Dan.. the LW is looking for an affordable therapist or support groups for their friend, not a lawyer.
I hope they all sue every last penny out of sleaze bag Harvey Weinstein and those who enabled him need to be shamed and blamed and maybe sued as well.

When's everything coming out from guys about David Geffen and Bryan Singer?

If she has insurance, she can find out how much therapy will cost--she should call the number on the back of her insurance card and find out if she has a deductible, and if so, is it for in-network or out-of-network services. An in-network therapist may cost only a copay for each visit. Also, there are programs in some states that will reimburse crime victims who cooperate with the police for health care expenses related to the crime. She may be able to get help for free. The DA's office for her state should be able to tell her about that.

@2 Men are going to be even more reluctant to come forward because there is even more stigma against male rape victims because of our culture relating to male sexuality. If any of the men are gay themselves, people are just going to point to the sort of wild sex parties that *some* gay men engage in and say, "Well that's just gay dudes." In addition, the immediate defense from Bryan Singer (whom I know is out as bi; Idk about Geffen) will be an accusation of homophobia, just as was done by Ed Murray's people; even when Murray's victim was gay, they accused the representing law firm.

@1, why do you think a referral to legal services won't point Rachel in the right direction?

If the attorney Dan recommended has made her living off of domestic violence, assault, revenge porn, and especially assault by the wealthy and powerful, then it's a given that she not only knows how to litigate, but that she has a rock-solid "what next" referral system in hand. If your victim is too terrified and traumatized to testify, and you need them to testify, you have to have the resources in-hand to get them prepared for trial (aka mental health care, DV resources, etc).

@2 and 4, check out this tweet thread:https://twitter.com/terrycrews/status/917838446697226240

It will come. It will take time, but it will come.

True Slinky, I read the LW was looking for therapeutic services at the moment for their friend, and cheapish ones at that. Going to a lawyer will cost.

To the LW, I'm not sure if this is available in your area (I'm in Illinois), or advisable for your friend... But some psychiatry/therapy graduate programs at colleges and universities make their grad students available for clinic sessions as part of their doctorate training (or is it masters, or some other degree? idk?).

My family is just starting this with my oldest son (9 years old) after some horrendous insurance mishaps (ended up with a $5,000 bill from first practice after they said they'd "work" with my insurance. Second insurance "sponsored" therapist didn't show up at appointments or return phone calls). I'm very new to this arrangement, but so far I'm also very impressed.

Yes, our therapist is a young'ish grad student, but I prefer to think of her as eager. Also, all of the sessions are recorded...but they are kept private and confidential. This is so her professor/ adviser can monitor her practice, and provide tips and guidance where needed. And this professor is licensed, with over 30 years experience...so in some respects you get two therapists for the price of one.

As for cost, they use a sliding scale...but our middle class family is currently paying about $55 per session, which is far less expensive than the average private practitioner (who tends to start at about $250 per hour).

Anyway, I have no idea if this is available for your friend; or advisable for the type of trauma she experienced...but if cost/insurance is a big concern, it may be something to consider.

Oh Carrie Goldberg, no you don’t! You don’t get to elevate your clients’ claims by trivializing someone else's. Setting one woman against another is not cool.

+++ +++ +++
From Wikipedia:

Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants, also known as the McDonald's coffee case and the hot coffee lawsuit, was a 1994 product liability lawsuit that became a flashpoint in the debate in the United States over tort reform. Although a New Mexico civil jury awarded $2.86 million to plaintiff Stella Liebeck, a 79-year-old woman who suffered third-degree burns in her pelvic region when she accidentally spilled hot coffee in her lap after purchasing it from a McDonald's restaurant, ultimately Liebeck was only awarded $640,000. Liebeck was hospitalized for eight days while she underwent skin grafting, followed by two years of medical treatment.

...

Burn incident
On February 27, 1992, Stella Liebeck, a 79-year-old woman from Albuquerque, New Mexico, ordered a 49-cent cup of coffee from the drive-through window of a local McDonald's restaurant located at 5001 Gibson Boulevard Southeast. Liebeck was in the passenger's seat of a 1989 Ford Probe which did not have cup holders. Her grandson parked the car so that Liebeck could add cream and sugar to her coffee. Liebeck placed the coffee cup between her knees and pulled the far side of the lid toward her to remove it. In the process, she spilled the entire cup of coffee on her lap. Liebeck was wearing cotton sweatpants; they absorbed the coffee and held it against her skin, scalding her thighs, buttocks, and groin.

Liebeck was taken to the hospital, where it was determined that she had suffered third-degree burns on six percent of her skin and lesser burns over sixteen percent. She remained in the hospital for eight days while she underwent skin grafting. During this period, Liebeck lost 20 pounds (9 kg, nearly 20% of her body weight), reducing her to 83 pounds (38 kg). After the hospital stay, Liebeck needed care for 3 weeks, which was provided by her daughter. Liebeck suffered permanent disfigurement after the incident and was partially disabled for two years.

Pre-trial Liebeck sought to settle with McDonald's for $20,000 to cover her actual and anticipated expenses. Her past medical expenses were $10,500; her anticipated future medical expenses were approximately $2,500; and her daughter's loss of income was approximately $5,000 for a total of approximately $18,000. Instead, the company offered only $800. When McDonald's refused to raise its offer, Liebeck retained Texas attorney Reed Morgan. Morgan filed suit in New Mexico District Court accusing McDonald's of "gross negligence" for selling coffee that was "unreasonably dangerous" and "defectively manufactured". McDonald's refused Morgan's offer to settle for $90,000. Morgan offered to settle for $300,000, and a mediator suggested $225,000 just before trial, but McDonald's refused these final pre-trial attempts to settle.

@9 that comparison... is terrible. The McDonalds hot coffee was not a particularly gendered debate, and Goldberg isn't setting these two "against" each other - she's arguing that both aught to actionable, not one or the other. And lastly, that Liebeck was female doesn't mean that she should be immune to having her actions questioned. Basically every element of that comment is, IMO, incoherent.

@9 side note - medical care was cheap back then. Those injuries today would cost well more than 6 figures and maybe in to 7 figures.

@10: Yeah, pretty much that. The hot coffee lawsuit has nothing to do with this.

I think the outrage about the McDonald's incident is that the woman had the coffee cup in her control. It did not spill on her when handed to her by the McDonald's employee out the drive thru window. As was documented, and as she admitted, she herself put it between her legs and removed the cover. It then spilled because she must have shifted in place. That this would somehow be McDonald's fault is what makes it so insane. Drinks such as coffee are brought to a boil and then served. Every adult knows this. By definition coffee is going to be hot and that is how people want it. They will be upset in fact if it's served cold.

Not to say that her injuries weren't terrible and that she didn't suffer as a result. But it was a pure accident. No one spilled the coffee in her lap but her - by accident. She might as well have blamed the manufacturer of the car she was sitting in.

Re Harvey, one has to wonder just now prevalent this behavior is in powerful men. The cynic in me thinks it's much, much more common than anyone realizes.

And one has to wonder what in hell it feels like to be the wife or kids of a guy with that level of immorality. With that level of disrespect of women. And this guy undoubtedly had a daughter or neice, right? Love how they never, ever think, wow, how in fuck would I feel if some disgusting old bastard pulled this shit on my daughter?

It's not just powerful men @14, VelvetBabyAgain.

Innocent until proven guilty, Dan.

. The Entourage view of how a lot of Hollywood operates, is probably very close to the truth. Maybe Casey Affleck will soon be another shamed out of the place. And what of women predators.. I imagine a few of them are In the mix.

I was a young woman back in the 70s and early 80s, when for the most part powerful men did not bother to try to hide this type of behaviour. It was prevalent to the extent that if a powerful man who had some influence over a young woman's financial and career prospects did NOT try in some way to exploit her sexually, it was a surprise. I had zero surprise when Trump's "grab 'em by the pussy" tape came out - for a man of his type, raised when he was raised, and working in the environment he worked in, NOT having his attitudes would be the shocker.

Awareness of this was just part of life - in fact, some of the opposition to "career girls" from the people who actually cared about these women (fathers, brothers, husbands, etc) came from the basic assumption that a young woman out in the working world was opening herself up to sexual harassment. *

* and yes, of course it's more complex than that, and fear of women's independence weighed even heavier, but knowing that your wife's boss would be making the moves on her was part of "My wife will never work!"

True agony, the men coming of age then sure weren't feminists. Not that I came across any men like this guy.

@13

IIRC, McDonald's brewed their coffee to a much higher temperature than other vendors and there had been a history of people suffering from burns from their coffee. They were aware of this but continued to cell coffee at that temperature. I think that factored significantly into the case.

#19
You don't know how many 'men like this guy' you may have come across. You just were lucky enough not to be a victim.

This is a huge secondary issue. If we can't imagine that Uncle X or Managey Y could be one of 'them' they get decades of free predation before enough witnesses/victims come forward to tip the scale.

@13 The McDonald's issue was that the coffee was insanely too hot. I could pour fresh brewed coffee on my bare lap right now and not end up with 3rd degree burns, because drinkable coffee isn't hot enough for that. IIRC, they were serving coffee at like 20 or 30 degrees hotter than they were supposed to. Considering that you put coffee into your mouth and don't get burned (even though the skin there is super thin), imagine how hot this coffee must have been to burn someone through their clothes and tough exterior skin. She won that case on the merits.

@17 I'm fascinated by the idea that people struggle to convert "facts" into opinions. For 20+ years everyone has known that Weinstein was doing inappropriate things, but very few were saying they were disgusted. Today, they're disgusted, over the same behavior they already knew about and weren't disgusted by. So weird. W/R/T female creeps, I'm sure they're out there. But women aren't dangerous at all, they can't possibly hurt a man, so let's ignore it, OK?

To actually answer the LW's question, talk therapy is now covered under all health plans at the same cost as a visit to a regular doctor. This is thanks to the Mental Health Parity Act, which Trump has fortunately not ruined yet. I'd encourage LW's friend to see a therapist ASAP, especially since mental health services are now within the reach of most people.

@13 Actually, the outrage had to do with people not getting all the facts. A lot of people only heard "woman sues McDonald's after she spills coffee on herself, wins millions" and didn't bother to look into the details. I remember lot of false information going around too, like people claiming she was driving at the time. From the Consumer Attorneys of California webpage (emphasis is mine, and is what I'm guessing prompted the jury to rule in Liebeck's favor):

Mrs. Liebeck was not driving when her coffee spilled, nor was the car she was in moving. She was the passenger in a car that was stopped in the parking lot of the McDonald’s where she bought the coffee. She had the cup between her knees while removing the lid to add cream and sugar when the cup tipped over and spilled the entire contents on her lap.

[...]Here is some of the evidence the jury heard during the trial:
- McDonald’s operations manual required the franchisee to hold its coffee at 180 to 190 degrees Fahrenheit.
- Coffee at that temperature, if spilled, causes third-degree burns in three to seven seconds.
- The chairman of the department of mechanical engineering and biomechanical engineering at the University of Texas testified that this risk of harm is unacceptable, as did a widely recognized expert on burns, the editor-in-chief of the Journal of Burn Care and Rehabilitation, the leading scholarly publication in the specialty.
- McDonald’s admitted it had known about the risk of serious burns from its scalding hot coffee for more than 10 years. The risk had repeatedly been brought to its attention through numerous other claims and suits.
- An expert witness for the company testified that the number of burns was insignificant compared to the billions of cups of coffee the company served each year.
- At least one juror later told the Wall Street Journal she thought the company wasn’t taking the injuries seriously. To the corporate restaurant giant those 700 injury cases caused by hot coffee seemed relatively rare compared to the millions of cups of coffee served. But, the juror noted, “there was a person behind every number and I don’t think the corporation was attaching enough importance to that.”
- McDonald’s quality assurance manager testified that McDonald’s coffee, at the temperature at which it was poured into Styrofoam cups, was not fit for consumption because it would burn the mouth and throat.
- McDonald’s admitted at trial that consumers were unaware of the extent of the risk of serious burns from spilled coffee served at McDonald’s then-required temperature.
- McDonald’s admitted it did not warn customers of the nature and extent of this risk and could offer no explanation as to why it did not.

In a story about the case (pdf) published shortly after the verdict was delivered in 1994, one of the jurors said over the course of the trial he came to realize the case was about “callous disregard for the safety of the people.” Another juror said “the facts were so overwhelmingly against the company.”

"Rachel" I want you to know that I have your back. "it is never the wrong time to do the right thing" MLKjr and you are doing it, doing the right thing and it matters. It matters to my 12 year old daughter (and all the many women) who may be spared because of your courage. And to all the other women who may now find the strength to speak up. I can't believe how hard it must be, but we can do hard things especially when we stand together, and I stand with you. Thank you

Insurance is all over the place, I am lucky to have very good insurance tied to an otherwise middling income. I pay 30 dollar copay. Not bad for 45 to an hour sessions with a pyschologist. She won't know the cost till she looks around or asks her insurance. Some also do sliding scale.