Definitions and Explanations
Etiology Source or origin of psychiatric disorder Reckless Conscious disregard for consequence
Infliction of Emotional Distress
Non-intentional infliction of emotional distress refers to damage cases by negli- gence, in which the unintentional action or inaction of someone caused a mental health harm which, if permanent, extended beyond the maximum improvement achieved through psychological and psychiatric treatments.
Intentional infliction of emotional distress (intentional tort) is a legal concept that considers the “mental injury” created as a result of an intentional, malevolent, unre- strained, and immoral conduct. For this claim to succeed, the plaintiff has to dem- onstrate that:
1. The defendant acted intentionally or recklessly.
2. The conduct was “extreme and outrageous.”
3. The conduct caused the emotional distress.
4. The emotional distress is severe.
Once it is determined, by confession or evidence, that intentional infliction of emotional (psychological) distress has happened, there is usually the question of
“Illness is the experience of living through disease. If disease talk measures the body, illness talk tells of the fear and frustration of being inside a body that is breaking down. Illness begins where medicine leaves off, where I recognize that what is happening to my body is not some set of mea- sures. […] Disease talk charts the progression of certain measures. Illness talk is a story about moving from a perfectly comfortable body to one that forces me to ask: What’s happening to? Not it, but me”. – Arthur Frank
44
what type, how much, if it limits the functioning of the plaintiff/victim, and whether it is likely to be permanent.
Case 5a: Sexual Predator in a Coach-Student Relationship
I was hired to determine if Julie Smith was psychologically afflicted by her roman- tic/sexual relationship with Coach Franklin, her high school marching band coach, and if confirmed, what the diagnosis, etiology, and treatment were recommended.
She became involved with him at age 14 while he’s in his late 50s. Their affair lasted a year and a half.
I met with Julie 4 years after the relationship had ended. She informed me that she was taking lamotrigine for bipolar disorder, as diagnosed by her psychiatrist.
I determined that Julie had been psychologically damaged as a result of the sexu- ally abusive attitude and behavior that her marching band coach inflicted on her, from the time he lured her to become sexually involved with him until the time he was incarcerated.
Julie’s relationship with Coach Franklin started during her freshman year of high school, when he started making sexual jokes in class. Their sexual relationship began when he asked her to stay after school to help him prepare for the band per- formance. When he had her alone in the room, he shifted to a serious sexual nature, asking if Julie “wanted to touch it.” He took her to the back of the room, and it was then they shared their first kiss. He warned her not to tell anyone since he was risk- ing everything to be with her.
Some months into the relationship, a student happened upon them kissing in a classroom. State Child Welfare Support Agency was called and both Julie and Coach Franklin were questioned about the event. Both of them denied any involve- ment and presented it as a misinterpretation on the part of the student that saw them together; and no further action was taken.
Some months later, the teacher’s wife caught them in the Franklins’ home. Julie and her friend had been invited over to Coach Franklin’s house for a marching band barbeque. Since Julie had become friendly with Coach Franklin’s daughter, she spent the night at their house. While everyone was asleep, Coach Franklin came downstairs to where Julie was sleeping and had sex with her. His wife walked in while they were engaging in sexual intercourse.
The coach’s wife did not tell anyone about what she had witnessed until 5 months later. She reported to her husband’s supervisor at the school that he had become too close with Julie. The supervisor told her that he did not want to get involved. Later, Mrs. Franklin went to Julie’s parents. Julie responded with suicide threats. Her par- ents did not take legal action since Julie had attempted suicide 1 year earlier, but they forbade Julie from seeing the coach.
The affair continued in secret for another several months, until Julie’s parents caught her out with the coach. They took legal action. Julie sank into a depression and began to “cut herself,” a behavior that she had been struggling with for years.
5 Assessing Psychic Damage: Pain and Suffering
45
She believed that she and her coach were in love. Julie was hospitalized for 2 weeks for her own safety. She started therapy and antidepressant medication.
Julie’s younger brother suffered from a mild form of autism. This was a very upsetting situation for her family and Julie in particular. Julie stated that she wished that she had been afflicted with the syndrome rather than her brother. Coach Franklin succeeded in isolating Julie from them.
After this “relationship” ended, Julie described problems handling anger, which she said she did not experience before this relationship. Julie had to con- stantly remind herself that the coach did not love her, in order to cope with the situation. She felt that she missed out on a large part of her adolescence because of him.
She had flashbacks of their sexual experiences and feared that Coach Franklin would look for her once he got out of prison. Julie also reported trust issues. She had difficulty telling people about herself or believing what others say.
After the affair, Julie entered into a relationship with a woman, not much older than her, and began to identify herself as “gay.” She felt more comfortable with a woman. She learned to replace cutting herself with running when feeling down and stressed. She also described herself as a private and secretive young woman, who was constantly looking over her shoulder. Feeling safe this way, her lack of aca- demic achievement became more pronounced.
I concluded that Julie Smith suffered from adjustment disorder with mixed anxi- ety and depressed mood, chronic. Her condition was permanent. The stressor that Julie was psychologically responding to was repetitive sexual exploitation, based on the coach’s position of power. Julie experienced impairment in personal, family, and social functioning. After the affair, Julie learned to “play it safe” as an effort to limit her exposure to exploitation. She also exhibited weariness, irritability, and impa- tience; she did not feel safe in unstructured environments.
Julie’s time with her coach was made to feel right, loved, accepted, and in a world with no blemishes, providing that she devalue and stop caring for the world she came from. The coach became the sole supplier of all her needs as long as she submitted to and wanted to be his object of sexual exploitation.
Julie needed her school to provide her with a safe environment where she could study and meet people her age. Her marching band coach preyed on her, having identified her as vulnerable due to her age and emotional conflicts. He isolated her from friends, parents, and psychotherapist. He controlled her, taught her to lie, and became her only source of self-esteem regulation. Her sense of freedom became reduced.
By being in a homosexual relationship, Julie was avoiding confronting the state of mind created by her coach. I recommended that Julie continues psychiatric and psychotherapeutic treatments, focused on helping her deal with this situation and improve functioning by developing new and adaptive mechanisms to the ordeal. I also recommended family therapy to mend their bonds needed to continue process- ing the unfortunate situation that unfolded.
Case 5a: Sexual Predator in a Coach-Student Relationship
47
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019
A. M. Goldwaser, E. L. Goldwaser, The Forensic Examination, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00163-6_6