Rebuttal to Jeanette Bartha’s articles on Neil Brick

In the last month, Jeanette Bartha has written two articles about Neil Brick or his work helping to educate others about extreme abuse issues.

This article will detail the inaccurate statements made by Ms. Bartha as well as other problems with her page.

Her page is called “Multiple Personalities Don’t Exist.”  However, the majority of psychiatric organizations around the world recognize the existence of dissociative identity disorder (previously called Multiple Personality Disorder).

Her second article was written about  “Debating the non-believers: getting equal time for survivors views” http://neilbrick.com/debating-the-non-believers-getting-equal-time-for-survivors-views/

She states that Neil Brick is a believer of “several conspiracy theories.”  A conspiracy is defined as “a combination of persons for a secret, unlawful, or evil purpose.”   This happens often in the world.  The theories Neil Brick writes about are backed by evidence.  This evidence is at http://ritualabuse.us

She writes that “(he) insinuates that people who take a position against coercive and suggestive techniques used by many psychotherapists who believe in multiple personalities and dissociative identity disorder are tantamount to child abusers…”

Nowhere does the article state that “skeptics” or false memory proponents are “tantamount” to child abusers.  Of course, there is no evidence that many psychotherapists use “coercive and suggestive techniques.”

Below the article, there is a comment containing an insult about Neil Brick, because the writer disagrees with him.

In her first article, she attempts to attack the credibility of one of the conferences SMART sponsors.  She critiques the term “Lifespan Integration” simply because a speaker’s biography mentions it as “new.”  She does not actually discuss the research behind the concept or the results it has produced.

She mentions the conference has “so much pseudoscience being tossed around”  yet does not mention anything specific about any of the theories presented at the actual conference.

She critiques the conference webpage because one speaker’s biography doesn’t mention that she has a “Christian focus.”  Ms. Bartha writes that “the organizer of the conference chooses not to disclose” this. Yet, the biographies of conference speakers  are normally not written by conference organizers, but by the speakers themselves, as was true in this case. This counselor is a licensed therapist with many years of experience.

In conclusion, Ms. Bartha makes several statements without backing in her critiques of Neil Brick and his work.  She allows others to comment at her blog insulting those she does not agree with. She herself calls theories she doesn’t believe in “crap.”

The above critiques cast doubt on the accuracy of Ms. Bartha’s articles about Neil Brick and the techniques she uses to discuss these concepts.

 

Jeanette Bartha has replied to the above comments.

our quote:
Her second article was written about “Debating the non-believers: getting
equal time for survivors views”
http://neilbrick.com/debating-the-non-believers-getting-equal-time-for-survivors-views/

her reply:
I did NOT write the article linked above, Mr. Brick did.

our reply:
It is stated above that the article was from neilbrick.com and that she was
writing about the article at neilbrick.com

In her rebuttal Jeanette Bartha claims that the theories written by Neil
Brick and S.M.A.R.T. are not backed by evidence.  Readers themselves can
see that they are by going to http://ritualabuse.us and reading the data
there.

our quote:
Below the article, there is a comment containing an insult about Neil
Brick, because the writer disagrees with him.

her reply:
What is the statement? Show us!

our reply:

We try not to repeat name calling and insults at this webpage. This page is
provided primarily for research and civil discourse.

our quote:
In her first article, she attempts to attack the credibility of one of the
conferences SMART sponsors.  She critiques the term “Lifespan Integration” simply because a speaker’s biography mentions it as “new.”  She does not actually discuss the research behind the concept or the results it has produced.

her reply:
What did I say? Where is the evidence? Was the research offered?

our reply:

Our quote replies to information on her own webpage. Normally a speaker’s biography does not list research citations.

our quote:
She mentions the conference has “so much pseudoscience being tossed around” yet does not mention anything specific about any of the theories presented at the actual conference.

her reply:
Yep, he got that one right.

our reply:
The use of the term “pseudoscience” without evidence is just using a
negative label without evidence in an attempt to discredit a subject.

our quote:
In conclusion, Ms. Bartha makes several statements without backing in her
critiques of SMART and Neil Brick and his work.  She allows others to
comment at her blog insulting those she does not agree with. She herself
calls theories she doesn’t believe in “crap.”

her reply:
What statements were made? Quote me. I allow 99.99% of people who come to my blog to leave comments without editing. They say what they want. I have nothing to do with their opinions and statements. Mr. Brick, on the other hand, does Not allow comments on his blog. Heck, I’m even posting him!

our reply:
Here is the direct quote: “this is the crap they find” in reference to
those who write theories that disagree with hers.

 


The reasons comments are not allowed at this web page is due to the repeated harassment, name calling and insults of survivors and their helpers by false memory proponents. This harassment began in the 1980’s and 1990’s and has continued to the present day.

A good article on some of the more well documented cases or harassment can be found at:

http://ritualabuse.us/research/memory-fms/false-memory-syndrome-proponents-tactics/

One of the posters at Jeanette Bartha’s blog is Douglas Mesner.

Information on his harassment, name calling and insults of SMART and Neil
Brick can be found at:

http://ritualabuse.us/ritualabuse/douglas-misicko-alias-douglas-mesner-update-3/
http://ritualabuse.us/ritualabuse/douglas-misicko-alias-douglas-mesner-update-2/
http://ritualabuse.us/ritualabuse/douglas-misicko-alias-douglas-mesner-update/
http://ritualabuse.us/ritualabuse/douglas-misicko-alias-douglas-mesner/
http://ritualabuse.us/ritualabuse/harassment-by-false-memory-proponents/
http://ritualabuse.us/ritualabuse/rebuttal-to-the-report-from-the-smart-2009-conference/
http://ritualabuse.us/ritualabuse/rebuttal-to-the-report-from-the-smart-2009-conference/

The pages above will give readers the full background on this subject as  well as a rebuttal to Mesner’s comments about ritual abuse and our conference.

These pages list many of the comments posted by Douglas Mesner as well as other aliases. These pages will show connections  between Mesner and websites like process, radiofreesatan.com and the book “Might is Right.”
Douglas Mesner has continued using personal insults and attacks against survivors of ritual abuse and the professionals that work with them.

In his more recent attacks on SMART, he continues to take extreme cases of ritual abuse and cult crimes out of context, ignoring evidence showing that these crimes may have or actually did occur. He uses this technique to attempt to discredit the large volume of work and research others and S.M.A.R.T. have presented.

Here are some examples of the name calling and insults he has written at
Jeanette Bartha’s blog in reference to either Neil Brick or S.M.A.R.T.

“zealous conspiracy-mongers”

“insane drivel”

He has made false statements at Jeanette Bartha’s blog, stating that “bill schnoebelen” has spoken at a SMART conference. He never did. He claims a speaker spoke about “dolphin porn” and another about “evil extraterrestrial invaders” at the conference. No one ever spoke about any of this.

Mesner purposefully pulls out the least believable ideas from the conference, then rewrites them using language to make them look absurd. He leaves out evidence and other stories to try to discredit S.M.A.R.T. and all of the research discussed at our conferences.

Mesner states at Jeanette Bartha’s blog that Neil Brick has never debated
anyone about these concepts. Yet, Mesner himself has debated Neil Brick and others several times online.

Mesner came to the S.M.A.R.T. conference in 2009 without notifying the conference coordinator he was there as a journalist. Journalists are not allowed at our conferences because the conferences are for survivors of child abuse. This is to protect the anonymity and safety of the participants.  Mesner made no attempt to speak to Neil Brick or anyone else in charge of the conference while there. He also stopped payment on his check after the conference.