Tell Them You Love Me left a LOT out. Should have been a series instead.

Yes, you're right. And I really want to see the details of the appeal trial as well. This was the most disturbing documentary that I've ever seen. Usually netflix draws out their little documentaries over 3 episodes & I usually think that should have just been a movie but this case is the opposite.

Okay am I reaching but her literally trying to rename Derrick is an example of her white savior complex. “Dman” just feels like a micro aggression. She gave him this entirely new identity that she was warping in her mind. In her head, I do believe she thought that this was consensual. Her being out is disgusting and I hope she wasn’t paid one red penny from this documentary

This documentary made me so sad for Derek and his family. I have seen some comments on other threads where people are debating if Anna knew what she was doing or if she really believed she was helping which I just don’t understand. First of all, she is not a SLP, she is a professor of ethics. Even if FC actually worked, she should have never offered her “services” in the first place because she was not trained to do so and didn’t have an appropriate background. Second of all, even if she really believed she was helping, there was never any ethical way for her to be the only person on earth who was able to give Derek a way to communicate and be romantically involved with him. You don’t get to paint yourself as an authority on ethics and then play ignorant to taking advantage of a massive power imbalance. Her behavior is over the top predatory no matter how you look at it.

When Wesley arrived and saw what was going on, he confronted Anna with his doubts about the typing. ‘‘If you believe that [D.J.] can do this F.C. thing, then if I ask [D.J.] a question, he should be able to give me the right answer.’’ Anna agreed to the test, and Wesley asked, ‘‘Who is Georgia?’’

With Anna’s hand on his, D.J. typed an answer, very slowly, over several minutes: ‘‘Georgia in high school worked for Mom.’’

Georgia, who died before Anna got to know the family, was D.J.’s ‘‘auntie.’’ She had often cared for Wesley and D.J., helping out when their mother was at work. Wesley said later that Georgia was D.J.’s other mom, that he loved her as much as anyone and that she made the best scrambled eggs and toast in the world. Then Wesley said he had a second question, and Anna objected.

‘‘Well, this is just a follow-­up question,’’ he continued. ‘‘Tell me who Sally is.’’ Sally was a nickname that D.J.’s family used for Georgia. Now D.J. typed, with Anna’s help, something about ‘‘Mom’s little nephew,’’ but the answer trailed off. As Anna remembered it, Wesley shook his head and said he hoped Anna could work out her marital difficulties. (In court, Anna’s lawyer argued that the answers to Wesley’s questions were correct: Georgia had ‘‘worked for Mom,’’ in the sense of helping her with child care, and she was ‘‘Mom’s little nephew’s kin.’’)

I think it’s important to note that Tell Them You Love Me is not a Netflix produced documentary. It was produced by Louis Theroux for Sky media in the UK and was released via Netflix to North American audiences. Theroux is well know for his “both sides equal air time” approach to documentaries, as well as for giving perceived antagonists centre stage on his docs. He’s behind the camera on this one, but his approach is the same. 

All this being said Anna is a rapist and the Johnson family are an unbelievably strong and protective family. Derrick and individuals like him are as close to perfectly innocent human beings as can be found in this world. What Anna did to him is abhorrent and she should have served every single day of that 12 years. 

Derricks mother is a hero and an amazing parent. 

Her calling him Dman is pissing me off. It’s D - MAN

I agree. Came here after being so disturbed by the lack of attention to detail in the doc. Anyone with true ethics (and she knows ethics rules better than anyone) would have properly handled developing romantic feelings in a situation like this.

1. Consent cannot be truly given in power differential positions.
2. Don't act on the feelings (because you're in a position of power and it's unethical, regardless if the person expresses desires). Detach professionally (get them other professional assistance) and seek personal counseling instead.
3. Tell your spouse and give them the opportunity to leave or renegotiate the relationship (more informed consent).
4. Don't tell the family of the victim he pursued you and you "valiantly" resisted (victim blaming while casting yourself as the innocent hero/savior) under the guise of victim's "words".
5. Don't expect anyone to believe you love him when you ask for five YEARS to divorce your husband. Not only robbing your spouse of the truth, but asking Derrick's family to participate in the lie for five years.
6. Don't expect anyone to believe you when you fail the test Wesley gave you and obviously know you failed.

I believe Anna's husband. She's a highly manipulative and skilled liar and exceptionally self-centered. Not uncommon in professions like these where there is a "savior" dynamic.

Deeply disturbing. They sure gave her enough time and a stage to replay her sex scenes in more detail than I needed. She mentions him seducing her, but nothing about simple professional ethics.

What I didn't understand was, if they were unsure Dman was talking for himself, they could have asked him a question only he would know the answer to and ask him to type it.

Yes, I totally felt like they gave Anna too much credit. Why did she feel qualified to do any of this without consulting an actual SLP? We are trained extensively on this. She was working way outside her scope and she absolutely had no business even offering it.

I was hoping they would talk to more experts about the issues with FC and how to work with nonverbal patients/clients in an ethical way, as it's well-established at this point. It drove me crazy how she kept saying he couldn't communicate, when he has functional communication that his family understands. It's widely inappropriate to devalue that. FC's history of damaging families when CPS started getting involved with fictitious accusations from facilitators would have been worth adding as well.

I was shocked she was doing this in 2010...it was debunked in like, 1992!!

At first I kind of believed Anna. Especially after the Mom said Derrick was now masturbating. I was like of course he is, he got a taste and what man wouldn’t want more. But then they actually showed footage of Derrick. I thought, uh uh, no way. There’s clearly nothing there and this man is obviously severely disabled. I have seen people with cerebral palsy that are not mentally disabled (this Hank JR from breaking bad), that  is not the case with Derrick. Derrick is clearly not able to consent. I honestly don’t even think Anna realizes she did anything wrong. I think she was unhappy with her life and marriage, and created this perfect what was in her mind “intellectual” counterpart subconciously to fill the loneliness she was feeling. Doesn’t make it right, but I got the impression that Anna truly believes what she says happened.

I’ve worked in the field of IDD for over 25 years. This doc was disturbing and so is facilitated communication. Most professionals agree it’s bogus and i’ve even engaged with adults who use FC. Somehow they were able to write eloquent poems and express themselves in ways they’d never been exposed to. The saddest part to me is that OF COURSE those who love them want this to be true. It must feel like a miracle to them. This professor is delusional and so was her mother

What I'm confused about is he how did he write all those papers for school with only a fellow student (not in his class, hadn't read any of the books) acting as facilitator? That never gets clarified. Because that's a whole lot of proof of intellect outside of Anna's control and influence and I would think that that evidence would have produced an innocent verdict so something that invalidated all that must have happened but I don't think it gets explained? Anybody know?

this, I’m readingNYT article rn

This doc was too sympathetic towards Anna. If I would have been the family I would be pissed that this is how Netflix chose to interview and edit this documentary. Anna should have been asked tougher questions. For example, if she had ever considered power dynamics in her “relationship” and she was supposed to be an adult providing care to someone of lower status than her? Same way if she would think it appropriate to have a sexual relationship with another student in one of her classes. Is that really consent if the student has to report to you and is impacted by your opinion of them?

I am a true crime junkie. I love murder stories. I love it. But this, really really bothered me. Anna should be locked away for life. Horrible

Does anyone know 1) if they tried FC with another SLP since? Because what about the essays with the other facilitator?

2) if being with him would financially benefit her ie did the family have money/inheritance etc.

I don’t have access to NYT article / no sub

Thanks!

I didn't know anything about this case or the background with FC, etc. I liked documentaries and it popped up, so I watched it.

My boyfriend and I were so lost on what was going on, so much information missing or contradicting. No one really explained themselves.

I think Derrick's family was done a disservice in the way they had their story told. They came off as aggressive and reactive with every piece of information they gave, but also without context. Anna had this calm and collected narrative the whole time with all of this detail. I think they just weren't given the screen time they were owed and the background missing to understand their POV.

A lot of trial information was missing along with the NEO information?

I walked away like I couldn't really have an opinion either way because it was missing.

What's also weird is that they focused on facilitated communication from the 1990s. Most of the tech was typewriters! Things had changed significantly in the subsequent 20+ years. It's important to note that not only was he autistic but he ALSO had cerebral palsy, which is a muscular degenerative disease.

Why weren't other tools used that are common with CP, such as switches? Why weren't there more neurologists involved? Why didn't they show MRIs?

So much was missing!

One thing I don’t get is why Derrick’s tutor was able to get him to use him keyboard to write his essays, but his brother and mom couldn’t. Doesn’t that maybe mean he was typing with Anna too (instead of her “influencing” the words)?

One thing that is throwing me off is why tell his family about the sexual encounter if she really didn’t believe he was communicating and they were in love? It seems to me she’s absolutely delusional and truly believed he was someone she was in love with when she was just in love with herself. She needs to be in a psych ward.

Man I was going back and forth this whole documentary. Even when I saw Anna’s dead eyes I still believed her. Got to the end of the documentary and had to remind myself that the eyes never lie. Anna is a disgusting human and needs to go back to prison.

The first few times she alluded to the name "D-Man", she actually pronounced it correctly. And then all of a sudden started saying "Deman". What the hell was that switch up about? Cosplaying with crutches made me know I was in for a horrible story. That woman is sick, and she has no business living freely today. Woah.

Can we give a collective shout-out to Daisy? She was able to raise two kids, both on the outer edges of skill level, on her own! She was able to meet both of their needs. Making sure that one had access to like peers through her work with organizations while making sure that her other kid had access to all that is needed to reach the level of PHD. She is amazing!

I am an SLP and was greatly bothered by the whole documentary. What a sick woman. Also, can you imagine the outcome if it had been a man who had done the same thing with a disabled young woman?

IMO, I think giving her a lot of airtime was PERFECT. It showed the viewer how genuinely crazy & disgusting she was. She talked herself into her own “grave”. A smart viewer would catch on quickly that something is wrong with her, but it hits you all at once when you realize she’s actually evil. The more she talks, the more she smiles, the more you realize how disgusting she is.

Honestly this is probably one of the most unethical and poorly done documentaries ive ever seen and the producer should be ashamed.

They let his abuser be his voice for the entirety of the doc, she remains completely unchallenged for the first half.

Shes clearly a narcissist and a liar whos version of the story is complete bullshit so im not sure why they let her spend so much time justifying it.

They let her spend the entire documentary re victimizing (and giving her the opportunity to relive the joys of abusing derek) derek and the family by talking about how they were in love and he loved her, describing her abuse like it just some cute date they had even though it was all lies. She blames derek for seducing her and that it was all actually a good thing.

They dont go in depth at all about facilitated communication is bullshit. Just a quick its all bs at the end. Nothing about the obvious times shes just talking to herself.

It was like watching an hour of Jared Fogle talk about how mature they were for their age.

I honestly dont think the producers cared about derek any more than ana did. If this was about a man molesting a 12 year old girl they never would have put half of what they said in that documentary.

What got me was Anna even appearing in this documentary and still believing that she did nothing wrong. I kept thinking, what a narcissist! She actually believed that Derrick was in love with her, that what she felt for Derrick was really love. I wonder how her children are dealing with all of this.

I had this on in the background and eventually had to sit down after getting confused wtf was happening. Why is Anna, the suspected abuser, the main narrator?? She made everything sound very flowy, things naturally progressed, and somehow she became his professor to dropping her life for her student. Total red flag to ethics and position to power, that just seemed to never get addressed.

It looked like they aimed to be fairly impartial and tell both sides of the story, but the main character can't even communicate??? Its horrible to show the families impacted in such a passive way.

Anna is mentally ill … the whole documentary reminded me of the teacher on student sexual assaults specifically Mary Kay Letourneau. Anna was in a position of authority and control over Derrick. She took advantage of her position and sexually manipulated and assaulted him. trying to make it look like he was able to communicate and that it was consensual. It was her own level of control and narcissism that she used him to make it look like he was understanding and communicating.

Very sad for Derrick’s mother and brother who really loved him and had his best interest. And also very sad for Anna’s ex husband and children …. Anna was convicted and went to prison as she should have …

They shoulda made this like HBO did the Jinx.

Yes! It said all the messages from the Neo was saved but we didn’t see any them to know if Anna was telling the truth. If he typed those messages she stated he typed, where are they?!

you voiced my exact thoughts. im having trouble finding any reliable articles with more info on this online...

Just watched first couple minutes. She’s a sociopathic narcissist obviously.

This documentary left me with many questions and wonderings. I agree with what I’ve read on here, more could have been added. I also want to find out how is it that she was able to repeal and get 2 years instead of the longer sentence. Sounds absurd!

Agreed- I felt like a fair amount of the content was surface level. 

I also wish there had been a deeper analysis & exploration of disability advocacy. The reality imo (as someone who worked with folks with disabilities) is that, regardless of FC, Anna and DJ could not have a healthy, non-abusive relationship. The power imbalance was just too strong. She was his teacher- even if they were both verbal\able bodied, a sexual relationship would be unethical!! 

But also two things can be true at once and, as much respect and empathy as I had for his mom, I was saddened by some of her comments. (His brother was wonderful though.) 

There are so many layers of this to examine! I would have loved to heard from more experts and zoomed out on the elements to this case too.  

I did not see any documentation or evidence of the communication that was created between him and the other facilitator he worked with? - I feel like this is so important. What was her experience and outcome of her communication with him? Did any other clinicians attempt this type of communication with him? Did any other qualified professionals attempt to recreate this with him? What was the outcome and observation?

That bit with the one psychiatrist who worked with him was so minimal and didn't delve into the methods used previously, other than to compare them to another double-blind. That test only confirms the bias of that clinician. They are separate people. No to say this method of communication is valid. It proves neither that is valid nor invalid.

I wish all of that was included because so much can be garnered from a comparison between Anna's commucation with him vs his other faciliators and other clinicians. Those should have been compared in the movie it would have provided enough evidence that would diminish the need for speculation

Why does his mother medicate him to prevent him from masturbating?

Anna has a white savior complex and a savior complex in general. His mother also infantilizes him and demonizes sex in her son's perpetual "young state" despite him being 40 years old. A 40 year old man masturbating is not corrupt or strange.

I believed her story. Just saying I did.

The moment I heard of her cosplaying someone with disabilities and her mom helping facilitate that by providing crutches and such..nope. Crazy runs in the family apparently

If she’s guilty (not saying she’s not!), then why did she tell the family at all about it. If she knew/believed she was committing sexual assault, she wouldn’t just happily confess that at a meeting she set up, right? Do you think that could prove in a way that even if she’s guilty, she didn’t think that she did something wrong? 

They really tried to say that because people "see street signs" then that means they can read and write. You don't just naturally learn to read by osmosis. It takes WORK.

Everyone is so furious about her pronunciation of D-Man. I genuinely don't understand how anyone but Derek (who can't speak) can be certain of the correct pronunciation. I'd also like to hear from people with disabilities (if there are any on this forum) for their thoughts. I notice that this doco had a lot of people talking ABOUT those with disabilities, but very few (one) voices from the disabled community themselves.

Maybe I wasn't paying close enough attention but I'm still confused by the part where the student helper did the FC with him and wrote the paper that she hadn't been in the class discussion for (and therefore wouldn't have known what to write).

My moment was when she left the voicemail saying okay okay I guess I’ll leave my husband. If you were really in love why was it ever a question??? She was using him.

I do get conflicted as to whether or not she knew it was wrong because if she was aware AND she was faking the messages, she wouldn’t have told the family. I’d be fully convinced she was a master manipulator if they had been caught.

All in all I think she’s horrible and I can’t believe she is out there living her life.

Did they explain the aide writing the college paper?

I would love to know more of the ex-husband's perspective.

Imagine if she were a man and DJ was a woman?