TranceNet: TM & Dissociation -- A Case History
some identifying details have been altered to mask identities
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
JOHN DOE I-VI and JANE DOE, : CIVIL ACTION NOS. Plaintiffs : 85-2848 85-2854 vs. : (Consolidated for WORLD PLAN EXECUTIVE COUNCIL- : Discovery) UNITED STATES MAHARISHI INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY, Defendants : JUDGE GASCH
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Friday, November 14, 1986
- - - - - -
GERALD F, RAGLAND, JR., ESQ,
...GARY GLASS, M.D., having been duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows:
(This deposition is being conducted under the Federal Rules by agreement of counsel.)
MR. RAGLAND: The Doctor will waive signing, I am sure.
EXAMINATION BY MR. JAMES:
Q: Would you tell us your name, please?
A: Gary Michael Glass.
Q: What is your address?
A: Care of [an East Coast city] Psychiatric Center.
Q: Can you tell us how old you are?
A: I am XX years old last week.
Q: Can you give us a brief description of your professional credentials and current area of practice?
A: I graduated from the University of Pennsylvania as an undergraduate in 1970, attended the autonomous University of Guadalajara School of Medicine from '70 to '74, trained in pediatrics at the Union College of Medicine in Newark, as a psychiatrist at the University of Pennsylvania.
During the time I took that training I served as chief resident in psychiatry and a special program in forensic psychiatry. After my training I took two positions, one at the [an East Coast city] Psychiatric Center where I became director of the outpatient department and I also served as assistant director of psychiatric residency training at the University of Pennsylvania.
The following year I became acting director of training and I became director of outpatient services in 1981 and I gave up my -- I was associated director[sic] of the center for studies in psychology-psychiatry at the University of Pennsylvania, '79 to '83.
In '83 I gave up the appointment and became a clinical associate of psychiatry at Temple. I was moved into the role of assistant medical director of the [an East Coast city] Psychiatric Center, served for a year and a half as acting medical director and currently I am in the assistant's position. I am on the faculty of the University of Pennsylvania Graduate School of Criminal Justice and Villanova Law School, a member of MENSA, many organizations, committees and national things.
Q: Are you Board certified in Psychiatry?
A: By the American Board of Neurology an examiner in Neurology, a member of the Doctoral Board of Psychiatric Residency for training examination. I am a member of the American Academy of Psychiatry and chairman of several other committees.
Q: What is forensic psychiatry?
A: The area of psychiatry that interfaces with the law.
Q: In that regard is part of that specialty one of testimony being --
A: Evaluating situations or patients for legal purposes, writing reports and on occasions, testifying in those circumstances.
Q: Prior to this incident involving [John Doe], did you ever testify or examine someone concerning any psychiatric or emotional problems involved with the practice of transcendental meditation?
Q: Have you had any training in transcendental meditation or TM-SIDHIS?
Q: Can you tell me what you have done as far of[sic] the investigation of the practice of TM or TM-SIDHIS programs?
A: I have done nothing except to examine Mr. [Doe] as a psychiatrist.
Q: Can you tell me what you did in that?
A: I spent in all approximately nine or 10 clinical hours with Mr. [Doe]. During that time I had him tell me of his experience with the TM crowd.
Pardon me if I don't use all the right words. I had him tell me at length of his experiences. The reason for that was twofold. First, I needed an opportunity to learn something about the organization and secondly, I needed an opportunity to spend a lot of time with him and to be able to assess his thinking and thought processes and link thoughts and to deal with reality and assess situations. So that afforded both.
I have completed a mental status examination. He has provided me with a variety of written materials about the organization which I frankly have not reviewed as yet.
Q: Do you intend to use those as part of the basis for opinions you are going to give in this case?
A: I don't believe so.
My opinions are based on my clinical evaluation of him and his current condition.
Q: Do you intend to offer any opinions concerning the nature of the organization itself?
A: The nature of the organization? No, I don't think so.
Q: Issit[sic] fair --
A: Let me be careful what I say, then. My role as a psychiatrist in this instance is not -- I understand my role as not to judge any organization as to its merit. My role is to simply judge the individual clinically and his current situation clinically and try to make an assessment to the best of my medical ability.
As to the role that his experience in the organization played in the development of his current clinical condition, to that extent I will be linking those things. I am not here to judge the organization.
Q: Is it fair to say that with respect to my clients, World Plan Executive Council - United States and Maharishi International University, you have made no attempt to develop any personal knowledge of the nature of the practices of those organizations?
I am sure I will be reading these materials.
Q Aside from what Mr. [Doe] gives you, you see it through the eyes of Mr. [Doe], do you not?
Q: And not through the eyes of any other people who may have had some different kind of experience or see it differently than Mr. [Doe]; is that correct?
A: I am dealing with his clinical situation at this point.
Q: To the extent that he relates things to you that he felt were important for you to know, you rely on the thrust of what Mr. [Doe] tells you; is that correct?
A: Well, in the most basic sense that is correct. However, in terms of completing my evaluation to this point, the thrust of every specific item is not necessary to arrive at what I am doing. It is the general theme of what he tells me which is the essential part.
Q: I suppose that if he were so inclined, he could manipulate that theme; could he not?
A: Not the gross theme. I think he could tell me untruths about specific incidents. I am sure that is possible . I don't think it was the case.
I am not easily fooled, but I don't rule out possibility.
Q: Did you take notes of the history that he gave you?
Q: Did you bring those with you?
A: Yes .
Q: I will want to look at those in a minute, Doctor; but could you briefly tell me the history that he gave you.
Q: Give it to me --
A: I will do the best I can.
Please guide me. If you would like me to go in detail, I will be glad to.
Basically the history was -- there are two parts, the life history and the history with the TM organization. Would would you want?
Q: Why don't you tell us about the life history first?
A: [John] was born in [an East Coast city]. He described himself as having been an illegitimate child. By that he meant that he was born to an unwed mother but the son of a father who was otherwise married.
The father, nevertheless, he feels was very much in love with his mother and very much a part of his life for approximately three to four years of age. At which time, for circumstances which he doesn't understand, the father decided to, I guess, rededicate himself to his marriage, left his mother, left [John] and went back to his marriage.
[John]'s mother is now 00 years old and living and well. She is retired from a [technical] position. He describes her as a good woman who did her very best to raise [some] children under very difficult circumstances. The father himself is 00, although he hasn't seen him really since the age of three or four and knows nothing else about him at this time.
He was raised in a sense both by mother, by herself and also [b]y mother's family, a maternal grandmother who had 00 children. There were a great number of aunts and uncles available to him.
When [John] reached age of approximately 0 mother met and married a gentleman by the name of [Ronald], who then became his father figure in the home for approximately four years when he died of a heart attack.
[John] has a sister, [Susan], 00 years of age. He himself is [mid-30s] right now. [Susan] is working in the real estate business and is single.
When [John] was [in his teens] his mother took ill. He is not sure exactly what the illness was, but he says it related to women's type problems. That is what he was told at the time. And she was under the weather, had several surgical procedures and was pretty much laid up for a period of about two years
[John], [in his mid-teens], took on the task of helping to support and manage the family. He had a full-time job selling [clothing] in [an East Coast city] while he was also going to school and was helping to care for his younger sister. He graduated from [high school] in [the late '60s]. He got very good grades up until about [his mid-teens] when these other events started to impede on his ability to study and take school as seriously as he may have wished or had done previously.
After graduating from high school he went to work for a [manufacturing firm] where he stayed for a few years in [a technical] department and he attended [a liberal arts college] at night.
He was working full time and taking a full course load, but that was a little too much so he withdrew some of the courses. He then left [his job] and went to work at [another manufacturing firm] in [his city], also in [the technical field] where he stayed for approximately a year.
He was apparently a rather outgoing gentleman who had a number of friends as a child and benefited greatly from the input of his extended family, that being his aunts and uncles who really filled the role of surrogate parents in many cases. Nevertheless, he certainly longed for an appropriate father figure, which was clearly not only absent for his life, but which he had lost on several occasions.
[John]'s past medical history is relatively stable. He had no medical illnesses. The only operation or surgical procedure that he has had was a tonsilectomy at approximately 00 years of age. He has allergies, he does not smoke, he rarely drinks and he does not use any drugs at this time, though he experimented with marijuana infrequently in high school.
Q: Did he relate anything of a head injury to you?
A: A head injury? Not that I recall.
Q: Would that be significant to you in any way? A: Well, I would have to see it. But there does not appear at this time to be any neurological impairment. If there was a head injury, my feeling is that it could not have been a very serious one and has certainly not had any long range effect on him.
Q: You are quite certain about that?
Q: Did he relate any previous examination by psychiatrists or neurologists or anyone of that nature?
A: He has never been in psychiatric treatment. He was -- there was some discussion somewhere in the early years about psychologists in school, but it never came to anything, to my understanding.
Q: He never told you about a period of being unconscious following a head injury in a [department] store rest room?
A: No, he did not.
Q: Suffice it to say, he did not include any of that in the history he gave you?
A: He told me nothing about the head injury. Q: Did he ever tell you of any diagnosis? Of course, if he didn't tell you about the head injury, he couldn't tell you about the head injury; could he, Doctor? A: That sounds right.
Q: If there were a head injury with a diagnosis, would that be important? A: Tell me what the diagnosis would be. That would be important.
Q: Let's go on to the -- MR. RIDGE: Wouldn't the fact that he didn't tell you be important to you in evaluating it?
THE WITNESS: I don't think so.
Let me remind you that you asked earlier about Board certification. I am certified by the American Board of Psychiatry & Neurology. The assessment of him takes into account any neurological findings. I found no reason to conduct or was it indicated, a neurological consultation or evaluation.
MR. RIDGE: You didn't care about his credibility? THE WITNESS: What do you mean?
MR. RIDGE: When I suggested that the failure to tell you of an incident might be significant, the point being, does that or did it reflect on the credibility; and are you not concerned about the credibility in forming your opinions?
THE WITNESS: Yes, I am concerned about that.
That does not reflect upon his credibility because there are a lot of things in life that he didn't tell me. I did not say, "Have you had a head injury?"
If I had asked that question and he had denied it, then I might be concerned. I did not ask him that question.
BY MR. JAMES:
Q: Doctor, along those lines, of course, he understood that he was being asked concerning some symptomology, specific symptomology by you; is that correct?
A: I am not sure I understand.
Q: He was here with specific complaints in his personality?
A: That is not quite true.
Q: Why don't you tell us what the complaints were?
A: I think it is clear to understand, and I think we all understand that [John] did not come to me seeking treatment. He came to me upon referral for evaluation.
Q: By whom?
A: By Mr. Ragland.
Q: He came to you before by whom?
A: By Mr. Cucinotta. That is correct.
Q: After the initial visit with him, did you have some concerns about his credibility?
A: I had a lot of concerns about his credibility.
Q: Did you resolve those?
A: Yes, I have.
Q: Do you now find him to be a credible person?
A: Within the limits of his mental and emotional ability.
What has happened is that I now understand what I had concerns about with regard to his credibility.
[ return to Research Archive ]
[ continue to Analysis ]
[ top ]