I want to be really clear about who I am and why I'm interested in this:
I'm a young journalist (25). I got started at 60 Minutes and have worked since then mainly in international news. A friend of mine suggested I do a story about Alan Slifka, who was a major philanthropist and a big donor to Yale, my alma mater. While researching Slifka, I got interested in his wife's practice. It was one thing that she was falsifying her credentials, but the real problem was that Riva Ritvo was advertising very aggressively for her clinic, claiming to have 20 years' experience in 'diagnosing and treating individuals with autism spectrum disorders.' If that's true, that means she'd probably treated a lot of patients without having the degrees or the licensure she said she had, and that's worth writing about. If it turns out, though, that she was saying she was a Ph.D and had a clinic in order to impress her friends and didn't really have an active clinic, then I'll probably drop the story.
I don't necessarily think this is a big story, but it's worth pursuing if she really ran a clinic for two decades with a falsified resume. She also recently came into hundreds of millions of dollars, and gives the story a little more weight and urgency. I don't have any hidden agenda or any vendetta against Ritvo. From where I am now, it seems like it might be a good article (and it can't hurt anybody if she turns out to be practicing fraudulently and is exposed as such), but if Riva Ritvo hasn't done anything really wrong, then I'll drop it.
Thank you for bearing with me on this. I realize that Intensity Squared isn't intended for a thread like this, and I am sorry to be taking up your time with this.
- Sam