"2026. PJ Reed. The Arizona State Hospital and Patient Abuse."

                      Key terms or words: People like this suck.  

                                                  "The wrath of American justice."

Paolo Jack Reed.
Kim Williams Nature Preserve.
Missoula, MT. 2020.

ANY AND ALL WHO MAY FEEL THE SAME, PLEASE, ANY AND ALL WHO MAY FEEL THE SAME PLEASE FEEL FREE TO REACH OUT ME PERSONALLY: 

paoloreed@gmail.com

       There are simply too many things being exposed that remain point specific to American psychiatry, exclusive to these kind of doctors only, that there is no way in hell they will be geeitn away with their own shit for very longer. Documentary film, mainstream news reporting, my own having proved about abusive psychiatrists in state managed mental hospitals, and just shit load of equally revelations about them and them only. 

   More on exclusivity specific to a very exclusive  type of medical doctor. Only they had a dominant presence in the horror show mental hospitals of the era to mid 20th century, just as only they have the most control over all in-patient psychiatric care settings today. 

     Hard to deny one thing, yet they only know to deny truth no matter how loudly is manifests in the United States today specific to the contemporary American psychiatrist. This in and of itself is rather exclusive behavior, never wanting the admit truth no matter how obvious it is. 

        They only created the DSM- 1952- as means to appear more of less expertise, and yet, the thing remains a patently false medical text that has long left the American people as a whole with no way of knowing how many otherwise preventable harms and deaths have been caused by the DSM's utterly invalid method(s) of diagnosing serious illness.

   Prior to 1952, it was more or less guesswork at best, having no form of direct referential source, even though the DSM has always been a patently false medical text since 1952.

   These motherfuckers can take all such 'subtypes' and put them where no sun ever shines. They are liars and dimwits, either willful in creating false approaches of this kind, or too goddamn stupid to understand invalid scientific methods, period. Ugh... Fuck.  

Dr. Ira Gaddy.
The ninny in full view.
Arrogant, insecure'
white male American.
The son of  a white Mississippi doctor.
White wealth in the Deep South, 
and all that that implies. 

    They are criminally minded Americans with medical degrees who have run amok in the US for no less that the last 150 odd years, and the time frame used herein that includes the establishment of "The Association of Medical Superintendents of American Institutions for the Insane", the very ugly predecessor of the American Psychiatric Association itself, which was founded in 1844, as well as the first edition of the false medical text, 1952, the proverbial bible of American psychiatry. 

    And so much more the horror show American psychiatric hospitals circa the early to upper middle 19th; the failed promise of  mother fucking  deinstitutionalization in the 1960s-1970s, the characterization of homosexual men and women as depraved criminals well into the 1970s.

    Progress continues in myriad form, while these kind of 'doctors' remain lodged like stickers in the heel of young children, never caring to move forward now in any way alter the shitty ass way the have always done things.  

1,500 Buffalo Returned To Tribes In 2025

The InterTribal Buffalo Council, which represents 89 member nations, has spent decades rebuilding buffalo herds after federal extermination campaigns and land dispossession nearly wiped the animals from tribal homelands. The group’s 2025 transfers included animals from public, private and tribal lands to nations such as the Blackfeet Nation, Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, Modoc Nation, Osage Nation, White Earth Nation and others across the Plains, Midwest and West.

     And as proven above, many American Indians are effectively recreating progress via reintroducing crucial traditions. It's a joke, the fact that the American psychiatrist is willing to call themselves "modern American medical doctors." The only ones in the US who cannot seem to grasp progress, as I see it, are people like this, the American psychiatrist. 

    This said, three words of note. 

 l. Exceptionalism. Which refers to the kind of Americans who feel they are inherently exceptional. 

    Only lesser intelligent persons would believe that a medical degree proves that the person is inherently caring, or in any way exceptional.  On this note, it is not very exceptional to be the only kind of doctor with a history of horror show mental hospitals.

2. Exclusivity. Which describes behaviors as well things such as due accountability. 

   They get away with shit that no other kind of professional, including medical doctors, would ever be able to get away with the shit they still get away with today.  

3. Exclusionary-ism. Speaks to excluding those willing to challenge them.

     Missoula, MT, Providence-St. Patrick's Hospital's acute "NBMI" in-patient psychiatric unit, Dr. Robert Munjal sought to play the role of a unilateral, patently unobjective investigator. I was falsely accused of behavior not ever connected to me, and his telling me when I pressed for due redress, "I can see no patterns."

   And on basis of my not agreeing with this, these same Providence-St. Patrick's psychiatrists fell into excluding my access to that unit from that time thereafter.  

     On further note, only these kind of doctors so easily avoid due accountability, a very exclusive sort of status. And proven by the fact that the white American psychiatrists  involved in the preventable death of April Mott violated Tarasoff Act.   

  As follows. 

The Tarasoff law (derived from Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California, 1976) establishes a mental health professional's "duty to protect" intended victims from foreseeable, serious, and imminent threats of violence by a patient. This legal obligation, often called a "duty to warn," overrides patient confidentiality, requiring therapists to take reasonable steps—such as notifying police or the victim.

Key Aspects of the Tarasoff Rule

• The Case: In 1969, Prosenjit Poddar told his psychologist at UC Berkeley he intended to kill Tatiana Tarasoff. Despite the warning to police, the victim was not warned and was subsequently murdered. The California Supreme Court ruled that therapist-patient confidentiality ends where public peril begins.
• Duty to Protect vs. Warn: While the initial 1974 ruling emphasized the "duty to warn" the victim, the 1976 final ruling (Tarasoff II) focused on the broader "duty to protect," which can be fulfilled by warning the target, notifying law enforcement, hospitalizing the patient, or taking other reasonable steps.
• Requirements for Duty: The duty is generally triggered when a patient makes a specific, credible, and imminent threat against a clearly identifiable victim.
• Application Across States: While established in California, many states have adopted similar "duty to warn" or "duty to protect" laws, though specific requirements regarding whether to warn the victim or notify police vary by jurisdiction.
• Exceptions & Limits: The rule typically does not apply to vague, non-specific threats or when there is no identifiable victim.

       Jablonski by Pahls v. United States, 712 F.2d 391 (9th Cir. 1983)^[1] is a landmark case in which the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals determined that a mental health professional's duty to predict dangerousness includes consulting a patient's prior records, and that their duty to protect includes the involuntary commitment of a dangerous individual; simply warning the foreseeable victim is insufficient.

        In 1987, the American Psychiatric Association established guidelines for clinicians regarding the duty to protect. The guidelines state that a patient must express a clear threat of killing or significantly injuring a specific (or at least a reasonably identified victim), voice threats of destruction of property that may place others in danger, express intent, and also possess the ability to execute the threat. Clinicians must take reasonable precautions for protecting third parties, such as notifying the identifiable victim(s), informing the police, or hospitalizing the patient voluntarily or involuntarily. There have been no established legal guidelines for assessing the risk to third parties.

      The American Psychiatric Association is not the final authority when it comes to this area of concern. Much to the contrary, duty to warn and requirements specific to mental health workers in this specific areas of concerns remain matters of US law. 

   Patterns. Even the APA seeks to act as arbitrator, when no member of the APA's board nor any American psychiatrist is lawyer. 

   It happens all the time, such as when my ASH psychiatrist willfully tried to persuade me to not contact Phoenix police after an ASH staff member, a technician, had physically assaulted me. Note too, that they doctored- no intended pun- the actual video data specific to this matter. 

     And again, Missoula, MT, in Providence-St. Patrick's Hospital's acute "NBMI" in-patient psychiatric unit, Dr. Robert Munjal sought to play the role of a uni-lateral, unobejective investigator. I was falsely accused of behavior not ever connected to me, and his telling me when I pressed for due redress, "I can see no patterns."

   And on basis of my not agreeing with this, these same Providence-St. Patrick's psychiatrists fell into excluding my access to that unit from that time thereafter.  

    Time is fast coming, this is a given at this stage, when American psychiatry will be exposed once and for all. And I am satisfied in knowing that I am playing a role in it. I am not a violent nor abusive person, but they sure the fuck are. 

____________________

Note: The editor and founder of this publication, P. Jack Reed, offers his services today as an expert witness specific to either civil actions, or better yet, criminal prosecutions of American psychiatrists subject to such prosecution in our otherwise great nation's criminal courts. In this latter sense, I ask no more than straight up costs with no nature of fee arrangement; while in the former case, a contracted  flat fee grounded in possible awards via a successful civil action, no more than 6% depending upon the specific issues most at stake.

    And yes, since this public blog was first published in April, 2012, a justifiable and wholly righteous process that did serve to bring about long past due federal oversight and intervention specific to the hospital wide corruption and the bad acting American psychiatrists working for the Arizona State Hospital circa 2011-2015, nothing has changed in lasting fashion.

     _____________________________

Paolo Jack Reed.
Founder.
Stoner Woods/Red River.
Caddo Parish, LA.