Another time bomb: therapist with LaSalle Ph.D. arrested

This was the main page one story in the St. Catharines (Ontario, Canada) Standard today, October 10th. One the rare cases where the user of the fake degree is actually arrested.

Story today at http://www.scstandard.com/ -- may require a search later. This is big news there, and there is a follow-up story scheduled in a day or two.

 

Direct link:
http://www.scstandard.com/news/011010/5328017.html

 

You have touched on a very valid point, John. Obtaining the title by any means is the very fuel that keeps less-than-wonderful schools in business.

Russell

 

True, but I don't think it was vanity here, as it has been in other cases. Her legitimate degrees were a general BA and a bachelor's and a master's in education. She (allegedly) wanted to fraudulently practice as a psychologist, and hence the psychology PhD from LaSalle. It's interesting that the degree itself is the main piece of hard evidence of fraud that they have. Truly a classic "time bomb".

 

I think what is being overlooked here is not necessarily the degree but the fact she stated in her literature she is a registered psychologist which is not true as Canada will not register anyone in psychology with a degree from a non-accredited school.

Jimmy

 

I must disagree; it is the degree. Claiming to be a registered psychologist, is just one of the allegedly perpetrated frauds. The others include simply calling herself “doctor” and claiming to be a Ph.D. (in addition to charging for her services). It is interesting that the authorities are making a distinction between a degree and “academic credentials” and recognizing that “the degree came from a business, not an accredited university, and was obtained for a fee and perhaps some ‘token study’."

In fact, it is unknown whether she is, indeed, registered as a psychologist. It is quite possible that an evaluator mistook the degree from LaSalle for one from a similarly named accredited school, and approved her registration. This is precisely the reason why so many degree mills choose names similar to accredited institutions. If this is the case, it would not be claiming to be a registered psychologist that would be the fraud, but the use of fraudulent credentials to obtain the registration. Of course, she could always plead ignorance, claiming she did not know that the school was unaccredited (“But I did a lot of work for my degree!”), or that a degree from an accredited school was required for registration.

The predicament this degree holder from La Salle currently finds herself in sheds new light on the oft-discussed issue of the legality of such degree. It appears increasingly so, that holding a degree from an unaccredited school, in and of itself, is not illegal, but putting it to any kind of use may be.

On a lighter note, it is possible that Rose Venneri Donatelli may be a reader of this forum. She seems to have taken to heart the frequently given advice regarding unaccredited degrees that, “You are probably better off simply printing your own.” The article states that the police were unable to find any documentation of the degrees she claimed to have from the University of Western Ontario, York University, the Ministry of Education and the State University of New York at Buffalo.


Gus Sainz

 

I have a question: Am I understanding that the general consensus on this forum is that anyone who has a degree from an unaccredited school commits fraud by calling him/herself a "doctor" or by putting PhD, ThD, etc. after one's name? If so, why does accreditation determine what is and what isn't fraud? Does this also mean that anyone who received a degree from Luther Rice PRIOR to their TRACS accreditation committed fraud by calling him/herself a "doctor" such as DR. CHARLES STANLEY?

Thanks,

 

I don't really have a problem with someone listing an unaccredited degree, as long as the source is also clearly listed. One of my pet peeves of school websites and catalogs is not full disclosure of faculty credentials. Simply listing "Clint Steele, Ph.D." is not sufficient in my opinion, the Ph.D. could be from Harvard or from Columbia State. At the very least, the source of the highest degree should be listed, "Clint Steele, Ph.D. University of Texas".

Preferably, all degrees should be listed, but if the highest degree (especially a doctorate) is legitimate, it can be safely assumed the lesser degrees are also.


Bruce

 

In answer to your questions, I don’t believe it is the aim of this board to achieve consensus, nor as your question infers, is some kind of Machiavellian plot afoot concerning unaccredited degrees. However, some things are just plain common sense. Of course it is not fraud for anyone who has a degree from an unaccredited school to call him or herself a "doctor" or put a PhD or ThD after their name. It is fraud, however, to do so to convince someone else of something you are not, i.e., someone who has earned legitimate academic credentials, and especially, to profit in some manner from such a deception.

One does not have to look any further than academe, where the individuals who are most knowledgeable in this area and are responsible for granting and evaluating such degrees, have determined that unaccredited degrees are unacceptable and their use fraudulent. In business, the utility of such a degree is dependent upon the ignorance or apathy of the evaluator, but in cases of incompetence, however, even a neophyte attorney would have an easy time convincing a jury that an unaccredited degree holder fraudulently misrepresented his or her qualifications. I suspect that unaccredited degree holders are exposed much more frequently than we are aware of, because it is logical for employers to want to minimize publicity and the potential for increased liability.

Practically every time the holder of an unaccredited degree uses the title, he or she is hoping that it will be mistaken for a degree from an accredited school. It frequently is, and he or she does absolutely nothing to dispel that misconception. The deception ranges from “cross-my-fingers-and-hope-no-one-finds-out,” to lies of omission, to complete fabrications and blatant lies. Who do you know that states, “I am Dr. So-and-So, but my Ph.D. is from an unaccredited school” (much less “and I received my degree in just a few months with significantly less work, but you can’t verify this because the school has now gone out of business, and copies of my dissertation aren’t available anywhere”)?

And of course it isn’t accreditation that determines what is and isn’t fraud, it is the individual and the choices he or she makes. Accreditation only enters into the picture because the holder of an unaccredited degree would like others to (if, perchance, they did not mistake the degree for an accredited one to begin with) believe that is was, at a minimum, equivalent. When exposed, unaccredited degree holders frequently tout such irrelevancies as “state licensed” and “accreditation is voluntary,” and the familiar, “but I did a lot of work for my degree,” oblivious to the fact that he or she is simply corroborating that the deception (fraud) was intentional.

It is interesting to note, that the individuals most successful at deceiving others as to the legitimacy of his or her unaccredited degree, are those who are fairly knowledgeable, intelligent and articulate. In fact, it is quite believable that they could have earned an accredited degree if he or she had chosen too. This only contributes to the overall deception; since it is incomprehensible that such an intelligent individual would ever pursue substandard academic credentials, it is assumed that his or her degree must be legitimate.

These individuals are dangerous. Because they are somewhat successful in passing off their credentials as legitimate (either through smarts, charisma or chutzpah) they set themselves up as a living, breathing example of what can be achieved with a degree from a less-than-wonderful school. What he or she (and the naïve and gullible individuals who seek to follow in their footsteps) fail to realize, is that it wasn’t their deceptive degree, but their knowledge, work, intelligence and smarts that enabled them to achieve their modicum of success. However, they probably would have been even more successful without the illegitimate degree and had, instead, chosen to act ethically.

In order to protect themselves, their substandard credentials and careers, many unaccredited degree holders are all too willing to maintain and expand the deception, frequently becoming outspoken advocates of the school and its programs, in the belief that there is safety in numbers. It is these same individuals who become the most vociferous defenders of their degrees and schools when the truth concerning his or her credentials are brought to light. They mount a plausible, but basically flawed, argument that his or her degree (and the work done to earn it) are equivalent to an accredited one, solely for the purpose of luring both the unsuspecting and ethically challenged to make the same unsound decision they did. Unlike the vast majority of unaccredited degree holders whose intellect and skills immediately expose the fraudulent nature of their credentials, these intelligent and skilled individuals truly are dangerous and a menace to society.


Gus Sainz

 

I don't think so. We received a "threat of the week" from her today, and the language of the threat indicated that she's near-computer illiterate. She didn't even mention the name of the site that she was complaining about, and asked us to "take the site offline"

I responded with my standard "Sorry, there's nothing libelous or defamatory in the thread'

 

banging head slowly on desk

Hi Chip: Thanks again for your vigilance.

However, that is to say, duh, I spent a half hour trying to find the article in the St Catharines paper before I noticed that the article ran in 2001.

(quiet thudding noise)

This, uh, person is getting around to threatening NOW?
If it weren't despicable it would be sort of funny.

 

Uncle Janko... don't feel too bad. You are not the only one. One day I'll learn to check the dates first.

Cheers,
Tony Maranto

 

If she is, as she claims, computer illiterate, I wonder how she found out about DegreeInfo, and, specifically, a thread that is almost three years old. The only plausible answer is that someone told her about it, in hopes that she would complain. I do remember that, at the time (2001), my post created brouhaha on another, long deceased, channel due to me having opined that, “These individuals are dangerous.”

Interestingly, a Google search of the term “Rose Venneri Donatelli“ yields a single hit—this thread.

 

I've recently (August 2004, that is) received a flurry of faxes and Emails from Ms. Donatelli telling me to take down this thread. I have explained that I have nothing to do with running this forum -- but if she will tell me how it is that the newspaper got things wrong, I'll be glad to try to look into it, and at least post a message trying to set things straight. No response to this.

 

Perhaps I should clarify. *She* didn't indicate she was computer illiterate.

I deduced that from the fact that she sent me an email that didn't even reference the domain name or URL where the supposed offending content was located, and asked that I "remove the site from the Internet."

The full text of her email is below:


Dear Mr. White,

I am Rose Donatelli Venneri. It is my understanding that you are responsible for an internet site which involves me.

I am respectfully requesting that you remove this site from the internet.

I trust that this will meet with your approval in order that any legal actions can be avoided.

Thank you,
Rose


It's also worth noting that the email came from a Ruth Heneri. Don't know if that's someone that sent the email for her, or whether, like Sheila Danzig, Rose has aliases that she goes under.

 

There is a long list of CCU Ph.D.s teaching at RA schools. Do you really believe that their employers are unaware of CCU's status as unaccredited, state approved? How about individuals with Ph.D.s or Psy.D.s from CCU or SCUPS or a number of other CA state approved schools that passed psyc. board exams in CA and are licensed clinical psycs. Are you saying they are all frauds? I would agree that claiming or using a "Ph.D." from a diploma mill is fraud but to state this is the case with all unaccredited degrees goes a bit too far.

 

I don’t know whether all academic employers are aware that CCU is unaccredited or state approved, or even what California BPPVE approval means (I am referring to those involved in the employment process, not those involved with admissions or enrollment), but I'm fairly certain that most business emplyers are not. Nevertheless, to date, not a single example of an individual that actually gained and maintained employment in academia on the basis of such a degree has been proffered. What we do see are individuals who have been hired on the basis of accredited credentials who later on added an unaccredited degree to his or her CV and faculty listing. What we do see are individuals who are asked to remove such a listing or are not referred to as “Dr.” in the school literature in spite of having an unaccredited doctorate. And, on the rare occasion when it is claimed that an individual is hired on the basis of an unaccredited degree, we see him or her lose the position when the true nature of the credential comes to light. It may or may not be fair, but that’s the reality of it.

I believe I specifically stated that a fraud involved convincing “someone else of something you are not.” Therefore, if someone with a Ph.D. or Psy.D. from CCU or SCUPS passed the board exams and held themselves to be licensed psychologists in the State of California, they would not be committing fraud. If, on the other hand, they represented their degrees to be legitimately accredited or claim to be licensed in states in which they were not, then their behavior would be fraudulent.

In any event, the gist of my argument is that, for the most part, academia regards unaccredited degrees and their use fraudulent.

I guess there are many degrees of fraud. For example, how many individuals with an unaccredited degree list it on their résumé and specifically state that the degree is from an unaccredited institution? I’ve seen thousands of résumés and I’ve seen hundreds of unaccredited schools listed (including mills). Not once, have I ever seen an unaccredited school listed as such. Why is that?

 

Has Mr Coates anything to say about the droll Ms Donatelli?