Ronnie Bass Posted November 5, 2011 Posted November 5, 2011 I agree with the sentiment of others here. The main thing that initially made me question his story is that in the middle of an alleged scary scene where they were being shadowed by something in the bushes, Dr. Johnson leaves his family to take a dump in the wild. I've heard of people being so scared that they wet themselves, but this one always felt odd to me. Now the fact that he turns on the water works every time he retells the story, using almost identical language each time -"everything I thought I knew about the wilderness came crashing down" - coupled by the fact that his personal life appears to be in shambles and he plays pull the finger with a Sasquatch certainly makes me question the entire story. Yeah, I just can't get past this, I find it hard to believe that any bigfoot would be crazy enough to poke someone when they can't see if they are armed or not. They ain't stupid and know what a gun can do. Or Johnson would grab a bigfoot finger knowing it can tear his arm off in two seconds.
TimB Posted November 6, 2011 Posted November 6, 2011 His reaction to the original sighting is very consistent with a Post Traumatic Stress Disorder flashback. The more recent stuff... well... he did have an injury. Tim B.
Guest Posted November 6, 2011 Posted November 6, 2011 . . . All of which illustrates an interesting point. Dr. Johnson's encounter is, on its surface, really compelling. We've got a professional man in a wilderness area in the PNW who reports a clear, daylight eyewitness encounter that left him visibly shaken and emotionally affected for years after the incident. Of all the eyewitness encounters out there, it's easy to consider this one of the "best". This account probably has a profound influence on newbies especially. But we should examine this (and all accounts) critically, i.e., from the perspective "What else might have played a role in this incident?" When we do, we learn that there are some real questions about Dr. Johnson's emotional state prior to his alleged eyewitness encounter, and his own words provide an important clue about a natural phenomenon in that environment (grouse hooting) that likely was a key trigger to his subsequent experience. In the years following his initial report, erratic behavior and a literally incredible report of pulling bigfoot's finger add fuel to the fire that there's something unfortunate going on with Dr. Johnson. So . . . if you know this account well and are familiar with the questions that have been raised about it, the most responsible thing to do when someone brings it up or mentions it as "really convincing" is to politely introduce those questions into the conversation. Even if you are someone who believes that Johnson did encounter a bigfoot that day, the responsible way to talk about it is to acknowledge that some people who've examined the account have some serious reservations about it.
Guest Posted November 6, 2011 Posted November 6, 2011 JDL said: "Actually, I believe that a significant number of people are drawn to psychology as a profession specifically because they have disorders of their own." Boy, I had been biting my lip deciding earlier in my first post whether to mention this or not. I worried that some one of our members (if part of that field) might get a little ticked off, or be insulted by this idea, but since we're not talking about anyone specifically- it definitely crossed my mind. Maybe that's just my take on them, maybe its just a personality trait they share, but from my view its unmistakable.... (that they seem a little off). Art (PS- After being forced to endure some counseling as a teenager with someone who acted far stranger than myself- I ultimately became a fan of working through my own problems.... )
Guest Cervelo Posted November 6, 2011 Posted November 6, 2011 What's the saying "Dr. heal thyself" that might fit in some cases for sure.
JDL Posted November 6, 2011 Posted November 6, 2011 JDL said: Boy, I had been biting my lip deciding earlier in my first post whether to mention this or not. I worried that some one of our members (if part of that field) might get a little ticked off, or be insulted by this idea, but since we're not talking about anyone specifically- it definitely crossed my mind. Maybe that's just my take on them, maybe its just a personality trait they share, but from my view its unmistakable.... (that they seem a little off). Art (PS- After being forced to endure some counseling as a teenager with someone who acted far stranger than myself- I ultimately became a fan of working through my own problems.... ) I was married to a PhD Psychologist who turned out to have significant issues. Fortunately, she never took up counseling. Mostly, she just beat people over the head with her PhD.
Guest Cervelo Posted November 6, 2011 Posted November 6, 2011 We are all to aware of the power of those letters here!
TimB Posted November 7, 2011 Posted November 7, 2011 Okay I've spent several years working in themental health field. I think the presence of mental illness in professionals is similar to most other professions- just more "out" due to the nature of the industry. From what I read the subject's injury, it happened after the first sighting.
Guest Posted November 7, 2011 Posted November 7, 2011 There's no indication that people working in the mental health industry have higher incidents of mental illness than the general population. Mental health workers are more likely to seek treatment for mental distress such as depression simply because they recognize the symptoms and are less reticent to seek counseling and pharmaceutical aid. Saying Dr. Johnson is more prone to stress because he is a clinical psychologist is akin to saying a fireman is most like a pyromaniac because he puts out fires. IMHO, Dr. Johnson’s mental health is speculation and basing his state of mind on that speculation and the misguided notion that mental health professionals have higher incidents of mental illness is a dead-end.
Guest Dr. Boogie Posted November 7, 2011 Posted November 7, 2011 There's no indication that people working in the mental health industry have higher incidents of mental illness than the general population. Mental health workers are more likely to seek treatment for mental distress such as depression simply because they recognize the symptoms and are less reticent to seek counseling and pharmaceutical aid. Saying Dr. Johnson is more prone to stress because he is a clinical psychologist is akin to saying a fireman is most like a pyromaniac because he puts out fires. IMHO, Dr. Johnson’s mental health is speculation and basing his state of mind on that speculation and the misguided notion that mental health professionals have higher incidents of mental illness is a dead-end. I agree with you that the state of his mental health should not be questioned on account of his profession. However there does appear to be some evidence that all might not be well; The reported decline in his professional and personal life, the finger pulling story that not many on this forum appear to find convincing.
dopelyrics Posted November 7, 2011 Posted November 7, 2011 Hi there, This is what I posted in the previous thread, and I've not seen/heard/read anything to change my opinion: Whilst it is a fascinating story that Dr. Johnson recounts,there is something about the waterworks that don't quite sit right with me, especially as he seems to break down in every interview he gives. But we all react in different ways so who am I to suggest his reaction might not be genuine. Maybe I find it slightly surprising that a psychologist seems unable to come to terms with what he has seen or seems to be going through the same process of reliving his experience in the same way over and over again without making any headway. I am not a psychologist so maybe I am way off the mark here. And I believe that just because he is a clinical psychologist with 3 degrees doesn't mean that his mind is necessarily as infallible as anyone else's or that he is not capable of telling a few porkies. I am not suggesting for one minute that he is, and I honestly hope that he is telling the truth. It's a highly entertaining story nonetheless. best. Lee
Guest Posted November 7, 2011 Posted November 7, 2011 I agree with you that the state of his mental health should not be questioned on account of his profession. However there does appear to be some evidence that all might not be well; The reported decline in his professional and personal life, the finger pulling story that not many on this forum appear to find convincing. My understanding is that he received a brain injury in 2009. Apparently the injury was severe enough to impair his speech for three months and cause some short term memory loss. It may explain his current encounters, but I don't see that it impacts the 2000 sighting. Derek indicated that he was emotional at that time as well.
bipedalist Posted November 7, 2011 BFF Patron Posted November 7, 2011 I was married to a PhD Psychologist who turned out to have significant issues. Fortunately, she never took up counseling. Mostly, she just beat people over the head with her PhD. I find it inappropriate to condemn a whole field of professionals because of your personal marital experiences, but that is just me. Sort of like condemning the whole Penn State campus because of the personal problems of an assistant athletic coach. I agree with Ridley on this one, and incidence rates playing like all the other professionals with a twenty percent chance of having a mental health disorder, except that probably psychologists are more likely to seek treatment than the 20% of those 20% that actually get treatment for their disorders. I believe that the head injury was after his second sighting involving the finger pull as I remember. He is now apparently gainfully employed so it couldn't have been a career ending PTSD or mild head injury so I am thankful for that. I wish him well.
Guest Dr. Boogie Posted November 7, 2011 Posted November 7, 2011 My understanding is that he received a brain injury in 2009. Apparently the injury was severe enough to impair his speech for three months and cause some short term memory loss. It may explain his current encounters, but I don't see that it impacts the 2000 sighting. Derek indicated that he was emotional at that time as well. Yes, the time line is important when considering if or how his recent problems could be ascribed to a psychological instability. Quite what that time line is I'm not sure of for all of the issues. I was assuming that a marriage breakdown and removal of licence were the result of actions over an extended period of time but that doesn't have to be the case.
bipedalist Posted November 7, 2011 BFF Patron Posted November 7, 2011 He didn't have his license in Oregon removed, and the only actions known were his closed head injury when he went on inactive status because of the brain injury and rehab./recovery from it's effects. His license was in good standing (inactive practitioner) when he left Oregon and still is until it expires in Oct. 2012. There were no sanctions against his license listed. Since he is now in California and is an MSW he can practice within those professional guidelines I'd imagine. How about doing your homework before indictment? Look the license up in Oregon yourself.....google is your friend. All you need is a last name and you can go from there.
Recommended Posts