Welcome to the Nexus of Ethics, Psychology, Morality, Philosophy and Health Care

Welcome to the nexus of ethics, psychology, morality, technology, health care, and philosophy
Showing posts with label Cyberstalking. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Cyberstalking. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 25, 2018

Dear Therapist: I Google-Stalked My Therapist

Lori Gottlieb
The Atlantic
Originally published March 21, 2108

Here is an excerpt:

Most of us wonder who our therapists are outside of the therapy room, usually because we like them so much. Sometimes, of course, people Google their therapists if something feels off—to see if their credentials check out, or if other patients have posted similar concerns. More often, though, our curiosity is a reflection of how important our therapist has become to us, and in some cases, it’s a way to feel connected to the therapist between sessions. The problem is, of course, that we want therapy to be a space where we feel free to talk about absolutely anything. And no matter what we discover—a bombshell like yours, or something more mundane—the fallout of a Google binge becomes a secret that takes that freedom away.

Carl Jung called secrets “psychic poison” for good reason. When I finally confessed my Google-stalking to my therapist, all the air returned to the room. My verbal shackles were removed, and we talked about what was behind my desire to type his name into my search engine. But more important, the way I handled the situation before fessing up taught me something interesting about how I handle discomfort—something far more interesting than anything I learned about my therapist online.

And I think the same might prove true for you.

What people do in therapy is pretty much what they do in their outside lives. In other words, if a patient tends to feel dissatisfied with people in her life, it’s likely that she’ll eventually feel dissatisfied with me. If she tries to please people, she’ll probably try to please me too. And if she avoids people when she feels hurt by them, I’ll be on the lookout for signs that I’ve said something that may have hurt her, too (she cancels her next session, or clams up, or comes late).

The information is here.

Tuesday, August 9, 2011

Cyberharassment and Cyberstalking

Bruce E. Mapes, Ph.D., and Samuel Knapp, Ed.D.
                                                           
As the list of potential uses of technology to aid the practice of psychology grows, so does the list of potential misuses by disturbed or angry clients. For example, social network sites and public tax or utility records can provide personal information about a psychologist. A virus or worm may be embedded in or attached to an e-mail. An e-mail sent to a client may be modified. For example, in response to his client’s e-mail, Dr. Smith wrote “I am concerned about your distress and would like you to come to my office this evening.” The client edited the message to read “I am concerned about your wife’s distress and would like her to come to my office this evening”; the e-mail was forwarded to his attorney who was representing him in a custody hearing the following day. More recently, computers have become a means to harass or stalk psychologists.

Cyberstalking (CS) and cyberharassment (CH) are relatively new problems. Although they share many characteristics, the primary difference is CS most likely involves the risk of offline contact and physical harm, while CH involves the intent to attack character or reputation. Both may be driven by revenge, mental illness, jealousy, or anger, but CH may also be driven by the desire to intimidate or embarrass the victim. The anonymity of the Internet often empowers the individual to send multiple e-mails or text messages to the victim or to the victim’s significant others. Or the individual may hack into the victim’s computer; sign up the victim for spam or porn sites; send offensive e-mails in the name of the victim; or post on Web sites and include fabricated, misrepresented, or embellished information about the victim.

Although Canada has passed laws for both CH and CS, the United States has been slower in passing legislation, especially for CH. Some of the reasons for the lack of legislation include: (1) issues of legal jurisdiction since the Internet is an international medium; (2) limited resources to collect and authenticate evidence; and (3) the double-edged sword of free speech. Typically, CS is handled through the criminal courts and CH is handled through the civil courts. If CH is related to a custody matter, it may be possible to pursue criminal charges under laws related to intimidation or harassment of a court official or witness. Victims may try to file a complaint with the harasser’s ISP to have the account canceled or the Web site shut down. This is rarely successful since the ISP is not a publisher, but rather a means to access the Internet and therefore can rarely be held accountable for the “free speech” of the harasser.

When stalkers attempt to meet the victim offline, immediate consultation should be sought from law enforcement because this may pose a serious threat to the victim’s safety and welfare. Pursuing civil action in the case of CH can be more difficult. Harassers typically represent themselves which can result in a very lengthy process (years) and excessive attorney fees for victims. Even if victims are able to win damages and attorney fees, they may not actually collect any money, and it is unlikely the civil court will issue an order to shut the site down.

In the case of CH, the victim should keep a file of all offensive messages and posts, but should not provide intermittent reinforcers by responding. Typically, the harasser needs to be in control and wants to debate. Any response usually results in exchanges which escalate and can quickly get out of control (flaming wars). Harassers want to be recognized and will continue to make postings that are likely to become more outlandish and/or unbelievable, and ultimately discredit themselves. Most harassers discontinue when after a while they fail to elicit a response from the victim.

Harassment and stalking are stressful. Psychologists who are victims may experience a variety of symptoms, including but not limited to anger, demoralization, withdrawing, hypervigilance, avoidance of the computer, excessive self-consciousness, sleep disturbance, nightmares, impairment in concentration and memory, hypersensitivity to the comments or actions of colleagues and clients, and other symptoms common to prolonged stress. Psychologists who are victims should continue regular personal and professional routines, and remain active in recreational activities, family activities, and other activities that will help to reduce the preoccupation with and the harm from the CH. As in other situations, if the “symptoms” begin to impact one’s daily functioning, the psychologist should consult with a colleague or contact PPA’s colleague assistance resources.

For additional information on CS, CH, topics such as cyber-bullying, ways to protect yourself, and other resources, the reader is referred to the Stalking Resource Center, a program of the National Center for Victims of Crime (www.ncvc.org), and Cyber911 Emergency at www.wiredsafety.org. Occasionally google your own name to see in what contexts it may be used on the Internet.

Man gets 4 years for stalking on Facebook


SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP)
USA Today/News

A California man who trolled women's Facebook pages searching for clues that allowed him to take over their email accounts was sentenced Friday to more than four years in state prison after a judge rejected a plea for a lighter sentence and likened the man to a peeping Tom.

Once he took over women's email accounts, George Bronk searched their folders for nude or semi-nude photographs or videos sent to their husbands or boyfriends and distributed the images to their contact list, prosecutors said.

The emails went to families, friends and co-workers. Women in 17 states, the District of Columbia and England were victimized.

"This case serves as a stark example of what occurs in so-called cyberspace. It has very real consequences," Sacramento County Superior Court Judge Lawrence Brown said. "The intrusion of one's profile is no different than intruding one's home."

Bronk, 24, pleaded guilty in January to charges that included computer intrusion, false impersonation and possession of child pornography.

Brown sentenced him to four years in state prison for the charges related to the Facebook and email offenses, and added eight more months for charges related to child pornography.

Bronk's attorney, Monica Lynch, said her client took responsibility for his actions and showed remorse. She had sought a sentence of one year in local jail with probation afterward, or two years in state prison with no probation.

Brown based his decision on a sentencing recommendation by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. The evaluation stated that Bronk demonstrated remorse and quoted the self-identified alcoholic as saying, "If I could go back with the knowledge that I have now, I would not have done any of the things I did."

But the state expressed concern about his lack of understanding about the severity of his crime and noted Bronk had demonstrated "a high degree of callousness." The evaluation said he used the child pornographic videos and images "as an instrument designed to inflict pain and humiliation on the very people he stole the images from."

Read the entire story here.