because I went temporarily insane from the abuse. That's attempted manslaughter. Virginia Hooper That's attempted manslaughter. Virginia Hooper & she gave me an NYU Medical Center Notice of Privacy Practice form. Where the HELL Is Robin Goodman, PhD, When you f.cking NEED her ~ ? & Geeeez, it honestly made me climb out my 16th fl. window because I went temporarily insane from the abuse. That's attempted manslaughter. Virginia Hooper Because her colleague, my doctor, wasn't calling me back, either. >& Geeeez, >it honestly made me climb out my 16th fl. window [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >Because her colleague, my doctor, >wasn't calling me back, either. Is there some rule that requires they return your calls? I don't have enough information to know one way or the other. SignatureKent No todos los que ven tus obras ven tus virtudes. > >& Geeeez, > >it honestly made me climb out my 16th fl. window [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Kent > No todos los que ven tus obras ven tus virtudes. Yes, malpractice, willful indifference to life, neglect, abandonment. That is NOT Standartd Practice, in a life-threatening emergency over the course of one month. I would NOT put my worst enemy under Matthew B. Smith or Victoria Rivamonte's healthcare. And that's a fact. That is no joke. Virginia Hooper I would NOT put my worst enemy under Matthew B. Smith or Victoria Rivamonte's healthcare. And that's a fact. That is no joke. Virginia Hooper Perhaps I have not communicated facts clearly enough. I think thei licence to practice should be revoked. I would be content with 5-year probation and jail time. Jail time is not such a bad thing; they could learn a thing or two, the way I learned a thing or two in Bellevue Psych ER. These are professional prescribing Schedule II medication, and monitoring patients taking Schedule II medication. Failure to monitor and respond to suicide risk is unacceptable. Virginia Hooper >I'm a history teacher. >~ Kent [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >I also blame Victoria Rivamonte, >a neuropsychologist who said that sh.t to me ... Maybe you do. I don't know you, so I can not know. >& Geeeez, >it honestly made me climb out my 16th fl. window > >because I went temporarily insane >from the abuse. Telling you that you blame everything on your past is not abuse. It may or may not be accurate, but it doesn't fit into any definition of abuse. >That's attempted manslaughter. Maybe, but you'll have a heck of a time proving it. SignatureKent No todos los que ven tus obras ven tus virtudes. >I'm a history teacher. >~ Kent > >YOU BLAME EVERYTHING ON YOU PAST! I've blamed nothing on anything. What are you on about here? >GET OVER IT. Was I under it? SignatureKent No todos los que ven tus obras ven tus virtudes. > >Kent, > >Will you accompany me to lawyer's office > >and advocate for me? Hi Twittering... Did you know that any conversation that you have with an attorney at whick a 3rd (or more) party is present is considered to be one that is outside the scope of the attorney-client privilege? I just wanted you to keep that in mind for future reference. Dane >> Did you know that any conversation that you have with an attorney at >> whick a > 3rd (or more) party is present is considered to be one that is outside the > scope of the attorney-client privilege? Do you mean "a 3rd party not being represented by the attorney" is present? In other words, if I have a legal problem and take my wife along with me to the attorney's office to discuss it, does that mean nothing we say is confidential? If the attorney is going to represent "both of us" or "the family," or whatever, does that make it privileged? If the attorney is representing me alone and I just take my wife along to see what is going on or to provide additional information I might have forgotten, does that destroy the attorney-client privilege? If the latter were true, it is something that is not widely known and more people should be informed about! >>> Did you know that any conversation that you have with an attorney at >>> whick a [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >If the latter were true, it is something that is not widely known and more >people should be informed about! Yes, people should be informed, and I always do when a client wants someone to "sit in" on a consultation. You bring a third party -- friend, relative, spouse, parent -- to a consultation with an attorney. Later, that third party voluntarily tells what you said. No problem -- no privilege. May that third party be compelled to testify to a statement made by the client or the attorney? I can't think why not. May the attorney tell over the objection of the client? Absolutely not. There are other questions, and many variations, but just remember that the attorney-client privilege is for the protection of the client, not the attorney or the third party, it binds the attorney but not the client or third party, and it can be expressly or impliedly waived by the client -- like by letting a third party sit in. - Jon Beaver > Yes, people should be informed, and I always do when a client wants > someone to "sit in" on a consultation. You bring a third party -- [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > think why not. May the attorney tell over the objection of the client? > Absolutely not. That is interesting. I take it then that an attorney could not be compelled to testify to something revealed by a client simply because a spouse was present when the information was revealed. This is what bothered me in the previous post. >> Yes, people should be informed, and I always do when a client wants >> someone to "sit in" on a consultation. You bring a third party -- [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >present when the information was revealed. This is what bothered me in the >previous post. But consider whether the SPOUSE can be compelled to testify. I think the spouse can be compelled. - Jon Beaver >>> Yes, people should be informed, and I always do when a client wants >>> someone to "sit in" on a consultation. You bring a third party -- [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > But consider whether the SPOUSE can be compelled to testify. I think > the spouse can be compelled. I didn't think a spouse could be compelled (forced) to testify against their husband or wife. Is this not true? "I didn't think a spouse could be compelled (forced) To testify against their husband or wife. Is this not true ~ ?" ~ Adam "A Picture Is [sometimes] Worth 1000 Words." ~ Zoe > "I didn't think a spouse could be compelled > (forced) [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > "A Picture Is [sometimes] Worth 1000 > Words." Please explain. >>>> Yes, people should be informed, and I always do when a client wants >>>> someone to "sit in" on a consultation. You bring a third party -- [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >I didn't think a spouse could be compelled (forced) to testify against their >husband or wife. Is this not true? Depends on your state. That's another matter -- spousal privilege. It has nothing to do with the attorney-client privilege. - Jon Beaver > But consider whether the SPOUSE can be compelled to testify. I think > the spouse can be compelled. I can think of many occasions where spouses consult an attorney together, and have been in a few myself along with my wife. They always occur in connection with real estate transactions. I have never thought about attorney-client privilege and have more or less assumed that these meetings would be strictly confidential. It is hard to think of a reason why anyone would have to testify as to what was said during consultation about buying or selling property, but, come to think of it, that probably could happen. >> But consider whether the SPOUSE can be compelled to testify. I think >> the spouse can be compelled. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >would have to testify as to what was said during consultation about buying >or selling property, but, come to think of it, that probably could happen. Consider parents who come into my office to ask me to represent their teen-ager in a juvenile court delinquency proceeding. I get them to sigh the fee contract and then I say "Okay, will you will please wait outside while I talk to MY CLIENT." It sometimes takes them by surprise and sometimes it takes them a minute or two to realize that I am serious. You'd be amazed at how often, once the parents are out of the room, the kid will tell me what really happened and then say ". . . but don't tell my parents." I assure him/her I won't. In my family of lawyers we have a little saying: A lawyer can get by without knowing the law, but he's in big trouble if he forgets who his client is. - Jon Beaver "I think I recall you telling me you liked one of them in an e-mail -- said she was hot." ~ O Hush Dr. Seiden is cute, but she's a bloody bitch. How do you Model Empowerment ~ ? O, Just observe a first ~ rate LITIGATOR In action ... ... for you ~ ! How do we spell Empowerment ~ ? * M * O * N * E * Y "I think I recall you telling me you liked one of them in An e-mail ~ said she was hot." ~ O Hush "Dr. Seiden is cute, But she's a bloody bitch.." ~ Twittering "Twittering, According to Merlot's grape vine, Dr. Seiden likes to win her cases. Nice A winning legal case does not comprise." ~ Folly "O, very wise Goose, you, Folly, I do realize." ~ Twittering |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.