Psychologist Billed Insurer for Sex - Patient Sues

Gee I am so glad your girlfriend agrees with you that its okay to call this woman a slut. And no I don't think you are a sexist--I just think you are a complete idiot who does not understand that just because a woman says she likes you or even consents to have sex with you means she is a slut. (Because a true "slut" would most likely charge your ignorant ass double--if she even bothered to notice you at all).

With that said... in this particular case the doctor was obviously manipulating her or drugging her or telling her straight up lies to gain her trust and consent--hence why she is not suing for rape but instead malpractice and sexual assault. If you want to throw around labels--this is a classic case of misuse and abuse of power and why licensing was put into place--so that men (and sometimes women as well) would not use the power of their profession or office to sexually abuse clients.

Did you even read the story? It starts off this way: "A woman claims.." She CLAIMS that this happened. There's no proof that the allegations against the doctor are even true, so it doesn't even make sense for you to say that the doctor "obviously" did anything to her. I'm not calling her a slut because she ended up having feelings for the doctor, if that part of her story is even true. And she's not a slut for consenting to have sex with a man. Shes' a slut for screwing the same guy who's supposed to be helping her cope with her depression (if her story is indeed true). Here's the thing. IF she did screw around with her doctor: 1) she's just flat out stupid as shit, 2) the doctor is a jackass for letting (or making happen whatever), and 3) her stupidity in this case makes her a slut. I don't care if she's depressed. Being depressed is not an excuse for going along with what she did.

Did you read the article? It says the doctor billed the woman's insurance company--and got reimbursed for having sex with her while she was his patient (obviously) and claiming that violating ethical licensing standards was justified because it helped treat her depression.-- so there's your "proof".

Also the article notes that because of the doctors "treatments" and the aftermath and probably because you are not the first person to call her a slut--she had a complete mental breakdown and her depression worsened. So again she obviously suffered from depression which the doctor failed to adequately treat or even address--because also notice the article says the doctor was taking medications he prescribed for her "disorder" in order to enhance his sexual experience.

Also it would seem to me by your logic it is the doctor who is the slut. He was obviously willing to have sex with a patient who was seeking treatment from him--poor guy she walked in an seduced him he was just trying to help her by fucking her--and treating her for depression that might or might not have been her issue--and the insurance reimbursement was just gravy.

Not even close to relevant. There is no mention of anything regarding sex therapy or even physical contact in general. Why don’t you create a “conservative psychiatrist” group were you can post your special code of ethics and promote outdated psychological treatments. let the innovative psychiatrists improve society

Chucky, you are a moron!!

you're the moron its "Chunky".

Yes I agree. Sex with a person who is not in a position of authority over you could be construed as a way to alleviate depression.

But sex therapists are supposed to teach you how to heal your misunderstandings or misconceptions about sex and sexual expression--not have sex with you for fun and profit. (or maybe I missed the memo that said sex therapist is the new euphemism for pimp).

It's like you don't go to the gynecologist or the urologist and expect them to feel themselves up or pee in front of you to "show you by example" what they are treating you for.

Honestly I get that most of your posts "Chunky" are meant to be sarcastic and dark--but in this case it was an epic-fail.

Wtf are you talking about? Most bizzare responese I've gotten in a while.

Let me try again. Psychiatrists or sex therapist should not have sex with their clients. It's unethical. So no this woman filing a lawsuit and posters pointing out that this was not appropriate behavior by a psychiatrist is not some kind of conspiracy or "witch hunt" to prevent therapists or doctors who practice sex therapy from using new, innovative treatment options.

But yes--if you are feeling a bit depressed going out and finding a person who is not in some type of power relationship over you and/or having sex with your spouse or significant other is not a bad idea--and in fact may actually have been studied as a way to relieve depression.

The two ideas are completely different--and sexual exploitation, ethical violations based on inappropriate sexual contact and abuses of power are not topics that lend themselves well to dark sarcasm or stupid humor that defends the perpetrator for their clearly unethical behavior so in that regard you failed.

That assumption seemed to differ from the length of time the patient was being "treated" since "1995 until May 2009" is certainly long enough for the APA to find out especially with the bills being part of the record.

Why did the patient wait so long if the "therapy" wasn't helping her? What were the circumstances that "in May 2009, "an officer of Plaza Therapy Associates who knew of Lerom's misconduct demanded Lerom cease conducting such professional and misconduct acts against plaintiff?"

"That assumption seemed to differ from the length of time the patient was being "treated" since "1995 until May 2009" is certainly long enough for
the APA to find out especially with the bills being part of the record."
I understand that the length seems long but that is actually typically for a case involving depression. It doesn't go into a lot of detail about what kind of depression she had such as manic depression. But, assuming the worse, therapy for a client with severe depression can last several years. But, as always, it depends on how the client responds to treatment, the therapists, and their willingness to want treatment.

Another point is that many clients who decide to see a therapist are somewhat vulnerable. Especially for depression, they are most likely to go along with whatever the therapists says will work. In this situation, it seems that the therapists may have taken advantage of this situation. I had a psychologist who works in California tell me that for each monthly APA newsletter, there are approximately 15 - 40 people being investigated each month. And the Code of Ethics that is violated that most is the duo relationship statement.

"Why did the patient wait so long if the "therapy" wasn't helping her? What were the circumstances that "in May 2009, "an officer of Plaza
Therapy Associates who knew of Lerom's misconduct demanded Lerom cease conducting such professional and misconduct acts against plaintiff?""
For the first part, I don't know why she didn't report the therapist to the APA. Most likely, she may have not known and/or may have been told by the therapist that the therapy was "working." Not many people, besides those inside the psychology field, know and understand how and when to report another psychologist for misconduct.

And to the second part, I kind of addressed that point in a response to your earlier comment. Overall, what should have been done was for his colleague to report him to the APA and let the APA investigate.

Actually, there is no empirical evidence that supports the method that having sex with a client is a successful method of therapy. Not only that, it violates the Code of Ethics that bounds all psychologists licensed by the APA and the State. Of course, if they are not APA accredited, they are not bound by the Code of Ethics.

Under the Code of Ethics, a psychologist is absolutely not allowed to have a dual relationship, which means that they are not allowed to have a professional and personal relationship with the client. And further, the Code of Ethics dictate that having sex with client is representative of a personal relationship whether it was meant to be or not.

If there is evidence to prove even the fact that the psychologist had sex with his client ONCE, his state and professional license will automatically be reviewed under the state and the APA Board. And with that, the client can sue the psychologist for malpractice.
Even if the psychologist had the best lawyer in the world and may win the court case, the APA Board and the state will still continue to review his state and professional license.

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/sex-therapy/MC00065

That depends on whether or not he has had training as a sex therapist and the laws about that in the state of Fla.

"Certified sex therapists sign a code of ethics that prohibits sexual contact of any sort, in the office or anywhere else. For a certified sex therapist to do so is considered unethical, and in some states it's against the law. **However, some sex therapy counselors aren't bound by these rules and may engage in sexual coaching that involves contact.**"

As I said earlier, "Of course, if they are not APA accredited, they are not bound by the Code of Ethics. "

Personally, I would not suggest seeing ANY person that claims to be a psychologist without being bound by the APA. They are not bound by anything and cannot be disciplined at all. All psychologists give thier name and their licensing number for the client to look them up as evidence that they are licensed by APA and the state.

Just FYI, APA is involved in the approval and licensing of all psychologists in the US and Canada. :)

He probably would argue that he terminated his professional relationship when he decided to have sex with her.

But she got him going with sex (which is much like flight or fight, the higher cortex turns off completely) and got him strung out -

But somehow he still dumped her.