The Respondent
Episode 40: Dr. Drew Pinsky

Episode Transcript

Multi-hyphenate medical practitioner, media personality and nationally syndicated radio host, Dr. Drew is a doctoral star of the TV series Celebrity Rehab, an outspoken critic on the homelessness crisis in Los Angeles. He's also appeared on Wheel of Fortune, and was the eagle on the show The Masked Singer. This week. Drew Pinsky is The Respondent.

It's good to see you. Thank you for being on The Respondent.

Dr. Drew Pinsky: Of course.

GE: First of all, I want to thank you for being what I consider a beacon for many people during these last 20 months this pandemic. It's been ever so hard for people to get information. And I think there's a general lack of trust in the citizenry. So bless you for doing all that you do.

DP: Thank you for that. But yes, yes and yes. Right? And we all feel it. And I just thought early on, I just got to try to help people make sense of things. That was my early little idea.

GE: People who don't know can hear and see you on so many platforms, I think more platforms than anyone I know. You've got Rumble, you've got YouTube, Clubhouse, you got Facebook? Am I missing any?

DP: Well Twitch, Twitter, Facebook, I don't know, I have to think of them... The reality is, is that the IP, the IP streaming has become so sort of omnipresent. Well, I don't know how to say this. People are spending their time on so many different platforms. If you want to reach them, you have to go out on all the platforms and sort of be everywhere all the time. And so that's what we're trying to do to try to reach people where they are.

GE: And your locals as well. Right Dave Reuben’s company, which I think was just bought by Rumble?

DP: I believe that's true. I don't know the details, but I hear that and I see that they see it on social media.

GE: So Rumble just very quickly... Rumble is... I've only recently heard about Rumble. It' eems like a safer place than YouTube to talk and use words that we're not allowed to speak of these days.

DP: I don't know if I'm allowed to use 'the' words on your platform. But...

GE: You can use any words...

DP: Okay, good. We went over to Rumble because I was put in YouTube jail, I think two and a half times like I was put in twice, then taken off and put in a second time again, for using the word, well for discussing early therapeutics with physicians, which meant that the word ivermectin would come up and hydroxychloroquine would come up. It's weird. Hydroxychloroquine was one of those words would put you in jail. Yesterday, I talked to a pulmonologist from the Cleveland Clinic. And he and I were discussing about the early part of the pandemic. And he went spontaneously he said, 'Well, we all prescribed hydroxychloroquine to everyone'. And I thought, oh, yeah, that's what we did. But we weren't allowed to say it. We literally weren't allowed to talk about it. Now, none of us think it really worked. But we were just reaching for anything to try to help people. And that was interesting that we were able to finally say that on a stream yesterday. You know, this whole pandemic has had these little nodes of turning points. It's been very weird for me. One of the nodes was when Dr. Fauci said, yeah, maybe that thing came from Wuhan, maybe we can think about that. And another node was yesterday when this pulmonologist said to me, something... described something we were all doing at the beginning of pandemic, and I wasn't cancelled by YouTube. So that's a node.

GE: Yeah, it makes me think of conversation. I think I mentioned to you before Professor Brett Weinstein, who's a friend of mine, we talked a long time ago back when this all started about the lab leak hypothesis. And I've had Dr. Pierre Curry on my show and on Clubhouse and talked with him. And just even having a conversation with him about ivermectin on just... Q&A. And other people like Steve Kirsch came into the room. And there was just a broad minded conversation about it, the room got shadow banned. And there was all this this censorious... just for information

DP: It's weird It's so weird. It's not as though... I’ve spoken all these guys too. And then I was early relationship with Steve to try to get his fluvoxamine literature out there. And it's not as though my opinion about any of these treatments have been massively changed. I just sort of kept an eye on on the way they are interpreting the literature and I need... it's what I do as a doctor, I watch the literature, I watch it evolve. And if at some point, the literature or the information, hopefully published literature or peer reviewed, gets the point that it changes my opinion, then I adjust my practice. I don't, I'm not brainwashed by somebody talking to me about data. It's crazy.

GE: It is crazy. And where do you go to like... where would you say that people who, who don't have as much knowledge as you, where do they go to get information on a daily basis?

DP: Daily basis?

GE: Because people... I hear so many people saying, Oh, I don't even trust... like the New York Times the Gray Lady is dead. That's one place where I don't... like the LA Times the established you know, places where we would ordinarily look for news and facts that become somewhat propaganda.

DP: Let me tell you where I go to sort of keep an eye on things that I think the public could go, No, I watched the real literature I watched during the journal I watch channels, internal medicine, I watch jam, I watch. I read those all the time. And I have this thing called like med alert or something that sends me literature as it's been published. But I have found Monika Gandhi, who is a infectious disease expert up in San Francisco, who has been a very sensible source of opinion. Like it's almost as though you're getting an opinion from an infectious disease expert about the literature as it comes out. Follow Monica Gandhi... G A N D H I. And she's just just very sensible very even keeled, good judgment, lots of good information there. You can't really... you can go to the CDC, but know that they change. They change their opinion a lot. And, you know, from the beginning, I kept saying, here's another node for me, I kept saying... the press needs to shut up. The press does not know what they're talking about. They're just creating a panic, that panic will have horrible mental health consequences. Shut up. I just kept saying Shut up. And of course, once memes were made of me, they left out the last part of my statement, which was watch the CDC website, listen to the CDC, and follow watch Dr. Fauci tells us and I said, I would say these words I said, let Dr. Fauci be your North Star, because he was my North Star through four pandemics. H1N1, SARS1, MERS and AIDS. And during aids, he's the reason I think I told you the story, why I got involved in radio. He was telling us young physicians; he was absolutely... almost my idol back then. And I was deep in the AIDS pandemic, I took care of maybe 1000s of AIDS patients, it was a dark, dark chapter. And he kept saying, you guys got to go out there and educate about this. The young people don't know this, they got to start wearing condoms. We have to change behavior. And I took that very seriously. And that's why I got involved in radio back in 1984. So he has been adulterated I would say a little bit. He he did something a couple days ago that bugged me finally, so I too am like worried about him. He finally went, he said, Oh, yes, we're funding viral research that changes function of viruses, but doesn't qualify for what's the catch word now for upgraded function of the virus. We all... it's in the press all the time. But anyway, it's not that it's just we were just, we were just changing the function of the virus. And that made me so angry because it was obvious. That's what everyone's been asking him for three months, which is did you fund viral research in Wuhan? Yes or no? I don't know what you're talking about. What are you talking about? And so that really bothers me.

GE: Is that gain of function. Is that right?

DP: Gain of function. That's right. So he didn't... he said we weren't a gain of function. We were just doing function change. I was like 'well explain that to us four months ago'. Why did it take till now? It makes you look like you're obfuscating, and that really bugged me. So we'll see if he gets through this one.

GE: The trust that you have in him as your North Star. Has that waned because of this...?

DP: Yes. In the last couple days it finally wrinkled a little bit. Finally crumpled a little bit.

GE: Welcome to the club.

DP: I have literally four decades of experience with the guy and I figure... I keep figuring I understand why people have a problem with him and this and that but I keep figuring his reputation will sort of revert to the mean, you know, where he's always been for me. And I still think that may happen. I still have a bit of faith. But for the first time, I was really bothered by something he said and did. And, you now, so...

GE: Well, I think he's a very skilled... I think to be in that position. You obviously he's very smart, but he's obviously a very skilled politician as well. You have to be very aware of politics and how to survive. So... Look, switching gears for a moment, I didn't watch I haven't watched the show The Masked Singer, although I did read somewhere that you were torn between practicing medicine and becoming a professional opera singer. Is it true that you auditioned for a celebrity singing show, but the show passed on your appearance because you told producers that you couldn't sing pop songs and you're more of an opera singer? Is this right? I didn't know this about you.

DP: No I was on the Masked Singer. I was the eagle on the Masked Singer.

GE: So you were revealed as the eagle on the Masked Singer? Yeah, so for those who don't know, the Masked Singer is what? It's celebrities...

DP: It's a crazy show... a Korean show that they adapted for this country where they take singers and celebrities and put them in these elaborate, you know, multi.... they've probably spent millions of dollars on costumes by now. And you go sing and you choreograph. And then Jenny McCarthy and Ken Jeong and Joel McHale, and Nicole Scherzinger and Robin Thicke judge you and then you get kicked off or you go on whatever. It's a competition thing. It was the best produced television show I've ever seen.

GE: Was it fun?

DP: Everybody that's on it has a blast. Rob Schneider just got revealed and I called him and said, 'Was this not the funnest thing?' He said, 'Best show I've ever done'. And it's, it's it's so fun. It's unbelievable. And I knew I knew it would be and... but the way they, what they have to manage from production standpoint, is insane. I mean, think about do you have all these temperamental celebrities, you have song selection, you have song clearances, you have to train everybody up, get the songs learned, then choreograph and the costumes. And then everyone, you have to sign NDAs and no one can know you're doing it. Whenever you travel to the show, you're covered head to toe so somebody can't even see your skin color. I mean, you're not allowed to speak.

GE: Hang on. When you travel to the show you're covered head to toe? Meaning what?

DP: You wear gloves, sweats and a hoodie with a crazy mask on. And you... literally not one molecule of your skin is exposed and you're not allowed to speak and they shuttle you into your trailer and you don't... they tell you they don't speak until the door is closed behind your production team when they come into your trailer. And they pull it off.

GE: No interactions with the other celebrities?

DP: Oh, no, no, no

GE: Do you know who the other...

DP: No..

GE: You don't. So...

DP: Everything is blind. Everything.

GE: You're in isolation as the eagle, you get into costume. Did you choose to be the eagle or do they say 'we want you to play the eagle'?

DP: Again... I didn't think we'd be talking...

GE: You know, neither did I. But you know, we could have gone down the vaccine rabbit hole. But there's so much we could talk about. I had no idea that you... that this was, you know, part of your repertoire.

DP: No, let me let me just take it back to my singing career. I was when I was trying to decide what to do in my life, there was five minutes where I thought I would go to West Germany and train and become an opera singer. Thank God, I did not do that because I'm a good singer, at least I was at one time, I'm a terrible musician. And so good. Good. My son actually ended up training in opera, my mother was an opera singer. So it's sort of in our family. But it was not my thing, thank God. But I've done you know, I sing national anthems at Dodger games and Laker... Kings games and stuff like that. And so, when the Masked Singer came along, I said, I should be on that. There's no reason you guys should, I told my producer, my agent I said you should book me on that and why am I not on that? Two minutes later, they're calling me and they're going 'well, what should your costume be? Think about it'. And they called me back. And for some reason, I immediately thought about an eagle. I have no idea why. And they called me back and they said you know we're thinking about an eagle. I said, well there you go. Let's do it. Now what I did not know you're back to your statement about the opera and the pop songs. I was you know, I don't sing the kind of music that they sing on this thing. So I was angling for like Bublé and Sinatra and Johnny Cash or sort of going that way with this. We were going through many many many songs. We went through 30 songs before we landed on something and then I put the costume on. And it was about 10 days, two weeks for the show. And I thought oh no, because they kept going. It's got to be the it's the it's the character you got to be the character of the costume. Don't let the costume carry you. And I put the costume on an it's a Rock Eagle. Like explicitly a rock eagle. I thought, I can't do Come Fly With Me as a Rock Eagle, maybe the third song if I make it that far. So they ended up with a meatloaf song. I Would Do Anything For Love. And we sort of adapted it and stuff. Crazy. It was a crazy experience, but really, really, really, really creative and fun.

GE: And is it each week, one of the... One or two are eliminated.

DP: Yeah, one or two.

GE: How long did you last on the show?

DP: I was up against? Shoot, what's her name... A professional singer. I'm blanking on her name now, but she was exceptional. So I was immediately sort of pushed through at that point in the show i was only the second season, they had this thing sort of called a sing off. That if you didn't make it through your first round, you'd go to the Sing Off thing. And when I went to this... when I was put back to my trailer, my team came in I said, I have a week. I'm not gonna make it. We everyone thought I was just gonna go right through. And so they didn't pay much attention to this sing off thing I said, I this is not a good song for me. It was These Shoes Are Made For Walking. You know, Nancy Sinatra. I said, I'm gonna get killed. It's been a great experience, guys. I'm not gonna make it. I just know it. And I didn't. I didn't make it. And Sherry Underwood, I think came out and just kicked my ass.

GE: Well These Boots Are Made For Walking is not the greatest song for a rock eagle. It's a little bit campy. You've got to perform it and...

DP: Oh listen, the next week I started... I actually was freaking out a bit because the next week was going to be Pour Some Sugar On Me that what is that song?

GE: Oh, 'Pour some sugar on me...'

DP: Yeah, I don't know how I was gonna pull that off. But that was coming up next. Good times. It was all great.

GE: Who knew you were the singing doctor? So regular viewers of The Respondent who follow me know that I appeared on your show recently. And you know, I wasn't aware until after we'd finished. There was quite a strong reaction from many people.

DP: Really?

GE: Yeah, there really was a lot of people.

DP: In a good way?

GE: There was some people who were quite upset. And they expressed how incredulous they thought you were about what happened to me in the maze of family law.

DP: I was. I still am. I can't... In fact, I was so shocked by your story, I went back and talked to administrators at hospitals and prisons, to try to figure out what happened to you. Because they all looked at me. I said not in the state of California that couldn't happen. That was sort of my thing, too. Like, how did that... And the only thing I can come back with is that would not have happened in my hospital, I assure you, when I was administrator, so I apologize on behalf of all...

GE: Well you don't need to apologize. I actually see this as an opportunity. Personally, I think my story is a challenging story to swallow. And I think many experts are unaware of the current state of the system on so many levels.

DP: Oh, my God...

GE: So you know, nobody... we know each other, nobody's on trial here. But I do think we have an opportunity to maybe explore the specifics of what happened to me. So you can, you know... because I'm not sure if you've had the time to finish reading my book. And frankly, what happens to thousands of people, as I said on your show,

DP: That's the part that's the part I can believe it happened to one and that's way too many. But the... and by the way, oh, by the way, I went back and read your medical records is what I did. Yeah. Remember I told you I said, I got to read these medical records. And I did. And they are persuasive. Particularly the doctor at the very end, the psychiatrist that evaluated you, I forget her name.

GE: Dr Susan Dupee

DP: And she, correct me if I'm wrong, was hired by your wife to do this analysis. Right. Yeah. And for the...

GE: Well not hired by, she was chosen by. I ended up paying.

DP: But the point is it was her legal team that wanted the psychiatric evaluation, right? Yeah. So that usually goes against you. Usually as sort of jaundiced a view of you as it could possibly be. And this woman laid it out very clearly what happened to you. And she was skeptical of some of the stuff. And if you notice she dropped in the kind of skepticism that I was leading with when we talked. But she said one thing that sort of helped me make sense of things with her take was that the Del Amo hospitalization, and the documentation there, set the stage for everything else that followed that was so incredible.

GE: And this is what's key here, I think Drew is, is you know, when I talk to you about that 10 would lie and hearsay and the false allegation, which seems to have become the go to strategy in family law, because it's a win before you even get into court. That lie that allegation that silver bullet, if you will, it haunts and continues to grow and get bigger and more documented over time to the point that it's almost an inescapable situation. Because to find someone who isn't overworked, who in the system, who has the power, you know, from the administration angle, to actually listen to you and to understand. And frankly, if you were incredulous to my story, and you've been an administrator at a hospital, I think was Las Encenas maybe in Pasadena. And we're gonna talk about that as well, because I have experience of Las Encenas. And you say to me that it wouldn't happen to your hospital. If you were there. In 2015, 2016.

DP: No I was gone by 2010.

GE: Then it didn't happen under your watch.

DP: Because I didn't like... one of the reasons, I left for many reasons. But one was things were going in a direction that was concerning. But there are still very, very, very good people there. Psychiatrists, particularly. And I'm surprised that on their watch, this kind of thing can happen. But I accept that I was having trouble placing it before I was having... So it literally I totally was like an asteroid landed your backyard, I'd be a little bit more like.... Okay, well, that maybe that could happen. But this, no way this could happen. It's impossible.

GE: I think we have an opportunity here for people who are watching and listening, who have maybe been through this and more important than maybe the people who are kind of incredulous like you'd say, How could this happen? Where the flaws and mistakes were in the system through my story? Because I remember me telling you Oh that that wouldn't happen. You need a judge. It shouldn't be... a 5150 hold should never be extended unless a judge...

DP: So you got it. But here's why. So I heard that piece made sense to me because you got the judge, but it was really delayed. Actually sort of criminally delayed. And so that, to me, tells me how overburdened the system is right, just that. Just that one piece.

GE: Well, I didn't get the judge. I mean, this is what I wanted... It was a hearing officer, not a judge.

DP: I don't know the difference myself.

GE: Well, the difference is that, you know, hearing officer comes to the facility inside the facility, although there's a patient advocate, frankly, the patient advocate, you know, spoke very broken English and told me that no man had ever won their hearing in front of this officer. And then I would have had to have waited two weeks to actually be in front of the judge. I didn't want to wait two weeks.

DP: Okay. So I stand corrected, it wasn't like that. They would have sort of, in my day, hearing What do they call them? Hearing officers that would represent the judge, or somebody, an attorney acting as the judge would come in, but there would be sort of a lot of officiating, sort of passing of the deputizing. There's a lot of deputizing that would go on, but it was very formal. And the psychiatrists would have to be present. You're the doctor that's asking for the hold was he there?

GE: No

DP: See, this is all very weird.

GE: So I saw when I originally went in, it was a Dr. Wang, who was standing in for Dr. Sharma, because it was the weekend. And that's why I had to wait to actually speak to Dr. Sharma on the Monday. And the only time, the only time I saw him and spoke to him was on the day I was supposed to be discharged. And I saw him in a corridor at four o'clock in the afternoon. I'd been waiting all day, and I ran over and I was so great to see you. I gave him my name. And and I quote, it's in my book, he literally didn't even look at me looked at his lesson said, yes. Oh, I see. Yeah, based on what your wife and mother in law have told me, I'm going to extend I've decided to extend your stay from three days to 14 days, turned around and walked away. And I'm left there like, how do I what do I and I think what I want to just backtracking a moment, what I want to get into is why there are so many people and have been and continue to be so many people like me, unjustly locked up in psychiatric facilities. Why and how does that happen? Well, here's my quick take. All right.

DP: It's shocking. It's shocking. You don't understand you're like telling me a story that I'd like...

GE: I understand. And so here is part of it. And we touched on it on your show. You educated me a little on the reasons for the change in mental health and patients being homeless.

DP: A legacy a horrible, horrible 30 years. Really it wasn't a politician. It was unelected officials that destroyed the health care system.

GE: And the ramifications for our mental health services and the people who are homeless in LA and have been for years. It's so disturbing It makes me... It really is disgraceful. And how so many people who have mental health challenges and issues, sometimes they're pulled from the streets and when they should be going to the psychiatric hospitals and mental facilities, many of them end up in prison, where they're even further abused. So here's why we have so many people like me, who don't need to be in mental health and psychiatric hospitals who are placed there. So the false allegation was called in on me by my ex-wife. Yeah. The 10 words. The police, law enforcement arrived. It used to be discretionary and then the discretionary detainment or arrest became mandatory. For many reasons, the Violence Against Women Act the Safe Families Act the... what happened with OJ Simpson, etc.

DP: It's believe the accuser. That's right. It's a female.

GE: And it doesn't matter if there's proof, it's hearsay. And that's enough for with an allegation.

DP: Let's start with that. So is that the pendulum having swung too far? Do we sign off on this? Do we think it's too much does it protect more people than it hurts? What do you feel about this generally, the fact that they do it this way.

GE: When we look at the data, and the statistics on false allegations of domestic violence and over 70% are unprovable and temporary restraining orders that are granted, they don't move to permanent restraining orders. Right. There's a clear correlation here I think when we look at the data and statistics between petitioners, and you know, 80% of divorces are initiated by women. The go to silver bullet of that false allegation, and law enforcement moving from a discretionary approach to a mandatory approach to detainment or arrest. So they arrive at my door, based on this false allegation. And they've decided I've since, I later find out, I'm being removed from that house, regardless of how I behave, and my behavior was calm, I was compliant, I was pleasant, I was civil, it made no difference.

DP: I want to dismantle every, not dismantle, I'm gonna examine every piece of this. So in terms of the intervention for domestic violence, separating the couple of thought to be the number 12345 priorities, just get them apart, get them apart. So that's a good thing to try to separate people when there's a question of this. I don't you don't necessarily have to get them apart by putting one in a hold. That's bizarre. That's, that's, to me, I can't. I choke on those words, it's so weird. There are people who really need holds who can't get them.

GE: Well it has to be. Exactly and here's the thing. When there is no history of violence, when there is no history of domestic dispute, when there is no history of law enforcement involvement. There are there are red flags there, that there might be something off there. So I get it. So if there's an intervention, separate the people. Again, that doesn't mean to say that we make someone homeless or incarcerate them, etc, etc. But back in the day when it was discretionary, there'd be conversations had. That more community policing approach.

DP: I presume that happens in other states. Everything excessive and problematic happens in California. Welcome to California.

GE: Welcome to California. Welcome to Texas in particular, welcome to New York. Welcome to Cleveland to Idaho. This is happening across America. Oh, I think...

DP: The point is... Like states I've been... Indiana's a state I've been to with some mental health stuff I've been dealing with. I've been amazed what a great job they do. So I'm guessing they don't have that there. You know what I mean...

GE: They do have it there. And here's why.

DP: Oh they have it in Indiana?

GE: Yes. Because it's the when the federal law was passed in 74.

DP: Oh I see. Okay

GE: And it moves from discretionary to mandatory, law enforcement has no choice. In fact, they're incentivized.

DP: I didn't realize there was a federal law.

GE: Yeah, in fact, they're incentivized to, they have to make the money to be able to I think it was the Adoption and Safe Families Act, which offers financial incentives to the states that increase, in particular, adoption numbers, and we can talk about the foster care system and how 4000 children lose a parent a day in family law, and states get reimbursed $6,000 for every child that's placed into foster care.

DP: Jesus. That's disgusting.

GE: So in effect, we have legal child trafficking going on. And I don't say that lightly. And I don't say that this is going on Drew, and no one is talking about it. Because when we get to child trafficking, when we get to the federal government, incentivizing the states and our CPS and DCFS, who really are... they have the power to come in and threaten and make determinations. We have poor parents being targeted to lose their children because they don't have the wherewithal or the or the financial resources to hire an attorney to fight the system. You know, being poor and lacking proper housing shouldn't mean that your children are removed, that the CPS have redefined poor to mean psychologically inferior. This is not the best interest of the child. But I do want to go back very quickly. So my situation, law enforcement arrive. They can't arrest me because I haven't committed a crime. Okay. But they have to act because God forbid they don't. And also because it's mandatory. So removal from house in handcuffs, where do they take me? Where can they take me?

DP: To a hospital.

GE: What kind of hospital?

DP: Well... They could take you to an ER, that's an option. And I was a little surprised that if they want to put some... Let me ask this. Could the law enforcement put you on a hold at that point? Are they the ones that put you on the hold?

GE: No. Law enforcement... so here's the point I'm making. They have to take me to somewhere. So in the in the first particular instance, the SMART team from the Department of Children and Family Services, they come to the house, and they do an immediate evaluation. And that evaluation took all of two minutes. It was a few questions. I was shackled in handcuffs, and then removed and taken to UCLA Medical Center which was just basically you know, the stopping point before I was taken to Del Amo and there...

DP: So you did go to an ER you did go to emergency?

GE: I went to ER, I wasn't given any answers to my questions. I was told...

DP: Did you see a physician? Did you see a doctor?

GE: I did not. I was told to give a urine test I went in to give one at that point. I looked in the mirror, became so dizzy and disoriented because of my situation, having been pulled from my home and my two sons who were left at home, and shackled in handcuffs, which, you know, I'd not been arrested before. I still hadn't been by the way that's a technical point that matters. I've been detained. I couldn't be arrested because I hadn't committed a crime. And if I had I would have had my Miranda rights read to me which of course you aren't because domestic violence isn't a criminal offense. It's in quasi kangaroo court of family law, which has its own rules and is like the wild west but I actually collapsed, fainted, hit my head on the sink, and I'm on the floor and a pool of blood, you know, on my right side, and there's banging on the door and I finally get to reach out. I'm in a gown. And then two guys arrive with this ambulance. I'm placed in a gurney in handcuffs shoved in the back, the doors are closed. And I'm there for about an hour and 20 minutes terrified in the dark of where I'm going who these people are, why this is happening if my sons are safe. Why my liberty has been stolen. Why I'm in handcuffs, why law enforcement is on it... like a whole myriad of things. And then when I arrived, still no answers, put into a dorm with five other patients, one of whom is extremely mentally ill. And I kind of semi wake up from a dream-like nightmare thinking it's raining. And he's straddling me urinating on my face, and then I get physically attacked. That's the beginning of the dystopian nightmare that I went through. And so many people go through. My point being, where do law enforcement take people?Eventually, it ends up on a 5150. The second time was into solitary confinement, where I had no information again, while the police...

DP: Again, that was the other part I was trying to investigate. To try to understand because what I was told from the jail people is like, No, we don't really have solitary confinement we have... we put people in a cell by themselves...

GE: Well it may be a single cell by myself. I refer to it as solitary confinement, because when you haven't spent any time in a prison cell and you're on your own?

DP: I just want to make sure I'm understanding the story. So Okay, keep going...

GE: Right, yeah so then I'm waiting for the... I find out later that the police are trying to get me to a hospital. And the one piece of information I'm given after about two hours of waiting, was that they were trying to get me to the hospital to get me evaluated. Now I've been through the wringer by this point. And I knew that this wasn't going to be an ER at a regular hospital, this is gonna this was going to be a 51, I was going to be imprisoned again, against my will, for no reason, with no diagnosis of mental illness whatsoever. One of the reasons I put those two medical reports in 2015, 2019, in my book, they're my medical records, I can publish them, and they're there for all to read in the book, The Respondent. So there I am. And they take me this time to another hospital. And now I know on the way what's going to happen. The police tell me, you just gonna get an evaluation. That's all. They're making it sound very innocent. I know what's coming. So I'm telling them what's going on. And they're like, Yeah, this happens all the time. We...

DP: They're telling you that?

GE: Oh, yes. We've made this drive so many times. And we talk about why because there's nowhere else for them to take me. They can't arrest me because I haven't committed a crime.

DP: Oh I get that. I understand.

GE: One of them gives me their cell phone to use they're like 'Oh I'll get in trouble. So please don't tell anyone'. And I call my therapist who's a traumas trauma specialist who already got me out of Del Amo. And she...

DP: I didn't marry that part of the story. How did that one get you out of Del Amo?

GE: Oh, when I say she well, when she got me out of Del Amo, she actually was the person who because I couldn't I didn't have any money to guide him anywhere to go. She ordered an Uber which was quite funny. She'd never ordered an Uber before. After my hearing, Del Amo, all of that it was a really moving sight, the patients, all the patients were there, and they collected money for me to make phone calls. Because I didn't have money. And when there were meetings, I would stay behind after every meeting, I thought I'll find something good from this. And I'll give back and I'll help people and I remember one one girl sitting on a sofa and she's at the end of a meeting and she said to me, you're going about this the wrong way. And I said what do you mean? She said, There's no way out. It's the crazy people who get out. It's those who are sane who actually can speak to the injustice of why they're here who are kept in longer, and that was one of many red flags along the way. So you know, I'm on my way to the second place. When a police officer gives me gives me their phone. And I call this trauma specialist she meets me at the hospital for this "evaluation" gets there at five in the morning isn't allowed until seven in the morning waits with me till 4pm No doctor comes for an evaluation, one assistant comes in with questions and then leaves and then says you're getting admitted on a 5150. So that was the second time I won't even maybe we don't have time to get into the third and the fourth time and straitjackets...

DP: But I read about it with that, again I can't I can't remember the doctor's name. One more time, her name? I'll write down.

GE: Oh, the original doctor?

DP: No the doctor at the end of your book, the one during the psychiatric evaluation.

GE: Oh, the one who did the psych... the independent psych... court ordered psychiatric evaluation in 2019 was Dr. Susan Dupee.

DP: And she made that all clear. You know she documented all that there. Right. And she reported on all those hospitalizations.

GE: She did and much similar to the 2015 independent psychiatric evaluation done by Dr. Carl Hoppy, which also contains 69 summaries of monitored visits with my sons which clearly showed...

DP: That's the preceding...

GE: Yeah, there was clear evidence there that there was no major mental illness. In fact, the argument could be made that the one person who needed to be evaluated was my ex wife. And she by projecting everything onto me as the scapegoat avoided all of that.

DP: I told you, I don't know what's... I want to know what's going on with you that you thought she was okay. She was a good person to have a marriage with.

GE: I say this. All right. We all I know, I know we joke about that. And I do think it's important to joke about but putting it on me for my choice and being happily married for 20 years? I think every relationship has issues and problems and challenges. And when someone reveals, and I hear this a lot. This is not what I say through my experience. But I hear this a lot. That there is a snap that takes place like who I was married to, was not the same person after March 5 2015.

DP: What happened? Why did she snap like that?

GE: Well, I think we could get into the you know, the psychological emotional baggage...

DP: No, no, but I mean, can you give... I know you've thought a lot about this. As you described it to me, we were getting along fine. Kids were happy. Everybody's happy. All of a sudden pow. She's dumping this stuff on me. Was there you say, you know, we weren't sexually active. And we were sort of drifting apart. But, you know, she is behaving like someone. I don't know her. And I think I said this on my podcast. I don't know her. I'm not passing judgment on her. But somebody that behaves like that has

GE: Psychopathy.

DP: Yeah, I mean, it kind of it goes into somebody who's like, has another relationship. And wants out now, and doesn't care how she gets out. And what it does to you, she doesn't care because she wants to go on to do something else. And she and usually when somebody does it, boom like that, it's because they're already involved with somebody.

GE: Well, I don't think it was that...

DP: Let me just say that, you know, alcoholics can do this. Psychopaths can do this. Sociopaths can do this. Borderlines can do this. But usually the alcoholic and the borderline, you kind of have evidence of that beforehand, you kind of know that's what you're dealing with. But they can behave like this to in their illness. And they're not well, I'm not and I say this with peace and love, you know, they're not well when they do these things, but that kind of suddenness is usually motivated by something. And so I'm wondering if you have any sense with that?

GE: Yeah, I have a few thoughts on that. One of the thoughts I have was that when I met her, she told me soon after, after we met that she used to be a drug addict. In fact, she was she had the nickname of Hoover, because there was there was no amount of cocaine in her vicinity, that wouldn't be taken. But she decided one day, I'm done with this. Now you can decide to be done with with a drug and you can actually be sober for a certain amount of time. Very good. But at some point, you're going to have to deal with the underlying behavioral patterns that led you to that addiction in the first place.

DP: Yeah, correct. And that person, and by the way, over time, that underlying stuff gets worse, number one, and number two, usually that person is drinking or smoking pot the whole way. Weed rather...

GE: Well she, the woman I was married to was not that... Well. I say not that... She wasn't using when I was with her. It was nowhere to be seen. And she her comment was I pushed the boat out so so far, I nearly drowned. So she was you know, there was a there was a dormant... because I don't think she'd looked in the mirror done the recovery work, actually understood the nature of the addiction and why she was led there. So I think there was that I think it was the family system. Mother...

DP: Drama? Has she got a lot of trauma to herself?

GE: I think I think childhood. I think her family set up... her mother would leave her with her grandmother for long periods of time, and there was little T and big T trauma in youth and her mother used to always say, the only good thing to her since she was a kid, the repeated cry was your 'the only good thing your father ever did was provide sperm for your existence'. There was a there was a contemptuous hatred for her biological father. And her mother was married a couple of times and divorced and knew the system and etc, etc. So although it was very sudden, within a two-week period, there was a lot of pressure from her mother, who was at the house, got to the house after I'd been taken away before she did, and moved in, and was apparently really pressuring her.

DP: Yeah you said that she was the one saying 'we're going to put him away forever or whatever she was up to'

GE: Yeah, 'he'll either up in a mental institution or end up killing himself'. That was before the second restraint. So I think that had something to do with I also do think the panic disorder, which she was diagnosed with, which is ironic. She was diagnosed with a mental health disorder, I wasn't. She had medication, she was off the medication. So there was

DP: Ooh. What medication was she on? Ahhhh there's your thing man. When people come off Xanax and Klonopin, they get crazy. They can look like almost any psychiatric condition you can name. So there's something to kind of look at. She may have been strung out on benzodiazepines, which doctors do that all the time.

GE: Well, I don't think it was that. I think it probably was psychotropic that you because we're going back so far now but I was I was thinking about this the other day, she was off that medication. And you know, to your point, to be on strong medication, psychotropic medication, then suddenly be you know, be off it. I don't know what was you know, whether the panic manifested or the paranoia manifested and she was out of town.

DP: Withdrawal. Withdrawal.

GE: I mean, so like you say that you know, there are I think there are a multitude of...

DP: Unless it was anti psychotics that was on. Do we know the meds she was on?

GE: I don't no. If it's ever mentioned to me down the line it'll probably trigger something and I'll be like that was the one.

DP: Will you call me and tell me what they were when you find out?

GE: I will definitely.

DP: Because that'll be really interesting to know... that'd be highly revealing. Because you can.... If it's the benzo withdrawal, we're done. But if it's other medicines, it will sort of tell me diagnostically what's going on here. I mean, I kind of read through what they're treating by what they use.

GE: I will definitely let you know. And I think with what happened to me to try and explain the bigger picture of why this is happening and why it is, it really is a national health emergency. It's a crisis situation.

DP: But you know what's crazy and makes me even more overwhelmed and upset and disgusted is you're telling me this unbelievable story that is just, you know, I can't it's so hard for me to accept it because I worked in that world for so long and I valued what we did. And the fact that that things can do this to somebody. It's really it's hard to let in because it's so awful. And that's bad enough. But then what overwhelms me with the whole thing is our inability to treat people that do need psychiatric care at the same time. And this is like the whole system's needs to be reworked from the ground up, that they destroyed the state mental health systems. See there's nothing in the federal in the Constitution that really gives the federal government the ability to go after health care, particularly mental health care, which is why it was challenged many times over hundreds of years. And it was why was left to the state it's actually left to the states is sort of a way we would look at it from this point in history. Back then, when the state started developing these systems, it was considered inhuman that somebody would develop a system to help people that needed help. The federal government had to do had no authority to do it. So the state had to do it. Because it would be insane to not do it for somebody not to do it. And look where we are now. Look where we are now.

GE: Well this is why what we can do with a system that's grown so large, I mean, just the family law system alone is a nearly $60 billion a year industry. Plus all you know what you're talking about mental health hospitals, which is which ties in because there are so many people like me, the false accusation the silver bullet, they get put into a 5150 then it gets worse and worse for the person who's targeted and you know, I mentioned CPS, you know, for decades now children have been removed intentionally from their homes, seized from their families for profit. And I'm not over exaggerating when I say snatched, kidnapped, legally trafficked and the 1974 legislation I'm talking about is the Adoption and Safe Families Act, which offers that the incentives to the states that increase adoption numbers, fundings available when a child is placed in a foster home with strangers or this placed in a mental health facility and they call it medicated, usually against the parents’ wishes. So these parents have been victimized by the system that makes profit for holding their children longer. And bonuses, Drew, bonuses for not returning children to their parents. This is a growing global criminal and political interest.

DP: Global? It's just this country it seems to me.

GE: Oh my god, it's happening in the UK. It's happening in Scotland, in England, Wales, it's happening in Australia. South America, the stories from South America are heart wrenching and disturbing. I've been getting emails daily from mothers and fathers predominantly fathers but some mothers as well. I have a mother who's a nurse in Pennsylvania who was on the show, Marianne Petry, and she, two kids falsely accused of sexually abusing her children. She lost her job as a nurse and she lost access to her children. She was thrown in prison, had a heart attack, all based on a false allegation.

DP: When did she stop nursing?

GE: I don't know.

DP: Because I'm wondering if I... I got to like talk to her and see if she can help me understand the medical system part of this that we're in because she understands it and how it fails. Maybe she can tell me more about what's where these failures are?

GE: Well, the failure for her I think wasn't necessarily the medical system when the administrators found out about the allegation, it was in family law court. They didn't stand behind the...

DP: Family law court is out of control. You talk about twisted incentives. Family law court highly reinforces lying and distortion and obfuscation. That's right. It sort of...

GE: It punishes integrity and rewards liars.

DP: Profoundly like really that's the whole setup. And so that's where the rubber hits the road a bit right there and then it kind of spirals out from there.

GE: Yeah. And when you have and I think what's important to note is when you have a legal system that doesn't answer to the Supreme Court, the State Bar Associations write their own family law codebook. The attorneys become judges. There isn't oversight. There aren't rights. I mean, one of the one of the gentlemen who is the Executive Director of my charity, he talks about 20 plus years ago when he was accused falsely of domestic violence. He put his wrists up in front of the judge and said you want to handcuff me and just what you're saying is like no handcuff me, violence is a very serious offense. Arrest me and take me to prison. And what he was basically saying was a roundabout way. I get more rights as a criminal.

DP: He's saying that and he's also calling his bluff, so to speak. You're calling him a liar...

GE: Well no he told me. What do we what do? What I've been doing personally is talking to people about it and it's difficult because like you I mean, you know, I respect the amount of work that...

DP: o it's important to talk to people like me, because we have a different 'like what? how could that happen? We have to get our head around it. We have to really get our head around it because you notice already I'm like, where are the weak points? Can we solve it for something quick? Is there something we can do as a medical system to prevent these kinds of things from happening? I don't know.

GE: Well, I think there's, there's multiple things that we need to do. One of the things that we need to do is we need to the Violence Against Women Act. Okay, that's one thing that's being refreshed and renewed and that's President Biden. He pushed for that years ago. And although well intentioned, it's actually not helping because until we provide a presumption of innocence to parents and partners and spouses, due process presumption of innocence, jurisprudence, so if there is an allegation... and look Drew just very quickly. One of the programs that I'm looking at developing is so a call is made to law enforcement dispatch for a domestic violence dispute. Then they arrive. I'd love to have cards with a 1800 number that law enforcement gives to the person who is alleged to have committed domestic violence and they can call this 1800 number helpline. And that will do is they will get their rights so they will know about their rights and we explained the situation with law enforcement and probably most importantly, the one who's that casualty of domestic violence a beat. It gives everyone a moment you know, calm their parasympathetic nervous system and chill. And of course, if there's evidence, there still needs to be investigation, and it needs to be taken seriously. We need to hear people, particularly women, who are victims of this kind of situation. But these false allegations and the use of them are an affront to the real victim. So that's just one program. What else can we do like reforming this system? But it's so big and so profitable it will take an army of people who have a real vested interest in reducing the suicide rates of divorced men and women and parents and partners and fathers and mothers in the system. Who are no longer in the system. Social isolation over the last 18 months hasn't helped with courts being shut down, with visitation. It's understanding I think four specific things.

GE: 1) We need to process and the presumption of innocence 2) We need to get better educated on parental alienation and the psychological damage of parental alienation, what it means, what it is, how it's used, and how...

DP: That's a whole... Interestingly, that's another topic we've barely scratched on that today. You know, that's a whole... I must tell you, I have heard a lot more conversation about that. Both on the professional side and on the lay side. I would say that two years ago, if you've three years ago, if you brought that up most people would not know what you're talking about. And I think today most people have at least a sense of that being a thing.

GE: Yeah, I mean, ultimately, it's, again, I'm not mincing words, it's child abuse. When you, your coercive control that leads to child abuse and brainwashing and you can't undo that. And to separate the targeted parent, a once loving and still remains loving when the evidence shows after the alienation that the child doesn't want to do have anything to do with that parent.

DP: Let me just say, reading you know the quotes from your kids presented by the psychiatrist and the psychologist. What happened? Why aren't they still in your life? I don't understand how it went from that to now cut off. It's just awful.

GE: Because the system. So that money that $10,000 spent on that report those two days at the battering attests of Rorschach tests and MMPI tests. Talk about terrifying - knowing that your access to your children's life on the line and your financial ability to just stay alive and not be homeless as you know. And I have people helping me I had, you know, some amazing people who stepped in and stuck around and helped me and I'm very grateful for the many...

DP: The fact is you can afford it. How about the guys that can't?

GE: Well, I mean, you know, I've read the suicide notes I've spoken to not only people and parents who have had suicidal ideations, but a couple of people in the act of because it's too unbearable to live in grief. I think I mentioned that suicide by living grief. There is no end to this inescapability of the trauma is unrelenting. You know, the body keeps the score. And yes, you know, we know somatically you know, the effect that continues to happen, the PTSD you know, I think one of the things that's...

DP: You're traumatizing me I'm sorry to say. But that's okay, it transferred to somebody.

GE: Well I don't mean for you to be traumatized but I think you know, no one's out there talking about it.

DP: I'm so glad you are. I mean, you know, we you and I met in a green room and immediately we were like, this is important. Let's talk about it. So I'm here to support the whole process, but I haven't got my head around it. I have yet to understand what's going on. And I'm getting there. I'm getting there.

GE: I think it's a very... It's a catastrophic confluence of laws gone bad or misinterpreted by a legal system without oversight, judges who are incentivized who used to be attorneys who have connections and $1,000 an hour for an attorney. I mean, ka-ching, ka-ching, ka-ching.

DP: Keep going. Have you thought about or maybe you have already contacted the guy I worked with that produced the divorce court documentary that I was in? Because he was a victim of the family court system...

GE: There have been conversations had and I actually just received financing for a feature film on this...

DP: I'm not saying do a documentary, I'm saying talk to this guy. He was a surgeon who became a biotech entrepreneur, who then suffered through the system and then made it his life to try to raise awareness about the he said he's sat in court is a very bright guy. He said he sat in court just hearing the stories, and he realized what was happening to him was happening to everybody. And I think you two might be able to come up with some interesting ideas. You're two smart people...

GE: I'd be happy to speak to him.

DP: I'll see if I can get hold of him.

GE: I mean, you know, yeah, I know this talk about another document. Coincidentally a few people who were... Marilyn York, who was in divorce court was on The Respondent. She changed her law practice in the bar to... she only employs women and only represents men. Because she saw the disparity and the bias towards men and fathers in family court. And another one was John Nazarian, private investigator. He's sitting on two Bentley's and talking about how stupid people are, parents are, because you know, he gets rich. This is the guy who produces YouTube videos on how to ruin your husband. You know, literally says, I'm speaking the Word of God. When your husband gets home have your nails done, your hair done serve him pasta sauce. Halfway through dinner, pour it all over yourself scream and yell, he'll be confused - what's going on. Pick up the phone and say he's attacking me, he's attacking me and that's the silver bullet you'll get everything. This is the guy who was a PI for my ex-wife, through her attorney. And you know, I had I went through a... my mailbox was stolen, my trash gone through. Court papers served regularly in the two hours of visiting time with my sons each week. Who were 8 and 10 coming out and seeing this guy with a badge on his belt. Back to what you were saying about solutions equal 50/50 equal shared parenting. That should be the baseline when there is marriage dissolution proceeding. So two parents are together and one files for divorce, it should be 50/50. It's not. More often than not, we're still in this outdated model of Mother is the major and only caregiver with children. And as we've evolved through society to have more men staying at home and more women in the workplace, which has been great to see. The ideology in the perception family call these judges has not moved on from the 60s and 70s. So I think they're in two states the past legislation.

DP: Let's be clear. Because it suits their priorities, their motivational systems. Their distorted f'd up motivations, and that's the right so it really needs legislature to change all that.

GE: And we've seen two small, very meaningful victories in Arkansas and Kentucky of all places where they've introduced legislation of 50/50 rebuttable presumption of shared parenting. Meaning that it starts 50/50 and if one parent wants more time with their children, they have to prove why they get more time which speaks to more of the jurisprudence model of you know, the burden of proof, if you will, is on the accuser, if you will rather than the accused. So that's been good and Kentucky only passed it... one of the major reasons they passed it is because it's illegal for law firms to lobby politicians. So the money is kept out. We have many legislators I look at Minnesota. They have family law attorneys on the state legislators, some of them have brothers who have family law firms, some of them have been created quite recently. There is so much money in this because it's raping and pillaging of family estates.

DP: Do they feel good? No, it feels gross. Sorry, you went through it and I'm also sorry that I made you feel or people thought you were... I was somehow. My incredulity was not directed at you, my incredulity was directed at the system and how could it... How's it possible that it did that to you? And again, I did my homework. I went back I read your read the reports... and your Dr. Dupee is the one that really came through loud and clear for me, which is you have one misadventure, which was your opening misadventure in Del Amo and the cards just taught the dominoes just toppled from then on. Then that's a...

GE: And sadly, ultimately, that one misadventure being that hearsay allegation, which happens to so many people across you know, what I say globally is globally but particularly focused on America and the American Force machine. That's all it takes. And I think we need to really address this.. Anyway, we're not going to worry too well on that I know we only have limited time, but I appreciate what you said Drew in terms of your incredulity. I wasn't upset...

DP: I was just in disbelief. I just like what? What are you telling me? It's literally like I told you, it was like you just were telling me that something had happened that I didn't know could happen.

GE: I know I get it and I think I think people get irritated, frustrated and upset because of the lack of relief that they're getting.

DP: I understand, I get it but what you need more people like me that hears, you know, not just hears it but accepts, you know, gets it in. Gets all the way into what people are experiencing. So, again, that's why I want to talk to that nurse. I want to help understand, are there points we can sort of work on whether it's the specific system problems and I'm hearing just you know, we've already said once earlier in this conversation, dismantle the whole thing and start from the bottom up. That's seems like the only choice for me. But in the meantime, what do we do?

GE: Well, I think it's having the conversations, talking about it, getting educated, getting social policy, you know, reforms, talking about the challenges of, you know, with VAWA the Violence Against Women Act. I'm a Caucasian heterosexual male, and I'm out there talking about, you know, why we had to be careful about domestic, false allegations of domestic violence. It's difficult to you know, because even the domestic violence act in England which was being passed through the House of Commons and the House of Lords late last year, and I was talking with a couple of Lords, it's worded. It's the domestic violence act for women and girls. So where's the protection for baby boys? Where's this protection for gay men? Where's the protection for the male? There isn't any in the law. So that's not equality, and we want the equality for all people. I would think that's what...

DP: They want to destroy the patriarchy my friend and that's not equal. It's equality of outcome by a little bit of retribution as well.

GE: Too, too true. And for those who don't know the nuances...

DP: I don't think most people believe that. I think that's a point of view that's out there today. I do believe it's out there. But I don't think most people really adhere to that.

GE: Yeah. Well, I don't think there's you know, it only takes the loud vocal sometimes minority to

DP: Yeah. A friend of mine used a word to describe that that 5% holding the rest of us hostage as Apartheid. I thought it was an interesting use of that word.

GE: It really is. I've heard that used recently with medical apartheid in terms of the two tiered society in the vaxx pro vaccine and vaccine hesitant, curious, but...

DP: Dude, we could talk all day.

GE: We could. So we're gonna, I usually wrap it up with what I call the Philosophical Cue segment. This is the part of the show where we go a little deeper. Eclectic within the dialectic and see what's in the philosophical cues. Socrates greatest axiom was Know thyself. So Dr. Drew how well do you know thyself? Let's find out as we play a little of the philosophical cue. This one I call the meaning seeker. So I like to define meaning as everything happens for a reason we make up afterwards. Where does Drew Pinsky find meaning?

DP: In service. The medical service. I have come to understand that having a skillset or a knowledge base where you could help a person is the most nourishing thing a human can do. Just that's it. And Aristotle pointed that out. Aristotle said that a good life is a life of service. He did have a sidebar where he said it's also life of contemplation, but one of his good lives was a life of service. But this is the part that that Americans miss too. To be of service to get all that nourishment out, you must have something he called Techne, which is skill and phronesis which is wisdom, meaning experience. And so if you have wisdom and experience in an area and offer it and use it to helping other people, it's about the most nourishing thing you could you can do. Otherwise his family, friends and time spent with other humans. Not just being heard, but feeling other people's... You know, another part of important meaning is feeling felt feeling felt feeling like you're understood deeply. And so I like doing that as well.

GE: What is the most meaningful moment of your life?

DP: When I got married, maybe that's what pops in my head. Now mostly because I remember that moment at the altar so vividly because I was thinking I had this experience. There's all kinds of doubts should I do it, not do at the alter it was a moment of clarity, one of my moments of clarity, and those are always very powerful.

GE: This one's the urbane pioneer I call it. Where do you go for your fantastic neuroplastic urbane monastic? i.e. Where does Dr. Drew find solace? Where's your calm in the storm place?

DP: Running, working out. I'm sort of a maniac with that stuff. And so it's also my study hall where I listen to podcasts and shows like yours. And, but I that's it that's sort of my.... I have to be active during meditation. I'm one of these people it seems like that mindfulness makes me worse. Unless I'm doing something and I sort of found a way to do that.

GE: I like to call it mind wellness because filling up the mind is kind of counterintuitive to me with my wellness and Qigong works for me - moving meditation. I'm similar. I like...

DP: Data points that out - 20% of people. It's not good to sit quiet...

GE: Right. So you find what's best for you. This one's the Enlightened Trailblazer. What book comes to mind if you were to recommend to someone interested in philosophy or stoicism.

DP: So you know, Ryan Holiday, right? So, I was in 20 plus years, or maybe 30 years ago as I was giving a lecture and this kid came up to me and he said, What are you reading right now? And I said, Really? What am I reading right now? You really want to know because I my, my reading is weird and eclectic. So if you want to know what I'm reading right now, is I'm reading this thing, called The Ingredient by this guy named Epictetus, and he went okay, good. I'm gonna read that and thus started Ryan Holiday becoming the Ryan Holiday stoic philosopher. We know of today. So I like all of Ryan's... I like his stuff is so digestible. Probably The Ego is the Enemy. The Obstacles The Way I made my kids read that so I do have many I read broadly in philosophy but good entry level would be Ryan Holiday and the obstacles but particularly if you're interested in stoicism.

GE: Great, what a wonderful story. Great inspiration. This is the sense maker. If you could write your own epitaph. What might you want it to say?

DP: He made a difference. Very simple.

GE: Love that. The presence extender. If you had one wish, what would it be?

DP: Probably for my kids to be as happy and fulfilled as I am.

GE: Love that. Well, lastly, I'm going to ask you where can people find more Dr. Drew? Do you have more plans for the rest of the year? 2022? What's your... any goals?

DP: I'm just sort of getting out there more and trying to build create things. I've got a bunch of things cooking. I don't know what's going to be a reality. In the meantime, I do lots of podcasts and streaming shows it's all at either DrDrew.com or DrDrew.tv. I'm involved in a very surprising, unusual strange podcast called Dr. Drew after dark at your mom's house. The podcast on the platform with Tom Segura and his wife Christina P. And that's been a wild adventure sort of in a reincarnation of Loveline.

GE: When you say your mom's house, you're not talking to me. It's not at my mom's house?

DP: The... hashtag your mom's house.

GE: And yeah, so Adam Carolla...

DP: We do podcasting three days a week.

GE: Brilliant.

DP: So the Adam and Dr. Drew show. He calls me most days. And I wouldn't say they are philosophical discussions. It's sort of more Adam complaining about the state of the world. But I must tell you, No, I'll just say you won't give me one little pearl, which is that everybody that tells him he's.... he's changed, he's changed. I've been there the whole time. That dude has not changed one molecule. It's just that in today's context it strikes the ear differently.

GE: I feel that about where I where I stand politically, and I do feel like the left has gone so extreme that I haven't gone to the right it's the left and I'm like what and I self-critiquing and go where...

DP: Exactly where I am. I've always been a little moderate well quite moderate but liberal, but I feel like both sides. I always end up pulling away from the right I didn't want to... They're always attacking me by the way. They were the ones telling me how to live my life and how to do radio and how to talk and not to talk about HPV vaccines and morning after contraception. You can imagine the balance of that. And then the left became the source of all that. The hell everybody? What are we doing here?

GE: I think we live a little in the upside down. Drew, thank you very much for taking the time to join me. I'm looking forward to continuing the conversation. Maybe we get together again. Give my best to Susan, okay.

DP: Thank you, sir.

GE: You're welcome. Thank you.