E-mail Accounts Dead
I learned quickly. I did need touch to calm down my adrenals. Touch was deeply re-assuring in a traumatic context. I had no one to turn to. The emotional pain was such that it was very important for my heart that whoever held me really wanted to do it. I was also feeling very hurt by the cycle of paying one professional to heal the pain of my parents, and another professional to heal the pain of all the trauma experienced in HAI relationships, and then another professional to heal the trauma created by that professional re-enacting abuse under psychedelic influence after promising to take a rock-solid stand for my safety.
HAI was my community. So I sat down to write an e-mail request to the community for a safe and stable non-sexual cuddle buddy.
The e-mail bounced back.
My heart started to pound. "Surely they could not be this stupid and criminally negligent?" To disable the account of a workshop participant on the sole grounds of suppressing the truth about facilitator negligence when that participant was in trauma cased by the facilitator would account for murder in a small percentage of cases. We have seen what the U.S. government has done to Chelsea Manning, Edward Snowden and Jullian Assange for bringing abuses of power in U.S. government to light simply to protect the power structure. But this was HAI.
Context: The reason therapists have so many guidelines to help them avoid abuses of power is simple: Data shows that a trusted therapist, let alone a lover on psychedelics, goes into areas of the brain so suggestible and vulnerable that one of two things is likely to happen:
1) With a competent professional using healthy protocols (this is hard to find in my experience) the mental/emotional patient will have an authority figure advocating for the most authentic parts of that individual in such a way that creates the safety for an adult to emerge out of the state of arrested regressed child enlisted in the childhood abuse contract.
2) With an incompetent professional, and certainly a narcissistic man such as Peter, the vulnerability of the client is exploited to go deeper into regression to protect agendas of the therapist, both conscious and unconscious, leading to severe damage done to the client.
The most sacred oath of any doctor is: First, do no harm. Second, put the patient's well-being above any other consideration. While that is being tried sorely by the for-profit health-care plans our capitalistic paradigm sees fit to support, with doctor visits so short and superficial they cannot, by their own admission do their jobs, there were no such time or money constraints on Peter Sandhill. I am someone who has always prioritized paying for inner well-being over things. Yet without insuring my physical, emotional or mental well-being HAI not only did not secure me paid help by competent professionals, it was continuing Peter Sandhill's protocol of communication controls to manipulate me into silence, while continuing to teach workshops to other innocent people promising them the same thing they had promised me: "We are committed to creating a world where everyone wins."
I needed to know, so I checked heart-beat. Same thing. This time, for the first time in more than eight years, my password was rejected. I had not violated a single list guideline. My community support was being withheld to protect my abuser and HAI's image. This was gross criminal negligence.
Questions: How far is HAI willing to go to harm it's clients before owning it's mistakes and making amends? Does every facilitator, who reaches consensus for these behaviors, need to go personally bankrupt so that money can be returned to people who are hurting in silence and shame to cover facilitator incompetence? Does HAI need to go into receivership with criminal records on all of the facilitators? What is so horrifying to these human beings about the truth of their mistake that they would risk murder, bankruptcy, loss of trust and the failure of the mission to cover it up?
Concern: When I saw this, I realized that Peter had been covering his tracks, along with Sarah for fifteen years. So I did a quick google search, curious if I would find someone else who had been silenced. I'm sure there are more, but there was one woman who talked about an identical pattern: HAI behaved poorly and broke their word with this woman. She asked them to apologize and explain. They ignored her. Then they shut her off the lists unless she was willing to drop it. That's when I realized that if anyone in the community was to be safe from this kind of bullying that they would need to be exposed in a way they could not control. That's when the documentary was born: The medicine for communication controls and betrayal of ethics is transparency in a format the facilitators have no control over.
Suing For Best Practices at HAI
