Lawsuit update


As promised, I’m providing an update on my lawsuit against Gina Crosley-Corcoran.

The short version: After several delays, Gina’s lawyer filed a motion to dismiss based on jurisdiction, just as we expected. The issue is whether I can sue Gina in Massachusetts or must I sue her in Illinois. There is case law on both sides of the argument and, while the balance seems to be in favor of keeping the case in Massachusetts, there is no way to know what the judge will decide. This is a technical issue and has no relationship to the merits of the actual case.

The longer version: Despite the fact that the motion to dismiss is a technical issue, Gina’s lawyer felt compelled to file a document laced with ad hominem attacks. Here is the Motion to Dismiss, complete with exhibits:

The motion begins:

The Plaintiff in this action, Amy Tuteur, is a bully.

She is, to be sure, a modern-day bully; a “cyber bully,” who spews her venom over the Internet, rather than kicking sand on a playground, but she is a bully nonetheless. Ms. Tuteur, a former physician who is no longer licensed to practice medicine (and yet who identifies herself as an obstetrician gynecologist on her websites), runs a number of blogs, including one entitled “The Skeptical OB,” where she is something of a niche bully…

Curiously, the motion says nothing about the fact that the lawsuit was filed because Gina was abusing the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) in a avowed effort to censor me by contriving to keep webhosts from hosting The Skeptical OB. Instead, the motion states:

This lawsuit represents another form of Ms. Tuteur’s bullying. The Defendant in this action, Gina Crosley-Corcoran, is a mother of three young children, a graduate student, a practicing doula, and (most importantly for the purposes of this motion) a resident of Illinois. A proponent of parents’ right to choose home birth, Ms. Crosley-Corcoran has often found herself the target of Ms. Tuteur’s ire…

In support of her ad hominem attacks, Gina’s lawyer included several of my posts in the exhibits, though curiously neglected to include the original post in question (Questions for The Feminist Breeder). He also fails to mention the multiple DMCA notice filings, the efforts to solicit others to send DMCA filings, etc. Therefore, it appears that Gina has no idea why she was sued, beyond my supposed effort to bully her.

I guess her lawyer has not seen what Gina has been writing lately on her own blog.

… It seems like every single time I’ve ever tried to stand up for myself in this blogging gig, It has backfired. TERRIBLY.

Example: After three years of being non-stopped harassed by that psycho ex-doctor Amy Tuteur, I finally stood up for myself, scraped together just enough cash to hire a lawyer for a few hours of work, and tried to get her to stop. She responded by using her millions to file a federal lawsuit against me that is FULL of outright lies and speculation, designed only to bankrupt my family and ruin my life. Even if/when I WIN against this insanity, the court costs will destroy my family finances forever. I will probably never be able to afford the kind of lawyer I need to actually defend myself In court, so she could simply win a “default” judgement (because I’m just too poor to fight this.) That’s how this shit works. She knows that. That’s why she’s doing it.

But it’s my fault – you know why? I should have kept my fucking mouth shut. I should have gone on ignoring the attacks like I’d done for THREE years prior. Any time I try to respond – try to defend myself – it comes right back to bite me in the ass…

… So, here I am, wrapped up in the aftermath of yet another highly publicized incident that people will use for years to come to paint me as the asshole.

I’m NOT an asshole. I AM a fucking idiot.

I can only agree.


Addendum: I’ve just filed a motion to strike. You can read it at

The key points:

As discussed herein, Defendant Gina Crosley-Corcoran’s Memorandum Of Law In Support Of Her Motion To Dismiss contains numerous immaterial, impertinent, and scandalous allegations that are highly prejudicial and have nothing to do with this action or, more specifically, Defendant’s claim that this Court lacks jurisdiction over her. Dr. Tuteur seeks to have Defendant’s improper allegations stricken from Defendant’s Memorandum or, in the alternative, to have Defendant’s Memorandum stricken in its entirety pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f)…

Crosley-Corcoran’s repeated name-calling is a transparent attempt to cast Dr. Tuteur in a disparaging light. Crosley-Corcoran’s insulting language is not only an attempt to denigrate Dr. Tuteur’s character, it evinces complete disregard for the appropriate level of decorum expected of parties when appearing before a federal court.

Needless to say, none of the Improper Allegations bears any possible relation to Crosley- Corcoran’s arguments that she is not subject to the jurisdiction of this Court. For instance, it is unfathomable how Crosley-Corcoran’s personal feelings about Dr. Tuteur translate to any cognizable basis for her assertion that there is no statutory or Constitutional basis for the exercise of jurisdiction by this Court. Similarly, Crosley-Corcoran’s apparent view that Dr. Tuteur is a “bully” is not relevant to the claims asserted in the Complaint or any conceivable defenses thereto.

Latest update: Gina’s response, which is basically more of the same:

619 Responses to “Lawsuit update”

  1. March 16, 2013 at 10:32 pm #

    I genuinely feel sorry for whoever has to preside over this case. This could go on for ages.

  2. Playing Possum
    March 9, 2013 at 8:22 pm #

    So I just read a statement on TFBs FB from TFB herself that Dr Amy “charges for medical advice on the internet despite not being licensed to do so”, but refuses to link to the site where this happens to stop traffic being driven to it. I am starting to get embarrassed for TFB, she’s behaving so badly.

    • Certified Hamster Midwife
      March 10, 2013 at 7:16 pm #

      She’s not pulling that out of her ass. I don’t know whether this site has any customers, but it does exist.

      • Poogles
        March 30, 2013 at 9:34 am #

        IIRC, Dr. Amy has said in the past that she charges a small fee on her Ask Dr. Amy website to keep the number of incoming questions within a manageable range.

  3. Anaesthetist
    March 9, 2013 at 1:25 pm #

    Its a shame you cant just do the UK thing and refer to the reply of Arkell vs Pressdram

  4. ItsJustaName
    March 8, 2013 at 12:11 pm #

    I’ve read Gina’s pleadings – No lawyer in his right mind would let a doula write a motion to dismiss and then sign his name. However it is extremely common for one layer to write a document and then have another in the proper venue “process” it by signing his name. I think that one of Gina’s earlier lawyers or some lawyer/doula/lay midwife in Illinois wrote up the motions with Gina’s help. The lawyer in Boston would then only charge some nominal sum. Lawyers only do this as a favor for friends.

    If the suit gets kicked out and refiled in Illinois, we can expect much more of the same. But, you know, federal judges in Illinois aren’t actually stupid.

    • LukesCook
      March 8, 2013 at 12:53 pm #

      That was my first thought. Not so sure now that a second set of papers of equally low calibre has been filed. Unless Evan is extraordinarily careless of his reputation.

      • ItsJustaName
        March 8, 2013 at 3:31 pm #

        I’m not a lawyer, but I did google him and you can pull up some of his other pleadings in other cases. The ones I did find sound nothing like these. The name calling is extremely unprofessional.

        But I don’t think any of this would really hurt is reputation in employment law.

        Whoever wrote the motions is emotionally invested in the case. Evan would have no reason to have his panties in a twist. TFB wears perma-twist spanx. Some type of lawyer/lactation consultant wrote this drivel and TFB reviewed and edited it.

        • March 8, 2013 at 7:28 pm #

          “TFB wears perma-twist spanx.” lololol

        • KarenJJ
          March 8, 2013 at 8:37 pm #

          “Whoever wrote the motions is emotionally invested in the case.”

          That doesn’t sound like a good place to start with legal advice.

  5. The Computer Ate My Nym
    March 7, 2013 at 11:10 am #

    Paranoid thought: Is this lawyer who ostensibly signed GCC’s documents really involved with the case? Could she have picked his name out of the phone book and started signing it to documents she wrote? Is that even possible or is there some way to authenticate the signature? Does the court contact the attorney or the client in situations like this? I’m probably wrong, but I can’t reconcile the apparent professionalism of the lawyer’s web site with the documents being submitted.

    • Rabbit
      March 7, 2013 at 11:27 am #

      I think that is unlikely. The documents appear to have been filed electronically, which requires a CM/ECF registration, which is tied to the individual lawyer. You can’t get access to the filing system to make a filing unless you are admitted to practice in the district (or the court admits you pro hac vice). The attorney will also receive an e-mail every time a filing is made in the case. If he wasn’t really the attorney on the case, he’d have called the clerk’s office by now.
      Anyone can register a PACER account and read the filings, but not everyone can register an account to do filings.

      • The Computer Ate My Nym
        March 7, 2013 at 4:42 pm #

        That’s good. It’s just a strange set of briefs. Why would an experienced lawyer submit a brief that starts out “X is a bully” anyway? Especially on an early, procedural brief. Maybe as the start of a closing argument to a jury, but what judge is this going to impress?

  6. KarenJJ
    March 6, 2013 at 11:27 pm #

    ““crazy,” a “fanatic,” a “clown,” “self-absorbed,” “ignorant,” a “pathetic narcissist,” “desperately insecure,” “sanctimonious,” and “immature.””

    Are terms that Dr Amy has used for Gina, so what has Gina accused Dr Amy of? Because if my memory serves correctly they are much worse. And all that said, in amongst all the verbal slanging matches from either side, was Gina in the right to escalate it as she did?

    The quotation at the top was great though. I suppose Gina is trying to say that she is afraid of Dr Amy in the similar way someone might fear a bully that they find intimidating, except I took it to mean that they are afraid of what Dr Amy has to say about those beliefs that they hold dear.

  7. Jackie
    March 6, 2013 at 10:22 pm #

    Why can’t they show you the respect you’re due and say “Dr. Tuteur” instead of Ms.. It really is interesting to read all the back and forth. Just for my own info, when did she start selling the right go,view her blog? Is it to offset her legal costs?

    • The Bofa on the Sofa
      March 7, 2013 at 10:52 am #

      Why can’t they show you the respect you’re due and say “Dr. Tuteur” instead of Ms.

      Because they have included in their argument the fact that she let her license lapse, which means she apparently isn’t qualified to be called doctor, and if they actually called her doctor, then that would an admission that the fact her license lapsed is not relevant.

      • Kalacirya
        March 7, 2013 at 11:05 am #

        I really can’t believe that they’re trying to make it a point in the case. It has absolutely nothing to do with the suit, it’s just a pathetic attempt at discrediting Dr. Amy.

  8. stenvenywrites
    March 6, 2013 at 5:25 pm #

    So having failed to shut down the opposition by abusing the legal process, she wants us to feel sorry for her? To quote Dr. Gregory House: Here’s how life works: you can get an apology, or you can shoot people. Not both.

  9. Meredith
    March 6, 2013 at 4:53 pm #

    SOMEBODY has a pretty high opinion of herself..

  10. KateTdid
    March 6, 2013 at 4:31 pm #

    Gina’s Boston lawyer answered an interesting question on a while back:

    • auntbea
      March 6, 2013 at 4:35 pm #

      Oof. Being on the wrong side of this one must be killing him. I hope.

  11. Are you nuts
    March 6, 2013 at 3:21 pm #

    Did anyone see on her Facebook page that she plans to host a Q&A session on YouTube? Here’s a direct quote: “I’ll do my best to answer anything, even if you ask me some insanity about aerospace, I’ll google that shit if I have to.” So now she can present, with equal confidence, on birth and aerospace! Can’t wait!

    • Bombshellrisa
      March 6, 2013 at 3:29 pm #

      That ought to be quite the conversation-sounds like my dd, who has become an “expert” on orthopedic surgery and feels quite qualified to pontificate on the subject of joint replacement. She accompanied grandma to the doctor’s before and after all three of her joint replacements and now has (through close proximity) absorbed a great deal of knowledge, although she isn’t at the Google University Graduate of Cut and Paste stage yet.

      • Are you nuts
        March 6, 2013 at 4:01 pm #

        Sounds to me like she’s just about qualified to start performing knee replacement surgeries! I wonder if anyone’s ever had a knee replacement with only a hot bath for pain relief…

        • Bombshellrisa
          March 6, 2013 at 4:08 pm #

          I wonder if the comfort measure so lauded by Penny Simkin would help? Or maybe having a doula tell you that you aren’t in pain? Maybe some rebozo scarf rituals. We did have a “bye bye hip” and “bye bye knee” party for my mom, does that sorta count as a Blessingway?

      • KarenJJ
        March 6, 2013 at 11:06 pm #

        Sounds like how I became an expert in immunology. Not enough to confuse any actual immunologists, just enough to confuse a few anti-vaxxers that are silly enough to try and say that we don’t need anti-bodies because the body can rely on it’s innate immunity.

    • lacrima
      March 7, 2013 at 6:15 pm #

      Speaking as an ex-astrophysicist, now librarian:
      HA HA HA HA HA HA, have fun with that, sunshine.

  12. BS
    March 6, 2013 at 3:16 pm #

    Perhaps if you had just ceased from using the photo you could have gone back to defaming people on your blog and avoided this nonsense.

    I landed here via another facebook page and am honestly amazed that you would bother with something like this? What’s the big effin deal Dr. A?

    You are NOT allowed to take other people’s photos and post them without permission. I know they don’t teach you that in medical school – but they sure as hell cover it in intellectual property classes. Why don’t you take one?

    • I don't have a creative name
      March 6, 2013 at 3:32 pm #

      Gina DID give her permission, “BS”, and then acted like Dr. Amy should’ve known that the permission was “just kidding”.

      • Karen in SC
        March 6, 2013 at 3:41 pm #

        Plus, Fair Use.

        You could just as easily ask, What’s the big deal, TFB? The picture was one her blog for all to see, and Dr. Amy linked to the post, bringing her more traffic, potentially. TFB was the one serving take down notices, urging others to do the same, threatening a lawsuit, gathering contributions for legal fees, trying to get others to join her, etc etc.

        Who’s making the bigger deal?

        • BS
          March 6, 2013 at 4:00 pm #

          “Take it back to your blog and obsess” is not exactly permission. Amy was asked nicely afterwards to remove it. Fair use is for educational purposes – not defaming. Sorry but Amy does seem like a bully and I don’t even know this Gina Person.. I’m just reading the dropbox items here Amy has posted. Seems like a waste. Why does Dr. Amy care who advocates for what… she does her thing – someone else does hers.

          Amys post titles prove that her professionalism does not come with empathy. Thank god she’s not providing a bedside manner anymore.

          • BS
            March 6, 2013 at 4:03 pm #

            and I can’t read the other blog because it isn’t open access… – so all I have is this.

          • March 6, 2013 at 4:49 pm #

            That’s sad. Someone should do a Cliff Notes version. (Hint: the information is in the original filing.)

          • Captain Obvious
            March 6, 2013 at 6:19 pm #


          • Squillo
            March 6, 2013 at 5:10 pm #

            But you just know it’s defamation, like you know without reading the statute that Fair Use is just for educational purposes.

          • The Bofa on the Sofa
            March 6, 2013 at 4:11 pm #

            “Take it back to your blog and obsess” is not exactly permission.

            True. It’s more like an instruction to do it.

            BTW, would you care to respond to my question above. For the record, at least.

          • DirtyOldTown
            March 6, 2013 at 4:46 pm #

            Yes, we’d all love to hear where you acquired your legal expertise, BS. Ally McBeal doesn’t count.

          • The Bofa on the Sofa
            March 6, 2013 at 4:50 pm #

            Only because BS is the one who told us all about what we would learn in an IP class. I mean, no one would tell us that unless they actually took one themselves, would they?

          • Kalacirya
            March 6, 2013 at 4:15 pm #

            And Fair Use is for more than education, it can also cover commentary and criticism. You can’t deny that Dr. Amy did just that.

            Also, please cite the defamation against Gina from that blog post. I wasn’t aware of any.

          • suchende
            March 6, 2013 at 4:56 pm #

            ” Fair use is for educational purposes – not defaming.”

            You’re WILDLY mistaken.

            “Fair use is a copyright principle based on the belief that the public is entitled to freely use portions of copyrighted materials for purposes of commentary and criticism. For example, if you wish to criticize a novelist, you should have the freedom to quote a portion of the novelist’s work without asking permission. Absent this freedom, copyright owners could stifle any negative comments about their work.”


            In fact, it’s NOT fair use to use a material that would divert the author from income otherwise, which is often what educators (illegally) do.

          • I don't have a creative name
            March 6, 2013 at 5:11 pm #

            Oh, don’t confuse her with the facts. That’s meen.

          • Iris
            March 6, 2013 at 5:11 pm #

            Hi G, kids ok? HH behaving himself?

          • March 6, 2013 at 5:29 pm #

            “Amy’s post titles prove that her professionalism does not come with empathy.”

            Ouch, that’s gonna leave a mark.

          • Victoria
            March 6, 2013 at 5:46 pm #

            “Who does Dr Amy care who advocates for what . . . she does her thing – someone else does hers.”

            I think you meant to say this to that “Gina Person” who was actually trying to stop Dr Amy from doing her thing. If you want to get right to what you really wanted to say then now would be the time – Dr Amy is a ‘bully’ and should have her website taken down. Dr Amy has responded on her own blog to things that Gina has written on her blog. So because she didn’t just slap a bunch of “go mama”s on the response she is now a bully? She was critical so she deserved those ridiculous and illegal takedown notices being filed?

            Bedside manner? Dead giveaway of where the value in treatment is and it is all about the ‘nice feelings.’ Some of us non-wilting flowers can put up with a bit of not so great bedside manner for a thorough and knowledgeable doctor. I actually think a number of posts where Dr Amy recounts her time in practise show she had a lot of empathy for those under her care.

          • Bombshellrisa
            March 6, 2013 at 6:02 pm #

            Cause you, ya know, being nice means that you are smart!

          • The Computer Ate My Nym
            March 6, 2013 at 6:12 pm #

            “Take it back to your blog and obsess” is not exactly permission.

            IIRC, the full quote was “Here’s something for you to take back to your blog and obsess about.” She told Dr. Tuteur that she could take the picture back to her blog. Not just take the picture and obsess over it, but specifically take it back to her blog. I’m not sure how else to read it except as explicit permission.

          • Something From Nothing
            March 6, 2013 at 7:06 pm #

            BS, with all sincerity, you have no clue what you are talking about. Why don’t you read some of the posts that Dr. Tuteur has written, and then spend some time with Gina. Then, you might see things differently. Dr. Tuteur cares who advocates for what because there are a tremendous number of ass hats like Gina handing out bad and dangerous information. Spend some time reading before you start talking shit when you are not informed

          • Deb
            March 7, 2013 at 3:16 am #

            So you read something emotive from someone claiming to be a victim of bullying, and that proves they are truthful and correct? Sterling critical thinking skills there. If I tell you the sky is green will you believe me?

          • moto_librarian
            March 7, 2013 at 11:04 am #

            Fair use is NOT limited to educational purposes – it also covers criticism, reporting, and commentary. If you actually knew anything about intellectual property, you would already know that. You’re out of your league here, BS.

          • Susan
            March 7, 2013 at 11:23 am #

            In context it seemed exactly like permission to me. Frankly I think the argument is valid that Gina likely posted the picture hoping Dr. Amy would post it and then she could play “gotcha”.

    • The Bofa on the Sofa
      March 6, 2013 at 3:46 pm #

      You are NOT allowed to take other people’s photos and post them without permission. I know they don’t teach you that in medical school – but they sure as hell cover it in intellectual property classes. Why don’t you take one?

      For the record, can you tell us when and where you took an intellectual property class?

    • theNormalDistribution
      March 6, 2013 at 3:49 pm #

      Yes, yes you are, and if you had taken an intellectual property class you would know that.

    • Squillo
      March 6, 2013 at 3:51 pm #

      Go back to law school. There are most certainly instances in which one is allowed to use others’ intellectual property without their permission. Try reading the actual law. 17 U.S.C. § 107

      Moreover, if Ms. Crosley-Corcoran had actually filed the suit she seemed to feel so strongly she would win, or, alternately, ignored Amy’s use of the disputed photo, denied herself the pleasure of filing several DCMA takedown notices and soliciting others to do the same, she certainly could have avoided this nonsense.

    • Sterrell
      March 6, 2013 at 3:53 pm #

      Oh, hey, the permission she granted when she stated, “And since I don’t want to leave you without something to take back to your blog and obsess about… (picture).” But no worries GCC, you can rewrite history however you please.

    • Kalacirya
      March 6, 2013 at 3:58 pm #

      Fair use. Faaaaaaaair use. Fair use.

      The end.

  13. Squillo
    March 6, 2013 at 3:08 pm #

    One does wonder how Ms. Crosley-Corcoran happened upon Evan Fray-Witzer and decided to engage him as her attorney. The home page of the website touts the 2-attorney firm’s narrow focus (management-side employment law) as a bonus: “We don’t do everything because we would rather do a few things exceedingly well.” [Emphasis original.]

  14. home-birther
    March 6, 2013 at 3:06 pm #

    You are a scary woman Amy. I can tell by reading your blog. Fear inducing psychopath. Thanks for spouting NON-science.

    • Durango
      March 6, 2013 at 3:14 pm #


      • March 6, 2013 at 4:52 pm #

        What is so scary about Dr. Tuteur? Could someone explain this to me?

        • DirtyOldTown
          March 6, 2013 at 5:08 pm #

          She likes math, understands statistics, and doesn’t include “sistah” or “mama” at the end of her comments. Also there is a decided lack of hearts, kissy marks, and multiple exclamation points on her blog posts. It’s downright terrifying, sistah!!!!

        • Kalacirya
          March 6, 2013 at 5:15 pm #

          Dr. Amy doesn’t respect the babymother Anj.

          • Bombshellrisa
            March 6, 2013 at 5:22 pm #

            motherbabyplacenta-Don’t you dare leave the placenta out!

          • Kalacirya
            March 6, 2013 at 5:23 pm #

            LOL, is that what we’re calling it now. I’ve been derelict in my reading.

          • Bombshellrisa
            March 6, 2013 at 5:35 pm #

            Actually I invented the term, I was tired of Ina May inventing names and titles and thought I would have a go

          • Hiro
            March 12, 2013 at 9:58 am #

            it is only a matter of time…

          • Bombshellrisa
            March 12, 2013 at 2:04 pm #

            Arrested Development!! And if I remember correctly, Buster was overdue, as he didn’t want to leave his mother’s womb!!

        • suchende
          March 6, 2013 at 6:06 pm #

          I find Dr. Amy scary. She knows her shit and she’s not afraid to make you look foolish.

    • Kalacirya
      March 6, 2013 at 3:14 pm #

      Good one, home-birther. That was really funny.

    • Bombshellrisa
      March 6, 2013 at 3:30 pm #

      Hi Gina!

      • home-birther
        March 6, 2013 at 4:02 pm #

        My name is actually Sam – short for Samantha – but whatever. You are a nasty bunch… so have fun with your “science”

        • March 6, 2013 at 4:13 pm #

          Go read your first comment. It was a nasty comment. What kind of responses were you hoping to get?

        • auntbea
          March 6, 2013 at 4:25 pm #

          I will, thanks! I love science!

        • March 6, 2013 at 4:50 pm #

          So, I take it that you don’t believe in science?

          • Bombshellrisa
            March 6, 2013 at 5:22 pm #

            Well, she doesn’t believe in “non science” and since she doesn’t agree with the scientific evidence as presented on this blog…one is left to wonder. Maybe any theory more complex than someone being “scary” is just too much for her.

        • DirtyOldTown
          March 6, 2013 at 4:54 pm #

          But if you let us take “science” and science, what will you have left to bolster your fanciful claims about placenta consumption and the evils of pain relief? Think carefully before you give up “science” home-birther. You need something convincing to beat otherwise rational women about the head with, and so far “science” is your best weapon next to guilt. Generous offer, but why don’t you sleep on it?

        • Siri
          March 6, 2013 at 5:16 pm #

          Thanks! Ditto with your attempts to take women and babies back to the dark ages, death rates included. No need for any science or ‘science’ in your world.

        • Kalacirya
          March 6, 2013 at 5:18 pm #

          Is it just me, or has the whole deride-by-quotations thing gotten old and tired?

        • Captain Obvious
          March 6, 2013 at 6:21 pm #

          Science that we can teach our living children about.

        • Deb
          March 7, 2013 at 3:23 am #

          You’re using that special dictionary again, aren’t you.

    • March 6, 2013 at 3:43 pm #

      And there is ZERO fear inducing going on in the home birth community. No one tries at ALL to scare the crap out of women away from interventions and hospitals and OBs or anything medical. Nope, not at all.

      Big difference is Dr. Amy uses actual facts and data. In the home birth community it’s a bunch of nonsense and sort-of true information and some times just downright false information. For example: “My home birth midwife said breech is safe, just a variation of normal, the SOGC said it’s safe!” Then you go read the SOGC bulletin and you find out one key piece of information is missing from what that midwife said: it should be attempted only inside an operating room. Oh and also, continuous EFM is mandatory in second stage. Obviously, neither of which are possible at a home birth. Just an example.

    • Karen in SC
      March 6, 2013 at 3:45 pm #

      Two out of three babies that die at homebirth would have lived in the hospital. That’s REAL reason to fear.

      • March 6, 2013 at 5:51 pm #

        Slightly more than two in three, which is a legitimate reason for concern, although it is comparable to that caused by moving to a house five or six miles farther from your child’s school. But Dr. Amy says she thinks non-prospective research without randomised trials is “crap”, so it is not clear why she cites the two-in-three figure.

    • Victoria
      March 6, 2013 at 5:51 pm #

      You’re a scary “wombyn” Samantha. I can tell just by reading your comment. Brain-to-porridge inducing nutter. Thanks for spouting nothing of importance.

    • Deb
      March 7, 2013 at 3:20 am #

      So did you actually have a point or did you just feel like trying to upset someone? What a lovely way to spend your time, you could at least come up with creative insults.

  15. Kalacirya
    March 6, 2013 at 1:58 pm #

    Also, I’m of course no law student or lawyer, but I really enjoyed this:

    “Even if Rule 12(f) was applicable, the Court should reject Tuteur’s claims as inconsistent with her own actions. Tuteur claims in her motion that the use of the word “bully” and references to her as “Ms. Tuteur” as opposed to “Dr. Tuteur” should be stricken because they “are scandalous” and “improperly cast Dr. Tuteurin a derogatory light.” Plaintiff’s Motion, p. 4.

    It is a particularly hard argument for Tuteur to make given that, within hours of the Motion to Dismiss being filed, Tuteur prominently posted copies of the Motion, Memo, and Exhibits to her website, along with her commentary on the same. Surely, if Ms. Tuteur actually felt scandalized by the contents of the Motion to Dismiss, she would not have done everything within her power to publicize the same. Given her actions, Tuteur’s claims to the contrary cannot be said to be made in good faith.”

    What kind of faulty logic is this? So their reasoning is that if Dr. Amy really found the motion to be defaming, she wouldn’t have posted it for the public to see? What a load.

    • moto_librarian
      March 6, 2013 at 2:03 pm #

      Given that all filings are a matter of public record, why shouldn’t Dr. A provide links?

      • Kalacirya
        March 6, 2013 at 2:04 pm #

        Well clearly, obviously, duh, if Dr. Amy really thought that the filings contained information that misrepresented her, she would pretend the filings didn’t exist!

    • Captain Obvious
      March 6, 2013 at 6:23 pm #


  16. Kalacirya
    March 6, 2013 at 1:51 pm #

    LOL, Gina included comments for the other SOB posts she included, but not for this one on the Lawsuit Update. I wonder if that’s because the whole thing is just dumping on her and her lawyer.

  17. Amy Tuteur, MD
    March 6, 2013 at 1:27 pm #

    Latest update: Gina’s response, which is basically more of the same:

    • GuestB
      March 6, 2013 at 1:45 pm #

      Her lawyer used the word “silly”. Somebody please tell me this isn’t right.

      I’m picturing any one of my dental charts right now:
      “I didn’t feel the need to investigate the patients complaint of pain because it was, well, silly.”

      • Squillo
        March 6, 2013 at 2:54 pm #

        OTOH, I’m impressed that the opposition filing began with an epigraph.

        • TiffanyEpiphany
          March 6, 2013 at 2:56 pm #

          !!! Which says everything that anyone needs to know!

    • Karen in SC
      March 6, 2013 at 1:54 pm #

      I’m dumbfounded that a response to a motion to strike based on derogatory language just repeats more of the same. And I’m double dumbfounded that any blog content had any bearing on the points of law. As evidence yes, but in this context. Of course, I’m not a lawyer, so maybe someone can explain if this makes any sense.

      • Squillo
        March 6, 2013 at 2:39 pm #

        But the bestest part is that Amy’s post–including the quotation of yet another admission by GCC that her intention was not to protect her IP but to get Amy to stop “harassing” her–is now part of the court record, courtesy of GCC’s own lawyer.

        This just gets better and better.

        • auntbea
          March 6, 2013 at 3:43 pm #

          At least this one sounds mostly like it was written by a grown-up.

          • Squillo
            March 6, 2013 at 4:10 pm #

            Or at least, not by the law clerk. (No offense meant to actual law clerks.)

    • The Computer Ate My Nym
      March 6, 2013 at 4:02 pm #

      I can’t help but feel that both of you are arguing the other’s case in this situation. GCC is making the case that she is harassing you quite well with her irrelevant attacks in the affidavit. And you seem to me to be trying to make it easier for her by striking the more malicious parts from the record. Perhaps I’m missing something-I have no legal training at all-but my first thought on reading the response was “some people just can’t be helped.”

      I don’t think she’s doing herself any favors by now refusing to use any title-Dr or Ms-for you. That will confuse the issue since your husband is involved as an attorney and the judge is unlikely to appreciate having to work to figure out which Tuteur is being discussed in a given paragraph. It’s make me cranky anyway.

    • auntbea
      March 6, 2013 at 4:32 pm #


  18. anonymous
    March 6, 2013 at 1:16 pm #

    This from Jake’s Page:

    At Cipolla Associates, LLC, Marcus represents clients in a wide range of legal matters including the myriad practice issues confronting small businesses including non-physician health care practitioners, the educational rights of special needs young people, criminal defense, family law, employment, copyright, trademark, and antitrust.

    Yep, she’s a woman. Off to the right, there’s a link to an interview on a lactivist website.

    The only downside to all this is that I’m afraid that Dr. Amy’s husband is going to get calls from some of these birth nutters at his office now.

    • Bombshellrisa
      March 6, 2013 at 1:32 pm #

      “We are one of few U.S. firms familiar with the legal and regulatory aspects of the daily practice of non-physician health care professionals such as International Board Certified Lactation Consultants and midwives, including unlicensed practice areas.”
      How many lactation consultants do you know that get sued?

      • Kalacirya
        March 6, 2013 at 1:47 pm #

        She definitely represents CPMs, I know on her personal website she has at least one practice cited.

      • Siri
        March 6, 2013 at 5:25 pm #

        Lolol. Strategies for springing a placenta from jail, sorry, hospital: opt for lotus birth and bring it home attached to baby. Eat it whole and take it home in your stomach. Refuse to push it out/retain it and take it home in your vagina. Get your husband to stuff it down his pants. Have it declared deputy mom and given status of personhood.

        • Victoria
          March 6, 2013 at 5:57 pm #

          Oh boy – I have tears running down my face – that made me laugh so hard. I can just imagine my husband’s face if I asked him to shove the placenta down his pants!

    • LukesCook
      March 6, 2013 at 3:38 pm #

      I followed the “Awards for Jake Marcus” link on her page. I didn’t find much in the way of awards, but did find a bio, presumably provided by Jake herself, which mentioned only three trial cases – one not pursued after negotiation, one where client was found innocent and one in which she was involved as an associate, no less, at a firm she last worked for in 1991 and even though she’s apparently been a solo practitioner for 19 years – does that sound to anyone else like the level of experience you’d expect after your first few weeks in practice? Of her 4 peer recommendations, 1 is from her own partner (!), and 3 of her 6 publications are features on breastfeeding for Mothering Magazine. She also lists under her qualifications (oh cringe) “Certificate in Editing from Temple University”. Unless that’s something very different to what it sounds like, isn’t that a bit “Blackboard Monitor”? She sounds just like Gina, a hobbyist and a dabbler without much substance.

  19. Amy Tuteur, MD
    March 6, 2013 at 1:08 pm #


    • AllieFoyle
      March 6, 2013 at 1:16 pm #

      So naturally she banned Priscilla and the one person who liked that post, right? Though shalt not express doubt in Dear Leader, er Breeder. There must be like five people left there.

      • Bombshellrisa
        March 6, 2013 at 1:31 pm #

        Probably the ones that contributed to her legal fund or are paying to read. They figure they should get their monies worth.

      • Victoria
        March 6, 2013 at 6:00 pm #

        I notice that the comments are very few now. Free thinkers are not going to stay around for the type of paranoid control Gina likes to engage in. The funny thing is that these people think they are so good at sticking it to the ‘man’, standing up for themselves etc that they don’t realise they have found a rather unworthy and rather crazy substitute.

    • Frequent Guest
      March 7, 2013 at 8:58 am #

      We should take a collection and purchase one of her subscriptions, so that we can read all of these high-quality, informative posts! I’m DYING to see what she wrote…

  20. An Actual Attorney
    March 6, 2013 at 11:52 am #

    I realize that this will only mean something to the other legal folks, but I have to say it.

    OMG, pick up a fu**ing Bluebook!

    • suchende
      March 6, 2013 at 12:14 pm #

      So many typos. My red pen hand was itching the whole time.

      • Rabbit
        March 6, 2013 at 1:38 pm #

        The underlining going across the page after each header was driving me nuts too. Neither Word nor Word Perfect always convert to PDF perfectly. The underlining across a whole line is a known issue with both programs. You have to look at the PDF before you file it to make sure the formatting is right. I know it has nothing to do with the substance of the filing, but it is distracting, damn it!

        • suchende
          March 6, 2013 at 3:32 pm #

          Law: where it’s okay to ignore the substance when you’re annoyed with problems in the form.

          • An Actual Attorney
            March 6, 2013 at 3:51 pm #


          • Rabbit
            March 6, 2013 at 4:58 pm #

            Not what I said at all. Substance should be what matters, which is why when I am writing a brief I do what I can to make sure that the formatting is not distracting from the substance. And this is why there are serious articles written about choosing the best font for your brief, whether case names should be in italics or underlined, etc. I

          • suchende
            March 6, 2013 at 6:11 pm #

            I wasn’t trying to put words in your mouth, just my own tongue-in-cheek comment on our field.

          • Rabbit
            March 7, 2013 at 10:19 am #

            I apologize, I misread your tone.

    • Squillo
      March 6, 2013 at 12:33 pm #

      Perhaps GCC’s attorney clerked for Posner?

    • Frequent Guest
      March 7, 2013 at 8:55 am #

      YES! Holy hell.

  21. AllieFoyle
    March 6, 2013 at 11:31 am #

    I’m almost wondering if there is some strategy involved in submitting such a blatantly ridiculous and childish response. It’s as though they’re intentionally trying to keep this thing on the level of petty bullying that GCC is accustomed to operating under or just trying to make it so distasteful that her actions are lost in what seems like an avalanche of childish behavior and personal acrimony.

    She’s clearly the bully in this situation. Sure, I feel sorry for her husband and kids, I guess (and even for her to an extent, as she seems to be her own worst enemy but lacks the insight to realize it and protect herself from her own poor choices) but there is sweet justice in seeing someone stand up to her manipulativeness.

    • Frequent Guest
      March 7, 2013 at 8:56 am #

      I don’t think GCC is sophisticated enough to pull off such strategy. And if she was, legally, that would be a really stupid thing to do.

  22. Squillo
    March 6, 2013 at 11:29 am #

    GCC’s entire motion is actually a nice illustration of the post that started the whole legal brouhaha:

    Lawyers say:

    If you have the facts, pound the facts. If you have the law, pound the law. If you have neither the facts nor the law, pound the table.

  23. Renee Martin
    March 6, 2013 at 11:20 am #

    It just occurred to me that GCC is doing the very same thing as all the HB MWs and their advocates do- make an action all about persecution, and how they are being targeted for promoting HB and providing HB, even when it has zero to do with those things. “Midwifery Today” is even having a conference all about how their cause is about human rights, because in America, asking for regulation of the most basic kind for HB MWs = witch hunt, dontcha know?

    • PH Student
      March 6, 2013 at 12:25 pm #

      This made me laugh. I realize I may be putting my foot in it here, but the vast majority of HB advocates I know who preach about “choice” and “human rights” are also the ones who protest at abortion clinics and support personhood laws. Oh, the irony.

      • March 6, 2013 at 5:23 pm #

        Huh, I know a lot more left wing hippie types although I am aware there is a faction like the one you describe.

        • thepragmatist
          March 6, 2013 at 5:36 pm #

          I just met this faction locally. A nearby “pregnancy crisis center” is hosting a screen of The Farm 2 (or whatever it is called) and the pieces all just started to fall together for me… some of the most militant among them are extremely religious.

  24. Squillo
    March 6, 2013 at 10:26 am #

    Question for the attorneys among us: Could Amy potentially use GCC’s jurisdiction motion (specifically the references to Amy’s putative bullying) as evidence of her intentions in filing the takedowns?

    • An Actual Attorney
      March 6, 2013 at 11:07 am #


      • Squillo
        March 6, 2013 at 11:24 am #

        Ouch. That’s gonna leave a mark.

    • The Bofa on the Sofa
      March 6, 2013 at 11:35 am #

      That was my response exactly. What bearing does the question of whether she is a bully have on the question of jurisdiction? Whether the court has jurisdiction or not depends on legal issues that determine jurisdiction, and not on whether she is a bully or not.

      I can absolutely see a lawyer who would use that argument as evidence that it is about shutting her up. Basically, because she is a bully, she can’t sue in this court. The concept doesn’t make sense, even.

  25. auntbea
    March 6, 2013 at 10:25 am #

    ?sdrawkcab tuo emoc stnemmoc ym gnikam si zyqsiD yhw aedi na evah enoyna seoD

    • auntbea
      March 6, 2013 at 10:29 am #

      BWT, that reads “Does anyone know why Disqus is making my comments come out backwards?” Refresh fixed it, but that was really weird.

      • Victoria
        March 6, 2013 at 6:03 pm #

        But kind of cool. Then the homebirthers wouldn’t know what we were saying!

      • KarenJJ
        March 6, 2013 at 7:11 pm #

        That happened to me once. Weird.

    • The Computer Ate My Nym
      March 6, 2013 at 10:32 am #

      oN. yrroS.

  26. LibrarianSarah
    March 6, 2013 at 8:57 am #

    I really wish TFB would stop misusing the term “psychotic.” Psychosis is a serious medical condition not an insult. For a women who appears to be quite gung ho about “checking her privilege” she has a major blind spot when it comes to severe mental illness.

    • March 6, 2013 at 10:15 am #

      I usually ignore that accusation, or if I find myself annoyed, I think “Project much, Gina?”.

    • auntbea
      March 6, 2013 at 10:30 am #

      No, no. Not checking *her* privilege. Just yours.

      • Kalacirya
        March 6, 2013 at 11:31 am #

        Gina checks the privilege that is easy for her to check, the privilege that doesn’t require her to do anything. She already wasn’t doing anything actively or even passively racist, so she’ll go on and on about white privilege. She gets to pontificate and then not do anything about it. She’s far from the first and certainly not the last fellow feminist I’ve seen doing this.

        She’s not checking any of the rest of her privilege. Her WIC tantrum, her belief that access to NCB-based services are just what more poor, brown, what have you women need (like Gina is really talking to any of these people to know what they want), her direct or indirect shaming of c-section or formula feeding, and the list goes on.

        But addressing any of her privilege as they relate to these things would require her to shut up, and honestly absorb the opinions of others in those less privileged groups that may disagree with her. That education might require a change in her rhetoric, and a change in her perspective. And you can bet your ass that isn’t happening with her current state of maturity.

        Gina thinks she can get away with being super classist because she perceives herself to be in the oppressed class, when she really isn’t. The first reason is that she came from a low income family and she doesn’t feel they did right by her, and the second is that she doesn’t have much of an income as an adult.

        Regarding the first, she may have grown up poor, but the fact that she grew up that way, spent her 20s gallivanting as a musician, and then comfortably stepped right into the middle/lower-middle class shows you that she’s not particular oppressed. I say this as someone with a childhood that was very similar to the snippets I’ve seen dropped by Gina. I am 22, I’m doing pretty well for myself. I was also born immensely privileged and I was lucky to get the set of traits that I did. I hit a jackpot, and it was due to very little to no effort of mine. There are people who have worked 10x as hard as I ever have or probably ever will, and those people won’t move an inch in terms of socioeconomic status, education, what have you, where I’ve moved miles. I have a deep and unmoving respect for the poor and disadvantaged, but you won’t see me claiming to be them, or trying to project my pet issues as things that I think the poor and oppressed want or need.

        She doesn’t have much of an income because of her immense luxury of going to school (albeit probably on loans) to pursue a nebulous career goal that may or may not exist. Financially, it’s likely to bite her in the ass hard, but she still have significant privilege to even have a go at it.

        Rant over.

        • March 6, 2013 at 5:14 pm #

          Skewing white and middle-class or higher is a common problem in feminism, but I do think her WIC complaints have merit. We have the same problem with them.

          • thepragmatist
            March 6, 2013 at 5:40 pm #

            Wait a second. I’m really sick today, so maybe I am delerious… but weren’t you the one just going on and on about how good healthcare is too expensive to produce for the masses, BUT YOU ARE ON SOCIAL ASSISTANCE? Please keep them coming, Alan. You’re brightening up my otherwise awful day. Oh, the hypocrisy.

          • March 6, 2013 at 6:24 pm #

            Wow, you really have misapprehended where I have been coming from! My avatar is an Obama/GD amalgam, I have consistently advocated for single payer national health care, noted that my kids’ health care is provided by SCHIP, and even mentioned an admiration for Marxist principles.

            But you apparently took me for some kind of Tea Party bootstrapper? LOL, nonononono. I was saying I want us to reduce costs as they do in Europe, by rationing care, not by dumping poor people off the system.

    • Kalacirya
      March 6, 2013 at 11:07 am #

      I wonder if she even realizes what actual psychosis is, but I bet you that she doesn’t. Either way it’s pretty egregiously ableist.

      I don’t see how psycho is any more tactful than calling someone a retard.

      • S
        March 6, 2013 at 12:51 pm #

        I don’t think she does. I remember one or two people explaining it to her and asking her to stop using that word, and she responded (in a softened tone) with something like, “Well, what word would you use?” She clearly didn’t understand what they were telling her.

        • Kalacirya
          March 6, 2013 at 1:07 pm #

          Homegirl needs a thesaurus, she could use words like malevolent, pernicious, malignant, irrational, illogical. All such words would describe how Gina sees Dr. Amy. And for coarser and less complicated speech, she could call her an asshole, a douchebag, douchecanoe, f–wit, all are words Gina loves to use. Any of what I listed would get her point across without being ableist and insensitive to those with psychotic mental illness.

          • auntbea
            March 6, 2013 at 3:46 pm #

            But insensitive to canoes.

          • Kalacirya
            March 6, 2013 at 4:04 pm #

            Douchecanoe is like telling someone to have at a bag of d–ks. What does it mean? I have no idea, it was just something vulgar they slapped together. Perhaps it means a douche so large that you need a canoe to navigate its waters.

          • Bombshellrisa
            March 6, 2013 at 3:52 pm #

            Calling someone a “pernicious toad” once called them off me for the better part of a year. Granted, she had no idea what in the world I meant, but she wasn’t going to stick around and find out.

      • Siri
        March 6, 2013 at 4:04 pm #

        Or, as Alan does, a spazz.

        • March 6, 2013 at 5:16 pm #

          I suppose people with spastic disorders could be offended by that; but it does get exhausting to watch out for every possible verbal slight.

          • March 6, 2013 at 5:22 pm #

            Or for pity’s sake, there are plenty of words to use. Find a few that don’t single people out for characteristics that they didn’t choose to have.

          • Victoria
            March 6, 2013 at 6:04 pm #

            You actually watch out for verbal slights? I cannot say I would have guessed that.

          • March 6, 2013 at 6:30 pm #

            Ha, goes to illustrate the old parable of the blind men describing an elephant. On poker and sports message boards, they groan because I don’t let them slide by when saying “that’s gay” or “I really raped him in that hand” without a rebuke from me.

          • S
            March 6, 2013 at 8:27 pm #


  27. Antigonos CNM
    March 6, 2013 at 8:32 am #

    Does the phrase “psychotic ex-doctor” in a public forum not constitute grounds for a libel suit?

    • JC
      March 6, 2013 at 8:47 am #

      It is still interesting to me that Gina can call Dr. Amy a “psychotic ex-doctor” and yet it is Dr. Amy who is the bully. Gina is always the one who resorts to name-calling. I am tired of the”she’s/he’s a bully” card being played all the time. It’s as if the person calling “bully” will automatically get sympathy and support. Until Gina banned people who clicked on links from SOB, I read almost all her blog posts. And I’ve read Dr. Amy’s regarding Gina. If anyone is the bully in this situation, it’s Gina.

      • Sterrell
        March 6, 2013 at 2:32 pm #

        Yes, Dr. A’s the bully when GCC is the one who has: stalked people on twitter while giving birth to tell them how wrong/stupid they are for getting an epidural, blocked people from her website using the term “f***tards,” etc.

    • The Computer Ate My Nym
      March 6, 2013 at 10:31 am #

      Um…IANAL, but probably. She’s not an “ex-doctor” because she has an MD from a legitimate institution and has not engaged in any misconduct that prevents her from practicing as far as I know. Also, she could probably have a formal psychiatric exam entered demonstrating a lack of psychosis. So the allegation is untrue and appears intended to damage her reputation. Isn’t that the definition of libel?

      • thepragmatist
        March 6, 2013 at 5:42 pm #

        And even if she DID have a PPP it shows a complete lack of understanding about PPP to suggest it would cost someone their license. It is time-limited and treatable, after all. Unlike stupidity and narcissism.

    • Certified Hamster Midwife
      March 6, 2013 at 12:18 pm #

      One of the narratives about Dr. Amy in the homebirthsphere is that she lost her license due to postpartum psychosis.

      • Siri
        March 6, 2013 at 4:56 pm #

        My hamster lost its licence after developing PPP and eating an entire litter.

        • anonomom
          March 6, 2013 at 4:58 pm #

          Outrageous. Let’s set up a facebook page to raise money for her to get her license reinstated!

          • Siri
            March 7, 2013 at 5:07 pm #

            Rodents in chains.

        • Certified Hamster Midwife
          March 6, 2013 at 5:22 pm #

          Some pups just weren’t meant to live. And they were delicious.

          • Siri
            March 7, 2013 at 5:05 pm #

            Hammy, give your midwife her iPad back! Bad hamster.

          • Certified Hamster Midwife
            March 7, 2013 at 10:47 pm #

            *Bites Siri, scampers away*

    • Kalacirya
      March 6, 2013 at 12:38 pm #

      Because they’re clearly all too stupid to realize that calling someone psychotic is accusing someone of being rather severely mentally ill. I think the best part is that Gina does this kind of thing constantly, yet is the first to shout “DEFAMATION PER SE” every time she feels even slightly misrepresented.

      This is totally legal and ethical for me to say: “I think that person A is a moron. An idiot. A nincompoop. I think that they are so painfully wrong that I have nightmares about it. Every one of their opinions in the most wrongheaded thing I have ever seen. Person A is self-serving and wrong.”

      It’s more iffy to say things like: “Person A is a paid shill. Person A is a psycho. Person A is a fraud. Person A probably abuses her children. Person A fabricated their data. Person A stole this from me.”

      • Victoria
        March 6, 2013 at 6:06 pm #

        Was ‘A’ just a random choice or . . .

        • Kalacirya
          March 6, 2013 at 6:07 pm #

          Well A is at the beginning of the alphabet, that’s the only reason I picked it.

    • Deb
      March 7, 2013 at 3:54 am #

      It’s a really good demonstration of the untruth of GCCs whining. If Dr Amy really was a bully out to get GCC and home birthers, she has so many cases to choose from. If she was genuinely litigious or trying to shut them down she could sue them and have them gagged. Yet she has only acted when pushed by their attempts to censor her freedom of speech. Sounds like being the bigger person to me.

      • KarenJJ
        March 7, 2013 at 4:10 am #

        That’s what I was thinking about above. If Gina wants to get into who’s been throwing about the most offensive names and saying the most offensive things, she should be examining her own first. I don’t think you want to be standing in front of a judge and saying ‘but she called me ignorant’ when it can also be said ‘well she called me a ‘psychotic ex-doctor”. Especially when one actually may be ignorant whereas the other is not actually psychotic.

  28. yentavegan
    March 6, 2013 at 8:06 am #

    I hope that this case has a speedy and just resolution. The judicial process can be draining and aggravating.

  29. Alicia
    March 6, 2013 at 2:09 am #

    I don’t know if this has been commented on yet, but this: “8 Although Ms. Crosley-Corcoran assumes that four solid pages worth of citations suffices to make the point, she would be more than happy to provide the Court with dozens of other case citations consistently holding that the sending of cease and desist letters does not meet the constitutional due process requirements for an exercise of personal jurisdiction. It is odd that the Plaintiff appears to have missed all of these cases in doing her reasonable pre-filing inquiries.” Screams that GCC wrote this herself. Also, in the “exhibits” there are pages with comments on them. Exactly how does those comments matter to the case? And is sharing those comments even allowed?

    • The Computer Ate My Nym
      March 6, 2013 at 10:21 am #

      Is it just my imagination, or is GCC providing evidence in her affidavit that she did indeed harass Dr. Tuteur in the way Dr. Tuteur alleges in her lawsuit? Her lawyer should recommend that she settle as quickly as possible.

      • Squillo
        March 6, 2013 at 10:32 am #

        I don’t know, but it certainly seems that GCC and her attorneys are making Amy’s burden of proof considerably lighter every time they boot up their computers.

  30. stephanwhite
    March 6, 2013 at 1:36 am #

    I see she is trying to paint herself a poor little mother with tiny
    babies to take care of and Dr Amy as the millionaire bullying Goliath.

    Media Monitoring

  31. KarenJJ
    March 6, 2013 at 1:13 am #

    “So, here I am, wrapped up in the aftermath of yet another highly publicized incident that people will use for years to come to paint me as the asshole.”

    So there’s been others?

    • Bombshellrisa
      March 6, 2013 at 2:36 am #

      She had a lawsuit against someone who was supposedly hiding in her bushes-the person lived hundreds of miles away from her, but she was sure it was them hiding in her bushes. The person posted her awhile back.

      • Certified Hamster Midwife
        March 6, 2013 at 12:19 pm #

        Wasn’t there the suicide threat incident, too?

        • Bombshellrisa
          March 6, 2013 at 12:43 pm #

          That was something entirely different, that involved a rant on the blog and a wellness call where the police allegedly broke into her home and invaded her bedroom. The hiding in the bushes thing involved a student in WA state.

      • Kalacirya
        March 6, 2013 at 2:15 pm #

        I never found evidence of any such lawsuit. Searching court records for Gina (under married and unmarried name) turned up absolutely nothing. She likes to threaten litigation and apparently collect money for it, but she’s never done it.

  32. An Actual Attorney
    March 6, 2013 at 12:34 am #

    I wish to thank Gina’s legal team. Every summer I conduct a workshop for our interns on bad legal writing. I show them examples and we deconstruct what was wrong and discuss how it should have been written. I have found my new material.

    • Isilzha
      March 6, 2013 at 12:36 am #

      That would be an entertaining class!

      • March 6, 2013 at 5:09 am #

        The challenge would be to keep the class discussing the material with a straight face.

        • An Actual Attorney
          March 6, 2013 at 8:34 am #

          Laughter helps learning. This would be great.

          • Dr Kitty
            March 6, 2013 at 4:30 pm #

            *sigh* I taught some medical students recently. I would put money on the fact that the only thing they remember is “can’t see, can’t pee, can’t bend the knee” as a memory aid for Reiter’s syndrome, and my comment that the typical patient would be a student a week or two after a holiday to the fleshpots of the Mediterranean where the sun and sand had been somewhat overshadowed by the sex.

            In my experience they’ll learn best if it is filthy or funny.


    • Lisa the Raptor
      March 6, 2013 at 11:20 am #

      I’m a paralegal and I could write better than that. Shoot, I could have written that better as an undergrad. Make your point, use your details and avoid emotional arguments. It’s the same as writing any paper for school. You don’t have to say “Hitler was meeeeen”, your supporting details should prove that. D’oh!

  33. Lisa from NY
    March 6, 2013 at 12:30 am #

    I am so sorry for your aggravation, Dr. Amy.

    • Isilzha
      March 6, 2013 at 12:35 am #

      It’s hard to really enjoy watching Gina flail around knowing that this has to be (at the very least) aggravating for Dr. Amy to deal with.

  34. Squillo
    March 5, 2013 at 11:13 pm #

    It was helpful of Ms. Crosely-Corcoran’s attorney to include under Exhibit 7 the initial correspondence between Jake Marcus and Michael Tuteur. It seems to corroborate the assertion that GCC was primarily interested in stopping Amy from writing about her.

    Jake Marcus wrote:

    We are confident that, prior to an injunction, the image will be removed by Bluehost. However, this will not resolve the larger issue of continued conflict between the two women and their substantial fan bases. Please advise whether you are amenable to discussion.

    Michael Tuteur wrote:

    I am unsure what you have in mind by “a settlement of this long-standing discord.” Putting aside the issue of this photograph, it appears to me that both Dr. Tuteur and Ms. Crosely-Corcoran are (and should be) free to address in their own ways and issue of considerable public importance… That said, it is always my practice to receive and consider in good faith any proposal made to me by opposing counsel.

    Translation: [Marcus] “Even if the DCMA is bogus, Dr. Amy’s host is going to take the picture down. But my client’s real complaint is that Dr. Amy keeps writing mean things about her.”

    [Tuteur] “Free speech.”

    Michael Tuteur FTW!

    • KarenJj
      March 6, 2013 at 12:08 am #

      Since when have the fan bases been in conflict? I’ve read both (before I got locked out of Gina’s for, I suppose, clicking on a link from here). No great loss of mine to not read Gina’s blog anymore and I’ve mostly only really been active on here. It’s not a homogenous group of nerds vs popular or some sort of high school conflict.

      • Squillo
        March 6, 2013 at 12:16 am #

        I took that to mean: “Dr. Amy’s fans are mean to Gina. Stop them, or she might have to do something drastic like put her blog behind a paywall.”

        (Cue the “Jets and Sharks” theme from West Side Story.)

  35. NewName Jones
    March 5, 2013 at 10:40 pm #

    Looks like Gina has just crossed the line from the world of “think it hard enough and it becomes true” to what’s better known as “reality.” Poor thing.

  36. Lena
    March 5, 2013 at 9:56 pm #

    I am cringing in embarrassment for that lawyer right now. I think I might even be blushing.

    At least we now know that there ARE direct entry lawyers out there.

    • quadrophenic
      March 6, 2013 at 12:49 am #

      Actually in California there’s sort of an equivalent – after a set number of years of study/work under a lawyer you can sit for the bar without going to law school. Only a handful of people ever get admitted this way.

      • LukesCook
        March 6, 2013 at 3:08 am #

        All attorneys/solicitors used to qualify this way (in England and colonies, at any rate). One still comes across one occasionally here in South Africa – Nelson Mandela sat his bar exams after a period of clerkship without having passed his law degree, for example – but they’re all pretty elderly by now. They’re perfectly competent lawyers, on the whole.

        • quadrophenic
          March 6, 2013 at 3:18 pm #

          I am assuming from the abysmal passage rates of self study bar takers here they’re no Nelson Mandela in the IQ department. There’s practically a law school on every corner here now, so it’s not like you’re self studying in the days where you have to go somewhere far for a few years to get a degree. I think there’s 10 law schools within roughly 50 miles of me

      • suchende
        March 6, 2013 at 12:27 pm #

        Haha this is such a lawyerly reply.

        *Joke comment*

        *Technically accurate response*

  37. 'Nother Lawyer
    March 5, 2013 at 9:55 pm #

    Hey Evan, it’s “Dr. Tuteur.” You’re just making yourself look like an idiot.

  38. Alicia
    March 5, 2013 at 9:24 pm #

    Wow. She just keeps digging herself into a deeper hole. It also looks like her lawyer is an idiot. Wow. I do love the quote from her blog though. I bet she’s losing her shit over someone “infiltrating” her “private” blog.

  39. Squillo
    March 5, 2013 at 9:20 pm #

    The charges of bullying are particularly ironic in light of the central charge in Amy’s lawsuit. Ms. Crosely-Corcoran’s stated purpose was to shut Amy up using the power of the MCA, and there was much gloating on her part about how Amy’s head was gonna get all ‘splody when she saw what GCC “had for her.”

    As often happens to bullies–real bullies, not just people who are “mean” to others–when they pick the wrong target, her own bullying has come back to bite her, as she admits.

    Incredibly, she believes the only options open to her were to “keep her mouth shut” or to attempt to use the legal system to shut Amy’s. She ignores the third option, and probably the one thing that would have cost her nothing and in which she and Amy are guaranteed equal rights by law: defend herself using her right to free speech.

  40. TheHappyPappy
    March 5, 2013 at 9:01 pm #

    I am sick, sick, sick to death of hearing Gina bitch about how “poor” she is. My mom is on disability and I have no income because I’m in college. We walk or bus everywhere because we can’t afford a car. We wear sweaters instead of turn up the heat, grow our own food/ work trade with our farmer relatives to bring down our food bill. We go to the food bank every week and we take what we’re given with gratitude. We don’t bitch and moan because the food we get their isn’t the super-healthy stuff we’d prefer. We don’t buy new clothes or shoes and we stitch things up if they wear out.

    I’m saying all this because I want to underline the fact that despite all this, we don’t ever think of ourselves as “poor.” Mom told me years ago that if you can afford to have a dish of change in your house, even if it’s just a dish of pennies, you are wealthier than 97% OF THE REST OF THE PLANET. I have three squares a day, a roof over my head, and universal healthcare. I am SO GRATEFUL for everything I have in my life. Gina can afford to buy a backyard pool and a car and go on vacation. She can afford to choose to stay home with her family and go to school instead of working. She is NOT F**KING POOR.

    When I think of the people sleeping on the sidewalk in this country, the children and pregnant mothers who go to bed hungry, or have to go to school in dirty, ragged clothes with no lunch, and then I read Gina whining about how “poor” she is, I wish I could magically transport her to an Indian slum. I want her to realize how smug, entitled, privileged and IGNORANT she sounds. How DARE she complain, how DARE she try to play the poverty-stricken victim when she and her family are healthy, well-fed and comfortably housed? She has not one clue how lucky she is, or how humbly grateful she ought to be for all her good fortune and blessings. I am not perfect, I can be as self-centered as the next person, but I have the good sense not to take my MANY, MANY blessings for granted.

    And on a related note…Dr. Amy is “using her millions”? Really? I never got the impression the Tuteurs were loaded. Is that even remotely true? Or is it just another fantasy dreamed up by Poor Paranoid Persecuted Gina? I’m really curious now.

    • Bombshellrisa
      March 5, 2013 at 9:19 pm #

      As for “millions”, even if they did have millions, they have worked for every penny they have, as well as fed and clothed and paid for the upbringing of four children.

      • March 5, 2013 at 10:14 pm #

        As a basic matter of ideology, I do not believe anyone can have millions and have worked for every penny. But a discussion of Marxian surplus value is probably getting pretty far off topic so I will leave it at that.

        • March 6, 2013 at 1:16 am #

          Alan, you’re so funny!

        • AllieFoyle
          March 6, 2013 at 11:46 am #

          No, tell us more about Marxian surplus value, please!

        • suchende
          March 6, 2013 at 12:33 pm #

          Well “working” for every penny and having earned every penny independent of society are two different things.

      • Kalacirya
        March 6, 2013 at 12:43 am #

        Bomb, I would like to take this time to disagree with you and to casually mention a sophisticated topic that the average person would not know about. I hope you are impressed with how erudite I am.

        • Awesomemom
          March 6, 2013 at 12:52 am #

          I am suitably impressed! Your intellect is clear for all to see and I will send you a cookie as a reward.

          • TheHappyPappy
            March 6, 2013 at 1:37 am #

            Seriously, I can’t be the only one who suspects Alan is just coming back here to troll us, am I? I mean in the sense that he probably does think he’s terribly smart and correct in his opinions, but he just keeps showing up here to post them so he can sit back and watch us all get ticked and try to explain how ridiculous he’s being. “You all generally agree on a number of topics, so I’m going to disagree to demonstrate how counter-culturalist I am.”
            I vote we just start ignoring him.

          • Bombshellrisa
            March 6, 2013 at 2:34 am #

            He sounds exactly like someone who has had a brain injury. I had a patient who was in a car accident and the airbag hit her in such a way that she ended up with a brain injury. She had been a college professor before her accident. She would exhibit hostile behavior and have outbursts. She would also whip from topic to topic, trying to talk to her was exhausting. Maybe Alan has had a CVA, traumatic brain injury or who knows what, and it has rendered him memory wise like Dori from “Finding Nemo”, so his answers and the questions he asks that have all sorts of implied hostility are a byproduct of his not being in control of what he says because he can’t remember what he is talking about.
            As for the counter-culture part, he sounds like every other “white guy” who wants to show how not white and midwestern he is (keep in mind I am neither white or from the Midwest, but I am married to a white guy whose family is from Minnesota. He sounds like all the counter culturalists from that family, right down to bringing his own food. Yeah, I have seen it before)

          • anonymous
            March 6, 2013 at 6:40 am #

            Interesting theories re. Alan. 🙂 Just want to note that auntbea suggested a few days ago that if we stop replying to him (and remind each other when one of us replies anyway) that we can get rid of him. I agree with Dr. Amy’s general policy against banning people, but I also think he’s bringing down the level of discussion here and the only way to address it without banning him is for him to get so few replies that he gives up and goes away. Just my two cents.

          • anonymous
            March 6, 2013 at 6:41 am #

            ETA: This is not directed at you personally, Bombshellrisa, but everyone on this thread who may not have considered auntbea’s idea already. 🙂

          • Durango
            March 6, 2013 at 9:23 am #

            He’s so lacking in self awareness, I do find his posts hilarious but not in the way he would like. And the more excited he gets about his SAT scores and IQ, the dumber he looks. He must feel that he peaked in high school.
            Kalacirya’s sendups are spot on.

          • Kalacirya
            March 6, 2013 at 2:29 pm #

            Thanks, I aim to please!

            I’d like to think I can usually put together a strong and fairly well reasoned argument to people I disagree with. And I absolutely have done so on this site several times. But for people like Alan, all I have is snark. I’m so tired of his type of person. I’m a young woman, and I have met more people like this (pompous, blowhard, men willing to walk into any conversation and talk over others, particularly women, regardless of their relative lack in experience, education, or time spent considering the issues in comparison to others present) than I care to have met. I cringe at the thought of how many more I’ll meet in the next 20, 40 years.

            He may pretend to laugh at my jokes about him, but I’m pretty sure that the only thing he savors is the thrill of the debate, regardless of how ill-places and ill-informed his thoughts are. If we’re all laughing at him or ignoring him, he’ll eventually go away. I suppose there’s a small sliver of a chance he’ll stick around and become less insufferable, but I think it kind of unlikely. Maybe he’ll take my skepticism as a challenge.

          • March 6, 2013 at 4:32 pm #

            “He may pretend to laugh at my jokes about him”

            Sorry to hear you think I’m pretending. I swear on my kids’ lives, I am not. So, you don’t like me. You are still exceptionally funny and clever and I genuinely enjoy your snark because it is sophisticated and well aimed.

            I mean, yeah: pompous, arrogant, I may be at times (but also, as I say, kind, generous, and compassionate…even diplomatic when the situation calls for it); but insecure I am not. Why on earth would an insecure person put themselves in the line of fire like I do? (Not a masochist either; I am a wimp about being subjected to pain in fact.)

          • Kalacirya
            March 6, 2013 at 5:04 pm #

            A kind and compassionate person does not, in my opinion, respond to a blog-banning with the threat of stalking the blogger across the internet. Not even as some kind of poorly aimed joke.

            I have little hope for you Alan. Your initial behavior falls under a common trope, and we’ve seen your type before. Annoying, but not too troublesome and the type that eventually goes away. But given what I’ve now seen of you elsewhere, now that I’ve taken a measure of your potential, I’ve come to realize that you are not an annoying mosquito, you are a pestilence.

            Perhaps you are a witty, kind, intelligent person in your day to day life (let’s just say I find that one a bit hard to swallow), but I can say with certainty that you are *none* of these things in your online presence. Change that, as unlikely as such change might be, and you’d be so surprised at how many more people will give you the time of day.

            I’ve had my fun, but you’re neither interesting nor hilarious to me anymore. Adios, and enjoy your time here as you inexorably continue your march towards being banned from this website and others. Our time together was sweet, but you’re the type of fellow whose name I forget after I’m done with him.

          • March 6, 2013 at 5:39 pm #

            “I’ve come to realize that you are not an annoying mosquito, you are a pestilence.”

            Hey, an upgrade!

          • Anonomom
            March 6, 2013 at 6:51 am #

            I agree with the decline in the quality of discussion, and it’s annoying when the main topic gets derailed into completely OT subjects like the price of housing in urban areas… But a lot of lurkers who think like Alan are probably listening and learning about how false their premises are. I dont want this blog to become an echo chamber, and if the price of that is people like Alan, I’m ok with that.

          • AllieFoyle
            March 6, 2013 at 11:43 am #

            Agreed. I think Alan’s a pompous hipster windbag too, but he’s reasonably interesting to debate and he seems amenable to changing his opinions when presented with new evidence. This place is interesting precisely because people bring different viewpoints to the table and interesting discussion ensues, unlike so many other sites.

          • March 6, 2013 at 12:55 pm #

            I am not getting that he is willing to change his opinions. He is willing to be evasive about them when it looks as if he is going to be caught in a logical inconsistency. For example, using the “picking the flyshit out of the pepper” maneuver to find the one part of the argument where he can not be contradicted to imply that the whole argument is valid.
            And if there are lurkers like Alan, I would imagine that, like him, they will also post opinions without bothering to inform themselves in any way or listen to those who have (see argument below where Alan seems to still believe that Dr. Amy’s husband is doing her case pro bono).

          • AllieFoyle
            March 6, 2013 at 1:09 pm #

            But we’re all smart people here and can deal with a little dissent. If he makes a fallacious argument, call him on it or ignore him.

          • TiffanyEpiphany
            March 6, 2013 at 1:34 pm #

            Agreed. But I would say it’s more like delusion. Not worth acknowledging.

          • March 6, 2013 at 2:40 pm #

            “I am not getting that he is willing to change his opinions.”

            Oh no, not at all. I still think MRCS are vastly more expensive than attempting vaginal birth, and I am still adamant that I would want to try to have my kids via HB if I had it to do over again. I didn’t acknowledge that Dr. Amy’s 1/1000 (or even 1/900) figure was right rather than the 1/1500 figure I had extrapolated. And I have certainly never said in response to someone debating me “fair point(s)”.


            The problem is, some of you do want it to be an echo chamber here. Kudos to those who do not. Actually, that’s not quite right: the former camp wants a steady trickle of hapless, vastly outnumbered, intellectually outmatched, New Agey HBers to wander through like mice they can torture for their amusement and to reinforce their preconceptions without actually posing a challenge to them. When they get something a little different, they panic and try to rally the troops to silence the menacing interloper in their midst.

          • Siri
            March 6, 2013 at 3:50 pm #

            Menacing interloper, lol.

          • Kalacirya
            March 6, 2013 at 3:56 pm #

            How can you read my mind so well, Alan? I am flabbergasted at how well you know my motivations. It’s as if we exist at the same frequency, like two wayward pulsars half a universe away from one another, yet they somehow rotate as if they were one. Shine your beam of electromagnetic radiation on me Alan, I want to feel you like you can feel me.

          • Bombshellrisa
            March 6, 2013 at 4:01 pm #

            Kalacirya-you’re brilliant-stop feeding trolls (and now please go slap me up thread for doing the same)

          • Kalacirya
            March 6, 2013 at 4:25 pm #

            I suppose it’s feeding, I am going to child-led wean myself off of this for all our sakes. But I have this thought in my mind that maybe if we finally feed him too much, he’ll pop?

          • Bombshellrisa
            March 6, 2013 at 5:32 pm #

            I know, I so want to answer that one about my FIL being a cool guy-after all, I guess if you think that an alcoholic hoarder who refused to work based on “principal” (but made his wife work) and wanted all his children to be caught by midwives because doctors “make too much money” and wouldn’t let his wife get treated for Hodgkins lymphoma (herbal remedies instead) and let her DIE at age 30 because of his ignorance is cool, then I guess he was a cool guy. After all, he insisted on skin to skin contact all the time with his children when they were babies and they still hated him, it must just be a personal thing with family cause all his drunk buddies think he was the best!

          • March 6, 2013 at 4:12 pm #

            That was really good.

            Didn’t I compliment one of your snarky comments before? I am not good with names (the Inattentive ADHD), but the style seems familiar, and very enjoyable to read.

          • Chi-Town_MotorCity
            March 6, 2013 at 9:48 pm #

            Yes, Alan. Someone on the internet is WRONG. You did compliment one of her snarky comments before.

          • March 6, 2013 at 2:29 pm #

            Thanks, Allie. I appreciate that.

          • March 6, 2013 at 7:33 pm #

            Hmm I’m on the fence about this. On the one hand, I’m fine with dissenting opinions and I too would hate for this to turn into an echo chamber. I think everyone has a right to participate in the debate. However, posting comment after comment after tiresome comment, many of which come across as condescending, offensive or just plain irrelevant is not what I consider participating in a debate. If you ask me, that is using somebody else’s blog to repeatedly browbeat people with your own opinions and deliberately annoy people.

            Really, if I wanted to hear a bombastic windbag endlessly
            pontificate about his personal ideology while he insults those who do not agree with him, I would tune into Rush Limbaugh.

            You might have a higher tolerance for irritation than me and that’s OK. I’m just saying that I personally wouldn’t shed any tears if The Alan Show got cancelled (though it has been quite hilarious at times) and we got back to the regularly scheduled program.

          • TiffanyEpiphany
            March 6, 2013 at 7:42 pm #

            Thank you for saying what you said. I’m on the same page as you.

            I’m relatively new here, and I really haven’t had the chance to enjoy discourse here without Alan peeing all over the conversation.

            I couldn’t even get through the FFF readings because it’s so obvious that he is an obsessive and unstable soul (kind of sad, really, like in a pathetic way).

            I hope he gets help someday.

          • Amy Tuteur, MD
            March 6, 2013 at 7:51 pm #

            Alan is a blowhard. He’s like an invasive weed for whom attention is the equivalent of sunshine.

            As the FFF pointed out, if he wanted to argue the issues he could start his own blog, but no one would read it and then he wouldn’t have the attention that he apparently needs desperately.

            If you ignore him he will subside, just like a weed without sunshine, and will look for another blog where he can “educate” the benighted with his endless “wisdom.”

          • March 6, 2013 at 8:10 pm #

            I will leave right this second, Dr. Amy, if you admit that the research you endlessly tout (showing two out of three HB’d babies who die in childbirth could have been saved in the hospital) is fundamentally no different from any other “associational” research on diet (including infants’ diet) that you dismiss as “crap”.

            Assuming you do admit that (not that I’m holding my breath), this will be my last comment; in which case anyone who feels I have parachuted out without addressing a point they have directed at me is welcome to DM me on Twitter.

          • Chi-Town_MotorCity
            March 6, 2013 at 9:45 pm #

            Alan, someone on the internet is WRONG? Take a chill pill, it’s just a blog 🙂

          • Siri
            March 7, 2013 at 2:51 am #

            Parachuting out, lol. Alan has invented a parachute that can take you up as well as down.

          • Susan
            March 6, 2013 at 8:45 pm #

            I thought he was alright at first ( at least willing to concede a point here and there ) and thought the other regulars were being a bit harsh. But I think you all saw something I didn’t because it does seem he has some different motivation beyond discussing the issues. It’s way too much about him and not what we are discussing.

          • March 6, 2013 at 8:48 pm #

            I just read the FFF post all I can say is WOW.

          • Chi-Town_MotorCity
            March 6, 2013 at 9:43 pm #

            Clarissa, can you point me to the Fff post? I can’t find it. Thanks.

          • March 6, 2013 at 10:03 pm #

            Dr. Amy posted it somewhere in the comments. I found it again via google

          • Chi-Town_MotorCity
            March 6, 2013 at 10:20 pm #

            Thank you.

          • Chi-Town_MotorCity
            March 6, 2013 at 10:55 pm #

            Me too. Thanks for sharing it. There is something a bit more aggro going on beyond the annoying, “I checked what I wrote and yep, I’m being a rational, logical and dispassionate guy in my statements.”

          • mimi
            March 9, 2013 at 7:28 pm #

            Do you think he is a sockpuppet of the other poster that came in a few months ago? He sounds a little bit similar.

          • March 9, 2013 at 7:59 pm #

            I am no one’s sock puppet, and I resent that insinuation. There is a reason I consistently use my own name and the same handle across the Web. I am perfectly willing to own what I say elsewhere. (Note that I never tried to deny being the same person from FFF.)

          • Andy
            March 10, 2013 at 9:44 am #

            Are you talking about me? No! He is not my sock-puppet but he is certainly refreshing on this blog and I can tell you for certain that this site gets more people reading that agree with Alan’s perspective that you would ever believe – people that have real experience with home birth midwives that resemble NOTHING of the practices y’all circle again and again like vultures. It’s time for each of you to stop believing that the fringe you consider as representative of home birth midwifery is anything more that that.

          • TheHappyPappy
            March 6, 2013 at 8:06 pm #

            The derailing of otherwise intelligent discussions is my issue, and why I made the “perhaps we should just ignore him” argument.

            Sorry, Alan, but you seem more interested in dropping in to act superior than anything else and I have no patience for that. I don’t want an echo chamber but I also don’t want to read thread after thread where you say something ignorant or ridiculous and tick everyone off so much they feel compelled to waste time trying to explain it.

            But, that being said, if people want to engage you in debate, fine. Far be it for me to dictate what other people do with their time. I was just suggesting that I personally don’t think Alan is sincerely interested in discussion. I think he wants attention, and he realizes that by coming here and saying contradictory things, he’ll get it. As I see it, the thread below (that I hurt my brain reading) is proof of that. If you do think he’s sincere and you want to argue with him, feel free. I’m officially tagging out.

          • anonymous
            March 7, 2013 at 7:25 am #

            Hi anonomom. Good points. My personal perspective on this aligns more with Clarissa Darling’s, TheHappyPappy’s, and Dr. Amy’s, but like TheHappyPappy says later in his post, others are free to make a different choice. As I noted to auntbea above, I will refrain from further comments about the benefits of ignoring our conversational dandelion. 🙂

          • TheHappyPappy
            March 8, 2013 at 3:15 pm #

            It doesn’t matter terribly much (and I realize my screen name may be misleading) but for the record, I’m a she. 🙂

          • auntbea
            March 6, 2013 at 10:21 am #

            Thank you for being my enforcer, anonymous! Just to be clear, I am perfectly willing to allow that some people enjoy debating with Alan (or whoever) or think the conversations add something of value. I just know that arguing with people on the internet is not really good for my mental health, so I intended our cooperative as a motivator for me and anyone else who feels the same. Anyone can choose join our non-response collective or remain outside of it!

          • March 6, 2013 at 7:37 pm #

            You know I’m in on your non-response collective auntbea but, maybe we need to close the loophole of responding indirectly through other responses. I find I just keep getting sucked in. It’s like the Kardashians, I don’t want to watch but, I can’t change the channel! HELP!

          • TiffanyEpiphany
            March 6, 2013 at 7:49 pm #

            I second this motion. I’m guilty as charged, though. Here’s to a new leaf.

          • theNormalDistribution
            March 6, 2013 at 8:02 pm #

            Yes. Friends don’t let friends respond to Alan.

          • anonymous
            March 7, 2013 at 7:17 am #

            Thanks auntbea. I ETA’d below that I intended my reply for anyone who hadn’t considered this point before…apologies if I’ve overstepped. Henceforth I will just ignore for myself and privately hope that others do the same. 🙂

          • March 6, 2013 at 9:07 am #

            As someone who is white and from the Midwest I can back you up. The prairie counter culturalist is an archetype I know well. IMHO it’s a clear case of trying to hard.

          • March 6, 2013 at 4:22 pm #

            Nothing wrong with prairie counterculturalists; but though I now live in the Midwest I was born in East Africa, and raised mostly on the West and East Coasts by bicoastal parents. I did grow up listening to “Free to Be You and Me” though, and reading my way through my parents’ bookshelves (I remember distinctly being disappointed when The Invisible Man turned out not to be science fiction, LOL).

          • Kalacirya
            March 6, 2013 at 2:19 pm #

            We have plenty of his type in NY, so it’s not just a Midwest thing.

          • Bombshellrisa
            March 6, 2013 at 2:56 pm #

            It’s just funny because he sounds just like my late FIL, who was born in Minnesota (right down to the rants about money and the same opinions about home birth and breastfeeding).

          • March 6, 2013 at 4:24 pm #

            Sounds like a cool guy!

          • March 6, 2013 at 2:44 pm #

            Do you actually think this kind of mudslinging makes me look worse than it makes you look? I don’t talk to, or about, any of you this way.

          • Bombshellrisa
            March 6, 2013 at 2:55 pm #

            Suggesting you aren’t able to control the things that you say and that we need to view you with compassion in light of that fact is hardly mudslinging. Because if you ARE capable of reading and comprehending and staying on topic and simply choose not to, we have been much too nice in our responses to you.

          • March 6, 2013 at 3:14 pm #

            I will be more generous to you and suggest that you are being incredibly disingenuous rather than stupid. Those with a modicum of intelligence are well familiar with the below-the-belt tactic of taking a patronising tone of faux pity to attempt to diminish a rhetorical opponent. A variation on ad hominem is all it is; and if you actually think it is “sneaky” or that it offers even a remotely plausible veneer of deniability, then it is you who genuinely deserves to be pitied.

          • DirtyOldTown
            March 6, 2013 at 4:39 pm #

            I’m with you Bombshellrisa. I call white male baby boomer with an overinflated sense of his own intellect, a keening pride in his non-conformity, and an overpowering compulsion to always have the last word, because it makes him feel authoritative. I know the type well. In fact, I’d bet money on it. Having said that, I have no problem with him participating in discussions. I’m ok with posts meandering, as long as they don’t degenerate into incoherent swearing and such like. Frankly, I find Alan’s continued insistence he is smarter than everyone in the room highly entertaining. At the very least, I’m sure those who find him irritating can concede he’s not as bad as that libertarian academic who hijacked every conversation and turned it into a rambling political polemic. To this day, I am convinced it was Ann Coulter in disguise.

          • March 6, 2013 at 4:56 pm #

            A baby boomer with an eight month old baby? Nah, GenXer here all the way, AINEC.

            Also, I do not believe I am smarter than everyone here. That would be boring and I would have lost interest very quickly.

          • DirtyOldTown
            March 6, 2013 at 11:17 pm #

            Oh I do beg your pardon. A white male GenXer with an overinflated sense of his own intellect, a keening pride in his non-conformity, and an overpowering compulsion to always have the last word, because it makes him feel authoritative. Better? Feel free to leave the last word in the space provided below.

          • March 7, 2013 at 12:56 am #

            Yes, better. ;0)

          • GuestB
            March 6, 2013 at 7:23 am #

            I, for one, would rather have a battery acid enema than read another one of Alan’s comments. Or even a honey enema, followed by sitting on a fire ant hill. I suspect flaming bamboo under the fingernails would be a much more pleasant experience as well. But, to each his own.

          • AllieFoyle
            March 6, 2013 at 1:11 pm #

            Personally I’m hoping he posts more about his Myers-Briggs type. Fascinating.

          • Dr Kitty
            March 6, 2013 at 1:40 pm #

            See, this is what I like about this place.
            Alan posts that he has a 1600 SAT score, and instead of everyone saying “Oh yeah? Well I’m a Rhodes scholar and a member of Mensa and a super special INFJ” or “wow! I am made speechless by your intellect master, teach me!” or whatever he was expecting, he gets “that’s nice dear” and a pat on the head.

            I’m pretty sure all of us are smart enough to understand him, although personally I’m now scrolling over his comments without reading them. I don’t really care to try and unpick what is genuine, what is obvious trolling and what is just…not worth reading. It isn’t worth the effort.

            YMMV though, so if you dig the mansplaining Paleo-dieter with the attitude problem, crack on.

          • AllieFoyle
            March 6, 2013 at 1:57 pm #

            “so if you dig the mansplaining Paleo-dieter with the attitude problem”

            Ooh, snap!

          • March 6, 2013 at 2:55 pm #

            Kitty dear, let me mansplain ya something: I’m not a paleo-dieter. Just a plain ol’, boring, HSPH-dieter:

            I know those icky female parts of yours make it hard for you to understand such things, but maybe the picture will help…or you could ask your husband or father to help me out with some auxiliary mansplaining until it sinks in. ::pat pat::

          • Victoria
            March 6, 2013 at 6:15 pm #

            That one was not one of your what-passes-for best. Oh well they can’t all be reflective of that now unemployed 1600 SAT score.

          • March 6, 2013 at 6:33 pm #

            Ah, you are joining the “SAHD=unemployed” camp, eh? True for SAHMs also?

            And what did you feel *was* my what-passes-for-best, hmm?

          • Victoria
            March 6, 2013 at 10:29 pm #

            Yes, essentially SAHD and SAHM, unless on leave, are unemployed. I don’t really think that is insulting unless you need to defend your worth. I am a SAHM. The real issue is the defence of your intellect using a standardized test score but later insisting on innate intelligence and coming close to disparaging college education as meaningless.
            Your best isn’t worth my time recounting – some of your early comments I voted up. None recently.
            I now join the auntbea coalition for my own sanity. Laters Alan.

          • theNormalDistribution
            March 6, 2013 at 6:35 pm #

            You sure like to fire off a lot of responses to perceived slights but like a poor marksman you keep… missing… the target.

          • March 6, 2013 at 6:42 pm #

            You’re not nearly as witty as Kaliciwhateveritis, sorry bud.

          • TiffanyEpiphany
            March 6, 2013 at 7:22 pm #

            I’m pretty sure that what Alan thinks of anyone is inconsequential.

            ~ tND fan

          • Kalacirya
            March 6, 2013 at 3:30 pm #

            Dr. Kitty, I am getting very irritated by all you women not taking me seriously. I was almost vulgarly excited when you would argue with me, but this ignoring and deriding thing is about as palatable as that plate of lutefisk I shared while chatting with my good Norwegian friend King Harald V.

            So here’s what I’m going to do: I’m going to respond to you in a tone-deaf parody of what you all appear to think of me. I am hoping that this will preempt further snark directed my way. Please be compelled by this mirror that I am graciously attempting to hold to your face, and understand that you are repugnant and should respect me more.

          • Siri
            March 6, 2013 at 3:44 pm #

            Not the lutefisk! Kalacirya, is nothing sacred to you? Take my children, but leave me my lutefisk.

          • Dr Kitty
            March 6, 2013 at 4:11 pm #

            You know , I’ve never tried lutefisk, you’ve reminded me it’s on my list of interesting foods to try.

            Kalacirya, you are funny 😉

          • Siri
            March 6, 2013 at 4:40 pm #

            Dr Kitty, spare yourself an unpleasant experience; lutefisk is a vile, stinky substance.

          • The Bofa on the Sofa
            March 7, 2013 at 10:59 am #

            You know , I’ve never tried lutefisk, you’ve reminded me it’s on my list of interesting foods to try.

            Do you know who Andrew Zimmern is? He is the guy that has the TV show on strange foods. He searches out the locals in all areas of the world to find what they eat. He has eaten the strangest things, from nasty, rotten fruits to still-beating frog hearts.

            But he draws the line at lutefisk. Tried it once, and vowed to never do it again.

            Lutefisk: food so nasty that Andrew Zimmern won’t eat it.

          • Hiro
            March 10, 2013 at 8:42 am #

            Whatever you do, do NOT try ludfisk! I lived in Denmark for three years and I regret just one thing: being in a room with someone opening cod ludfisk. I hear other preparations with different fish smell less but…ugh. I couldn’t even go back in the room for a few hours afterwards. My ex husband told me that they have ludfisk parties in Sweden which they hold out-of-doors just so they don’t get complaints from others in their andelsboglig.

          • March 6, 2013 at 4:58 pm #

            That one was not your best. Oh well, they can’t all be gems!

          • Durango
            March 6, 2013 at 6:41 pm #


          • March 6, 2013 at 6:47 pm #

            The text adventure game??

          • DirtyOldTown
            March 6, 2013 at 11:06 pm #

            Isn’t it great that Alan is here to validate us by approving or disapproving of how witty (or not) our comments are?

          • March 6, 2013 at 11:19 pm #

            Psssst, you’re not supposed to talk to me–you’ll get in trouble with the in crowd. ;0)

          • DirtyOldTown
            March 6, 2013 at 11:28 pm #

            And I thought you weren’t going to post anymore until Dr. Amy admitted she was wrong? That was a terribly short flounce.

          • March 6, 2013 at 11:41 pm #

            LOL, you read that wrong. How would that make any sense, anyway? I said if she admitted she was wrong (or contradictory/inconsistent, if you prefer), I would *stop* posting. Then I gave her a while to respond, she didn’t, and I responded to your comment.

            BTW I’ve never heard “flounce” used in that context–sounds like what I’ve always heard called a GBCW post.

          • Kalacirya
            March 6, 2013 at 2:17 pm #

            LOL, you slay me.

        • Bombshellrisa
          March 6, 2013 at 1:14 am #

          I am impressed with your brilliance, now I will crochet you a “participant” ribbon as an award.

          • KarenJJ
            March 6, 2013 at 1:24 am #

            Now that would look REALLY good on the CV.

          • Bombshellrisa
            March 6, 2013 at 2:38 am #

            Oh goodie, I can add “fiber art scholar” to my CV then

        • KarenJJ
          March 6, 2013 at 1:16 am #

          Thank you for bestowing your opinion on us once again.

        • theNormalDistribution
          March 6, 2013 at 2:33 am #

          Oh gawd.

        • March 6, 2013 at 8:30 am #

          I thought he was maybe going to turn a corner and try and participate in this forum in a meaningful when I saw his comments on the C section page. Alas it seem he’s back to his MO of saying things that sound reasonable one minute and totally pompous, exaggerated or irrelevant the next.

    • TheHappyPappy
      March 5, 2013 at 9:48 pm #

      Whoops! The food we get *there*

    • thepragmatist
      March 5, 2013 at 9:48 pm #

      Poverty of mind and values can never be addressed. We are in similar circumstances without my income (due to disability) and I feel so blessed for everything that has been given to me. Not a day goes by we do not give our gratitude for the enormous generosity of friends and family who have helped us stay in our home, or the care of universal health (even if it is imperfect at times). When I was very young and VERY poor, I remember coming to the conclusion that nothing could ever impoverish my CHARACTER, and that I would make a home with whatever I had. Gina’s whining– and the whining and greed of others– is just flat out repugnant to me. I hear hardship, I get it, but what I don’t get is the ingratitude and self-pity. We suffer for our challenges, no doubt, and I could understand, but she is suffering for her own hubris and lack of morality: far different. I have little sympathy for her, only her children, who will certainly suffer.

    • Charlotte
      March 6, 2013 at 8:20 pm #

      YES! I agree 100%. My dad always said that some people wonder where their next meal is coming from, but others worry what they are going to eat two days from now because they know they aren’t getting any today or tomorrow. Gina has no clue what real poverty is.

  41. J_in_the_Lou
    March 5, 2013 at 8:40 pm #

    Question on the “Pounding the Table” post. It was my understanding that unless GCC filed suit against you within 14 days of your response to the takedown notice, you could put the material back up. I haven’t seen any lawsuits that she has filed against you. Will the picture be restored?

  42. J_in_the_Lou
    March 5, 2013 at 8:02 pm #

    I love, despite Gina’s best efforts, that you still have access to the blog posts.

  43. Coura Crosby-Kensington
    March 5, 2013 at 8:00 pm #

    I’m not sure what you were expecting “Dr” Amy. You were MEAN. And one HAD to defend oneself in the most mature manner possible: by flipping the bird. And the takedown notices HAD to happen! You spew your venom all over the Internet and MISREPRESENT yourself by calling yourself a DOCTOR! everyone worth their salt knows that once you relinquish your licence that you also loose the rights to the title. And as an experienced doula, maternal health skollar and advocate for the motherbaby, at least I don’t make myself out to be something I’m not!

    • Anonomom
      March 5, 2013 at 8:03 pm #

      Yes, and meanness is basically a hate crime and should be treated as such in the only reasonable way — censorship.

      • DirtyOldTown
        March 5, 2013 at 10:41 pm #

        Or, translated into Lolcat for those proficient in Internetz: “Meeeeeen lady made hurty-feelings – I can haz lawsuit?’

        • Lou
          March 5, 2013 at 11:11 pm #

          I can’t stop laughing at this comment. Seriously. Well done.

        • Squillo
          March 5, 2013 at 11:14 pm #

          I totally want “I can haz lawsuit” on a t-shirt.

          • TheHappyPappy
            March 5, 2013 at 11:44 pm #

            Along with the Finger Picture! Ladies, we have our T-Shirt design. XD

          • LukesCook
            March 6, 2013 at 2:56 pm #


      • AllieFoyle
        March 6, 2013 at 11:34 am #

        No, no, *disagreeing* is a hate crime. Meanness is a whole other level of crime against humanity. Think genocide and Westboro Baptist Church.

    • Sue
      March 5, 2013 at 9:11 pm #

      Good job, “Coura” – but the “MEAN” was a give-away….should have been MEEEEEAAAAANNNNN!!!!!

      • Bombshellrisa
        March 5, 2013 at 9:21 pm #

        And maybe start using motherbabyplacenta-I hear it’s the new take on the “holy trinity”

      • AllieFoyle
        March 6, 2013 at 11:36 am #

        You also forgot to make some kind of snappy retort about how awesome and fulfilling your life is and how you can’t be bothered to deal with the disgusting subhuman trolls who don’t hang on your every word.

      • Certified Hamster Midwife
        March 6, 2013 at 12:17 pm #

        Not “Meeeeeeeeen”?

    • Antigonos CNM
      March 6, 2013 at 8:45 am #

      ” everyone worth their salt knows that once you relinquish your licence that you also loose the rights to the title. And as an experienced doula, maternal health skollar and advocate for the motherbaby, at least I don’t make myself out to be something I’m not!”

      Once you earn a doctoral degree, in whatever field, and are licensed to practice in that field, whether you choose to or not , you are entitled to use the term “Doctor”. It is merely a convention to refrain from using Dr. for the holder of a PhD except on academic papers, but a person can do so if he/she chooses. Further, MD is particular to a person holding the degree of a Doctor of Medicine, regardless of licensure status, or whether the MD is is actually practicing medicine, as licensure is a state issue, whereas the actual degree is recognized nationwide. Retired MDs are still MDs; no one reverses the acquisition of the degree, just as I am a Certified Nurse Midwife with a currently valid license even though I retired some months ago. No one has erased my knowledge from my brain or given me amnesia so that I don’t remember my nearly 40 years in the profession.

      And, please, learn to spell as well as to try not to parade your ignorance.

      • I don't have a creative name
        March 6, 2013 at 8:51 am #

        Psst… the post you are replying to is satire. 🙂

        • Antigonos CNM
          March 6, 2013 at 8:54 am #

          Whoops. But there ARE those who do think that since Dr. Amy isn’t currently practicing, she’s not a “real” doctor. I presume these are folks who probably think that “Dr” Phil is. 🙂

          Besides, I think that Gina is such a farce that satirizing her is almost impossible to do.

          Dear me, that was too unkind, wasn’t it?

      • Esther
        March 6, 2013 at 8:54 am #

        Coura is the author of “The Feminist Bragger”, an erstwhile blog which was a parody of Gina’s. It was very entertaining…

  44. PH Student
    March 5, 2013 at 7:51 pm #

    “The remark was clearly sarcastic and was not meant to give Ms. Tuteur any type of license to use Ms. Crosley-Corcoran’s photograph on Ms. Tuteur’s website.”

    I’m no lawyer, but what the what? Her “defense” of filing multiple DCMA violation reports was that the remark was “clearly sarcastic”? Is that a thing? Like, if I threatened to hurt the president could I actually use “I was being sarcastic, natch” as my defense?

    • March 5, 2013 at 8:21 pm #

      If it *was* clear, then sure you could. Do you think that every time someone says “I could kill _____” they are making terroristic threats? Now, the president does have special protection; but the Secret Service frequently investigates cases where people have spouted off steam and the vast majority are never prosecuted.

      • Meagan
        March 5, 2013 at 8:31 pm #

        I think that’s a fair point, but Gina is going to have a tough time proving she was being clearly sarcastic. Intent is notoriously difficult to express in print (hence the rise of “/sarcasm” tags) and *sarcasticly* giving someone permission to use an image is a bit of a stretch. Even if she can convince the court that she was “just being sarcastic, jeez” I’m not sure how it’s relivent to the case. Permission is permission. She can revoke it I guess, but she can’t claim copyright infringement because Amy failed to correctly interpret some elaborate code of emoticons.

        • March 5, 2013 at 8:39 pm #

          Okay, but I just don’t see why both sides can’t just drop the whole thing.

          • Meagan
            March 5, 2013 at 8:42 pm #

            Well as a blogger I’m relieved to have ANYONE fighting a frivolous copyright suit. That’s the sort of thing that gets people shut down unfairly all the time. Usually people who don’t have the ability to defend themselves.

          • Isilzha
            March 5, 2013 at 9:04 pm #

            Why? Gina’s actions were unlawful and infringed on someone else’s rights.

          • thepragmatist
            March 5, 2013 at 9:52 pm #

            Because Gina would not stop trying to take down this site. Dr. Amy criticized Gina: in return, Gina set upon filing frivolous copyright infringement and encouraging others to do so.

          • Sue
            March 6, 2013 at 1:42 am #

            Alan, I don’t see why you can’t just eat white bread when you’re staying at someone else’s house.

          • March 6, 2013 at 2:29 am #

            Ohhh…right, because being picky about which foods you eat is JUST like suing someone! Uncanny similarity, you are so right.

          • LibrarianSarah
            March 6, 2013 at 11:43 am #

            I find it ironic considering you sent harassing emails to FFF when you thought she was “censoring” you.

          • March 6, 2013 at 3:31 pm #

            Bullshit. I asked her to print those emails in full, which she did IIRC, and it is absurd for anyone on this blog of all places to call those emails “harassing” given the far more piquant language that routinely flies around here. Quote the emails if you want to try to support this bogus accusation, or STFU.

          • Amy Tuteur, MD
            March 6, 2013 at 3:49 pm #

            Look! It’s déjà vue all over again:


          • TiffanyEpiphany
            March 6, 2013 at 3:54 pm #

            Dr. Amy, you’re the best.

          • Amy M
            March 6, 2013 at 3:54 pm #

            Oh! I remember that issue…hadn’t remembered it was Alan who was causing the ruckus. Doesn’t he have anything better to do with his time?

          • theNormalDistribution
            March 6, 2013 at 4:14 pm #

            “Alan, your opinions are not the problem. My problem with you is that you have literally hijacked my blog. You write obscenely long comments, often having little to do with the post in question; pick apart tiny points that distract from the original purpose of the post; have copied & pasted lengthy discussion threads from other sites; and as I said previously, use the blog as your own personal soapbox, or taking a less insidious view, as a chat room forum. I know it’s a tough distinction, because the blog invites discussion, but you’re the only person who has ever had a problem understanding the different mediums.”

            OMG history repeating itself.

          • Dr Kitty
            March 6, 2013 at 6:14 pm #

            Sometimes I think it best to act on these sites as if one is at a dinner party where you know only the host. After a while somebody gets left standing in a corner because they’ve managed to insult everyone, while everyone else chats about what they have in common.

            The options are to call them out and have a fight which disrupts the party, or ignore them and continue having a nice time with your new friends until either they decide to leave, or the host kicks them out.

          • Bombshellrisa
            March 6, 2013 at 4:06 pm #

            Thank you Dr Amy!
            So no traumatic brain injury, CVA or whatever. Just someone with a vast amount of time on their hands and no people willing to fill it.

          • Siri
            March 6, 2013 at 4:48 pm #

            And serious anger issues. And a habit of passive-aggressive ‘mea culpas’.

          • March 6, 2013 at 4:08 pm #

            Thank you.

          • LibrarianSarah
            March 7, 2013 at 9:32 am #

            ” If you go that route,
            you can guarantee I will be on you like a tick on a dog, following you
            to sites where you go to present your opposing views (like this one), and I’ll be sure to highlight your hypocrisy, not to mention the irony of calling yourself “fearless”. ”

            That doesn’t sound harassing to you? And the winky face doesn’t make it any less creepy. Seriously, if you read what you wrote and don’t find it the least bit creepy find a therapist. I am not saying this to insult you I take mental health really seriously but that is no a rational response to someone changing their comment policy. You basically threatened to cyber-stalk her.

          • March 7, 2013 at 1:16 pm #

            Are you offering to pay for my therapy? I would go for that. I love the HBO show In Treatment; if I could find a therapist like Paul I would definitely dig chewing the fat with him once a week. 🙂

          • March 7, 2013 at 1:37 pm #

            BTW, do you not see any irony in accusing me of cyber-stalking on a blog that includes recent posts like this:



            “If you don’t want to know what the majority of people think about your choice, don’t publish your story to the entire world. No one is going to respect your ‘privacy’ when you clearly have no respect for it, eagerly abandoning privacy in a desperate attempt to gain validation.”

            This strikes me as applying as much to FFF as anyone (though I think publicly berating/ridiculing a mother who is grieving over her dead baby is far worse than criticising a woman like FFF whose children are, as she likes to point out, “thriving”).

          • Bombshellrisa
            March 7, 2013 at 1:49 pm #

            You have to wonder if this is some sort of alter ego or this is his baseline

        • anonymous
          March 6, 2013 at 6:35 am #

          Good point. Still, I just want to note that that the less any of us replies to Alan, the sooner he will go away. 🙂

      • Isilzha
        March 5, 2013 at 8:46 pm #

        There’s also a huge difference between saying “I could kill ____” and “I will kill ____”. The later one is an overt THREAT even is someone doesn’t actually really intend to carry it out.

        • March 5, 2013 at 8:58 pm #

          I say context still matters. If a husband is watering the lawn and unexpectedly turns the hose on his wife, she may shriek “I will kill you!” But everyone understands she is not threatening to end his life.

  45. GuestB
    March 5, 2013 at 7:09 pm #

    This part stood out to me:
    “Ms. Tuteur, a former physician who is no longer licensed to practice medicine (and yet who identifies herself as an obstetrician gynecologist on her websites)”

    Well, she identifies herself as an obstetrician gynecologist because THAT’S WHAT SHE IS. Why do people not get this?

    This lawyer ain’t the sharpest tack in the box.

    • thepragmatist
      March 5, 2013 at 9:54 pm #

      This lawyer is so unprofessional, it boggles the mind. My family is full of lawyers and I have been involved in various legal issues. I can’t believe a lawyer is writing like this! It’s amazing. I can’t see a judge entertaining such rubbish. This is the legal system here! I’m pretty surprised to be honest that a lawyer would engage in such a thing. Are we sure this isn’t a lay-lawyer? LOL.

    • KarenJJ
      March 5, 2013 at 10:26 pm #

      She also identifies that she left practice to raise her children. We know that she is retired from practice because it says so up there in the little box at the top right corner of the website under the title Amy Tuteur, MD. It’s not as though Dr Amy is trying to do a sneaky on us.

    • Allie P
      March 6, 2013 at 12:15 am #

      I no longer work in the career that my degree is in either. I guess I should turn in that B.S., huh? Use it or lose it, right?

    • Meredith
      March 7, 2013 at 12:15 pm #

      No, I’m going to have to somewhat agree with the lawyer here. The point isn’t that she left the practice, it’s that she’s no longer licensed. So, technically, she “was” an OB/GYN, and if we’re going to get really technical, isn’t one anymore. Unless she renews her license, it is illegal for her to start practicing again. The lawyer is right. She is a FORMER physician. Everyone in my family is a doctor, and many of them are retired. The ones who have retired don’t say, “I’m a doctor,” they say, “I WAS a doctor.” I’m not trying to fight, I’m just pointing that technicality out. Darn lawyers.

      • GuestB
        March 7, 2013 at 12:43 pm #

        Being licensed and earning the title Doctor are two different things. If you are unlicensed, you are still a doctor. I’m not sure how someone can be a former physician. You can be a formerly practicing physician, or a retired physician, but how can you be a former physician?

        The day I graduated dental school I became Dr. So-and-So. I did not have a license then. If I quit practicing and let my license lapse, I am still Dr. So-and So.
        Happy to be corrected by someone if I am totally off the mark here.

  46. Naomi
    March 5, 2013 at 6:52 pm #

    Where can we read what Gina has said about Dr Amy? I would certainly hope she deserves this law suit, and that its not born out of a grudge against all homebrithing advocates. I too despise the homebirthing and particularly freebirthing community, but would not want to ruin their lives over a severe difference of opinion. I understand she has somehow tampered with Dr Amy’s blog somehow.. this is more than just standing up for yourself, I do feel sorry for Gina and her family, but such is the way of things when we declare war against our enemies. I have found in this day and age with law suits being thrown around like tissues, its always better to keep ones mouth shut, its particularly hard for me, I would much rather abuse people that do me wrong.

    • Karen in SC
      March 5, 2013 at 7:13 pm #

      Dr. Amy had a brief post called “Pounding the Table” back in December, That is the post that included the now disputed “finger picture.” Maybe someone has a cached version since I think it was deleted, or anyway, it would be behind the pay wall. GCC used the f-word liberally, and wrote that Dr. Amy would probably print out GCC’s words and writhe on top of the them… if one is looking for vitriol, it was that post. It may be one of the Exhibits in the original filing, not sure.

      • theNormalDistribution
        March 5, 2013 at 7:22 pm #

        Damn. By the time I thought to save the cached articles, it had already been updated to the paywall page.

        • J_in_the_Lou
          March 5, 2013 at 8:43 pm #

          The picture is one of the exhibits in Dr. Amy’s lawsuit.

    • attitude devant
      March 5, 2013 at 7:14 pm #

      There’s another post on this blog that outlines the reasons for the suit. Additionally there have been some fairly good news stories giving the back story. GOMI had the best summary, I think.

  47. Jessica
    March 5, 2013 at 6:46 pm #

    I literally laughed out loud when I read the first line of the Motion.

    • Isilzha
      March 5, 2013 at 7:03 pm #

      I got a bruised hand from face-palming and head-desking at the same time.

    • Jessica
      March 5, 2013 at 7:24 pm #

      Just for point of reference, the year after I graduated from law school I clerked for our local circuit court. Some of the best belly-laughs I had on that job was reading the Jail Mail: letters or pleadings from pro se criminal defendants with all the time in the world (or 7-10 years, as the case might be) to brush up on criminal procedure.

      Reading that motion was a lot like reading the Jail Mail.

      • An Actual Attorney
        March 6, 2013 at 12:23 am #

        Don’t be so insulting to the prisoners.

  48. shookiesmama
    March 5, 2013 at 6:45 pm #

    She got in over her head, but I don’t have an ounce of sympathy for Gina. Long before, Dr. Tuteur filed the suit, Gina was ranting about taking some kind of legal action against Dr. Amy and soliciting funds from her readers, supposedly for that purpose. Gina wanted a legal battle. Well, she got one handed to her alright.

    If Gina can’t afford the costs associated with the suit, she should have thought about that before she started filing all those DMCA takedown notices. Whether she filed in good faith or not, Dr. Amy has a right to protect her business interests in court, and to defend herself, and to file suit in response. That Dr. Amy did so should not have come as a shock or a surprise.

    Unfortunately for her family finances, it appears that Gina might be the type of person who leaps before she looks. Yes, Gina lawyers cost money. Good lawyers cost even more. But maybe your fans can pony up and donate more to the legal fund, or better yet, sponsor you to come to Boston for the court case.

    • Isilzha
      March 5, 2013 at 7:07 pm #

      I agree! Gina is the one who first made threats to pursue legal action and then escalated everything by filing the DMCA notices. This is totally Gina’s mess!

    • Bomb
      March 5, 2013 at 8:41 pm #

      It is undue hardship for her to go to Boston. Random vbac seminars and blogher crap? She can attend that just fine.

      • Hope
        March 5, 2013 at 10:36 pm #

        True! She travels for her seminars. She got her fans to give her money to go to the More Business of Being Born showing. Her reasons for not be able to attend this hearing are bogus.

        • An Actual Attorney
          March 6, 2013 at 12:23 am #

          No one actually goes to hearings anymore. It’s all computerized filings. And, some courts, in really modern cities, have telephones.

          • Holly
            March 6, 2013 at 12:52 am #

            Then why did she file the motion? She is still being served to appear at some point isn’t she?

          • An Actual Attorney
            March 6, 2013 at 12:55 am #

            She has an absolute right to insist that a case not be heard in a court which doesn’t have jurisdiction over her, as this court may not. It’s not an unreasonable motion on its face, but all the blather about poor her and meeeeen “ms.” t. and her kids just is whiny nonsense.

          • Sue
            March 6, 2013 at 1:26 am #

            If she had just made that case rather than all that “bully” and “three young children” stuff, she might have sounded credible.

          • An Actual Attorney
            March 6, 2013 at 8:38 am #

            Not getting the goal of the exercise is sort of the definition of NCB, isn’t it?

          • The Bofa on the Sofa
            March 6, 2013 at 11:21 am #

            She has an absolute right to insist that a case not be heard in a court which doesn’t have jurisdiction over her

            Absolutely, but AFAIK (and IANAL so correct me if I am wrong), jurisdiction is not determined by how convenient it is for the defendant to attend. in that case, “it’s too much of a burden for me to attend” is not an argument for lack of jurisdiction.

          • An Actual Attorney
            March 6, 2013 at 11:38 am #

            Well, you are not correct there. Personal jurisdiction (as opposed to subject matter jurisdiction) does, as a matter of legal theory, come down to the burden and the fairness.

            But that’s ok, that’s why you don’t actually practice law.

          • anonomom
            March 6, 2013 at 11:41 am #

            OMG stop oppressing him by saying he doesn’t practice law! Just because you have fancy “credentials” doesn’t entitle you to bully other peoplez by publicly bludgeoning them with facts!!!!11

          • The Bofa on the Sofa
            March 6, 2013 at 3:27 pm #

            So if I rob a bank in another state, can I claim that I can’t go to trial there, because it’s too much of a burden?

            Or is that a case of “subject matter” jurisdiction?

          • An Actual Attorney
            March 6, 2013 at 3:33 pm #

            Without sounding too much like Dr. T., you are now asking for me to explain what comprises a full semester in the third year of law school. You are confusing residence and personal jurisdiction. I have several books on this topic. Want to borrow one?

            Here’s a short basic outline on the subject I just found:

          • Sterrell
            March 6, 2013 at 4:09 pm #

            I’m just going to take your word on that!

            But then again, I like my professionals to be professional. Real doctors, real lawyers.

          • March 7, 2013 at 2:37 am #

            Or you could read a famous case about it 🙂

          • March 7, 2013 at 2:31 am #

            It’s not really that complicated. Basically, due process means the person being sued can’t be overly burdened by having to appear in a state where they spend no time and have no ties or relatives, etc. It wouldn’t be fair in the context of a lawsuit. If you robbed a bank I’m sure the state would transport you back at their expense and make sure you had a comfy jail cell to stay in while we were tried!

          • Holly
            March 6, 2013 at 5:19 pm #

            She has a right to insist it, but the point is that she goes other places without complaining that it is impossible. She even got her fans to give her money to go to the More Business of Being Born screening.

      • Sue
        March 6, 2013 at 1:25 am #

        But she’s the MOTHER OF THREE YOUNG CHILDREN!!! Did you get that? THREE. YOUNG. CHILDREN. Did I say THREE? Did you know they were YOUNG?

        • ratiomom
          March 6, 2013 at 2:58 am #

          I am sorry for those kids. The money to fund all this insanity is coming out of their college funds.

          • LukesCook
            March 6, 2013 at 3:21 am #

            You think she wouldn’t have spent it on some other fluff if it weren’t for this lawsuit? Attending conferences, perhaps?

            Besides which, the only college fund in her family seems to be Gina’s. Since it’s unlikely she’ll have graduated by the time her kids are college age, they’ll just have to go without.

          • Perturbed Guest
            March 12, 2013 at 9:29 pm #

            WHAT college funds? Gina doesn’t have a pot to piss in NOW.

    • Squillo
      March 6, 2013 at 10:16 am #

      I would have had some sympathy for her if she had simply complained about being unable to protect her IP due to her relative poverty. Her utter inability to focus on the only issue in which she may or may not have had a claim (although almost definitely not nearly in the amount she assumed in her post on the topic) has done her enormous harm, and I don’t think Ms. Marcus did her any favors in bringing up the idea of changing the tone of the blogs. And her current attorney did her no favors in bringing up Amy’s putative bullying in a jurisdiction motion.

      • The Bofa on the Sofa
        March 6, 2013 at 11:17 am #

        I would have had some sympathy for her if she had simply complained about being unable to protect her IP due to her relative poverty.

        I don’t know as much about the legal system as many here, but my impression is that the first thing you need to do in going to court is to define your complaint. Then you have to provide arguments to a judge why you should win your case over that complaint. The defendant needs to provide an explanation why THEY should win the case at hand.

        But the underlying feature of this whole thing is, what is the case is about. The judge’s responsibility is to answer the charge set before him/her. That is all that the judge cares about. In this case, the question is whether GCC was using the DMCA violation accusation really to address a question of copyright infringement, or whether it was just an attempt to stop Dr Amy from continuing her actions. Dr Amy contends that those claims were not filed due to any copyright infringement, but as part of an attempt to stop her.

        This is where it gets bizarre. In response to a lawsuit contending that GCC has been illegally trying to use the DMCA to stop Dr Amy, as opposed to protecting copyrighted material, her approach is to not focus why the copyright was violated, making her DMCA actions legitimate, but to cry about how Amy is mean and needs to leave her alone?

        At best, that doesn’t address the complaint. At worst, it is an affirmation of what Amy is charging.

        The number one rule of arguing before a judge: address the complaint, right? Define the question to be determined, and then show why you are right.

        She is way off the topic at hand, it seems to me.

        • LukesCook
          March 6, 2013 at 2:46 pm #

          Not really. It’s for the plaintiff to set out a cause of action and then prove it. It’s almost always more favorable for the defendant to try and have the matter dismissed without having to set out or prove their defense, firstly to minimize costs and secondly because you don’t want to disclose the basis of your defense prematurely.

          • The Bofa on the Sofa
            March 6, 2013 at 3:25 pm #

            It’s for the plaintiff to set out a cause of action and then prove it.

            But in this case, it is the defendant who is asking for dismissal on the grounds of jurisdiction, and that is the question before the judge.

            I always put these in the context if they were oral arguments.

            Defense: We move to dismiss

            Judge: On what grounds?

            Defense: Lack of jurisdiction

            Judge: OK. Plaintiff, why do you think I have jurisdiction?

            Plaintiff: Because of cases X, Y, and Z.

            Judge: Defense, why don’t you think I have jurisdiction?

            Defense: Because Amy is a poopy-head and I am just a poor mother of three young kids

            That is the information that the judge uses to make the decision. The judge isn’t going to make the case for either party, that is not their job.

            Given that argument, the judge has no choice to deny the motion, since the defendant has not provided any legitimate counter.

            The question before the judge at this point is the motion to dismiss on grounds of jurisdiction. If your argument is that the court does not have jurisdiction, then you absolutely bear a burden of supporting that. Doesn’t matter that it is the plaintiff or defense. You aren’t going to win your argument in front of the judge if you don’t any basis for your claims (which is what the motion is)

          • An Actual Attorney
            March 6, 2013 at 3:43 pm #

            You are right as a matter of rhetoric, but as a matter of law, once the defendant raises jurisdictional questions, the plaintiff has to prove jurisdiction exists.

          • suchende
            March 7, 2013 at 11:11 am #

            My husband (also an actual attorney) and I (JD done, not admitted anywhere yet) were talking about this last night, and I wonder how the DCMA notice will play into things, since it’s sort of “plaintiff-y,” to use the technical term. I need to get on Westlaw and see what’s already come up.

          • LukesCook
            March 6, 2013 at 3:48 pm #

            Whoda thunk, I’ve been doing it wrong all this time. Now that you’ve put it in context for me I know better.

      • Renee Martin
        March 6, 2013 at 11:22 am #

        Protect her IP due to poverty?
        From what, people that are “meen” and say things she doesn’t like?

        • Squillo
          March 6, 2013 at 12:04 pm #

          Meaning that, in order to prevent Amy from putting the photo back up, she would have had to file a lawsuit within 14 days of filing the takedown. That takes money,

  49. Lisa the Raptor
    March 5, 2013 at 6:45 pm #

    Funny, I was just reading that and thinking “Hey, they’re letting Gina write her own motions now.”

  50. Amy Tuteur, MD
    March 5, 2013 at 6:19 pm #

    I’ve just filed a Motion to Strike. I’ve added the document to the post.

    • March 5, 2013 at 6:43 pm #

      Those things have no relevance to the proceedings and her response would be improved by those changes.

      • Mrs. W
        March 5, 2013 at 6:59 pm #

        Dr. A takes the high road again – offering to assist Ms. GCC in her legal endeavours.

    • March 5, 2013 at 7:28 pm #

      I don, t see it!

  51. Lisa
    March 5, 2013 at 6:17 pm #

    She really has painted you as quite the arch villainess. After reading that, I can only imagine you and your husband are running around the house throwing money at each other and plotting to steal toys from orphans. She takes absolutely no responsibility for any part of this lawsuit. When she loses, she will not learn anything from this. She’ll just tell herself it’s because she couldn’t afford a powerful enough lawyer. It’s spalling that sit an immature person is raising three children.

    • theadequatemother
      March 5, 2013 at 7:05 pm #

      Isn’t that the identical thought process that leads a woman to the conclusion that her unnecessarean was due to not hiring a midwife or attempting a home birth?

      • Lisa
        March 5, 2013 at 8:08 pm #

        Close, but in the case of a cesarean, a woman cannot decide to have a small pelvis or a poorly-position baby. Gina chose to misuse copyright law.

        • theadequatemother
          March 6, 2013 at 8:44 am #

          True, I was more thinking that in both cases misattribution of causality is used in order to avoid a perceived ego blow.

    • Yammy
      March 6, 2013 at 10:53 am #

      Yup, she apparently already believes her looming crucifixion only came about ONLY because she stood up for herself – nevermind that she tried to fight dirty, instead of using her words compete in the marketplace of ideas. It’s like this free speech thing ought to come with a user’s manual.

  52. Robin G.
    March 5, 2013 at 6:08 pm #

    This lawyer is ten pounds of stupid in a five pound bag. “Dr. Amy’s mean so
    it’s okay that Gina abused the DMCA!” ain’t exactly a winning strategy.

  53. March 5, 2013 at 6:00 pm #

    I bet it kills her that you have access to her blog posts!

    • attitude devant
      March 5, 2013 at 6:19 pm #

      Oh for sure. She has been pretty adamant about blocking anyone she doesn’t like from her blog.

      • Erica
        March 5, 2013 at 8:59 pm #

        I would assume that quoting her locked entry is a “violation” for which she will now ban Dr. Amy. Presumably she is smart enough to not continue to attempt to remove the content via DMCA takedown notices.

    • thepragmatist
      March 5, 2013 at 9:59 pm #

      I love it. It is such a supreme joy to know she cannot hide from criticism, not matter what she tries to do. Bet she’s going nuts trying to figure out WHO it is. Ha. Love it.

    • March 6, 2013 at 12:53 am #

      But she doesn’t know. B/c she doesn’t read this website. Riiiiiiiiiight….

  54. attitude devant
    March 5, 2013 at 5:57 pm #

    No, actually, I disagree with Gina and Dr. Amy: Gina is an asshole AND an idiot.

    • March 5, 2013 at 6:52 pm #

      Personally, I would not be keen to put either of them on my Christmas card list, LOL.

    • shookiesmama
      March 5, 2013 at 6:58 pm #

      Two for the price of one!

  55. March 5, 2013 at 5:46 pm #

    What “attacks” was she ignoring? All I ever saw on SOB about her was criticism! Guess her lashing out at real criticism is more important than her family’s financial future

    • shookiesmama
      March 5, 2013 at 7:00 pm #

      It’s Gina’s world, her family just has to live in it.

  56. March 5, 2013 at 5:42 pm #

    I see she is trying to paint herself a poor little mother with tiny babies to take care of and Dr Amy as the millionaire bullying Goliath. Nice try, her lawyer says nothing about the pain Gina has caused all on her own.

    • The Computer Ate My Nym
      March 5, 2013 at 5:47 pm #

      The lawyer she hired appears to be a corporate lawyer who specializes in working for employers and defending employers against allegations of discrimination, sexual harassment, etc. In other words, he’s the man. This suggests that a) GCC has some money somewhere to spend on an expensive lawyer and b) she doesn’t mind being the establishment when it’s in her interests to be.

      • March 5, 2013 at 5:52 pm #

        Now I’m confused. Elsewhere in the thread, it is stated that he is a lay lawyer with very little experience.

        • slandy09
          March 5, 2013 at 6:07 pm #

          I believe they’re being sarcastic, Alan.

          • March 5, 2013 at 6:14 pm #

            Ah, ok…but hyperbole aside, they sincerely seem to think he is doing a bad job, amirite?

          • March 5, 2013 at 6:22 pm #

            I can’t judge very well, but considering his client, he might be performing competently considering his considerable handicap.

          • auntbea
            March 5, 2013 at 6:29 pm #

            So what are the ethics on this? If she writes up her complaint and insists he file it, does he have to? Can he file something he knows to be in her best interest without her consent? What if she will only consent to something not in her interest?

          • Jessica
            March 5, 2013 at 6:34 pm #

            He does not have to file anything she drafts. He cannot file something without her consent. If they can’t agree on course of representation, the professional rules of conduct would likely compel his withdrawal as her counsel.

          • auntbea
            March 5, 2013 at 6:45 pm #

            So what happens to people who are just intractably legally self-destructive? Do they just end up lawyer-less? Do they represent themselves? Do they lose by default? (They did not cover this in my courses at Law and Order SVUinversity)

          • LukesCook
            March 5, 2013 at 6:51 pm #

            They often do end up representing themselves, but it takes a while to achieve the level of notoriety required to become untouchable to any lawyer other than those so bad you don’t want them representing you anyway.

          • Mrs. W
            March 5, 2013 at 7:06 pm #

            I think this demonstrates that Gina is there in record time.

          • March 5, 2013 at 7:59 pm #

            Well, you know what they say about someone representing themselves!

          • Mrs. W
            March 5, 2013 at 7:01 pm #

            They pray to the Saints for pro-bono services and hope that judges won’t throw books at them for being daft fools.

        • shookiesmama
          March 5, 2013 at 6:55 pm #

          Her lawyer is probably good in his area of expertise which appears to be workplace harassment. Probably why he went for the bully language instead of focusing on the merits of the case.

          • An Actual Attorney
            March 6, 2013 at 12:20 am #

            Nah, that drafting wouldn’t fly anywhere. There’s dramatic story telling and then there’s whining. I don’t understand it. Not at all. I actually think there’s a good argument for dismissal in there, it just got lost behind the WAAAAAH.

          • KarenJJ
            March 6, 2013 at 1:06 am #

            It seemed to me that the following arguments were being used:

            1. The lawsuit should be dismissed because it was filed in a state that has nothing to do with the defendant.

            2. The lawsuit should be dismissed because Dr Amy is a bully.

            3. The lawsuit should be dismissed because she is not a real doctor.

            4. The lawsuit should be dismissed because it was filed in bad faith as it was filed in a different state to the defendant and because those doing the suing were doing so on personal time and also used information from settlement phone calls in the suit that we don’t believe should have been used.

            Only one, possibly two of those points seemed to be a decent reason as to why the suit should be considered for dismissal. The rest seemed to be padding…

          • Sue
            March 6, 2013 at 1:27 am #

            But you forgot the THREE YOUNG CHILDREN.

          • KarenJj
            March 6, 2013 at 1:47 am #

            So I did! If only I could use that as an excuse myself. And yet my manager still expects me to come to work, the police still expect me to keep within the speed limit while driving and my accountant still tells me that I am required to pay taxes. Phew is life tough living within these limits.

          • Box of Salt
            March 6, 2013 at 2:06 am #

            KarenJJ, you got the order wrong: Your #2 comes first. Re-read the first sentence of the complaint!

          • LukesCook
            March 6, 2013 at 3:26 am #

            Do attorneys sometimes file papers prepared by other attorneys, without reading them or applying their minds? They’ll do that here sometimes, for jurisdictional or other reasons, but usually only between attorneys who know each other well and are reasonably comfortable that the arrangement won’t embarrass them. Perhaps Jake has a friend in Evan’s office and wangled a freebie by getting them to file papers prepared by her/Gina?

          • An Actual Attorney
            March 6, 2013 at 8:42 am #

            Same here, but the one who files is vouching for what’s written. I’ve had attorneys do that for me sometimes, and they always read it over. I know because they usually suggest minor edits or such. Your filing = your reputation and responsibility.

          • LukesCook
            March 6, 2013 at 2:34 pm #

            I suspect our Evan may have just learned that the hard way.

      • March 6, 2013 at 8:11 pm #

        I’m surprised she didn’t hire Prenda law firm…

  57. Bombshellrisa
    March 5, 2013 at 5:40 pm #

    “spew”, “venom”, “no longer licenced”-working on a bingo card here.

    • Karen in SC
      March 5, 2013 at 5:57 pm #

      Public Health Scholar

      • PH Student
        March 5, 2013 at 7:38 pm #

        I almost destroyed my Public Health student karma by making a snarky response here.

      • Bombshellrisa
        March 5, 2013 at 8:31 pm #

        OMG-will that title never go away? Scholar? Can’t student be enough? Can we agree that you can only call yourself a scholar AFTER you have completed your masters-it’s student until then. If she is a public health SCHOLAR then I was a scholar in midwifery and Eastern medicine

        • TheHappyPappy
          March 5, 2013 at 11:53 pm #

          Yes, and I’m a High-Order Multiple Birth Scholar because I have a pet fascination which I indulge by watching YouTube videos and checking out books from the library (even though I don’t plan on having kids). At this point I’m probably just as qualified to deliver sextuplets as those genius mockwives in Oregon.

          • Bombshellrisa
            March 6, 2013 at 1:19 am #

            Over qualified….since I don’t hear you trusting birth!

      • thepragmatist
        March 5, 2013 at 9:41 pm #

        If I still drank, I’d be drunk playing our usual drinking game…

    • Isilzha
      March 5, 2013 at 6:36 pm #

      “mother to 3 young children”

      • Mrs. W
        March 5, 2013 at 6:58 pm #

        I hear the world’s smallest violin playing a solo for GCC….

        • March 5, 2013 at 8:22 pm #

          So no sympathy for her children, even? Really?

          • AmyP
            March 5, 2013 at 8:35 pm #

            Their main problem is that their mother is immature, impulsive and has trouble thinking about the totally predictable consequences of her actions. That is quite the problem.

          • Bomb
            March 5, 2013 at 8:43 pm #

            I think everyone feels sorry for Gina’s kids, if not because of the lawsuit, because their mother is Gina.

          • KarenJJ
            March 5, 2013 at 9:48 pm #

            I feel sorry for the kids and her husband, but fathers with young children also get sued and also put their families in financial peril by illegal actions.

          • TheHappyPappy
            March 5, 2013 at 9:41 pm #

            I feel very sorry that those children were born to a mother with such exceptionally poor judgment. I’m also sorry they may suffer financial hardship as a result of this lawsuit. It’s not fair to them. But having young children who might suffer because of the consequences of your actions does not mean you should not be held accountable for them. Reproduction does not negate culpability.

          • LukesCook
            March 6, 2013 at 3:27 am #

            Do you think she’s the first litigant ever to have children?

          • March 6, 2013 at 1:13 pm #

            Yes, Alan most of us have sympaty for her children if they should find themselves suffering for her idiocy. For any child who who has a parent with a big and fragile ego and not much sense.

          • March 6, 2013 at 5:05 pm #

            I have had sympathy for some time, and dread, for the boy who is going to grow up and potentially discover an archived copy of his mom’s blog post discussing her intense (even if transient) feelings of “HATE” for him.

        • Bombshellrisa
          March 5, 2013 at 8:32 pm #

          Learning to keep one’s mouth shut can be a really hard lesson..

      • mollyb
        March 5, 2013 at 7:18 pm #

        I’m just surprised it was “mama to 3 young children”.

        • Renee Martin
          March 5, 2013 at 9:52 pm #

          She is such a “feminist” she is trying to paint herself as a poor, dedicated, mama of 3 littles. Aw, next she should say shes barefoot and not allowed of the kitchen to go to court.

          Yep, some “feminist”….

          • KarenJj
            March 5, 2013 at 11:13 pm #

            That’s what really struck me too.

            Men have been sued and put their families through the financial wringer since the early days of suing, finance and wringers. Being a part of the big world now and being out of the kitchen gives us responsibilities as well as freedoms.

          • March 6, 2013 at 3:25 am #

            I’m not a big fan of GCC personally; but when I first heard about her blog I was excited that someone was pushing the meme of “feminist breeder”. Your comment illustrates why it is needed, representing the classic Second Wave position of pitting motherhood and feminism against each other, matter and antimatter that cannot coexist. Rubbish IMO.

          • JenniferG
            March 6, 2013 at 6:12 am #

            Alan, it’s Gina stating that motherhood is incompatible with her capacity to appear in court in MA. What’s next, mothers with babies can’t sign contracts? Own property? File DMCA complaints? Sign cheques?

          • LukesCook
            March 6, 2013 at 7:01 am #

            It isn’t motherhood per se that’s the problem, it’s societal constructs of motherhood. “Feminist breeder” ought to be a redundant term. The two are only in conflict when certain assumptions are made about the role of “breeder” (or “mother” or “parent”).

          • March 6, 2013 at 1:52 pm #

            But that is my point.

          • March 7, 2013 at 7:36 am #

            Oh, Alan please mansplain to us more about feminism and choice and motherhood. Nothing is really really discussed until a dood does it.

    • shookiesmama
      March 5, 2013 at 6:49 pm #


    • Karen in SC
      March 5, 2013 at 7:17 pm #

      ooh oooh, the name of her rock group – Veruca Salt!

    • Alicia
      March 6, 2013 at 2:26 am #

      Don’t forget to add Wikipedia!

  58. March 5, 2013 at 5:40 pm #

    Was the document from Gina’s lawyer written in crayon, per chance?

    • March 5, 2013 at 7:48 pm #

      With each letter in a different color! That’s how they do it in kindergarten! (Special words like your name can use little hearts instead of dots over the i’s.)

  59. Mrs. W
    March 5, 2013 at 5:35 pm #

    I’m shocked – a lawyer put their name on that? I’m also not a lawyer – merely married to a lawyer – and that just does not strike me as being the work of an actual lawyer. I’m surprised Gina is using a “lawyer” – but then again she also advocates uses “health care providers” who would not be qualified to practice anywhere else in the first world….

    • I don't have a creative name
      March 5, 2013 at 5:37 pm #

      Yeah, definitely a lay lawyer. He took 20 CEU’s and attended 20 courtroom hearings and is now qualified to practice law! In Oregon, he’s now qualified to be a judge.

      • Sue
        March 5, 2013 at 9:14 pm #

        ” In Oregon, he’s now qualified to be a judge.”

        Made my day, creative name! Brilliant!

      • Guestll
        March 5, 2013 at 10:31 pm #

        Was the test online and in multiple choice format? I’m betting it was.

      • Siri
        March 6, 2013 at 4:08 pm #

        Contempt of court is just a variation of normal.

    • March 6, 2013 at 8:08 pm #

      Yah, definitely a doulawyer…

  60. Elle
    March 5, 2013 at 5:32 pm #

    When you can’t come up with a logical rebuttal, use name calling. Hey, it works for kindergarteners.

  61. The Computer Ate My Nym
    March 5, 2013 at 5:32 pm #

    She responded by using her millions

    You have millions? I presume she means millions of dollars. Since she’s made a point of saying that you haven’t worked in medicine for a while, I presume that blogging makes one rich. Except, if that’s true, why can’t blogger GCC keep herself in organic baby food and lawyers? Perhaps she’s simply not as good at it as you are.

    • Annie
      March 5, 2013 at 6:13 pm #

      I read that and wondered what millions she is talking about. Only thing worse would have been if GCC had said Dr T used her Benjamin’s to bulky her. GCC needs to realize that this is all out there and once she finishes her MPH she will have all this baggage to explain to interviewers

      • March 5, 2013 at 6:16 pm #

        You sure Dr. Amy is not wealthy? An OB and author, married to a lawyer–sounds like a power couple to me.

        • Minerva
          March 5, 2013 at 6:43 pm #

          After the amount of schooling a doctor has to go through and the amount of money needed to do so, they rarely become “rich”. Factor in the average lawyer is making around $50,000 these days. Yes, some doctors make decent money but OB/GYNs are not a huge money speciality. (Even though the HBM thinks that’s what they are all about).

          • March 5, 2013 at 6:56 pm #

            I have not seen her deny being wealthy. Even if your lowballing is accurate, it’s still a lot more money than my family has (or Gina’s). Also, if Mr. Tuteur is acting as Dr. Amy’s attorney (pro bono, one assumes), that in and of itself gives her a huge advantage in a legal war of attrition, no?

          • Mrs. W
            March 5, 2013 at 7:05 pm #

            Alan – you know what gives someone a huge advantage in a legal battle – being right. Dr. A definitely has an advantage, but it has little to do with how much money she has to throw at this.

          • March 5, 2013 at 7:57 pm #

            Looks to me like burdening an already overloaded legal system over a snit. Remember, I have no great love for Gina but this whole thing does not look to me to rise to the level of meriting litigation. I have traveled my share abroad, and have relatives who are citisens of other countries. One thing I have always heard frequently is the amazed observation that Americans are incredibly litigious. I wonder what the non-Americans on this board think about all of this.

          • JenniferG
            March 5, 2013 at 8:02 pm #

            As a writer I for one am glad someone is challenging the ridiculous use of DCMA. Did you read this link Alan?

          • March 5, 2013 at 8:27 pm #

            That was actually the link that brought me to this board originally.

            I’m not saying that what Gina did was right, only that Dr. Amy’s response is disproportionate. What are her actual, non-ginned-up damages?

          • moto_librarian
            March 5, 2013 at 9:18 pm #

            What makes you so sure that this is about money, Alan? Or do you think that no one ever does anything just on principle? Or were you one of the commenters who think that this dispute should be settled by mud wrestling?

          • Bombshellrisa
            March 5, 2013 at 9:40 pm #

            It’s ALWAYS about money with certain posters if you haven’t already noticed.

          • JenniferG
            March 5, 2013 at 9:19 pm #

            Well in the admittedly small sample of cases I have been involved in, my understanding is you can be granted less than you ask for but never more, so most lawyers advise that you go for a pretty high amount and don’t leave money on the table.

          • theNormalDistribution
            March 5, 2013 at 9:41 pm #

            Oh really? Then what do you think would be the appropriate response?

          • Kalacirya
            March 5, 2013 at 9:59 pm #

            The appropriate response is clearly whatever Alan would do in the same situation, duh.

          • Susan
            March 5, 2013 at 10:10 pm #

            And never make a penny more than Alan has….

          • AllieFoyle
            March 6, 2013 at 5:46 pm #


          • CanDoc
            March 5, 2013 at 9:53 pm #

            I’m from a different country, and the litigiousness of Americans almost never ceases to amaze me. Especially medico-legal litigation. But I’m actually generally on board on this one. Free speech, however you define it, needs to be protected (to an extent that varies based on jurisdiction and culture), and people can’t go around censoring each other by crying foul over DCMA like GCC did. Also, I can’t see this being an especially complex case in terms of facts and arguments – the facts speak for themselves and are fairly simple. Deliberation over DCMA will be interesting, necessarily so due to potential for precedent-setting. So I see this as a case with potential for useful and interesting legal precedent-setting, but not a massive burden for the court system. At least, that’s my completely, absolute uneducated speculation about the case. From Canada, where people threaten to sue a lot but almost never do.

          • Renee Martin
            March 5, 2013 at 10:00 pm #

            Disproportionate? Really?

            An unhappy blogger (GCC) spends all day and night trying to SHUT DOWN another bloggers site (Skep OB) with fake DMCAs, after threatening to sue her, destroy her, and make sure her blog is gone forever? Dr Amy had to move servers several times, of her own expense. When asked to please stop filing false actions, and quit trying to get Skep Ob to be taken down, GCC instead keep it up?

            The only way to stop someone like GCC, and her buddies, from constantly filing false DMCAs and disrupting this blog was to sue. Its not like there is anything else she can do to stop GCC. Given that GCC was spoiling for a lawsuit, and begging for funds to start one, Dr Amy has been very conservative in her actions.

            I am just glad someone is filing over false DMCAs, because lots of people abuse it to censor blogs they don’t like. But few people have the ability to do anything about it. I think its an important test case, as well as being necessary to stop unfair censorship.

          • Susan
            March 5, 2013 at 10:09 pm #

            Amy has a right to protect her freedom of speech. That’s what the lawsuit is about.

          • Holly
            March 5, 2013 at 11:06 pm #

            Wealthy or not, it’s not even relevant because the only reason Dr A had to do this was because Gina was being an actual bully. She was actively having Dr Amy’s site shut down time and time with false accusations. It was intrusion and direct interference and Dr Amy was not doing the same to others at all. Gina crossed a line.

          • Alicia
            March 6, 2013 at 2:58 am #

            No it’s not. GCC was making a focused effort of following Dr. Amy around the Internet from site to site to file DCMA notices. AND was encouraging her readers to also follow Dr. Amy and also file notices. THAT is disproportionate to being mad over someone saying something negative about you and using a photo you told them to use. Since GCC made it her business to harass Dr. Amy by trying to take down her blog, Dr. Amy had every right to use the courts to stop the harassment. No one could say that they wouldn’t do the same.

          • March 6, 2013 at 3:14 am #

            No one could say that? Really? Everyone on the planet would do the exact same thing. Ehhh…ok.

            Setting aside that little bit of weirdness, I guess I need to point out for the umpteenth time that I am no great fan of GCC. I have tangled with her before and got comments deleted (which I find greatly irksome, intolerable really; I will not post anywhere I have to stay on a short leash, and I will credit Dr. Amy btw for not running her blog that way). I just don’t think this dynamic of escalation piled upon escalation is in any way constructive.

            Does GCC fly off the handle and act immaturely? Quite obviously, no disputing that. What would impress me as the thing a mature, together person would do in the face of a kind of spazzy person like that is to rise above and be the “bigger person”. Not to get petulant right back and say “guess what, bitch, you are fucking with the wrong person and now you and your whole family is going to get pwned, HARD”.

            JMO, YMMV obv.

          • Deb
            March 6, 2013 at 8:16 am #

            What specifically in this case would count as being the bigger person? GCC was succeeding in taking this blog offline – the false DMCAs were causing hosts to take it down. The only solutions I can see would be to give up and leave it down, or eventually run out of hosts – there aren’t that many of them.

            Perhaps you’re more creative than me – what should Dr Amy have done?

          • Squillo
            March 6, 2013 at 9:47 am #

            Precisely. Amy has been the target of DCMAs before and since, and as far as I know, she has not filed any other lawsuits.

            If this were truly about Gina’s IP, and she felt it was sufficiently important to prevent Amy from using a photo that had zero commercial value, she could have followed the law and actually filed the threatened copyright suit. (Or she could have been the “bigger person” and said, “let it stand.” It was not, after all, infringing her ability to use the photo or to operate her blog.)

            Instead, she used a law that notoriously provides little reasonable recourse for the target, and almost everything she’s written–including the motion in question–implies that protecting her IP wasn’t her main concern. She rubbed her hands metaphorically at the chance to finally take Amy down.

            Unfortunately, when someone attempts to use the law to silence a critic, the only options are to be silenced or to use the law to fight back.

            So no, I don’t think Amy’s response was “disproportionate.” Not at all.

          • March 6, 2013 at 3:24 pm #

            How about beginning legal action as a “warning shot” and then dropping it?

            GCC has already cried “Uncle!” in the “I’m not an asshole, I’m an idiot” comment Dr. Amy gleefully quoted.

            Some drunken spazz can throw the first punch in a bar fight, but if they then get their ass handed to them, a decent person doesn’t keep kicking more of the erstwhile spazz’s teeth out as they lie helplessly in the gutter.

          • Squillo
            March 6, 2013 at 3:41 pm #

            Because filing a suit one has no intention of prosecuting would be vexatious litigation, which is generally frowned upon by the court. Crying “uncle” in a blog post is not the same as offering to settle, which GCC may or may not have done (I doubt either party is at liberty to say.) I she has offered to settle, I would hope Amy and her attorneys would consider the terms and act accordingly.

            Moreover, I would expect Amy hopes the suit will have a deterrent effect on the others whom GCC has urged to follow her example.

          • theNormalDistribution
            March 6, 2013 at 3:48 pm #

            What is this I don’t even…

            You don’t really get how law works, do you?

          • LukesCook
            March 6, 2013 at 4:40 pm #

            What you describe would be a frivolous and vexatious abuse of process. How overburdened do you think the legal system would be if it were flooded with “warning shots” and how much weight do you think those “warning shots” would carry? The legal system exists to resolve legitimate legal disputes, not to facilitate pissing contests between twits who want to make a point but have no intention of submitting to and abiding by the authority of the court.

          • March 6, 2013 at 4:45 pm #

            A warning shot can still progress to warfare if it is not heeded. Litigation is a form of proxy combat, and it is a well established principle of combat (in the human and animal worlds) that you try to wrap things up without all-out, scorched-and-salted-earth tactics whenever possible.

          • March 6, 2013 at 10:39 am #

            I’m glad Dr. Amy has the means to hit back at this kind of harassment. Most people don’t, and find themselves bullied off the internet because of the actions of people like GCC. If Dr. Amy wins this suit (and I can’t imagine she won’t), maybe other bloggers will take the consequences of harassment to heart and think twice before using tactics such as these.

          • Squillo
            March 6, 2013 at 10:53 am #

            Right. If Amy prevails, it’s a boon to all the “little guys” who are traditionally hit by bogus takedowns from those with more resources. So the argument that Amy shouldn’t pick on the poor is somewhat specious.

          • March 6, 2013 at 1:50 pm #

            Do you think Dr A should have been the bigger person by simply letting Gina get away with sabotaging this blog and repeatedly having it taken down? As far as I could see, she was more than capable of dealing with Gina’s wild hostility, slanders and “mean”. Gina thought, in her deluded way, that she could become an internet heroine, and she has just got herself in a fairly predictable mess.

          • Sue
            March 5, 2013 at 9:02 pm #

            “I wonder what the non-Americans on this board think about all of this.”

            I’m a non-American and I have a few thoughts:
            1. It’s “citiZen”
            2. GCC brought this on by her own actions, and deserves to bear the consequences.
            3. Yes, the US tends to be a more litigious country than others in some areas, but that doesn’t make this action unreasonable.

          • BCMom
            March 5, 2013 at 9:09 pm #

            I’m a “foreigner” Alan and I agree that Americans can be perceived as litigous, however, I also feel strongly about the right to free speech. GCC using what turns out are illegal means to shut down Dr. Tuteurs’ website purely because she didn’t like the message is wrong. This website was shut down several times in a week due to GCC’s actions – new providers had to be found and legal opinions had to be sought at a cost and inconvenience solely borne by Dr. Tuteur. Through all of this, I thought Dr. Tuteur cut GCC quite a bit of slack and it wasn’t until the SOB website was under real threat and Dr. Tuteurs’ right to free speech was compromised did she seek redress through the courts.

          • moto_librarian
            March 5, 2013 at 9:15 pm #

            Alan, I am reasonably confident that I know a helluva lot more about copyright law than you do. Abusing DMCA to try to silence your critics is illegal, period. Gina said that her intent was to stop Dr. Amy from blogging, and she initiated this entire scenario. I am fairly certain that Dr. A was content to let this go, but Gina just kept threatening and abusing the takedown notice. She had the opportunity to settle this but instead, she escalated. It’s not a “snit” – other people do this kind of crap all the time, and it’s about time that someone with adequate money is filing a suit that might set a precedent that will stop the outright abuse of the DMCA takedown process.

          • AllieFoyle
            March 6, 2013 at 11:57 am #

            Did you miss the fact that Alan has traveled abroad and (gasp!) has relatives who are citizens of different countries? He’s clearly the expert here. I for one am really impressed by the idea that some people outside the US view us as too litigious. We really should stop this whole lawsuit nonsense and just settle things the way that civilized countries do (how do they do that again? It’s something about organic food or IKEA or mass transportation, right?). If we spent less on frivolous things like lawsuits and MRCS just think of how many hipster dads we could subsidize.

          • Squillo
            March 5, 2013 at 9:47 pm #

            Crosely-Corcoran filed two DCMAs, publicly solicited others to do same (without regard to Fair Use), causing Amy to have to move her blog one at least one occasion. She also issued other unspecified threats.

            If it hadn’t been for the threat of constantly having to change blog hosts–which costs money and represents a significant disruption in “service”–I doubt very much that Amy would have filed suit. It wouldn’t have been worth the time, effort, and money (even rich people don’t like spending it unnecessarily.) I’m not sure what else would have persuaded Crosley-Corcoran to stop using the DCMA to harass or to dissuade others from trying the same tack.