witchofwestbyfleet
VIP Member
“Math”
LOOK LOOK I’VE GOT THE KIDS
LOOK LOOK I’VE GOT THE KIDS
Dr Jessica Taylor #9 Don't be fooled by the sports car I got, I'm still grifter Jessie from the block
- Thread starter witchofwestbyfleet
- Start date
-
- Tags
- jessica taylor
1
Sorry attached two by mistake. Though I don't believe for a minute that the school were emailing work for one snow day
---
---
---
And why is she saying math instead of maths. She's not American!
---
And why is she saying math instead of maths. She's not American!
Attachments
Blue bunny
Well-known member
She's probably trying to appeal to America as they get really into their mentoring personalities, I feel like the British aren't as into it.
---
An hour of her talking for £99? It would be 58mins of waffling about how great she is and possibly one slightly helpful suggestion that she's got from someone else.
---
An hour of her talking for £99? It would be 58mins of waffling about how great she is and possibly one slightly helpful suggestion that she's got from someone else.
witchofwestbyfleet
VIP Member
She really seems to somehow believe she isn't white or that because she's working class, a lesbian etc. she's not a privileged white woman any more and is just like Black and Brown women. No, Jess, that's not how the world is. She hasn't even got as much as Jack Monroe with the "my father is half Greek so criticising me for preparing food without having washed my hands is racist!"
Boogs
VIP Member
Poor Jess hounded by misogynistic homophobes wherever she goes.
Everyone is jealous of her youth, intellect, tits....
witchofwestbyfleet
VIP Member
Calling her a BIMBO
Boogs
VIP Member
It’s the butch lesbians who all want to sleep with her and her
nothanksbabes
VIP Member
Especially as she's now using ebonics. She really is the fakest person I've come across
She's so cringe it's painful.
AccidentalAcademic
Well-known member
As always, it's telling how she's using deliberately vague language (e.g. "professional case advice" instead of supervision, "educational programme" instead of therapy) to disguise the fact that she's trying to charge for services she is in no way qualified to offer. It shows that she cares about possible legal repercussions and she's savvy enough to cover her back, while being supremely unconcerned about the harm that could come to women as a result of her trying to act way outside her competence.
Six-session programmes are typically designed for people with mild to moderate anxiety or depression that is relatively 'straightforward' in its origin (e.g. no history of domestic violence or abuse, no current suicidality, no comorbidities that come with higher physical risk or require more intensive therapy, such as anorexia or bulimia nervosa). IAPT/Talking Therapies is the classic example. People are meant to be referred to a specialist service in their needs are too complex. In practice, this means they often get left with nowhere to go as secondary and tertiary services were gutted under austerity, but the truth is that this is still less dangerous than getting them to participate in a short-term programme that can't meet their needs. The wrong kind of support really can be more harmful than none at all. Jess is copying what she sees clinicians doing without any understanding of how horribly wrong it could go, and in the full knowledge that the women who sign up to that 'educational programme' are very likely to believe - despite the tricksy wording - that Jess is a clinical psychologist.
In addition to being grossly unethical from a psychological point of view, it's also taking financial advantage. For the price Jess is charging per session, women could get two sessions with an accredited therapist who is honest about what they can and can't do and who doesn't rely on verbal subterfuge to convince their clients that they're something they're not. There was a time when I thought that Jess did actually care about victims of abuse, but was too caught up in herself to realise that she's not helping. This type of thing makes it abundantly clear that all she cares about are her ego and her wallet.
Six-session programmes are typically designed for people with mild to moderate anxiety or depression that is relatively 'straightforward' in its origin (e.g. no history of domestic violence or abuse, no current suicidality, no comorbidities that come with higher physical risk or require more intensive therapy, such as anorexia or bulimia nervosa). IAPT/Talking Therapies is the classic example. People are meant to be referred to a specialist service in their needs are too complex. In practice, this means they often get left with nowhere to go as secondary and tertiary services were gutted under austerity, but the truth is that this is still less dangerous than getting them to participate in a short-term programme that can't meet their needs. The wrong kind of support really can be more harmful than none at all. Jess is copying what she sees clinicians doing without any understanding of how horribly wrong it could go, and in the full knowledge that the women who sign up to that 'educational programme' are very likely to believe - despite the tricksy wording - that Jess is a clinical psychologist.
In addition to being grossly unethical from a psychological point of view, it's also taking financial advantage. For the price Jess is charging per session, women could get two sessions with an accredited therapist who is honest about what they can and can't do and who doesn't rely on verbal subterfuge to convince their clients that they're something they're not. There was a time when I thought that Jess did actually care about victims of abuse, but was too caught up in herself to realise that she's not helping. This type of thing makes it abundantly clear that all she cares about are her ego and her wallet.
Blue bunny
Well-known member
"Professional case advice" really concerned me. Fortunately no one will use is because low paid support workers for children's or women's centres won't have the money to pay for it and anyone who could afford it would probably pay someone who knew what they were doing.
I honestly think her catchment consists of vulnerable women going through the court system who ate desperate and willing to pay for any advice they think will help their case and have been sacked in by her on social media.
I honestly think her catchment consists of vulnerable women going through the court system who ate desperate and willing to pay for any advice they think will help their case and have been sacked in by her on social media.
Jessterday
Well-known member
Is it just me or does she have a pattern of 'releasing' new 'products' immediately after coming back from a holiday?
Whatevesmate
Chatty Member
She definitely goes on regular money grabs in the form of 'new products'. It's all about the money and glory both of which will dry up as people wise up to her. Her field is highly competitive and in part, referrals and bookings rely on good relationships with other colleagues which she has failed to nurture. She will begin to look increasingly desperate, which of course underneath all her bravado is precisely what she is.
bracrumbs
Chatty Member
Especially as she's now using ebonics
I know this isn’t a new thing but posting an image of a ‘quote’ (irony) that you haven’t said, you’ve just typed and putting your own name on it and then posting it on your own account is so ridiculously cringe worthy that my vital organs may now well be on the outside of my body.
VeniVidiVicki
VIP Member
I’ve seen enough of her tits to last me a lifetime thanks
Whatevesmate
Chatty Member
I also have my own pair so plenty to go around
witchofwestbyfleet
VIP Member
Getting into medical quackery as well with these posts about how funding cancer and dementia research is supposedly a waste of time. Is she trying to appeal to Trump voters who oppose anything but the most basic of government spending?
