Good morning, kids. Still too early to get up, but I could not sleep, and now find news on Penn.
https://jimcoyneakacoyneoftherealm.substack.com/p/penn-psychiatry-chair-assisted-anti[*quote*]
CoyneoftheRealm on Substack
Penn Psychiatry Chair Assisted Anti-Psychiatry Trolls Seeking to Destroy an Emeritus Professor’s ReputationI never met the chair of my department, Professor Maria Oquendo. Yet her uninformed denunciation of me to an irrational cybermob several years ago continues to have devastating consequences.
JC Coyne aka CoyneoftheRealm
Nov 10, 2023
The chair of the Penn Department of Psychiatry, Professor Maria Oquendo provided an uninformed denunciation of me to an antisemitic cybermob several years ago. Quotes from her communication continue to have devastating consequences in repeated mobbings. Penn needs to acknowledge and rectify the damage.
A Prologue: Contextualizing the discussion of cyber mobbing and institutional harassment
Hateful cyber mobbing and cry bullying online pose potent threats to our ability to have needed conversations and to make progress addressing societal and global problems, especially when we are burdened with differences that are not readily resolvable.
In the US, as elsewhere, we are plagued by our inability to discuss issues like climate change, race relations, public health problems such as responses to the pandemic, abortion and women’s rights, and the war in the Middle East. There are very real and imagined threats to anyone voicing an opinion.
The threat of online harassment poses problems for the public discourse in general, but the threat also silences and intimidates academics, who traditionally have been seen as making such special contributions to public discussion that they require special protection.
Academic freedom, the privilege, right, and responsibility of academics to speak out is supposed to be different from—and in addition to the rights of ordinary citizens and subject to special protections.
If we are to understand and counter harassment, we cannot examine individual acts and episodes in isolation. We need to locate their occurrence in time and specific social and institutional environmental contexts.
In the case of academic institutions, irreversible damage can come in the initial responses of administrators. The apparent ineptness of the administrative response to online harassment sometimes reflects not just a lack of planning, but needs to be examined for deeper institutional dysfunction and conflicting and hidden agendas.
Understanding and correcting the actions of universities and their individual and collective administrators in response to online harassment is hampered by a lack of transparency and due process that should be seen as extraordinary for institutions in democratic societies and therefore questioned.
Over time I will present evidence to develop the more controversial view that the stifling of public academic discourse posted by online harassment gains incredible power from institutional complicity, down to the level of individual administrator actions, whether they act out of ineptness or maliciousness.
Academics who irritate the leaders of online harassment are often irritants in their own academic environment because of their insistence that thorny issues be identified and resolved. Women and persons of color are particularly at risk of institutional betrayal in the face of harassment, but so are senior white males.
My experience is that considerable damage goes unnoticed at the time because it is unrecorded and considered trivial or venial. This Substack article discusses the response of the University of Pennsylvania Chair of Psychiatry to well-known international sources of harassment who also happen to be antisemitic with their trivialization of the Holocaust (All psychiatrists are Nazis and are responsible for the Holocaust.)
This article will eventually be followed by an analysis of the response by the Dean of University Medical Centre, Groningen to threats from this same group to sue the Dean if I were not silenced.
An elite American Ivy League medical school and an isolated medical center in the North of Holland are very different settings, but they may share an intolerance for outspoken, principled dissent and disrespect for freedom of conscience and speech.
Penn and the University of Groningen are linked together in damage caused by their disrespect for my freedom of conscience and speech. I am an American citizen and my rights have been violated across international borders. This poses issues because if my rights are violated in the Netherlands, I may not have the same standing as a Dutch citizen in seeking a remedy. Keep that in mind in considering my situation, but also the more general problem of countering cross-border and cross-jurisdictional harassment and destruction of persons for what they say and write.
Some personal history
For over a decade, I have been targeted by an increasingly sophisticated, intense, and bold cyber mobbing campaign intended to sever my institutional ties, destroy my reputation, and dehumanize me. The ongoing mobbing became apparent in letters from Past British Psychological Society Pres. Peter Kinderman when he threatened to sue universities that would not muzzle me.
These letters had limited success but were followed by Kinderman’s hardcore group inciting anti-social and anti-academic trolls to take more extreme measures, including public Twitter campaigns to official accounts of universities and their administrators that claimed harm from my words and deeds and threatened violent retaliation against. Surfing the Internet and doxing to get new material became acceptable. The most bizarre rumors and falsehoods were given credibility and my family members were identified and threatened.
I have never met Bari Dzomba. After visiting 5 police departments, including the one at Temple University, I can find no evidence of her filing police reports. The officer on duty at the headquarters of the Temple Police Department told me to call 911 if anyone interfered with my visiting the Temple Campus. Bari has nonetheless has continued harassing my wife. Just last week, a troll account retweeted Bari’s tweets last week, renewing Bari’s assault.
As colleges and universities continue to emerge from the COVID pandemic, the personal cost inflicted by the mobbing is apparent in terms of my inability to earn a livelihood from marketing my unusual expertise and experience at academic institutions and forums. This is despite my being among the most highly cited psychologists in the world.
More broadly, I must also contend with the current institutional capture not only of universities but scientific journals and quasi-professional organizations and conferences, notably the American Association for Suicidology (AAS).
The capture of AAS is directly related to my current predicament. Public funds ($99,500) were obtained by the leadership and were used to disrupt the organization, as described in a Medium story.
The persecution and character assassination of the President of the American Association for Suicidology, David Covington: A suppressed story illustrates how wokes gained power by exploiting dysfunction in American institutions.
AAS specifically obtained public funds to empower a student entering the Temple University MSW program who played a major role in a disruption of AAS that at one point involved the resignation of all past presidents and many members.
The Temple student then attacked me for a single benign tweet about who Biden should appoint to head SAMSHA. With the active involvement of Lucy Johnstone and Peter Kinderman, she orchestrated the single most ferocious episodes of mob action against me of the past decade:
Cybermobbed! Explaining Nine Months of Character Assassination for a Single Tweet
Very recently, there have been some extremists going in for the kill, attacking me anytime I show up on social media, with a withering torrent of hate and falsehoods intended to silence me, no matter what the theme or topic.
The viciousness and language of these attacks have a strong ideological component. Anti-psychiatrists in the UK draw on content exchanged on Scientology websites, but they also adopt the Scientologist strategy of verminizing their targets with “dead agenting.” The cult’s founder, L. Ron Hubbard perfected the use of lies and distortions, no matter how outrageous, to disrupt an ongoing conversation and substitute the topic of the unspeakable evilness of the targets.
Over a many decades-long career, I have been an outspoken clinician-researcher psychologist who is willing to debate alternative views, but who seeks an evidence-based approach to mental health problems, relying on a skeptical critical appraisal that assumes that many claims are false or exaggerated. None of the antipsychiatrists—-neither Kinderman, Johnstone, Benthall, or Grant— figuring prominently in my harassment are willing to debate me in public.
My extensive clinical and research writings reflect that I accept the benefits of biomedical approaches for the severely mentally impaired, including the support and protection of vulnerable persons with quality inpatient facilities. Haters often lump me with psychiatrists whom they construe as Nazis and the primary architects of the Holocaust.
Anti-Semitism rears its ugly head
Until recently, psychiatrists in the UK were disproportionately Jews who fled the antisemitism of continental Europe. The anti-psychiatrists noticed these demographics. Those who were vocal in opposing antipsychiatrists were already labeled Nazis. now they are disgusting Jews. It did not matter that I am neither a psychiatrist nor a Jew.
These tweets were replies to an incitement by Richard Bentall, one of 9 signatories of the so-called Formal Complaint sent to the University of Pennsylvania and the University of Groningen by Peter Kinderman.
In August 2015, I was under intense attack from Peter Kinderman and his followers, but I had the support of Holocaust survivor and eminent psychiatrist Bernard “Barney” Carroll, along with psychiatrist John “Mickey” Nardo. I was never able to establish whether Mickey was a Holocaust survivor, but we were often in the mix on the same side. I learned a lot from Barney and Mickey on an informal listserv of senior psychiatrists who identified themselves as Holocaust survivors.
In comments made on my blog, Barney called out Kinderman’s trivialization of the Holocaust.
Barney’s analyses of the antics of Kinderman and his anti-psychiatry were incisive. I gave him lots of credit on social media for having influencing my thinking. I am sure there are tweets somewhere in which I refer to him as the Silver-tongued devil, as someone who speaks my thoughts better than me. (Apologies to Kris Kristofferson).
I praised Barney in a presentation critiquing a book by Kinderman and colleagues at my talk at the Edinburgh Infirmary, Division of Psychiatry, University of Edinburgh on July 22, 2015. Slides from the presentation passed the benchmark of over 1000 views within several days. Kinderman’s group escalated their harassment of Barney nd me.
For further information about Kinderman’s odd thinking linking psychiatrists to the Holocaust, see
The Holocaust Intruded Into Conversations About Psychiatric Diagnosis
Holocaust Survivors and Coyne of the Realm Clash With Lucy Johnstone and Anti-Psychiatry Trolls
British Psychologist’s Paper Retracted Because of Author’s Racism, Not Failure to Declare Interests
It would seem that Kinderman’s linking contemporary psychiatry and neuropsychopharmacology to the Nazis and the Holocaust was reckless, dishonest, and self-destructive, but it drew cheers for him and condemnation of me.
How do we view the later complicity of my chair of psychiatry, Maria A. Oquendo? Whether as a Penn administrator or President of the American Psychiatric Association, does she have a responsibility to avoid lending support to antisemitic antipsychiatrists?
Penn Department of Psychiatry Chair Maria A. Oquendo, MD enters the fray on the side of Kinderman
Professor Maria A. Oquendo, MD is Ruth Meltzer Professor of Psychiatry and Chair of the Department of Psychiatry, Perlman School of Medicine.
Here are excerpts from my letter to Chair Oquendo on March 1, 2018, concerning her contact with Peter Kinderman.
Dear Professor Oquendo:
I am writing to you in your capacity as the Chair of Psychiatry, but also as the 2016-17 President of the American Psychiatric Association. I am of course cc’ing both the General Counsel and Attorney Milstein. By the close of this letter, it will be apparent why I am making this personal appeal to you.
I am faced with a well-organized harassment and cyberbullying campaign incited and orchestrated by a few members of a closed Facebook Group and their followers, who are self-proclaimed survivors of trauma and psychiatry. A document that this group has put into widespread circulation on the Internet, the so-called Formal Complaint (copy enclosed as Attachment 1), is expressly aimed at destroying my reputation, as well as any affiliation with institutions and my developing web-based scholarly and consulting activities. The document quotes you as allegedly providing them with an “immediate and stronglyworded reply, …[describing] “Professor Coyne's behaviour [sic] as 'reprehensible'. According to the document, you further “regretted the ‘abuse’ that colleagues had been subjected to and joined us in condemning his ‘appalling’ language and actions. We welcome this statement and believe it reflects well on the Faculty.”
This extraordinary campaign arose in Europe, where it became a potentially criminal as well as a civil matter. One of the signatories to the Formal Complaint, Dr Alec Grant, had his Twitter account locked down until he deleted threats of violence and incitements of others to commit acts of violence against me. Twitter also agreed with me that another signatory to the complaint, Richard Benthall violated their policies against harassment and abuse. Documentation is available on request. Some organizers of the campaign have tweeted directly to the Twitter accounts of Penn and other universities with which I have past or present affiliations, demanding that any connection be severed.
One account sent tweets to @PennMedicine and other institutional accounts stating “As a person who endured incest from the ages of toddler to a teenager, I find @CoyneoftheRealm (Prof James Coyne’s) statements abhorrent. Please address this matter. Please contact me for more details of his comments + how this made me physically vomit!” There is much more, but I think you can get a sense of the unprofessionalism and sheer bizarreness of this campaign.
My efforts to address the problem in Europe are hampered by the perception that your alleged assessment of me could only be based on extensive, direct, personal experience, typical for any relationship between faculty members and their department chair.
Anyone against whom I might want to take action or even attempt to contradict can quote the above statements that are being attributed to you as a persuasive defense of their perspective. I enclose a screenshot of how one member of the group who is harassing me capitalizes on your statement. Of course, you and I have never met.
The letter from the Penn General Counsel to Alan Milstein dated January 26, 2018…strongly suggests that he is relying on a depiction of me in the Formal Complaint, and presumably another communication between this group and Penn to which the Formal Complaint refers. I am at a disadvantage because I do not have access to that communication.
The General Counsel’s letter states that I assert inaccurately that I maintain an affiliation with the University of Pennsylvania. The so-called Formal Complaint is explicitly intended to pressure institutions to compel me to stop claiming any tie. The General Counsel’s comments appeared to be a response to demands from this group.
Yet, the Penn faculty handbook states:
Emeritus status is conferred upon Professors and Associate Professors in the Standing Faculty and upon Standing Faculty—Clinician-Educators at the time of their retirement. Retiring faculty members have the option of using or not using the modifier “Emeritus” or maintaining their “Professor” title. The same rights and restrictions to being retired apply. (See also section on Retirement, which provides information on faculty transition programs, continuing University benefits in retirement and the rights and privileges of retired faculty members.)
The General Counsel’s letter provides a link to the back page of a publisher’s website. The page lists Penn as my affiliation when my work has appeared in its journals. This obscure link would be low in the results of any Google search. I am wagering that the link was provided by the harassing group because of the importance they attach to getting my institutional ties erased.
[Added 2023 Why else would the Penn General Counsel provide this link in your defense?]
The General Counsel’s letter accepts the Formal Complaint’s characterization of me as a misogynist who describes women as “bimbo’ and “bitch.” A search of my over 37,000 tweets reveals only one use of the latter term in an unusual context. Three years ago, a right-wing hate monger in the UK, Rod Liddle set off ferocious attacks on disabled chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis patients across social media platforms with a column in The Spectator, It’s time to admit that chronic fatigue syndrome is not a chronic illness (
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2015/11/lets-just-admit-that-chronic-fatigue-syndrome-is-not-actually-a-chronic-illness/). The column reflects the patient community having come into the rotating targets of his hate. Recently, Liddle declared that the expression “N**r in the woodpile” is historical and not racist and ridiculed those who took offense. (
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/a-vicious-reaction-to-a-very-bad-word/ ). Liddle was also suspended from the Labour Party for calling all Muslims anti-Semitic (
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/rod-liddle-suspended-from-labour-party-for-describing-antisemitism-as-visceral-for-many-muslims-a7037476.html).
My tweet appeared in an intense storm on Twitter linked to some unmoderated forums that were causing considerable distress among patients. I intervened and challenged the contempt being directed at them. My tweeting marked one of the first times someone outside the patient community stood up to Liddle. Patients have since commented upon my intervention as such. One of Liddle’s female colleagues jumped in with some mocking, disparaging comments about patients. The context of my tweet indicates I was referring to her tweet about the patients as “bitchy” not to call her bitch.
Only 2 of my tweets contain the word “bimbo,” one of them about a male and another to a female who were engaged in trolling, using sock puppets, and otherwise disrupting threads of blog comments. In the end, I don’t think that 3 of over 37,000 tweets define a professional nor do they warrant the kind of harsh condemnation to which I have been subject.
[2023 Comment: Kinderman was complaining that I called Lucy Johnstone a “bimbo” when she was calling me and others a Nazi.]
I would prefer not to provide here a lengthy rebuttal of the rest of the so-called Formal Complaint, but I am prepared to do so. A variety of accusations take words and deeds out of the contexts in which they can be seen as much more benign. Words and phrases are placed instead in the context of a fiery and libelous condemnation of me and made to appear as supportive evidence. Some were retorts in the face of threatening and disgusting attacks on me from leaders of the group, especially Kinderman, Grant, Johnstone, and Richard Bentall.
[For the sake of brevity, I am excluding 6 pages of text of the letter from this article. They are preserved and make a fascinating read for those who are interested in understanding online harassment. If there is sufficient interest, I will make them available in a future Substack article].
I am at a significant disadvantage in protecting myself from these trolls. I have no idea whether the statements being attributed to you are, in fact, your statements or your views. If they are your views, I would hope that you would be open to a more nuanced and thoughtful consideration of my public posture and statements.
I appeal to you because these alleged quotes invoke your authority as Chair of Psychiatry, but implicitly as 2016 –2017 President of the American Psychiatric Association, an organization that took a strong stand during your term on public statements by members about persons whom they have never met.
I have 2 requests:
1) I am formally requesting copies of all communications you have had with anyone about me; this is most critically necessary for communications from any of the aforementioned trolls; and
2) I would like a clarifying statement from you that makes it clear that you and I have never met, that I retired before you arrived at Penn, and that you have no personal or professional opinion about my extensive internet presence.
I am available to meet to discuss these requests with you. I hope that we can amicably put this episode behind us.
Commentary written on November 9, 2023
For six years, a so-called Formal Complaint has been in circulation on social media and recently I have seen reference to it or a direct quote on almost than daily basis. The letter is signed by Peter Kinderman and eight of his associates. It is a diatribe full of lies, distortions, threats, and a warning.
The diatribe reaches a crescendo with
Given this appalling history of misrepresentation, harassment, abuse and criminal behaviour, we advise people to be extremely cautious in their interactions with Professor Coyne and very sceptical about the accuracy of any blogs, articles or claims by him, either personal or academic.
The complaint cites the Penn Chair of Psychiatry:
In an immediate and stronglyworded reply, the Chair of the Department of Psychiatry, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, described Professor Coyne's behaviour as 'reprehensible'. She regretted the ‘abuse’ that colleagues had been subjected to and joined us in condemning his ‘appalling’ language and actions. We welcome this statement and believe it reflects well on the Faculty. The Chair also clarified that ‘Dr. Coyne has not worked at the University of Pennsylvania since 2013 and we do not anticipate any relationship with him in the future.’
Tales of my evil keep getting embellished and there are numerous statements that I have driven from all academic affiliations because of a criminal record of domestic abuse.
I am calling upon Penn to disclose that I left because I refused to apologize and that I was otherwise free to stay. I will add that my choice was honorable and ethical.
Penn should disclose that it was informed of a civil domestic suit before I was hired. I can add that no institution ended its affiliation with me because of accusations of domestic abuse.
My whistleblowing and a letter-writing campaign
My refusal to apologize led to my departure from Penn. It centered on what I construe as my whistleblowing about corrupt practices in the National Cancer Institute's Cooperative Groups Program that was overseen and authorized by an NCI program officer, Ann O’Mara.
Much whistleblowing does not result in formal action, even when it has considerable merit.
I should have learned from my earlier blowing the whistle on NIMH program officers. The information I provided to federal agents was sufficient for a federal judge to authorize me to wear a wire to record conversations. The investigation of the complaint resulted in the sudden departure of two key NIMH personnel, a payback of considerable grant money (allegedly millions of dollars to the government from academic institutions, and payment to me for lost research funds, but no formal recognition of any wrongdoing. Seldom do whistleblowers get recognition or honors, outside of a rare Qui Tam award.
In the instance of my later whistleblowing about the NCI Co-Op, NCI Program Officer Ann O’Mara retaliated for my action by providing Penn with over 20 letters that were not materially relevant to my complaints. These letters were from diverse persons and amazingly consistent in their content.
Whether or not Penn addresses the Psychiatry Chair’s behavior, I am free to share these letters in their content, excerpts, or their entirety.
One letter was from a then-deceased faculty at the University of Michigan and was secured earlier by David Healy who figures prominently in the antipsychiatry movement and in the agitation to get me removed from social life with my reputation destroyed.
His blog posts have from time to time contained instructions in the comments section on how to manipulate what appears in Google searches for my name so that the Formal Complaint is near the top.
What all letter writers have in common is their being upset by my willingness to discuss content that is threatening to them.
In one instance, the letter was from a clinical psychologist who was prominent in the governance of APA. She had me removed from two APA listservs after I produced evidence that she was involved in appointing accused war criminal Col Larry James to the APA Council of Representatives when the council was set to discuss James’ supervision of “enhanced interrogation” AKA torture. Two letters were from researchers whose claims I challenged in peer-reviewed articles that they had demonstrated that support groups extended the lives of cancer patients. The consensus of the scientific community is now that I was right: suuport grojups do not extend the lives of patients with metastatic cancer.
One letter was from a psychologist whose claim I disputed in a blog post that watching 9/11 on TV caused an American epidemic of PTSD. One letter was from Carl Elliott, whose role I had criticized in getting David Healy’s promotion of the ineffective and sometimes dangerous Reboxetine construed as Healy opposing antidepressants. The colorful list continues in the same vein.
Penn forwarded the letters to me as they were received. Puzzled, I solicited contradictory letters from prominent persons who could dispute what was contained in these letters. One rebuttal letter came from Jimmie Holland, MD, a founder of Psycho-Oncology who praised my work and refuted the claims of the various letters from academics claiming support groups extended the lives of cancer patients.
Psychologist Stephen Soldz provided a devastating first-person rebuttal to the clinical psychologist’s accusations about my disruptiveness around the issue of psychologists supervising torture. I never attended a single demonstration at APA because I had already resigned when the organization required members to contribute to a fund advocating for prescription privileges for psychologists with minimal training.
Dr. Soldz founded the Coalition for an Ethical Psychology. The Coalition has been in the forefront of efforts to withdraw psychologists from aiding abusive interrogations in US Department of Defense and CIA facilities.
After I submitted these two rebuttal letters, Penn requested me to stop soliciting any more until after their investigation was completed. I breathed a sigh of relief because the focus of the hearings had always been so ambiguous that I did not know if I was at risk. I thought we—Penn and myself—-were deliberating how to respond to NCI.
Some of the same letters have since reappeared in seemingly unrelated letter-writing campaigns, including a response to my getting a cease and desist order against harassment in the Netherlands.
Penn offered me a choice, that I construed as a Hobson’s choice, which is a single option, not a choice. I could apologize for my “false accusations,” vindicating the program officer and forever cutting off funding that I required if I remained at Penn. I could refuse to apologize, and accept a status of emeritus Penn professor, but with a DND (Do not denigrate) agreement. I presumed that with the protection of an emeritus status at Penn but with some difficulty, I could establish myself as an independent scholar and earn a livelihood based on my extraordinary record. Securing a Carnegie Centenary Visiting Professorship at Stirling University in Scotland was a promising start.
Then Penn Chair of Psychiatry Maria A. Oquendo helped make sure that would not happen.
Only now, as I face the threat of no livelihood, can I appreciate the full impact of Oquendo’s decision. Circulation of the Formal Complaint that cites Chair Oquendo re-inflicts the damage she did and there is no way to withdraw the letter from the Internet.
I have never been given a chance to confront my accusers in a fair proceeding in which I could challenge the truthfulness or relevance of their accusations. There is no jurisdiction in which the accusations could be evaluated and none where I could make any countercomplaint stick. Over the years, some wild accusations have been made that would immediately be thrown out in any judicial proceeding. The sources had to know there would never be a cross-examination.
The irony is that if I committed the worst of the high crimes and misdemeanors of which I am accused, I would have served time and would be free to participate in social life in a way that is now being denied me.
Trial by cyberharassment is a lynching, a denial of due process masquerading as a democratic process and a trial by jury of one’s peers.
Cyber harassment is taking a toll: How you can aid me
I am wielding my pen like a sword or at least the keyboard that replaced my pen. Yet I just turned 76 and I am full of energy to do go things, but tired of these kinds of nonsense distractions. I am diverting some of my energy to challenge those who inflict harm to others on social media without just cause.
I am suggesting there is no just cause for cyberharassment and verminization. If need be, I will dismantle this ugly apparatus one incident, one bully, or one professional who authorizes it at a time.
Kinderman and his followers argue that I have proven myself too bad a guy to even be allowed a cellphone, some harassing my wife to take it away before my wife and I are both arrested (it took some doxing to find out who my wonderful, but long-suffering wife).
If you are nearly broke like me, please subscribe to my newsletter and encourage others to do the same. If you have money to spare, consider taking out a paid subscription.
Hawking newsletters on social media will hardly pay the bills, but it is a start. I will be happy to negotiate other activities, including lectures and workshops on how to be such a principled, evidence-based pain in the ass to whoever needs one.
My lectures and workshops earned rave reviews. A moderator at a prestigious cancer institute in Australia once faced boos for announcing that time was up for a public debate in which I defended my views against a local champion for the other side.
I can coach high-power scientists pursuing grants. I even have a letter from the recent Rectus of the University of Groningen about how I coached a successful grant application after a failure. If she remains honest, she will tell you that that success made her career.
I have an aversion to accepting charity that I must now overcome. I faced a lot of humiliation growing up in public housing with a single mother and a sister caring for a disabled brother and having to find creative ways to pay the family expenses that welfare did not cover. How I ever got to Penn, received the highest salary of any psychologist in the department of psychiatry, risked blowing the whistle on NIH, and was willing to bail is a fascinating story I also would like to tell.
I have some very interesting stories to tell and I come with receipts to back up my tales. Find a forum for me or an institutional setting with financial support or a tax-exempt status. For over a decade, I was willing to give talks and workshops for little more than travel costs. Now I must ask for more.
CoyneoftheRealm on Substack is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Leave a comment
1 Like
·
1 Restack
2 Comments
author
JC Coyne aka CoyneoftheRealm
Nov 10
·edited Nov 10
Author
The Penn Chair of Psychiatry, Maria Oquendo was also President of the American Psychiatric Association at the the time and had no business getting involved in the harassment of an emeritus professor by a UK mob that had blatant connection to antisemitism.
The mob power has grown since and they continue to attempt to damage careers with impunity.
The full extent of the damage of her involvement is only now becoming apparent. The Internet will preserve a record and allow the damage to be compounded indefinitely, out of anyone's control. Some accountability from Oquendo is sorely needed.
Like
Reply
Share
Psychology Best Practice
Writes Psychology Best Practice Newsle…
Nov 10
Can academia become any uglier, any more deeply support and protect incompetence, or any further obstruct real progress? I doubt it. It’s a filthy, utterly repugnant industry. I don’t know how intelligent, talented, ethical folk survive in it.
Like
Reply
Share
Top
New
Community
Suffering in Silence: Long Covid and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome
A guest post by Michael A. Osborne, Professor of Machine Learning at Oxford's Department of Engineering Science about neglect of the connection between…
Mar 21
•
Michael Osborne
7
2
Dr. Aaron T. Beck, Quarking Ducks, and Me (2023 version)
Recalling how a towering figure in psychiatry and mental health became my friend after I subjected his work to robust criticism.
Apr 19
•
JC Coyne aka CoyneoftheRealm
9
2
Misleading Systematic Review of Mindfulness Studies Was Used to Promote the Benson-Henry Institute for Mind-Body Medicine
Alerting readers why they should be skeptical of what they are told about the benefits of mindfulness by an author who has multiple retractions for…
Aug 30
•
JC Coyne aka CoyneoftheRealm
8
2
Ready for more?
© 2023 James Coyne aka CoyneoftheRealm
Privacy ∙ Terms ∙ Collection notice
Start Writing
Get the app
Substack is the home for great writing
Our use of cookies
We use necessary cookies to make our site work. We also set performance and functionality cookies that help us make improvements by measuring traffic on our site. For more detailed information about the cookies we use, please see our privacy policy. ✖
[*/quote*]
