Don't act like a man Jack Conway, act like a father.

I don't live in Kentucky but I feel compelled to weigh in on the US Senate candidate Jack Conway (D). I've seen the Kentucky Attorney General's campaign ad against Rand Paul and it appears to be the typical low-blow, gutter-ball, 2-weeks-before-the-election political commercial. It happens, right? The problem I have with ads like Conway's commercial bashing Dr. Paul is that they scream personal interest. I believe that if you are running for a prestigious office you should act the part, rather than resort to tactics that resemble slanderous remarks on a middle school bathroom stall. It demonstrates that Jack Conway is willing to resort to low blows for his personal gain. Don't give me the line about it being in the best interest of the Democratic party for Jack Conway to win at all costs because some kind of greater good is being served by fighting the Evil Empire from taking over the US Senate. You don't act like a jerk because you think you are better than the other "jerk." Rand Paul told Jack Conway to be a man as if he were Vito Corleone speaking to Johnny Fontane in the Godfather. "Oh Godfather, I don't know what to do... I don't know what to do..." "YOU CAN ACT LIKE A MAN!" (Slap).

I don't think men should be told to act like men; they should be told to act like fathers. Some say that real men are the football players that yell and grunt and bang their heads against lockers. Others claim that "real" men don't cry. Usually someone yells "be a man" if they are trying to bait someone into a fight. What if Rand Paul would have said, "Act like a father"?

Many people have contacted me through this blog and www.DanHelpsKids.com. I can't give legal advice because I'm not a lawyer and I don't know enough about the law. I share my experiences to help others. The best advice that I can give people is to go through life conducting yourself in the same manner that you would if your young child was sitting on your lap. If I were Jack Conway, I would be embarrassed if my child saw the ad attacking Rand Paul. If I was Rand Paul's campaign manager, I would keep Dr. Paul away from Conway and applaud Dr. Paul for not shaking the Attorney General's hand because he took shots at Dr. Paul's Christian faith. From a political standpoint; it's a good strategy. If I was Rand Paul's father, I would have told him that he should have shaken Jack Conway's hand and that he should show up for the next debate. Can anyone tell me how Rand Paul's actions resemble that of a "man"? "He insulted my religion so I am going home and taking my ball with me." It's definitely not the conduct a father should teach to their sons about being "manly".

The worst thing about Jack Conway is that he sits on TV and tries to rationalize how his attack ad was something other than a low-blow. Jack Conway is a lawyer. As the Kentucky Attorney General, he is the highest ranking lawyer in the state. Jack Conway has participated in hundreds of trials, many of which involving juries. Jack Conway resorted to a legal strategy where he tried to implant into the minds of the "jury" that Rand Paul made fun of their religion. Unfortunately for Conway, the "jury" is the general public in this case and the strategy backfired because the “jury” didn't buy it.

So what is the lesson that we can take away from all of this? Should Jack Conway take Rand Paul's advice and start being a "man"? I don't think so. I fail to see how smashing beer cans on foreheads, painting sports logos on chests, and arm wrestling have anything to do with running the United States of America. Maybe Jack Conway and Rand Paul should concentrate on acting like fathers. It's hard to go wrong with someone who conducts themselves in an honest, compassionate, tolerant, and forgiving manner. Dear Jack and Rand, "Dad up" and show us what you are really made of.

For more information on Jack Conway, visit www.DanHelpskids.com.

-Dan Brewington

Letter to The State of Kentucky

To: Julie Jackson; Mark Brengelman; Kentucky Board of Examiners of Psychology; Jack Conway; and to others it may concern,

Please forward the Motion to Withdraw Appearance to the Board and to Mr. Jack Conway. This may seem like a joke but I can assure you that it is not. Judge James Humphrey is serving as the Special Judge assigned to my divorce because the former Judge, Carl H. Taul recused himself because of the ex parte communication he had with Dr. Connor. I have found this to be rather consistent behavior in dealing with anyone who has been associated with Dr. Connor or would be negatively impacted by Dr. Connor's professional demise. I have also found that the people who try to protect Dr. Connor often do ridiculous things they think they can get away with because I am not a lawyer; when actually they can get away with less in the end.

Some of Judge Humphrey’s actions are rather questionable. I would think that any of the people associated with the State of Kentucky who have dealt with me would believe that I am "competent." I would say that Judge Humphrey would assume the same. The problem that Judge Humphrey has is Dr. Connor stated that I just could not comprehend the policies and law pertaining to health records no matter how many times he patiently explained it to me. If Judge Humphrey says that I am competent to represent myself, then he will have to answer to why he protected Dr. Connor for so long. If he even rules on the above motion, it will be on the public record that Judge Humphrey is aware that Dr. Connor is a liar. If you combine this with the fact that Judge Humphrey just found out that the psychologist he regularly appoints as a professional expert was not licensed to practice psychology in the State of Indiana until July 8, 2008, Judge Humphrey could be subject to disciplinary action.

Try to put yourself in the Judge's position. His evaluator said I am dangerous. The Judge knows that I know he is aware that Dr. Connor is a liar. The Judge is aware that it "appears" that the State of Kentucky is protecting Dr. Connor. The Judge is aware of the Marco Chapman and Jeni Lee Dinkel incidents. Judge Humphrey is aware that Dr. Connor was not licensed to practice psychology by the State of Indiana when he was serving as a psychological expert appointed by an Indiana Court. The Judge knows that he is the special Judge because the former Judge recused himself due to ex parte communications with Dr. Connor. Judge Humphrey is aware that the Indiana Judicial Canon implies that he has a responsibility to report the actions Judge Taul; and the list goes on. Given that most people aren't aware that IP addresses are stored and can be subpoenaed, I would be willing to bet money that if I subpoenaed the IP addresses of all the people who visited my website and the records from the appropriate internet providers, I may find the names of people who shouldn't have been investigating the matter on their own. So what do you do if you are the Judge? Try to stomp out the opposition in an effort to save your own hide.

This is not going to end well. The final hearing of my divorce is still set for May 27, 2009. I think you understand that there is no chance that this ordeal concerning Dr. Connor is going to end on May 27. In fact, if the hearing goes forward, it will probably be much worse because you can count on people, who have protected Dr. Connor, to self-destruct; and you can count on me to continue to do what I do. After the May 27 hearing, I will begin preparing for a hearing on June 5 as I have been requested to testify against Dr. Connor in another father's custody hearing. I will be presenting Dr. Connor's December 22, 2008 response to the Board as evidence that Dr. Connor lies. That will make two legal proceedings involving Dr. Connor where his December 22, 2008 response to the Board will be part of the record. There is also the chance that two Judges will actively work to protect Dr. Connor. If anyone were to look at my original 237-page complaint, which was stamped "received" on November 21, 2008, it would be clear that the Board had all of the information necessary to determine that Dr. Connor lied in his December 22, 2008 response to the Board.

It may be too late for the Board to do anything before May 27, 2009 to prevent Dr. Connor from trying to cause further damage to my children. What is going to make the situation worse is that the Judge will probably rule on my Motion to Withdraw Appearance to represent myself. If he grants it, I will petition the Court to provide me someone to explain Dr. Connor's policies as I expect some difficulties in trying to find a lawyer and/or psychologist that will not think that Dr. Connor is lying about his policies and laws relating to the release of health records. I think these same people will probably have a hard time trying to figure out why the Kentucky Board of Examiners of Psychology ignored the information in my 237-page complaint. If the Judge denies my Motion, I will contact the ACLU because the Court violated Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act because it was Dr. Connor, the Court's own expert, who said that I could not communicate and understand the basic concepts of confidentiality. I think it is appalling to play the disabled card, but it was Dr. Connor who said I suffered from "severe" ADHD.

Ask the Governor or Mr. Conway if there is a way to prevent Dr. Connor from continuing to hurt families before the May 27 and June 5 hearings. If there is not, tell them that the State of Kentucky will have to answer to why they protected Dr. Connor by stating that there were no "apparent violations of law" in my 237-page complaint.

Feel free to contact me with any questions. As usual I will be posting this letter on my blog @ www.danbrewington.blogspot.com.

Dan Brewington

My latest attempt to reach out to the Kentucky Board of Examiners of Psychology

Dr. Markham, 

      Please see the following attachment.  This is the motion I filed with the Court last week.  I’m contacting you because you are the newest member of the Board and you seem to have an impressive résumé when it comes to helping people.  I’m sure that you are aware that Mr. Brengelman obstructed the Board’s access to a mailed copy of my complaint concerning Agency Case No 08-15.  Mr. Brengelman made a point to ask Julie Jackson if the Board had received a mailed copy of my complaint.  Mr. Brengelman said that because the Board didn’t receive a mailed copy of my complaint, the Complaints Screening Committee was slow to receive a copy of the complaint and couldn’t address the complaint at the April 13, 2009 Board meeting.  Mr. Brengelman later tried to get rid of the May meeting because he didn’t feel that it was necessary. 

      In a letter dated March 16, 2009, Mr. Brengelman wrote: 

Dear Mr. Brewington: 

   Your recent request for the names and addresses of the members of the Kentucky Board of Examiners of Psychology is being responded to by the Board staff directly.  As a courtesy to you, please feel free to mail to me, at the address on this letterhead, and Indiana court or legal document you wish to be received by any member of the Board.  I will acknowledge receipt of any such document by U.S. Mail on behalf of any member of the Board to whom you direct such a document. 

Sincerely yours, 

Jack Conway

Attorney General 

Mark Brengelman

Assistant Attorney General 

After Mr. Brengelman instructed me to forward any “Indiana court or legal document” that I wished to be received by the any member of the Board (as a courtesy to me), Mr. Brengelman failed to acknowledge that he received a copy of my mailed complaint.  Mr. Brengelman’s courteous actions seem to conflict with the fact that Mr. Brengelman deleted the following email messages without reading them: 

  To:      Brengelman, Mark (KYOAG); Jackson, Julie G (Finance

Occupations & Professions); Velez, Jan (KYOAG)

  Cc:     

  Subject: Public Records Dr. Edward J Connor

  Sent:    Fri, 13 Mar 2009 11:42:25 -0400 

was deleted without being read on Mon, 16 Mar 2009 17:47:54 -0400 

 

  To:      Jackson, Julie G (Finance Occupations & Professions); Velez,

Jan (KYOAG); Brengelman, Mark (KYOAG)

  Cc:     

  Subject: Public records request

  Sent:    Fri, 13 Mar 2009 14:57:08 -0400 

was deleted without being read on Mon, 16 Mar 2009 17:47:54 -0400

 

  To:      Brengelman, Mark (KYOAG); Jackson, Julie G (Finance

Occupations & Professions); Velez, Jan (KYOAG)

  Cc:     

  Subject: New initiating complaint against Edward J. Connor

  Sent:    Wed, 25 Mar 2009 11:46:16 -0400 

was deleted without being read on Thu, 26 Mar 2009 17:08:13 -0400

 

  To:      Brengelman, Mark (KYOAG)

  Cc:     

  Subject: New initiating complaint against Edward J. Connor

  Sent:    Thu, 26 Mar 2009 18:22:58 -0400 

was deleted without being read on Fri, 27 Mar 2009 17:24:42 -0400

 

 

  To:      Brengelman, Mark (KYOAG)

  Cc:     

  Subject: I thought you wanted me to communicate with your office.

  Sent:    Fri, 27 Mar 2009 17:30:48 -0400 

was deleted without being read on Wed, 1 Apr 2009 16:14:28 -0400 

 

  To:      Brengelman, Mark (KYOAG); Velez, Jan (KYOAG); Jackson, Julie

G (Finance Occupations & Professions); genrlpsych@aol.com

  Cc:     

  Subject: Request to address Board and additional information against

Dr. Edward J Connor

  Sent:    Fri, 3 Apr 2009 07:49:36 -0400 

was deleted without being read on Tue, 7 Apr 2009 17:22:03 -0400 

      I am well aware of Mr. Brengelman’s tactics in trying to direct any subpoenas to go through his office.  The problem arises when Mr. Brengelman attempts to “protect” the Board from me and then serves as counsel to the Complaints Screening Committee for my complaint.  There are now severe ethical and legal issues to consider now that Mr. Brengelman has conspired to obstruct the Board’s access to a complaint.  This is very concerning since Mr. Applegate provided false information to the Board during the March 2, 2009 meeting when he recommended that the Board not reopen Agency Case No 08-15 because there was no new evidence.  I sent the Board copies of altered health records for the psychologist in question.  I had never addressed this information in previous correspondence with the Board.  I have a copy of the altered health records that the Board stamped “Received February 20, 2009.”  This information could not have been dismissed as the Board didn’t ask for a response from the psychologist in question.  It appears that Mr. Applegate arbitrarily dismissed my new evidence.  It would be illegal for Mr. Applegate to dismiss evidence/a complaint based on Mr. Applegate’s rendered opinion of me, without ever meeting with me. 

      Dr. Markham, I am a father who is fighting for the right to spend equal time with my children.  This whole situation demonstrates how broken the family court system is.  I have been representing myself for over a year and I have been attacked by the “professionals” in the system for questioning the system.  I didn’t set out to represent myself, but I was forced to go at it alone when I couldn’t find a lawyer who wanted to challenge the ethical conduct of the psychologist in question.  The “professionals” would like to portray me as an irrational, out of control, renegade who is just trying to cause trouble.  I’m not irrational or out of control and if someone feels that I am a renegade who is trying to cause trouble then they probably have done something wrong.  I wasn’t the one who was having a hard time answering the question of whether my office received a mailed copy of a complaint.  I have written over 200,000 words during the course of my divorce/custody hearing and no one has been able to find anything that I have done that is illegal or unethical.  You will never find any derogatory statements about my soon to be ex-wife.  The only thing you hear are the petty arguments the “professionals” are using in an attempt to make me seem irrational.  Solving problems in ways that the legal system isn’t familiar with is creative and seemingly effective.  Having an Assistant Attorney General of the State of Kentucky crying foul and resorting to trickery in an attempt to throw off a parent fighting for the right to spend equal time with his children is disappointing.  

      I’m not irrational.  If I really were irrational and/or out of control, do you think Mr. Brengelman would be going to such measures to protect the Board from me?  It wouldn’t be irrational for me to get an attorney to sue the Board and the Office of the Attorney General for conspiring to commit fraud.  I don’t want to do that.  That’s not me.  I want to be able to spend the summer concentrating on having fun with my two daughters, but I refuse to give a free pass to anyone who engages in malicious and illegal conduct to protect a psychologist that brings considerable harm to children.  If the Complaints Screening Committee would have acted in a responsible manner, none of this would have been necessary. 

      I would invite anyone who thinks that my actions are harassing, illegal, etc… to take the appropriate legal action against me.  In his response to Agency Case No 08-15, the psychologist in question wrote “I believe it is Mr. Brewington who is potentially dangerous given his profile and behavior thus far.  As such, I have consulted with an attorney with regard to filing a restraining order against Mr. Brewington and/or filing charges of harassment, defamation of character or slander but have not taken these steps as of yet and would prefer not to do so.”  The Board didn’t even consider the ethical/legal violations of a custody evaluator threatening legal action against a party while serving as an impartial psychological expert.  The psychologist in question isn’t refraining from taking legal action because he’s a nice guy; he’s just making statements like this in an attempt to convince people that I’m a dangerous person.  Whether or not Dr. Connor believes that I am a dangerous person is irrelevant to the complaint.  The Board is in possession of many of this psychologist’s documents and nowhere does it state that I pose a threat to my children or their mother.  He just got caught doing something very bad and for some reason Mr. Brengelman and some of the Board members are trying to protect him.  The problem is this is the first time that a person has tried to hold people accountable for their actions while their divorce was pending.  The problem is that a non-lawyer seems to have infiltrated the system outside of formal legal action.  I have found that it is easy to keep “my story” straight because I always tell the truth and I always try to walk a straight line.  If someone doesn’t play by the rules, they may find themselves stuttering and stammering for words trying to explain why they didn’t provide the Board with a mailed copy of a complaint. 

      If people get offended by the content of this letter they have either done something wrong or they have a hard time accepting responsibility for the actions of the Board and the Office of the Attorney General of Kentucky.  Getting angry because someone is exposing unethical and or illegal conduct by people who are supposed to protect the public is self centered and irresponsible.  Ask Mr. Brengelman and Mr. Applegate why there weren’t any apparent violations of law in a 237 page complaint about a psychologist who said that there were HIPAA laws prohibiting him from releasing a custody evaluation case file to one of the participants of the child custody evaluation because the participant didn’t have a lawyer.  Mr. Brengelman and Mr. Applegate would probably just get mad.  Who’s irrational now? 

Thank you for you time 

Dan Brewington

Letter to KY Attorney General Jack Conway

Here is a copy of the letter I emailed to the Kentucky Attorney General's Office today.  I'm not going to quit until someone tells me the law that allows a psychologist to lie to a client, the court and the Kentucky Board of Examiners of Psychology.   

April 14, 2009 

Dear Ms. Velez, 

            Please have Mr. Conway’s office contact me regarding the conduct of Assistant Attorney General Mark Brengelman.  Mr. Brengelman serves as counsel to the Kentucky Board of Examiners of Psychology.  Mr. Brengelman is allowed to protect the Board members from potential subpoenas.  Mr. Brengelman can advise the Board on matters regarding complaints against psychologists.  Mr. Brengelman cannot actively protect the Board from potentially being subpoenaed by a person while simultaneously advising the Complaints Screening Committee on a complaint against a psychologist that was filed by that same person.  Mr. Brengelman informed the Board, during the public comment portion of the April 13, 2009, that he failed to provide the Board with a mailed copy of the complaint, postmarked March 17, 2009.  Earlier in the meeting Mr. Brengelman recommended not addressing Agency Case No. 08-15 because the Board only had an emailed copy of the complaint and not a mailed copy; which held up the complaint from being distributed to the members of the Complaints Screening Committee.  The Board members can attest to the events described above. 

            I filed a 237 page complaint with Board regarding Dr. Edward J. Connor Psy D in November 2008.  My primary complaint was the fact that Dr. Connor refuses to provide me with a copy of the case file from the custody evaluation he conducted for my wife and me.  Dr. Connor stated that he wouldn’t release it to me because I wasn’t an attorney.  The Board stated that this was not “an apparent violation” of law.  After I reviewed Dr. Connor’s response to the complaint, I found that Dr. Connor failed to address the matter, yet the Board didn’t find anything worthy of an investigation.  My March 16, 2009 complaint deals with Dr. Connor’s false statements. 

            At the least, Mr. Brengelman’s actions are unintentionally protecting Dr. Connor.  Worst case scenario is that Mr. Brengelman and the Complaints Screening Committee have intentionally protected Dr. Connor.  Both of which have caused further harm to my children during my divorce/custody hearing.  These actions also make the State of Kentucky responsible for unnecessary damages suffered by my family as a result of intentional/unintentional negligence.  

            If I don’t hear from someone from the Attorney General’s office by this evening, I will be posting this letter on www.danbrewington.blogspot.com.  If I don’t feel comfortable that this matter is being handled properly, I will be attending the 2009 Kentucky Crime Victims’ Rights Rally Day to represent people whom have been victims of crimes committed by the people we trust to protect us.  I won’t be coming alone. 

Dr. Connor wrote “We believe that minimizing the amount of time Dan has with the children will in fact sustain their existing bond.”  My girls were 1 and 3 at the time.  All I wanted was a copy of the evaluation case file from Dr. Edward J. Connor so I could represent myself in court.  I requested the case file on March 6, 2008.  The Judge tried to protect Dr. Connor.  I got Judge Taul to recuse himself because of the ex-parte communication he had with Dr. Connor.  Mr. Brengelman and the Board are working diligently to delay/obstruct an investigation of Dr. Connor.  I want this to be over.  The only way I’m going to give up on my children is if someone gives me the Kentucky Statute that justifies Dr. Connor being able to lie about why he cannot release a case file/health record to a client.  If there is no such statute; the State of Kentucky has taken an active role to protect criminal behavior.  I look forward to a quick response and resolution to this problem.

Sincerely,     

        Dan Brewington 

Loving father of two girls

Dan vs the State of Kentucky (and they just spotted me 30 points)

I found out today what I hoped wouldn’t be true.  The Kentucky Board of Examiners of Psychology is corrupt.  I’m not saying that every member of the Board is aware of malicious conduct, but they are part of it. 

I wrote in my last blog that the Kentucky Board of Examiners of Psychology was going to review whether or not to reconsider my 237 page complaint.  I thought it was worth the trip to Frankfort, KY, in an attempt to keep them honest.  I have been trying to get a copy of Dr. Edward J. Connor’s case file for the child custody evaluation he performed since March 6, 2008.  I am entitled to the case file from the custody evaluation under Kentucky Revised Statute 403.300.  The case file is considered a health record which I am entitled to by law.  I drove all the way to Frankfort, KY to find out that Richard (Applegate, I believe) stated that he reviewed my request to reconsider the complaint and recommended that there wasn’t any reason to reconsider it.  He also said that there was no new evidence to support the complaint.  The Board voted unanimously to not reconsider my complaint.  Game over; thanks for playing… right?  Not so fast.

I wasn’t mad.  I was frustrated because I felt that I had to go up against the Kentucky Psych Board now.  I didn’t storm out.  (I did hold a small sign on my lap for a short time that read KRS 403.300.  That’s the Kentucky law that says I’m entitled to the case file.)  I just sat there.  At one point the assistant attorney general’s boss, I’m still trying to figure out who he is, asked me if I was there to represent another psychologist.  I guess if I act like it long enough people may just assume that I am an attorney.  I wasn’t just going to walk out of the meeting room because I didn’t want to take the chance of missing something.  The Board had to go into “executive session” so I had to leave the room for a little while because whatever they were going to talk about was supposed to be double top secret or something.

COME ON, do you think I’m a sucker?  Executive session my arse.  Do you know how many suspicious and/or unethical things have happened during this whole ordeal with the custody evaluator?  IT’S MY JOB TO HEAR WHAT HAPPENS BEHIND CLOSED DOORS.  Mark Brengelman, Assistant Attorney General and Counsel to the Kentucky Board of Examiners of Psychology, sounded like the apocalypse was upon them.  He told the Board that I threatened to subpoena them to the final hearing in my divorce.  He kept saying that he didn’t want to see this happen because he couldn’t represent them in Indiana because he wasn’t licensed to practice law in Indiana.  He told the Board to contact him immediately if they receive a subpoena.  He told the board that this was a very unusual situation.  I never considered myself to be a usual guy.  If you look up “thinking outside of the box” you may see my picture.

I have to tell you that it was rather hard to keep from smiling when Mr. Brengelman let me back into the room.  He was very nice.  At the end of the meeting he told me that he would be with me in a minute because he said that I had wanted to meet with him.  Gee, that’s funny; I never requested to talk to him.

Mr. Brengelman was super nice to me.  He said that his office would be happy to provide me with any documentation I needed and they would prepare it so it would be worthy to submit to court.  I told Mr. Brengelman that I still had some concerns that the Board ruled that there were no apparent violations in my complaint.  KRS 403.300 states that I am entitled to the custody evaluation case file.  Dr. Connor’s contract says I am entitled to the case file.  Dr. Connor still hasn’t provided me with a copy of the case file and the Kentucky Board of Examiners of Psychology still doesn’t see any “apparent violations”?  Mr. Brengelman said he couldn’t speak for the Board but kept trying to shake my hand and make some kind of deal that I would only talk to his office.  Mr. Brengelman gave me the old “we’re just trying to help you out” bit.  He also suggested that I get an attorney to deal with the matter.  I’m sure he’d like that.  Attorneys don’t subpoena judges, entire psychological boards, and try to hold people to a level of accountability.  I did get to tell Mr. Brengelman that I wasn’t lawyer or psychologist but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express once.  I love that one.  He just looked at me with a stone face and said that he had seen the commercial. 

Something occurred to me.  I sent a letter to Mr. Brengelman a couple of weeks ago with copies of altered health records that came from Dr. Connor’s office.  I received a letter from Mr. Brengelman confirming that he received my correspondence and that the Board was going to review reopening my complaint during their March 2, 2009 meeting.  When they brought up my complaint they said that there was no new evidence.  What happened to my altered health record?  Mr. Brengelman was responsible for supplying the Board with additional evidence and he was responsible for telling the Board in a closed session that I had threatened to subpoena the whole Board and he would not be able to represent them.  This was after the Board voted against reopening my complaint upon the advice of “Richard” and Mr. Brengelman.  Good call counselor.  It’s good advice to keep the Board from having any further contact with me.  It doesn’t do anything to protect the public, but it’s a good strategy to keep the Board safe; at least in theory because I’m sure he didn’t count on anyone else knowing what went on in the secret meeting.

What is in Dr. Edward J. Connor’s case file?  What has this guy done?  I’ve had an attorney, a judge, a psychologist, the Assistant Attorney General of Kentucky, and the entire Kentucky Board of Examiners of Psychology work hard to keep this guy safe.  I will give the benefit of the doubt to a few of the Board members because if the person “reviewing” the complaint says the complaint is not worth investigating, why would they question their colleague.  Unfortunately this does not excuse the board members from any potential liability for their colleagues’ actions.  Unfortunately for them, I’m not planning on only communicating with Mr. Brengelman’s office, and I am not getting a lawyer right now.

People, I can’t make this stuff up.  The people I’m going up against have close to a hundred years of college education more than me and they’re the ones stuck in a corner.  “The big bad unrepresented dad is going to get us.  Oh the humanity!”  I guess they shouldn’t have picked on the kid with an Associates Degree in General Studies.  If anyone from the Board reads this, I hope you understand that your legal counsel may have counseled you into a hole.  If you are reading this Mr. Mark Brengelman, Assistant Attorney General for the State of Kentucky, could you please explain to my readers why your office condones health care providers refusing to provide people with their health records as required by law?  Readers, your families will be safe with me.