Kavanaugh Hearing

I have a question. Infowars (I know) reports that Blasey Ford might not be a licensed psychologist. May have committed perjury introducing herself as a psychologist.
Codes Display Text.

Her name does not come up in any search? Database includes expired licenses.
Search - DCA

 

THAT'S HER!! THAT'S HERRRRRR!!!!!!

I told ya!

 

Along with the phony photos, some of the other claims that some conservatives have made about Ford:
- Ford opposes Kavanaugh because she works for a company that makes abortion pills.
- Kavanaugh's mother was the judge who took Ford's parents' house away in a foreclosure suit.
- Ford's brother is linked to Fusion GPS.
- Ford also accused Neil Gorsuch of sexual assault during his confirmation hearings.
- Ford's students ravage her in reviews.
- Ford's husband says his wife has "sick issues."

Fact-checking internet rumors about Christine Blasey Ford

 

Why don't you read her opening comments, where she introduced herself to the Senate committee and get back to us.

 

Again, why is the media ignoring her immediate family in MD?

 

Nobody said Dr Ford was right as far as I recall.

Hopefully nobody is saying Dr Ford is akin to a Muslim terrorist.

 

who do you want interviewed?

 

She's an academic teaching and research psychologist, not a practicing clinical psychologist. No license required.

Who is Christine Blasey Ford?

 

A license number would help. I have had to do license searches while doing audits of mortgage loan files. I always searched by license number because for whatever reason the name search didn't work so hot. I'm not saying that is the case here, I'm just saying further research might be necessary.

 

Then there's that.

 

Her wiki page doesn't even mention her immediate family growing up. One would think that might be relevant in figuring out how she got to and from that party. But hey, why be logical, there are elections to win. SO PREDICTABLE.

Christine Blasey Ford - Wikipedia

 

First, for the love of humanity stop watching or listening to infowars. You might as well lick a spent nuclear fuel rod. Just as unhealthy

Second, she has a PhD in Psych (not to mention a masters and bachelors in psych too) and introduced herself as a Professor of Psychology. But even if she didn't have a license to practice [clinical] psychology in California, she could call herself a psychologist just as well.

 

She's not really Christine Blasey Ford at all. She's a crisis actor. Christine Blasey Ford never existed. Alex Jones of all people ought to know that. The FBI is so incompetent, of course, it probably won't figure it out, given that there is barely time to ask questions anyway.

 

Her first opening comment: "I am a Professor of Psychology at Palo Alto University and a Research Psychologist at the Stanford University School of Medicine."
I guess the keyword is Research.

 

Blasey, Christine, Ph.D.
Email Address:


Phone Number:

Position(s):
Professor, Palo Alto University

Faculty Directory | Palo Alto University

Well, well, well...the keyword is research after all.

Took me all of 15 seconds.

 

I would actually be somewhat surprised if that were true, at least generally speaking.

I haven't studied California's licensing statutes in depth, but many states prohibit you from "holding yourself out" as a professional in a field requiring licensure without being licensed (subject to some exceptions).

And from a cursory glance, it looks like California may be consistent with those states (I have not looked to see what exemptions apply, so she may be in the clear based on what she's doing, but it looks like as a general matter you should not be calling yourself a psychologist in California without a psychology license):

§ 2903. Licensure requirement; Practice of psychology; Psychotherapy

(a) No person may engage in the practice of psychology, or represent himself or herself to be a psychologist, without a license granted under this chapter, except as otherwise provided in this chapter.

§ 2902. Definitions

As used in this chapter, unless the context clearly requires otherwise and except as in this chapter expressly otherwise provided the following definitions apply:

***

(c) A person represents himself or herself to be a psychologist when the person holds himself or herself out to the public by any title or description of services incorporating the words “psychology,” “psychological,” “psychologist,” “psychology consultation,” “psychology consultant,” “psychometry,” “psychometrics” or “psychometrist,” “psychotherapy,” “psychotherapist,” “psychoanalysis,” or “psychoanalyst,” or when the person holds himself or herself out to be trained, experienced, or an expert in the field of psychology.

 

Check Section 2909.

 

And that’s why I caveated it with the statement that I hadn’t looked at what exemptions applied

I googled California unlicensed practice of psychology, and 2903 made clear that there were exemptions, but I didn’t feel like reading through California’s psychology code to see what they were when I was just making the general point that use of professional titles is frequently restricted.

 

Yes. Looks like #2909 covers it.

thx all

 

What it gets at is holding oneself out as as therapist of some sort. Lawyer already pointed out 2909, but section c that you cite also mentions this:

"...or when the person holds himself or herself out to be trained, experienced, or an expert in the field of psychology"

By definition she is trained, experienced, and an expert in the field of psychology. CA code would not prevent her from holding herself out as such.

...as bananas as this state can be.