“How have I come to this?
How did I slip and fall?
How did I throw half a lifetime away
Without any thought at all?

This should have been my time
It’s over, it never began
I closed my eyes to so much for so long
and I no longer can…“

In 2000, Sir Elton John’s and Tim’s Rice’s Aida premiered on Broadway. Its run lasted four (4) years.

One of the more powerful songs in Aida was entitled, “I Know the Truth.” A haunting yet beautiful aria sung by Sherie Renee Scott as Amneris [the daughter of the pharaoh] when she discovers that her betrothed is in love with another woman. The heartache and pain in her voice is gut wrenching.

A future she assured herself would happen was spirited away. She realized that the future she imagined, as well as her past and present were mirages, they never existed, and she did not have the insight, compassion or wisdom to understand since she was caught up with by own life, selfishness and perceived needs.

With that mindset, I can’t help but wonder how have we come to this, how the eating disorder community became so caught up in not just politics, but the intransigent, tribal mentality which defines the two major political parties today. Instead of looking at the substance of a message, how did the eating disorder community get to a point where it immediately closes its ears and eyes to any message being conveyed by certain people? How did we become so divisive?

How did so many in the community come to believe that a deadly mental illness is mainly a social justice condition and presumably can be treated by addressing universal social justice issues? Especially, since no credible facts, reason or logic support the hypothesis that eating disorders are social justice issues. That is a mirage conjured by persons with their own social agendas. How have we come to this?

However, if a person wishes to assert “… the mental health of American society, particularly its marginalized members, is ravaged by the intentional, avoidable, inequitable distribution of resources, opportunities and basic protections. The most valuable framework for understanding the poor mental health outcomes and mental health inequities in this country is one of social injustice.”

NOW you’re talking.

And you would be hard pressed to find a stronger ally than me on that issue.

The choices available to people with disabilities, or minorities, or ethnic communities or the disenfranchised get clouded by the reality that they have more limited access to medical care and support.

It is not really a choice when society makes it incredibly difficult to access health care support. It is not really a choice when a treatment center does not accept any type of health insurance. It is not a choice when a treatment center does not accept Medicare or Medicaid. It is not really a choice when the eating disorder treatment industry makes it incredibly difficult to access health care support. Or in some cases, perpetuates this inequitable system.

But that is not an eating disorder issue. The inequitable system is a broad based, societal dysfunction which impacts medical and mental health care across a vast spectrum. To limit broad based lack of access to medical and mental health care support as an “eating disorder issue” cruelly minimizes the crippling national impact resulting from the inequities in our health care system.

With all of the perceived differences within the community, the tribal mentality, the incredibly naïve and flawed view that research and treatment are a zero-sum game, one fundamental commonality, one inalienable truth exists … that is, all persons, regardless of status, race, gender, socioeconomic or any other status are entitled to the very best of mental health care.

Perhaps another foundational building block is that we must emphasize the needs of our families who are suffering from eating disorders today, at this time. We must have a triage mentality. Those who are the most ill will receive priority of treatment.

Those are the rallying points. Those are THE goals common to us all. That is the bedrock upon which we can build.

So, how does the eating disorder community effectively address an inequitable healthcare system? How does it provide collaborative real, workable solutions?

The most common proposition set forth by activists is to “begin to make progress, the mental health system must transform to dismantle the underlying structural forces of racism, sexism, oppression and discrimination, and must support the advancement of policies and practices that promote justice and equity in mental health access and care.”

This in essence calls for abolishing fear, self-loathing, lack of wisdom, ego and insecurities which exist within individuals while at the same time, dismantling the Constitutional Republic known as the United States.

So, assuming we cannot dismantle the Republic in a January 6^th manner, or wave a magic wand and make everyone’s negative qualities disappear, how best can we start to come together and rid ourselves of our divisiveness? How can we build upon the few, self-evident fundamental truths so that we can start to address inequities?

Perhaps to start with, we must first find a way to look past our own individual weaknesses and foibles, admit our egos have lead us astray, admit we do not have all of the answers. We must get past the insipid tribal mentality. We must be willing to openly admit, “I was wrong.” We must stop focusing on our differences and start the building process be embracing our common goals. And we must become not so frightened that we cannot look to those with whom we disagree and simply say, “Let’s talk.”

One small step at a time. It’s a start. And it’s not too late.

The common good. That which we have in common, that which we share. Embrace that. Then start to build.

The song, “I Know the Truth,” ends with the following lines:

I try to blame it on fortune
Some kind of twist in my fate
But I know the truth and it haunts me
I learned it a little too late

Oh, I know the truth and it mocks me
I know the truth and it shocks me
I learned it a little too late
Too late.

This aria can be found here:

Moreso than ever before, we find ourselves at an hour of change and challenge. A time of hope and fear. In an age of knowledge and ignorance. And as our knowledge greatly increases so too the greater our ignorance unfolds.

If statistics are to be believed, eating disorders claim the life of our loved ones at the rate of once every 52 minutes. All their hopes, all their dreams, all their aspirations, all their love and sacred beauty existing within their spirit and not just their soul, but our soul, extinguished and left scattered to the greatest unknown which awaits any human being.

And yet during these trying times, why does it seem like we have stopped striving to unleash the unlimited genius of humankind? I cannot, I will not believe that we have reached that dark place in our evolution that we place individual ego and self-absorption over the desperate, treasured needs of our families.

But, the divisiveness, the turmoil in the eating disorder community appears to be greater than ever before as we collectively place our individual demands and the flawed self-assurance of “our infallible wisdom and nature” above the needs of our families.

Surely, we cannot, we must now allow the ego, the fear, the self-loathing of individuals and cultural movements to predominate over life and death decisions. The needs of our most critically ill must come before all else … regardless of race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, wealth, privilege, age, gender or profiteering.

We cannot, we must not allow the continuation of the perpetuation of messages of fear, of misguided egos, of ignorance of science, medical and mental health wisdom and knowledge to predominate over that which can and will save even more lives.

A greater knowledge must be explored and expanded by intelligent discussion, debate and mutual respect. We must reach out to those whose views differ from our own. We do not have the luxury of ignoring studies or guidelines which can be used to educate our physicians.

For example, how many people in the general public were aware that the American Psychiatric Association issued new eating disorder treatment guidelines and implementation tools in February of 2023 … just a few short months ago? Where was the professional discussion of these guidelines?  How many families know about this? Why was this not front and center in explanatory articles issued by the REDC, and the EDCoalition, and NEDA, and iaedp and Project HEAL and AED and the National Alliance and every other organization? And this is not a solitary omission.

How many people and organizations committed to participating in the “Legacy of Hope” three (3) short years ago only to turn around and betray the very principles for which it stood because of their own self-loathing and flawed sense of self-importance?

What cataclysmic event must happen before this dysfunctional community recognizes the need to come together? How many more of our children must die? What must happen before our professionals put their own individual egos aside and agree to work in a great, collaborative movement from which only great deeds can be accomplished?

For that matter, what do we look for in those who have embraced enlightenment, understand that they do not have all of the answers and seek greater wisdom versus those who place themselves above all others?

Those with a higher self, a greater calling anticipate the next moment.  They pursue the next moment. Their arms are open … as are their eyes, hearts and souls.

And this must become the mantra of our professionals in the eating disorder community. For it is only through collaboration that we can accomplish great and mighty deeds. That we can dare to save lives.

We do not have the luxury of allowing yelling, protesting, attempting to boycott, and shrill screeching to become your calling card. For those qualities are merely a cacophony of loud noise. Noise that is drowned out by the quiet confidence of humility, grace and selflessness.

We must reach out to those who disagree with our views. And in the spirit of professional cooperation and with respect, discuss those differences. We will not always reach consensus. The issues perplexing our professionals and frightening our families are far too complex and beyond our current reach.

But, the opportunity to save more lives, to heal wounds caused by egocentric behavior and to establish a greater community is before us.

We must embrace it.

“Travel Advisories” are the latest straw man to be utilized by biased, politically backed organizations. Any person or organization can issue a Travel Advisory. Travel Advisories do not have to be based on facts, reason or logic. Fear alone will suffice.

On May 20, 2023, the NAACP issued a “Travel Advisory” for persons traveling to the State of Florida.  This travel advisory stated in material part:

“Florida is openly hostile toward African Americans, people of color and LGBTQ+ individuals. [emphasis added]

“Before traveling to Florida, please understand that the state of Florida devalues and marginalizes the contributions of, and the challenges faced by African Americans and other communities of color.”

“Once again, hate-inspired state leaders have chosen to put politics over people. Governor Ron DeSantis and the state of Florida have engaged in a blatant war against principles of diversity and inclusion and rejected our shared identities to appeal to a dangerous, extremist minority…”

Not to be outdone, the National Association of Gun Rights issued a “Travel Advisory” for persons in or traveling to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. This “Travel Advisory” was issued in response to that State Legislature’s 140-page bill, House Docket 4420. HD 4420 is a comprehensive gun control bill.

In 2023, Amnesty International issued a “Travel Advisory” for the entire United States. This “Travel Advisory” calls on people worldwide to exercise caution and have an emergency contingency plan when traveling throughout the United States. Amnesty International explained that its “Travel Advisory” was issued in light of ongoing high levels of gun violence in the country.

Naturally, at least one eating disorder organization reserved its place at the head of the “Travel Advisory” histrionics table.

On Friday, July 7, 2023, the International Association of Eating Disorder Professionals (“iaedp”) African American Eating Disorders Professionals/ Black, Indigenous, People of Color Committee (AAEDP-BIPOC) issued a release containing the following statement:

“We, as the leadership of iaedp’s African American Eating Disorders Professionals/Black, Indigenous, People of Color (AAEDP-BIPOC) Committees understand that many of you may have concerns about our upcoming spring 2024 Symposium in Orlando and the travel advisory issued by the NAACP for the State of Florida. We respect and understand those of you who opt to not participate in this current climate. But know that we also see this as an opportunity to show up, stand up, and be heard.”

This current climate? Presumably this refers to the current political clown show being perpetrated by both major political parties and their cheerleading, media lapdogs.

Nonetheless, let’s delve further.

As previously shown, The NAACP’s “Travel Advisory” utilized inflammatory, same tribe attracting language designed to elicit fear, divisiveness and animosity. Florida is openly hostile to African Americans? Hate inspired?  A war against diversity and inclusion principles?

If so, let’s look at statistics generated by independent entities which evidence the manner in which Florida is “openly hostile”:

1. A Pew Research Center study found that on a national scale, Florida moved into the number one spot in the United States for black-owned businesses, the number two spot for Hispanic-owned businesses and the number two spot for women-owned businesses.
2. Florida had one of the top three lowest black unemployment rates in the country in the first quarter of 2023, according to the Economic Policy Institute.
3. According to US News & World Report,  Florida ranks third in the United States for its public education system.
4. Florida is the highest-rated state in the country in public higher education according to the US New & World Report.
5. Florida was ranked the second-best state for education by the American Legislative Exchange Council’s Report Card on American Education.
6. No city or town in Florida cracked the most recent list of the top 25 “most dangerous places” compiled by US News & World Report.
7. The City of Tampa recently touted data that showed it had the second-lowest violent crime rate of similarly sized cities throughout the U.S.
8. The Washington Examiner reports Florida’s public school system ranks among the top five in the country and gets higher marks for racial equality in education than does California, New York, or Maryland – the latter state being the home of the NAACP’s headquarters.
9. While Florida’s equality rating with US News and World Report comes in at 22nd in the nation, it still gets higher marks on a range of measures of equality than Connecticut, Illinois, and even California.
10. Florida ranks 12th in closing the unemployment gap by race.
11. African Americans have a higher degree of safety in Florida than in most states. In 2o2o, Florida law enforcement recorded 127 hate crimes compared with 1,537 in California and 466 in New York.
12. According to the FBI, the reported hate crime rate in Florida was .6 per 100,000 people as compared to 3.1 per 100,000 in California.

These statistics indicate the State of Florida ranks among the best states for African Americans with regard to crime, education and business opportunities. So, how does this remotely indicate the State of Florida is openly hostile and/or hate inspired?

Only by removing all facts, statistics, reason, logic and accountability, only then the NAACP’s statement even approaches the same area code as the truth. And yet, we cannot let truth stand in the way of divisive, political statements and knee jerk, reactionary responses made by some mental health organizations.

So, addressing the statement made by iaedp’s committee [which has the longest name in the history of God] one must question what concerns are so substantial that they cause eating disorder professionals to abdicate their non-delegable duty to families suffering from eating disorders?

That they may discover that Florida’s public education system exceeds the education in their home state?

That they may discover that Florida’s crime rate is lower than that which exists in their home state?

That they may discover that Florida’s business environment for African American’s far exceeds that which exists within their home state?

That they may discover, according to the Florida Chamber of Commerce, there are more than 250,000 Black-owned businesses in Florida, and they collectively employ 77,136 Floridians and represent an annual payroll of $2.63 billion? 

That Mickey Mouse may leave Disney World and go on a crime rampage because Disney stock lost $123 billion in value in 2022 alone because Disney is pursuing woke policies?

That they choose to follow political statements which are not based in fact in order to embrace their own, short-sighted ideological views? And in doing so, they diminish the needs of the families suffering from eating disorders and place them lower on a list of priorities.

For that matter, why would any eating disorder organization follow, let alone embrace any political statements or views espoused by either of the two major political parties? 

Don’t eating disorders transcend politics? Don’t eating disorders impact all races, genders, communities and people across the globe?

Certainly, there are significant issues which exist with regard to access to medical and mental health care.

There is no dispute that access to medical and mental health care is inequitable. The healthcare system in the United States is remarkably flawed. Millions of people slip through cracks rivaling the size of the Grand Canyon. Yet, how is blindly following political agendas and embracing dogma with no supporting facts, evidence or reason going to address a healthcare system of inequities?

Instead, shouldn’t we focus on utilizing people’s voting power to improve care and advance health equity? By electing officials whose vision matches your own, voting power improves laws and policies which increase access to mental healthcare. Or pursuing an economic agenda for better access to mental healthcare with both government and commercial interests by motivating stakeholders to make change because a health equity-focused policy aligns with a government investment value. Or treating mental health disparities as a workforce issue.

Addressing inequities in mental healthcare is complex and multifactorial. We must be able to intelligently collaborate and work toward grand, cross-cultural solutions. Simply covering your eyes, placing your fingers in your ears and following vacuous statements which have no supporting facts or reason lead to only one result, that is, a reduction in the quality of care and increasing the divisiveness and backstabbing so rampant in the community.

And if you place your ideological and political views over the needs of our families who are impacted by eating disorders, then you are part of the problem.

And when you become part of the problem and not part of the solution, you very well may find yourself being called out to answer for being part of the problem. Your choice is simple… be part of the problem or be part of the solution.

Be the solution.

How does your idea, or theory, or statement or raison d’être help those families whose loved ones are suffering from eating disorders?

That is the question. The fundamental question. THE question that every organization, research professional, clinician, or advocate needs to be asking themselves.

Then after deep self-reflection, hopefully they have a substantive, powerful answer affirming their commitment to the family. For the greater good.

Everything you do, from something as seemingly small as replacing an “e” in a word with an asterisk, to using pronouns after your name, to fighting with insurance claims adjusters, to fighting with peer review doctors, to fighting over the wording of a survey that very few people will read … everything you do must be placed under the lens of “how is this helping the families who are suffering right now.”

What is the power of your message and how does that help those families who are so struggling right now?

Every organization, whether its focus is on eating disorders, mental health in general, or corporate work, must be greater than that one person who leads it. That person who may lead those entities is merely a conduit for the message that organization embraces.

It can never be about one individual. The issues and complexities in the research and treatment of eating disorders are far too vast for one person.

The series, Ted Lasso provides some insight into this.  In the show, Trent Crimm, a talented reporter/author who has been shadowing the team is writing a book about the season. He asks Coach Lasso for his input on a draft of the book. The only advice Lasso gives is:

A number of people have expressed concern that the eating disorder community is more splintered and divisive than at any other time. This statement, if true, is not just concerning but incredibly sad. 

After all, doesn’t everyone have the same end goal? Isn’t everyone’s long game the same, that is helping as many people, as many families as is humanly possible? Aren’t we all working toward the same goal?

And if we are all working toward the same goal, how can there be division? How can organizations in the community possibly be splintered? Doesn’t every entity have a common goal of increasing our understanding of eating disorders and then utilizing intelligent, evidence-based treatment to help the most families. A common goal for the common good.

If that is the case, aren’t we justified in asking whether organizations in the community are truly splintered? Does divisiveness come from organizations? The answers to these questions are fairly obvious. No, of course not.

Organizations do not have egos. Organizations do not have the frailties which define people’s existence. Organizations do not have feelings and emotions. Organizations do not implement emotion-based conduct designed to back stab and hurt.

But individuals do. People certainly do.

And it is from those frailties, it is from the egos, it is from the dysfunctionality which exist in some of our feelings and emotions, when allowed to define our very existence, which cause us to fail. That cause divisiveness. That blur our eyesight from its focus on a common cause.

And so to all, I ask us individually and collectively to explore our own ego. For those who have reached the stage where you are concerned with your legacy, I ask you to put those thoughts aside. Just be the authentic you. Don’t worry about your legacy.  History will make its own judgments.

To those “closed groups” on Facebook and other social media which only allow people of “like minds” to join and post, open your groups, open your minds, open your hearts. You know what you know but you don’t know what you don’t know. Do not remain an echo chamber which only resonates your own ideas and opinions. Stretch the boundaries of your knowledge and imagination by listening with an open mind to others.

To those in the community who know the identities of those who oppose or differ with your views or articles, to those whom you do not respect, reach out to them in the spirit of professionalism. Seek to acquire new knowledge. Seek to collaborate. Seek to expand your role as a mere conduit for a message by expanding the breadth and substance of a more powerful message.

Explore the limitless capacity of love by removing your ego. Become that person who brings divergent messages together. Be that person who finds a way to help people who are so imprisoned by their own pain, fear or insecurity, to find comfort and reassurance from all sources. Become that person whose message is so powerful, that even people who initially oppose you and not necessarily your message stand up, take notice and become curious and open.

If we do those things, if we embrace the reality that “it is not about us, it never was,” then we can get to that place where we are able to help those families who are so suffering from this insidious illness.

Because after all … isn’t that truly our one universal goal?

In the iconic television series, “Ted Lasso,” Coach Ted Lasso is challenged to a game of darts by the series villain, Rupert Mannion. Mannion brilliantly plays the role of the bad guy, spinning webs of deceit and betrayal wherever he goes. Lasso plays a bumbling, seemingly out of his element, eternal optimist brought in to coach a soccer team in the highest division in the UK. Unbeknownst to Lasso, he was specifically brought in to fail. And yet.

During the dart game, in which Manion “sandbagged” his own skills, so too did Lasso.  Which leads to one of Lasso’s many great lines, “I saw this quote by Walt Whitman, it was painted on a wall there, it said, Be Curious, Not Judgmental. And I like that.”

As the game reached its climax, Lasso remarked, “All them fellas that used to belittle me, not a single one of them were curious. You know, they thought they had everything figured out, so they judged everything. And they judged everyone. And I realized that their underestimating me, who I was had nothing to do with it. For if they were curious, they would have asked questions. You know.”

Be Curious … Not Judgmental.

The latest “Be Curiosity Not Judgmental” test happened on June 12, 2023. On that date, a study was published online involving obesity and the brain. Of course, the study itself was not free and would cost you $29.99 if you did not have keys to that Magic Kingdom.

Various media outlets published an article about the study the same day. Some of these articles were entitled: 

“Obesity Changes the Brain, With No Sign of Reversibility, researchers find.”

“Obesity impairs brain responses to nutrients, even after weight loss, study finds.” 

“Obesity changes the brain, with no sign of reversibility, expert says.”

“Obesity impairs brain responses to nutrients, even after weight loss, study finds.”

“Obesity can mess with the way your brain reacts to food to stop you feeling full — and the damage may be permanent.”

One study, a number of different media outlets and articles.

The study itself is 19 pages long with a number of charts, tables, footnotes and more multi-syllabic words than a Chinese translation of the Dead Sea Scrolls.

And yet, when any study mentions the word, “Obesity,” a certain group grabs their pitchforks, they light their torches, they figuratively march on whatever publication dares to mention the “O” word and they protest mightily. Most will never even read the study. They don’t even need to review the study. (Or the numerous other studies addressing the brain and the biological aspects and obesity and eating disorders.)

Some people don’t need to ask any questions. Some don’t need to seek greater enlightenment. Some don’t need to be curious. They know what they know. Their judgment is in. This is true even for professionals in the eating disorder industry. Those who refuse to even spell the word, “Obesity.”  As if putting an asterisk in place of the letter “e” will signal to the medical community, the mental health community at large, and for that matter, society at large, that they have greater knowledge than anyone else.

Your judgment is in.

You do not need to ask any questions.

You do not need to seek higher knowledge.

You dare not listen to opinions different than yours.

More’s the pity.

Recently, I received a social media message part of which read, “You say you stand [for] those who have experienced these deadly disorders but you don’t give that grace to those who don’t fit your narrative.”

This statement piqued my curiosity. And raised numerous questions in my mind. It made me wonder, “what is my narrative?”  For that matter, do I even have a narrative?

I have had the privilege of representing the stereotypical “little, rich, white girl.” I have also had the privilege of representing an incredibly strong willed, African-American lesbian woman with a high BMI. I have represented and helped boys, men, women, girls, families. I have had giants in the eating disorder community befriend me. I have helped people suffering from this insidious illness to get into treatment centers.

I have rejoiced with those who have recovered. I have mourned with those whose beloved children or loved ones succumbed to this illness.

And then, it hit me. 

Why do we even need a narrative? Aren’t eating disorders the true and only villain? The only opponent? Isn’t that enough? Isn’t having a common opponent all we really need?

Isn’t it enough that eating disorders take the lives of our loved ones? Isn’t it enough that eating disorders take the physical health, the mental health, the happiness, the joy, the love out of life?

How and why have we let the tribal mentality so prevalent in national politics become pervasive in the eating disorder community? Isn’t it enough that our children are being sacrificed each and every day?

Why the petty arguments in the eating disorder community? Why the backstabbing?  Why the fear? Why the ignorance?

Have we really forgotten that which is so important?

Why do we attempt to shut out intelligent voices who disagree with our viewpoints? Isn’t the very best way to learn, to expand our knowledge, is to surround yourself with intelligent people who disagree with your views?

What happened to curiosity? What happened to our relentless pursuit of knowledge, to explore the vast untapped, resources of knowledge that have eluded us?

Isn’t collaboration in our families’ best interest? Isn’t the exchange of differing viewpoints of the utmost importance? Why can’t we strongly and passionately disagree on topics and issues without attacking the person? [That last question comes from the Steven Dunn School of Hypocrisy.]

Why can’t we have a community wherein all intelligent, cogent viewpoints are discussed openly and with an open mind, an open heart and a willing soul?

Why can’t we get to that one day where we as a community can say … Bar-B-Que sauce?

Last week, I published an article entitled, “The Three Most Powerful Words.” Prior to that article, instead of remaining focused on the very complex, deeply personal issues regarding end-of-life options, I attacked Dr. Jennifer Gaudiani personally. That was wrong and I apologized for those personal attacks.

That very same day on Twitter, I received the following message:

“You also owe me an apology.”

            Chevese Turner, June 16, 2023

In considering Ms. Turner’s statement, a number of responses circulated through my brain. But, I did not want any response to come from the intellect alone.  My brain has been shaped (or warped) by 38 years in the litigation arena. More often than not, wars in the courtroom involve intellect, subterfuge, attacks, relentless research, intuition and endurance. Those are some of the criteria which make a good litigator.

It would have been easy to ignore, or be dismissive of Ms. Turner’s statement, and to respond in “attorney mode.” But, that would have been inappropriate. Instead, I knew that any response should come from the heart. From a place of compassion. At the right time.

Those types of messages often come at unexpected times and in unexpected ways. And when that message does become manifest, we are but mere passengers as the message flows through us and words just seem to appear.

In reviewing Ms. Turner’s statement, the words, “people who lead” kept coming to the forefront of my consciousness. And then, I suddenly found myself becoming a passenger.

In one of Simon Sinek’s TEDx talks, he talks about the difference between “leaders” and “those who lead.” Those words of wisdom are embedded here:

People who lead, those who inspire us to stand tall, to attempt to dare mighty things, drive us to help others. People who lead convey a message based on humility, wisdom and grace. People who lead are self-aware. Sadly, for most of my life, those traits have been largely missing or have come in very small doses.

As I have been introduced to, and have gotten to know some of the true giants in the eating disorder community, I hope I have learned by observing how they face adversity and disagreeable situations. They all seem to share certain character traits like:

Intelligence.

Wisdom. (Yes, they are different.)

Compassion.

Curiosity.

Courage.

Open-mindedness.

Self-awareness.

Self-reflection.

Humility.

A firm resolve to prioritize the needs of suffering families.

Those who lead inspire us to follow them, not for their sake, but for our own. When they give presentations, they do not talk about the personal obstacles they have overcome but they find ways to make us think about our own obstacles.  And how we can best overcome them.

They embrace the reality that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few … or themselves. They are people who lead because they are imbued with some or all of the qualities I listed. They are certainly not infallible and when they make mistakes, they look directly at the person whom they hurt and they say those three, incredibly powerful words, “I am sorry.” That type of apology comes from the heart. It is sincere. It is powerful. It resonates. It starts the healing process.

And because of who they are, they never demand an apology from others. To them, that type of apology is not important for they know a demanded, forced apology does not come from a place of honesty or sincerity. They know its sole purpose is to feed the ego of the perceived “wronged person” and not to further the power of a message which could help and inspire the community. They never expect an apology.

People who lead are open to other people’s points of view. They understand that in collaborating on issues in which differing points of view are openly and intelligently discussed, we all gain a greater understanding of the limitless possibilities of what the future may hold.

People who lead don’t have to make us believe in them. Their message is true and powerful. It is much bigger than any one person could ever be. People who lead make us believe in what they believe in. The purity and substance of their message is enough.  When it is, people will run through brick walls to pursue that message.

People who lead do not aspire to lead an organization or to place themselves front and center. People who lead are simply placed in a position of leadership by the people they inspire. Because of their message.  Because that message is one so many of us want to embrace.

A message of hope.

A message of healing.

A message of love.

I pray that we all can find that message.

At a recent meeting I had the privilege of attending, various difficult and divisive issues were discussed. Some of the attendees had strong, diverging opinions. Those opinions were discussed openly and respectfully.

As the discussion evolved, I was struck by the professionalism of this group, the respect that was evident. And then, a thunderbolt from above hit me.

As the meeting progressed, I eventually stated, “I believe the 3 most powerful words a person can say are, ‘I love you.’ I also believe the next 3 most powerful words are, ‘I am sorry.’” Someone then stated, “I thought you were going to say, ‘I was wrong.’” I laughed and stated perhaps those two statements may be 2A and 2B.

“I am sorry.” Powerful words indeed.

To say those words with conviction, to mean them, to have them come from every aspect of your very existence is an incredible demonstration of strength, of humility, of grace, of wisdom. It shows vulnerability. And yet in showing vulnerability, you turn a potential weakness into an incredible example of strength.

That vulnerability, that type of strength, was shown by Dr. Jennifer Gaudiani in a recent social media post which is embedded here:

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Gaudiani Clinic (@gaudianiclinic)

Perhaps it would have been easier for Dr. Gaudiani to stay on the path upon which she was traveling. But, to embrace a willingness to grow, to acknowledge mistakes of the past, to make amends and to commit to linking arms with others, to broaden one’s mind to greater possibilities may be the truest sign of an evolved soul.

Our society has devolved into tribal warfare. The two major political parties are engaged in perpetuating their own power at the expense of the Republic. Politicians and people in general have become emboldened to make harsh personal attacks instead of intelligently and passionately addressing our differences and the issues confronting us. And that has permeated the mental health and eating disorder communities.

And, I had a part in that.

In attacking Dr. Gaudiani personally, instead of debating, questioning and challenging, in a professional, respectful and yes, passionate manner, the concept of “Terminal Anorexia,” I was wrong. I allowed my deep, personal pain and strong views on this topic to dictate my narrative.  And in doing so, I failed. I failed Dr. Gaudiani. I failed myself. I failed the community.

Jennifer, I am sorry.

I can, I must, and I will do better.

Now, make no mistake, as it was proposed last year, I strongly oppose “Terminal Anorexia.” The very term itself is so incredibly divisive, so hurtful. More than most, I am acutely aware of the pain, the soul-wrenching agony which grips parents whose beloved children are taken by this insidious illness.

But that does not give me, nor anyone else, a free pass to say or do anything we please.

I must do better. We must do better. Our families who are suffering every day from this damnable illness deserve the absolute best from the community.

To collaborate. To come together. To save lives. To stand as one.

For those who are currently suffering. For those in the future who will suffer. And for those beloved ones whose lives were taken by this illness. We will do better. As surely we must.

On May 2, 2023, “Inaccessibility of Care and Inequitable Conceptions of Suffering: A Collective Response to the Construction of “Terminal Anorexia” [“Inaccessibility Article”] was published. Five scholars contributed. The article can be found here:

https://jeatdisord.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40337-023-00791-2

The Inaccessibility Article raises important issues. It points out that Gaudiani’s concept of “Terminal Anorexia” fails to address the widespread inaccessibility of eating disorder treatment, it fails to address the lack of parameters for what constitutes “high quality care,” and ignores the prevalence of trauma experienced in treatment settings for those who can access treatment.

The Inaccessibility Article further shows that Gaudiani’s characteristics for “terminal” anorexia nervosa are constructed largely based on subjective and inconsistent valuations of suffering which build on and contribute to harmful and inaccurate eating disorder stereotypes.

Of course, Gaudiani’s Mt. Olympian ego could not let the issues raised in the Inaccessibility Article go unaddressed. She issued a response on May 20^th. It was entitled, “Regardless of Inequities in Care, Terminal Anorexia Exists …” In this response, Gaudiani acknowledges, “Our previous presentations were not intended to assess eating disorders care broadly, [mission accomplished] but solely to bring attention to the importance of end-of-life care issues for patients with anorexia nervosa [so long as you are white, have insurance or can afford ridiculously outrageous fees…]”

Gaudiani’s past hollow words (without corresponding, supportive action) does address the very real issue of the inequities in healthcare. In fact, even the Inaccessibility Article does not go far enough in terms of exploring that fundamental issue. And that issue is …

Ignoring inequities in health care is no longer an option.

On April 26, 2023, the United Spinal Association, along with several disability organizations and individuals filed a lawsuit in federal court in Los Angeles seeking a declaration that the physician assisted suicide law in California is unconstitutional because of its discriminatory nature; that it violates the Americans with Disability Act and the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the 14^th Amendment.

The Complaint is embedded here:

Click to access Complaint_Accessible.pdf

The lawsuit, filed against state officials and agencies, argues that California’s End of Life Option Act, which allows terminally ill people to choose to get lethal drugs to end their life puts disabled people at greater risk of being coerced into seeking assisted suicide.

The plaintiffs identify a subtle type of discrimination called “steering.”  Steering is what happens when people who have difficulty getting the care they need feel compelled instead, to seek assisted suicide as their best and perhaps only perceived option.

The plaintiffs assert the healthcare system steers away people with potentially terminal disabilities from necessary mental health care, medical care, and disability support, and towards death by suicide under the guise of ‘mercy’ and ‘dignity’ in dying. [That sounds very familiar when reviewing Gaudiani’s past articles.] The plaintiffs assert that people with disabilities often face a denial of the medical care they need and, as a result, may be quicker to seek assisted suicide as an option.

The plaintiffs fear that vulnerable people will be pressured into taking their lives by family members or caretakers or feel pressure themselves because they don’t want to be a burden. They allege that people who could live indefinitely with proper medical care can be considered terminally ill and thus eligible for life ending drugs if they likely would die within six months without such care. [Again, similarities?]

In his criticism of the health care system, the plaintiffs’ lead attorney even referred to Gaudiani: “Bien [the attorney] cited a doctor in Colorado who wrote in a medical journal that she had steered two patients with anorexia to take prescribed life-ending drugs. Compassion & Choices said that violates the law.”

With this legal contest pending, we should explore …

What Choices Exist for the Disenfranchised?

Choices available to people with disabilities, or minorities, or ethnic communities or the disenfranchised get clouded by whether they have access to medical care and support. This support helps them to not just fight the illnesses impacting them but could determine their very existence.

Is it really a choice when society makes it incredibly difficult to access health care support? Is it really a choice when a treatment center does not accept any type of health insurance? Is it a choice when a treatment center does not accept Medicare or Medicaid?

Is it really a choice when the eating disorder treatment industry makes it incredibly difficult to access health care support? Or in some cases, perpetuates this inequitable system?

Even Gaudiani admitted that equal access to “quality” eating disorder care does not exist. In a September 23, 2022, podcast Gaudiani stated: “Across so many markers of disparity, sexual, gender, racial, religious, economic, people don’t have access to the kind of care that is optimal to the type I just described. And to say that only someone with resources across the board who has been to X number of treatments and failed them, only they are eligible for compassionate, appropriate end of life care is inappropriate and it perpetuates the system of oppression in which this person’s needs are not heard.”

Gaudiani then admitted, “And so, if that person is going to die of anorexia and somebody looks at a paper like mine but there’s very specific criteria and they weren’t ever able to meet those criteria met and they are unable to ever meet those criteria and they say, I’m so sorry, you don’t meet it, that person dies in pain. That person is forced into a situation where suicide is their only out. That is not acceptable.”

So, how does the eating disorder community effectively address the healthcare system of oppression and inequities? How does it provide collaborative real, workable solutions? Come on … we all know the answers.

It does not.

Not only does the community not address inequities, but in some cases, it even perpetuates the system of inequities.

Perpetuation of the System of Inequities

What national residential treatment centers accept Medicare, Medicaid or Tricare? What national residential treatment centers give access to its care at significantly reduced dollar amounts to those who cannot afford the treatment and/or who do not have healthcare insurance?

How are treatment centers working with insurance companies who provide mental health benefits to expand the reach of those treatment centers?

What does the eating disorder community offer in terms of possible solutions?

For that matter, can the eating disorder community even articulate the issues which need to be identified in a workable framework which could illuminate a path to more equitable care?

History provides the answers to those questions.  Answers which will surprise no one.

As we are aware, most treatment centers do not accept Medicare, Medicaid or Tricare. Some clinics, like the Gaudiani Clinic does not even accept insurance let alone those government programs.

Some treatment centers, like the Gaudiani Clinic price themselves so that only the wealthy and elite can afford treatment. Membership fees. Incredibly expensive consulting fees. Costly treatment fees.  

When those factors are considered, only one logical conclusion can be drawn. And that is …

Some people and entities in the eating disorder community and industry are grossly, intentionally and willfully perpetuating the very system they regard as oppressive, a system which has so many markers of disparity. A system which prevents most people from being eligible for any professional’s treatment.

“Terminal Anorexia” (even if it did exist) is only the latest example of the systemic, inequitable mindset which has poisoned the community. For the reality is even if, in the unlikely event, “Terminal Anorexia or the Protocol of Death” was ever passed into law, it violates the Due Process clause of the 14^th Amendment. It violates the Equal Protection clause of the 14^th Amendment. It violates the Americans with Disabilities Act. It violates the laws in at least 15 states. It perpetuates a system of oppression, discrimination and inequities. And it widens the gap between the “haves” and the “have nots.”

And yet, certain persons have the hubris to posture that “Terminal Anorexia” exists and must be discussed and embraced by the community [presumably, only the white wealthy community] while ignoring the most vulnerable of those who suffer.

A 2020 research study documented the “barriers to palliative/hospice care utilization” that Black, Asian, and Hispanic persons regularly experience because of racist medical policies and practices. Those barriers are significant.

A March 15, 2023, study published by the Kaiser Family Foundation “found that Black, Hispanic, and [American Indian and Alaska Native] people fared worse than White people across the majority of examined measures of health and health care and social determinants of health.

Contemporary research shows that racist health care policies and practices continue to result in widespread disparities in access to care and health outcomes.

Neither Congress nor the legislatures in the 46 states and 4 commonwealths have shown any inclination nor wisdom as to how to address the inequities which exist in medical and mental health care. As such, possible solutions must first come from the medical and mental health care fields. But that is not happening.

While Gaudiani and others like her engage in platitudes of … “Clearly applauding expanding treatment options” she is, at the same time, perpetuating that very system of oppression and inequity in healthcare.

Gaudiani, who in a podcast, proclaimed herself as a “Hope Bringer” also uses the phrase, “they terminate” when referring to our children who die from this insidious illness. She perpetuates a system of healthcare inequities through her business practices. And she wants to be included in the conversation pertaining to taking the life of our children who suffer?

I cannot help but wonder what greater hypocrisy “Dr. Hope Bringer” will parade for all to see. Surely, it cannot be something as blatant as talking about something along the lines of “Caring for those who are missed.”

Or can it?

And surely, no reputable organization would ever allow that topic to be presented to eating disorder professionals by a person who refers to the death of our beloved children as … they terminate?

Or would one such organization do precisely that?

Stay tuned.

This past week, the eating disorder community learned effective June 1, 2023, NEDA was transitioning its helpline program from 4 full time employees to an “artificial intelligence” chatbot designated Tessa. Tessa is expected to become the main support system available through NEDA.

First, Tessa is NOT an artificial intelligence chatbot capable of independent learning and evolution. It is not ChatGPT or Bard. Instead, Tessa is a “rule-based chatbot authoring program.” This type of program is more affordable to develop and can be used without extensive programming experience This approach also represents a reasonable first-line approach to the initial development of a chatbot for a specific purpose.

Having said that, there are obvious deficiencies and drawbacks to programs like Tessa.  Some of the arguments include that that type of program strips away the personal aspect of the support hotline. Another common complaint is a general limitation in understanding and responding appropriately to unanticipated user responses.

The development of mental health prevention chatbots is in its infancy. In the past, NEDA wisely invested money into research of chatbots. In January of 2022, an article entitled, “The Challenges in Designing a Prevention Chatbot for Eating Disorders: Observational Study” was published. That article can be found here:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8811687/

Since the chatbot is still being refined and polished, perhaps we should ask, why now? And this is where mid-20^th century thinking comes into play.

Labor unions have a long history in the United States as membership reached a peak in the 1940s and 1950s. They were created to protect employee rights and stop exploitation. Unions’ goals are generally enforced through calling a strike (as we see in Hollywood today) and/or collective bargaining.

And yet, for very small companies, and small non-profit organizations like NEDA, unions have the potential to cause catastrophic harm. Nonetheless, in some unknown way, the idea of unionizing came to 4 employees of NEDA.

According to one of the four employees working the helpline, they felt overwhelmed and understaffed. And so, the four decided to unionize. [I wonder where that idea originated?]  

That employee also wrote, “When NEDA refused [to recognize our union], we filed for an election with the National Labor Relations Board and won on March 17.”  And so, they officially became part of Communications Workers (CWA) Local 1101. [The answer to the previous question was just provided.]

Union employees, FOUR union employees… in a very small, non-profit, charitable entity. Four employees with presumably little, if any, legal education and/or experience organizing formal entities like unions.

And so, it would appear as if these four “union” employees want to dictate employment terms to a very small charitable organization. Or do they?

One of the four employees wrote: “Some of us have personally recovered from eating disorders and bring that invaluable experience to our work. All of us came to this job because of our passion for eating disorders and mental health advocacy and our desire to make a difference.” 

Those words don’t sound like they come from a union hack.

The timeline according to these 4 employees was: “After NEDA refused to make meaningful changes, [read, giving in to our union overlords’ demands] we collected a super-majority of signed authorization cards [3 of the 4 employees? How did they even know what constitutes a super-majority under the complex federal and state labor laws] and asked for voluntary recognition of our union around Thanksgiving.”

“When NEDA refused, we filed for an election with the National Labor Relations Board and won on March 17. [Again, how did these 4 employees know this was required?] Then, four days after our election results were certified, all four of us were told we were being let go and replaced by a chatbot.”

They also stated: “Helpline Associates United has filed unfair labor practice charges at the National Labor Relations Board over NEDA management’s refusal to engage in good faith bargaining and their retaliation against workers looking to form a union. [I can’t help but wonder who drafted that language? Language which utilizes legalese.] We plan to keep fighting. While we can think of many instances where technology could benefit us in our work on the Helpline, we’re not going to let our bosses use a chatbot to get rid of our union and our jobs.” [Notice that her statement emphasized “union” before our jobs.]

The NEDA Helpline Associates Union a/k/a those 4 employees, posted this on Twitter:

Those 4 employees end their Twitter post quoting Angela Davis. The Angela Davis who is a well-known eating disorder expert and advocate? Uh… no. It is the Angela Davis who identifies as a “Marxist,” a former leader of the Communist Party USA, a proponent of completely abolishing the prison system. This is the person those 4 employees chose to quote if not emulate. [Did those 4 employees even know who Angela Davis is?]

So, [and I am about to relish the gross and obvious hypocrisy of what I am about to type] … how much money will NEDA need to direct toward the labor complaint filed by these “4 Angela Davis quoting employees,” who instead of finding a collaborative, intelligent path to proceed in the future, chose to embrace a myopic, “dinosaur of the past” unionization believing that is in the best interests of those who suffer from eating disorders?

But then, those 4 employees are not really driving this train are they? In their Twitter post they state … “an unfair labor practice charge has been submitted on our behalf.” That statement clarifies the situation to a great degree.

Starting a union within an organization is a painstaking, difficult process. Submitting that union to a national worker’s union requires meticulous work. Complying with and understanding all aspects of the National Labor Relations Act requires the input of knowledgeable, experienced attorneys.

So, who exactly is giving those 4 misguided, perhaps naïve employees advice? And whose best interest is being pursued by their puppet masters?

Despite what those 4 employees may say, Tessa is a not a union-busting tool. [Again, I wonder from where that language came?] As technology continues to develop, Tessa and other chatbots and artificial intelligence programs represent the future.  

NEDA’s hand was forced not by these 4 employees, per se. But, by the Communications Workers of America Union.

As artificial intelligence and chatbots continue to evolve, improve and grow, this progress will inevitably threaten many jobs currently held by union members. The writer’s strike in Hollywood understands this reality. AI is one of the major issues preventing resolution of that strike.

And perhaps that is the real story.

If the Communications Workers of America Union is successful in obtaining a favorable ruling from the National Labor Relations Board holding that chatbots and artificial intelligence programs cannot be utilized to replace union workers (as is inevitable), the union will inevitably use that ruling as precedence for future, much larger disputes where many thousands of union jobs hang in the balance.

This dispute is not about those 4 naïve employees who are being used as mere pawns by the Communication Workers of America. This dispute is not about NEDA.

This dispute is about the future.

A future in which unions will lose power, prestige, political influence and of course, money.

A future which is inevitable.

“We are sorry that some individuals reading our paper have been upset by the concept that anorexia nervosa has a terminal stage. Our intention is certainly not to cause distress, and Individuals who are adversely affected by exposure to these terms might benefit from opportunities to further explore, clarify, and discuss their reactions to the issues raised by these concepts with their clinicians and others.”

            Jennifer Gaudiani, May 20, 2023

Will Rogers is credited with the quote, “If you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.” For some reason known to only God and broccoli, not only does Jennifer Gaudiani not understand that concept, but she uses an excavator auger to dig her hole as deeply as possible.

Apparently, Gaudiani does not care who she hurts so long as her oversized ego is fed.

On May 20, 2023, with two other authors, Gaudiani paid to have published an article attempting to explain her Protocol of Death. That’s correct. Unless Gaudiani worked out a special arrangement (perhaps a life termination at half price) she had to pay a journal to publish her litany of pablum.

According to that journal, it costs a minimum of 1,340 Sterling pounds which converts to $1,667.83 USD for a publication. Or, about 20 minutes of the amount Gaudiani charges families to buy a “membership fee” for her clinic.

I am embedding her latest manifesto here:

https://jeatdisord.biomedcentral.com/submission-guidelines/fees-and-funding

When you read her self-aggrandizing, self-important continued manifesto of death, you may ask, are there any new statistics in this article? Are there any additional collaborative studies included? Is there any greater insight into why Gaudiani was complicit in the lives of three victims being terminated? Does she explain why her first two victims were terminated before she even wrote her paper setting forth her Protocol of Death? The answers to these questions are obvious.

Gaudiani epitomizes medical system hierarchy and privilege.

The hypocrisy in Gaudiani’s manifesto is epic.  She states:

“First, we fully acknowledge the presence of systems of oppression at work throughout every aspect of eating disorder care and within society that harm both individuals and groups in pervasive ways.”

She then states: “Finally, as we stressed in our initial article, we clearly applaud expanding treatment options and availability, and we strongly advocate for making every effort to provide every single patient every option for treatment and recovery at every phase of their struggles.”

Expanding treatment options and availability?

These hollow words are betrayed by Gaudiani’s own conduct. She speaks of expanding treatment options and availability. So let’s review exactly how she accomplishes this.

Gaudiani’s own website exposes how vacuous her words are. Her fee structure is most instructive.

The fee for Gaudiani’s “expert consultation” is:

“Dr. Gaudiani: $2,500/2-hour expert consultation + pre/post-appointment review/follow-up”

If a patient chooses to join as a “member,” the annual membership fee is $5,000 for Dr. Gaudiani.

Follow-up session fees are as follows:

Dr. Gaudiani: $250/25 min. session + care coordination” [Even that statistic is deceptive. How many ethical therapists conduct 25 minute sessions? Maybe Gaudiani is so erudite, she can accomplish in 1/2 the time it takes other counselors one hour to accomplish. Obviously, Gaudiani can “terminate” eating disorders faster than anyone at home or abroad! Make no mistake. Gaudiani’s hourly charge is $600.00.]

What about health insurance?

Not only does Gaudiani NOT accept insurance, she will not even submit claims directly to insurance companies.

And as for Medicare/Medicaid?

Not a chance.

What about consulting with your primary care physician?

Sorry! Not … oh wait. She will do that. At the mere cost to every family of … $1,000.00 per hour.

In her manifesto, she stated, “We would like to emphasize that the motivation for our articles was to bring attention to the importance of considering end-of-life care issues for patients with anorexia nervosa, not to stigmatize, or develop hierarchies, or privilege some patients over others.”

For those who are suffering who cannot afford Gaudiani’s outrageous price structure?  You are the broken eggs making the omelet. You do not have access to Gaudiani’s so-called “clinic membership.” Gaudiani perpetuates the very definition of white, elitist, exclusionary, hierarchal medical and mental health care. Of course, she does not want to discuss those issues. Since she is the very essence of this elitist, medical bias.

Her fee structure, her refusal to accept Medicare and Medicaid, her refusal to accept insurance is the very essence of privilege and treating some patients over others. As for the poor?  Those in the minority communities? Well, her Protocol of Death may be just what you are looking for.

In fact, the only price point missing on Gaudiani’s website is the cost to participate in her Protocol of Death. Or is that the only service she offers for free?

HAES misaligned.

Gaudiani’s hypocrisy started long before the most recent revelations. For years, she has positioned herself as a HAES informed provider. Podcasts have stated, “She [Gaudiani] is working hard to change the way medical care is practiced for those in larger bodies. She shared her story of how she became HAES-aligned…” Another podcast stated, “Dr. Jennifer Gaudiani, author of the book, Sick Enough, has made weight inclusive medical care a priority at her Denver based telemedicine clinic and she shares her ideas for why doctors must act to eradicate weight stigma on this episode.”

Weight inclusivity. HAES aligned. Certainly, Gaudiani took those noble goals and made it a priority to be inclusive in her own hiring practices. So, let’s take a look at her executive employees.

Jennifer Gaudiani … non-obese, white female.

Sarah-Ashley Robbins, M.D. … non-obese white female

Aimee Lischke, M.D. … non-obese white female

Aimee Becker, Chief Operating Officer, non-obese white female

Meghan Eliopulos, Chief Marketing Officer, non-obese white female

Abby Brockman, RN … non-obese white female

Krista Erickson, Director of Intake … non-obese white female

Camille Vander Veen, Clinic Manager … non-obese white female

Anupama Das, MD … non-obese Indian nationality

Of the 9 employees listed on her website, 8 are non-obese white women.

The ASDAH, which owns the HAES trademark, drummed Lindo Bacon out of its organization for far less than this.

In short, Gaudiani may talk about being HAES aligned and being weight inclusive. But these words are hollow since she does not remotely practice diversity among her own executive team.

Perhaps what Gaudiani should have said was she was HAES aligned and weight inclusive (except in her hiring practices) as long as you can afford her outrageously high fees.

Taking Clueless to an Epic Level

The very first sentence of the May 20 article demonstrates the absolute tone-deaf nature of an egomaniac. “We are pleased that the concept of terminal anorexia nervosa is being considered in serious discussion.”

Gaudiani is pleased that the entire eating disorder community has aligned against her? Gaudiani is pleased that there are at least 5 articles from around the world which rip to shreds her Protocol of Death? Gaudiani is pleased that no reputable eating disorder professional will publicly stand with her and her little team? Gaudiani is pleased that her voice is the only voice in favor of her Protocol of Death?

Is that considered serious discussions? Clueless… absolutely clueless.

The Knife to the Heart

Gaudiani’s true damaging words, the words she boldly and unapologetically wrote included, “We are sorry that some individuals reading our paper have been upset by the concept that anorexia nervosa has a terminal stage. Our intention is certainly not to cause distress, and Individuals who are adversely affected by exposure to these terms might benefit from opportunities to further explore, clarify, and discuss their reactions to the issues raised by these concepts with their clinicians and others.”

So, if her Protocol of Death hurt you, or made you upset … tough! Go tell it to your therapist. Or, if you can afford her outrageous fees, you can come to her. As long as you have enough Mr. Green, Yankee dollars, sawbucks.

But that is not the worst. Gaudiani stated, “At the end they may have agonal breathing, and then stop breathing. Their hearts stop. They die. They terminate.” 

They terminate.

Good Lord. What cold, uncaring, unfeeling words from a superficial, egomaniacal hypocrite.

They terminate.

They terminate.

Our beloved children terminate.

Hey Everyone! My beloved daughter Morgan was terminated at 11:31 p.m. on October 30, 2016! Hasta la vista baby!

Why would any family go to the Gaudiani Clinic, pay her very high fees, (presumably in advance) while knowing that its founder refers to the most heart wrenching pain a parent can experience, the greatest heart ache imaginable … as your child terminating?

And that same person has the audacity to also say through her then attorney, “Let me begin by saying that Dr. Gaudiani and I both understand the overwhelming and lasting grief you must feel from the loss of your daughter to anorexia nervosa.”

The fact that Gaudiani uses the word “terminate” to describe the most precious thing you hold dear being taken from this existence, while at the same time stating she “understands the overwhelming and lasting grief” a parent feels when your child dies as a result of anorexia nervosa is the clearest example of the darkest of hearts and the darkest of souls.

They terminate.

They terminate.

Perhaps, regarding termination, the only thing that will be terminated is Gaudiani’s Clinic… as complaints to every state board in which she is licensed to practice are being made. And those complaints are being made. As more families come to the understanding that they will not abide their children being terminated.

Because surely, being terminated is the cruelest cancellation of them all.