![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
All this time I've believed a Complainant whose case takes a lot of my time (none of my stories have names or identifying information, you'll notice). She was removed after being forced to a fitness for duty psyc exam based on fears of safety of the workforce as reviewed by a forensic psychiatrist. She denied making most of the statements and actions attributed to her by her coworkers, though when I deposed her she mostly admitted conduct highly similar (a common type of denial, like when a child admits all of the language except the curse word that would get them in trouble). I do believe she's highly disturbed and needs help, but I also believed she was telling me what she truly felt was the truth.
I was wrong. (sorry I really need to get this off my chest to work)
All this time she has claimed the Agency forcing her on leave caused her irreparable financial harm to the point of near-bankruptcy. It sounded legitimate as she was out without pay for some time. My chief notes about that situation have been a) most people don't get bankrupt in the course of a month or 3 (people will argue about living paycheck to paycheck, but it's not the norm and I call it irresponsible - I saved up thousands when I rented rooms and made $10-12/hr), b) her damage allegations predate or coincide with another EEO case in which she prevailed (for technical reasons, as always not actual discrimination). I thought she simply didn't understand the fact once you have a case close, all the facts/damages from that point are erased...she's trying to double-claim the damages; she seemed devastated when I explained that to her. But I was wrong - she was flat-out lying. I looked through her records and she actually started having financial troubles when she tried to start her own business and failed. She claimed then her creditors recommended she file bankruptcy, and a year or more later she started filing EEO complaints at work and blamed the agency for her financial trouble including bankruptcy. She also had a series of car accidents and was getting settlements from them for damages. All indications are she's actively scamming lawsuits to make money, and even if that's not on purpose, flat-out lying about her financial trouble and the timing of those troubles is dishonest even if she's completely batshit.
Then I ran into more lies. My deposition went well because I revealed a lot of facts the psyc was not told by his 90 minute client. However one fact I didn't question was that she reported no prior psyc issues or treatment (in the relevant period). Turns out the same time, just before she started having auto-accidents and filing eeo complaints, she sought treatment for depression and anxiety...based on her failed business. She received antidepressants. She lied to 2 psyc because she didn't want to appear disturbed. Disturbed is forgivable, but she lied to make her story better.
I'm actually thrilled, excited, and angry about this. I'm trying my best to be as professional and respectful as I can about this disturbed person, but it turns out while I try to forgive them as crazy, they're in reality just a manipulative bitch. Crazy or not, she's lying to try and extort money from people who work harder than she does, who deserve the money they have, and she's willing to tear down and harm anyone she can to get her desired rewards. I used to think everyone was lying, but more recently I've noticed most people appear to believe what they say even when it's not true. Now, now I don't know what to think. I had one admit they were lying "I know it's not discrimination, but this is the only way I can get my rating changed," and now this one I can prove is lying. Sure I can win the case for documenting her lack of credibility, but what does this mean about my ability to understand people?
My god how can I ever date? I know multiple people who don't reveal to sexual partners they have herpes. People are having unprotected sex. How can you trust anyone? How can I, when I can't tell the most basic of work behavior is full of lies and deceit?
Related - still fascinated by the psychiatrist and the theory that being crazy often is just being immature or...lazy. I'm immature for my age - I'm the first to admit, though I'm theoretically working on it and trying to get better. But he described problems from a too-much-on-self perspective as being both foundations for disorders and conditions as being sort of stunted growth, failed developmental stages. Now I'm chalking the same theory up to a crossover of lazy. It hurts to question yourself (not wallow in self-pity, question with answer acceptance) and it really fucking hurts to try and change how you act. You try, fail, stumble, backslide...I cannot emphasize how hard it is, but I also cannot explain how worth it such change has been for me. So I'm wondering if this childishness that leads to actual DSM crazy can also be linked with flat-out laziness, an emotional laziness in which people simply stay immature because it's too much work to grow? This fits one of my attitudes about people over 30 talking about how "fucked up they are" based on something(s) their parents did. I mean that reason can be 100% legitimate, but over 30? Move on.
(none of this addresses chemical imbalances or those types of issues)
I was wrong. (sorry I really need to get this off my chest to work)
All this time she has claimed the Agency forcing her on leave caused her irreparable financial harm to the point of near-bankruptcy. It sounded legitimate as she was out without pay for some time. My chief notes about that situation have been a) most people don't get bankrupt in the course of a month or 3 (people will argue about living paycheck to paycheck, but it's not the norm and I call it irresponsible - I saved up thousands when I rented rooms and made $10-12/hr), b) her damage allegations predate or coincide with another EEO case in which she prevailed (for technical reasons, as always not actual discrimination). I thought she simply didn't understand the fact once you have a case close, all the facts/damages from that point are erased...she's trying to double-claim the damages; she seemed devastated when I explained that to her. But I was wrong - she was flat-out lying. I looked through her records and she actually started having financial troubles when she tried to start her own business and failed. She claimed then her creditors recommended she file bankruptcy, and a year or more later she started filing EEO complaints at work and blamed the agency for her financial trouble including bankruptcy. She also had a series of car accidents and was getting settlements from them for damages. All indications are she's actively scamming lawsuits to make money, and even if that's not on purpose, flat-out lying about her financial trouble and the timing of those troubles is dishonest even if she's completely batshit.
Then I ran into more lies. My deposition went well because I revealed a lot of facts the psyc was not told by his 90 minute client. However one fact I didn't question was that she reported no prior psyc issues or treatment (in the relevant period). Turns out the same time, just before she started having auto-accidents and filing eeo complaints, she sought treatment for depression and anxiety...based on her failed business. She received antidepressants. She lied to 2 psyc because she didn't want to appear disturbed. Disturbed is forgivable, but she lied to make her story better.
I'm actually thrilled, excited, and angry about this. I'm trying my best to be as professional and respectful as I can about this disturbed person, but it turns out while I try to forgive them as crazy, they're in reality just a manipulative bitch. Crazy or not, she's lying to try and extort money from people who work harder than she does, who deserve the money they have, and she's willing to tear down and harm anyone she can to get her desired rewards. I used to think everyone was lying, but more recently I've noticed most people appear to believe what they say even when it's not true. Now, now I don't know what to think. I had one admit they were lying "I know it's not discrimination, but this is the only way I can get my rating changed," and now this one I can prove is lying. Sure I can win the case for documenting her lack of credibility, but what does this mean about my ability to understand people?
My god how can I ever date? I know multiple people who don't reveal to sexual partners they have herpes. People are having unprotected sex. How can you trust anyone? How can I, when I can't tell the most basic of work behavior is full of lies and deceit?
Related - still fascinated by the psychiatrist and the theory that being crazy often is just being immature or...lazy. I'm immature for my age - I'm the first to admit, though I'm theoretically working on it and trying to get better. But he described problems from a too-much-on-self perspective as being both foundations for disorders and conditions as being sort of stunted growth, failed developmental stages. Now I'm chalking the same theory up to a crossover of lazy. It hurts to question yourself (not wallow in self-pity, question with answer acceptance) and it really fucking hurts to try and change how you act. You try, fail, stumble, backslide...I cannot emphasize how hard it is, but I also cannot explain how worth it such change has been for me. So I'm wondering if this childishness that leads to actual DSM crazy can also be linked with flat-out laziness, an emotional laziness in which people simply stay immature because it's too much work to grow? This fits one of my attitudes about people over 30 talking about how "fucked up they are" based on something(s) their parents did. I mean that reason can be 100% legitimate, but over 30? Move on.
(none of this addresses chemical imbalances or those types of issues)
