Tuesday, October 6, 2009

Oprah ignores child abuse while omitting key facts with a disturbing show featuring Jani Schofield 7 year old Schizophrenic

Oprah ignores child abuse while omitting key facts with a disturbing show featuring Jani Schofield 7 year old Schizophrenic.

Today Oprah (http://www.oprah.com/media/20090828-tows-schizophrenic-girl-oprah) did a Typically Sad Powder Puff Show on Childhood Schizophrenia featuring Jani Schofield a supposed 7 year old Schizophrenic; who's Father Michael admitted to being a blatant abuser on his blog: http://www.januaryfirst.org/

From his blog are the following quotes:

"I have had to recall a memory of once trying to throw Susan out of our moving car because I was so angry."

"Jani saw some of my violent rages. She has seen me hit her mother and her mother hit me back.

"I could feel the anger building inside of me, but be unable to stop it. Even during my most violent rages, a small voice inside my head would be telling me "You are going to regret this, Michael." I could see the fear in Jani's eyes. I could see in the pain and anguish in Susan's eyes. But I could not stop. It was a bizarre experience. I was rational, yet not in control of my emotions. There was so much rage in me that I wanted to hurt. Because I was hurt. And I wanted the world to feel my pain. I suspect that some variation of this is what Jani experiences."

"I suspect that this is also what serial killers experience. The only difference between them and me is I eventually listen to that voice telling me what I was doing was wrong."

"Five year olds are still desperate for parental approval.

Yes, kids have temper tantrums. But Jani would dig her nails into my skin and pull...leaving a bloody track down my arm or face. She would grin while she did this, a demonic grin that would have scared me had I had time to really think about it. But I didn't.

We tried everything. Positive reinforcement. Negative reinforcement. Hitting her back (I won't tell you how many people told us that all she needed was a good beating). We took all her toys away. We gave her toys away. We tried starving her. We did EVERYTHING we could to try and break her. Nothing worked.

Even then, it did not occur to us that our daughter was mentally ill. Now I wonder who was really delusional. Susan and I held fast to our belief that Jani was just a misunderstood genius.

Then Bodhi was born.

The violence became so bad that at times Susan and I both lost it and hit Jani as hard as we could. We hit in impotent rage.

We got a referral to a psychiatrist.

Two months later, Janni was hospitalized for the first of what has since been four times, but in truth will be many more times."

"Today, Jani is no longer a brat. Today, Jani is schizophrenic."


Oprah's research team obviously knew about the reported and admitted abuse; while choosing to ignore these facts for this show.

Of course I'm not surprised in the least by this kind of Tabloid Propaganda. Oprah has Pharmaceutical Company Ads running at the top of her site, uses a "NAMI" sponsored Doctor for her question-n-answer dog and pony show ( It's Not Breaking News that "NAMI" is just the paid Propaganda Pimp for Big Pharma), and did some great promoting of the parents new status as spokesperson profiteers for the New and Improved "Child-Hood Mental Illness Drugging Paradigm".

So what we got was another LA Times Bedtime Story sort of show, which didn't want the whole truth told, the real facts being shared, or all the information out there so "Joe" or "Jane" Public could make a balanced informed opinion on this topic.

Well, this must be a daddy "sociopath's" dream come true, as the accolades and attention abound. You have to wonder when the huge book deal will be stamped, and the movie will go into production. You must have also been thinking to yourself as you watched this piece of propaganda garbage on "Oprah"; where can you go to sign up as a fan club member and give away my hard earned cash?

I gather this is what our society has come down too after all is said and done in these times of no direction, lack of moral compass, or any basic social standards! We reward the worst kinds of people, behaviors, and crimes because it sells TV Shows, News, Products, and Influence.

The News/Tabloid Business must be beaming with pride as they lay their heads with absolutely no conscience against that soft pillow tonight.

Related links:

Oct 18, 2009 Open Letter to Oprah @ Different Thoughts Blog

Investigative reporter, Philip Dawdy live blogs the Oprah TV program here at his mental health news blog, Furious Seasons.

Different Thoughts blog had also written about Jani

soulful sepulcher blog also writes about Jani.

LA Times reporter defends child abuse in email exchange

Stan, discovered the father's blog


MacCruiskeen said...

I'd like to thank you, as I thanked Marian at the "Different Thoughts" blog, for your very good sense and above all for your straight talk. The Oprah fans are now out in force at M. Schofield's blog, and many of the comments there are just nauseating in their uncritical star-struck fandom.

As I told Marian, there was a very heated and lengthy (36-page) thread about this at the Rigorous Intuition discussion forum in the summer. I've recently bumped that thread, and here's a link to the last page, where I've just described Michael Schofiled's latest and quite dumbfounding lie:


I hope that unfortunate child can eventually be given some serious, rational and empathetic help. For her own sake, but also for the sake of the many other children who are now being brought up by parents who watch Oprah and read the LA Times.

Best wishes,


PS So you know where I'm coming from, I should add that I am not and have never been an active "mental health advocate" and have (thank god) myself never been diagnosed with any kind of "mental illness" (sic). But I am a parent and I was once a child, I read Laing and Bateson in my youth, and this whole "case" has really shocked me.

Stan said...

Dear MacCruiskeen:

Thanks for stopping by. I'm unpleasantly dumbfounded that the more this horrific travesty develops legs; the more the main stream media and powers that be bury their heads in the sand.

I was actually surprised to find that any of your comments were still up at his blog. Though I'm fairly sure they will not be there for long.

I have actually followed the thread over at rigorousintuition.ca/board for a while. I personally thought it was best to stay out of the fray and let the conversation develop into a logical debate that come to its own conclusions.

I fear through the manipulation by main stream media the majority of the public will never get to see all the facts/truth in this situation.

They will unfortunately take Oprah's and the LA Times propaganda verbatim; while never thinking to question beyond what they have been presented with all nicely gift wrapped and washed clean.

Harpo Productions and thier research team were well aware of M. Schofield's Blog and shocking admissions well in advance of this aired show.

They have visited this site and others related to this story leading up to the taping of the show. But as with the LA Times; (choosing to do follow up story's that never come close the mentioning the admitted abuse and violence portrayed by MS so vividly). Oprah also made a conscious choice not to ask about the abuse that would put this rare concrete diagnosis under scrutiny.

Now this just opens up Pandora's Box to why there appears to be this huge cover up to protect the public from a disturbing truth?

Stan said...

following Quoted from http://www.januaryfirst.org/www.januaryfirst.org/Blog/Entries/2009/10/9_The_Truth_Hurts....html


Michael Schofield

I feel terrible about asking for money, but I just found out today that the rent check on Jani's apartment was returned unpaid. It seems that I am having to make a choice between working and letting my daughter slip further into psychosis (when she is doing well right now) or being destitute trying to get my family through this.

Donations, if you are able to and feel comfortable, can be made at www.janisjourney.org.

Saturday, October 10, 2009 - 07:25 PM


I strongly suspected this would be happening sooner or later?

I must wonder though; between the LA Times stories, the Oprah Show, with the "book" on the way, and the new "fan club"; that this wouldn't be much of a problem.

I also must wonder aloud if M. Schofield has received his tax exempt / non-profit status yet?

MacCruiskeen said...

"Now this just opens up Pandora's Box to why there appears to be this huge cover up to protect the public from a disturbing truth?"

Stan, I fear the answer to that question is simple (and you indicate it yourself): money. Money and power.

If you have a population that is not just overworked, underpaid, underinsured, atomised, de-unionised, heavily indebted, worried about unemployment, terrified of Terror and desperately misinformed, but ALSO hooked on junk food, "mental health medication" and TV (three kinds of dangerous drug), then you have a population that can easily be controlled and manipulated and milked.

You can then even persuade that population that beating, neglecting, emotionally abusing and drugging your child will have no deleterious effects on the child's wellbeing. Then you can sell even more drugs to them (as a cure), even more junk food to them (as a comfort) and even more TV to them (as a distraction, and as something to cry over).

Oprah and the LA Times are corporations. Their raison d'etre is profit, so any truths that might might impinge on that profit have to be studiously ignored. That includes truths unacceptable to their main advertising clients, who of course include the manufacturers of "mental health medication".

And round and round it goes. In such an environment, it's really no surprise to see Saint Obama being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for selling barely-plausible simulations of Hope and Change.



PS Stan, would you mind deleting my second comment (the short one)? It's basically a duplication - I thought the first comment had failed to appear. Thanks.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This may contain copyrighted (C) material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. This material is distributed without profit.

Terms and conditions on the use of the contents of the “Is Something Not Quite Right with Stan - A Mental Health Blog” site are for informational and entertainment purposes only. Stan does not represent or guarantee the accuracy, completeness, timeliness or reliability of the information or content (collectively, the "Materials") contained on, distributed through, or linked, downloaded or accessed from this website.

Stan encourages you to make your own health care and legal decisions based upon your research and in partnership with a qualified health care and/ or legal professional. The information posted here should not be considered medical advice and is not intended to replace consultation with a qualified medical professional if they exist. I do not answer specific medical questions.

Third party information is gathered from sources that Stan believes to be reliable. However, in no event shall Stan, or any third parties mentioned on this site be liable for any damages resulting directly or indirectly from the use of the content whether or not Stan is advised of the possibility of such damages.

Stan reserves the right, in its sole discretion and without any obligation, to make improvements to, or correct any error or omissions in any portion of the displayed materials.

You hereby acknowledge that any reliance upon any Materials shall be at your sole risk.

Disclaimer of Liability

The user assumes all responsibility and risk for the use of this web site and the Internet generally. Under no circumstances, including negligence, shall anyone involved in creating or maintaining this web site, or shall the website writer or any commenter’s be liable for any direct, indirect, incidental, special or consequential damages, or lost profits that result from the use or inability to use the web site and/or any other web sites which are linked to this site.

Nor shall they be liable for any such damages including, but not limited to, reliance by a visitor on any information obtained via the web site; or that result from mistakes, omissions, interruptions, deletion of files, viruses, errors, defects, or any failure of performance, communications failure, theft, destruction or unauthorized access.


In states which do not allow some or all of the above limitations of liability, liability shall be limited to the greatest extent allowed by law.

Disclaimer of Endorsement - Reference to any products, services, hypertext link to the third parties or other information by trade name, trademark, supplier or otherwise does not constitute or imply its endorsement, sponsorship or recommendation by me. Nor is an endorsement by me is implied by such links. They are for convenience only, as an index in a public library.

Information Subject to Change - Any information on this web site may be removed without notice. Information may include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Furthermore, the information may change from time to time without any notice.

GENERAL INFORMATION - The information contained in this online site is presented and intended to provide a broad understanding and knowledge critical to psychiatric practices and humorous social interaction. The information should not be considered complete and should not be used in place of communication and consultation.


This site is not a monologue of truth. It is a catalyst for public debate about medical conduct and for entertainment purposes. The reader is urged to confront officials to clarify issues mentioned herein. This site is designed strictly to provide information for critical, literary, academic, entertainment, and public usage. A qualified and trustworthy medical professional must be consulted regarding medical issues, treatments, diagnoses, etc.; if they exist in all actuality or truth.