Arbour Counseling Services, Norwell

★★★★☆
  • 384 Washington St

    Norwell, MA 02061

    Map & Directions
  • 781-871-6550

Health & Medical

Health & Medical
More choices in Norwell:
Resultset_next

ACS Norwell

384 Washington St Norwell, MA

Resultset_next

Asaprosar

169 Libbey Industrial Pkwy Weymouth, MA

4.0 3
Hi! Sign in to let us know how Arbour Counseling Services, Norwell was?
Write a Review
.

STOPBULLYING.GOV:STOPBULLYING.GOV:Federal Laws directly addresses bullying, in some cases, bullying overlaps with discriminatory harassment when it is based on race, national origin, color, sex, age, disability, or religion. When bullying

3
★★★★★

STOPBULLYING.GOV:STOPBULLYING.GOV:Federal Laws directly addresses bullying, in some cases, bullying overlaps with discriminatory harassment when it is based on race, national origin, color, sex, age, disability, or religion. When bullying

.

18 U.S.C.875(c) criminalizes the making of threats via InternetLegislation against cyberbullying

Main article: Cyberstalking legislation
United States
Legislation geared at penalizing cyberbullying has been introduced in a number of U.S. states including New York, Missouri, Rhode Island and Maryland. At least seven states passed laws against digital harassment in 2007. Dardenne Prairie of Springfield, Missouri, passed a city ordinance making online harassment a misdemeanor. The city of St. Charles, Missouri has passed a similar ordinance. Missouri is among other states where lawmakers are pursuing state legislation, with a task forces expected to have ??cyberbullying? laws drafted and implemented.[23] In June, 2008, Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.) and Rep. Kenny Hulshof (R-Mo.) proposed a federal law that would criminalize acts of cyberbullying.[24]
Lawmakers are seeking to address cyberbullying with new legislation because there's currently no specific law on the books that deals with it. A fairly new federal cyberstalking law might address such acts, according to Parry Aftab, but no one has been prosecuted under it yet. The proposed federal law would make it illegal to use electronic means to "coerce, intimidate, harass or cause other substantial emotional distress."
In August 2008, the California state legislature passed one of the first laws in the country to deal directly with cyberbullying. The legislation, Assembly Bill 86 2008, gives school administrators the authority to discipline students for bullying others offline or online.[25] This law took effect, January 1, 2009.[26]
A recent ruling first seen in the UK determined that it is possible for an Internet Service Provider (ISP) to be liable for the content of sites which it hosts, setting a precedent that any ISP should treat a notice of complaint seriously and investigate it immediately.[27]Definition

The term "cyberbullying" was first coined and defined by Canadian educator and anti-bullying activist Bill Belsey, as "the use of information and communication technologies to support deliberate, repeated, and hostile behavior by an individual or group, that is intended to harm others."[1]
Cyberbullying has subsequently been defined as "when the Internet, cell phones or other devices are used to send or post text or images intended to hurt or embarrass another person".[2] Other researchers use similar language to describe the phenomenon.[3][4]
Cyberbullying can be as simple as continuing to send e-mail to someone who has said they want no further contact with the sender, but it may also include threats, sexual remarks, pejorative labels (i.e., hate speech), ganging up on victims by making them the subject of ridicule in forums, and posting false statements as fact aimed at humiliation.
Cyberbullies may disclose victims' personal data (e.g. real name, address, or workplace/schools) at websites or forums or may pose as the identity of a victim for the purpose of publishing material in their name that defames or ridicules them. Some cyber-bullies may also send threatening and harassing emails and instant messages to the victims, while other post rumors or gossip and instigate others to dislike and gang up on the target.
Kids report being mean to each other online beginning as young as 2nd grade. According to research, boys initiate mean online activity earlier than girls do. However, by middle school, girls are more likely to engage in cyberbullying than boys do.[5] Whether the bully is male or female, their purpose is to intentionally embarrass others, harass, intimidate, or make threats online to one another. This bullying occurs via email, text messaging, posts to blogs, and Web sites.
Though the use of sexual remarks and threats are sometimes present in cyberbullying, it is not the same as sexual harassment and does not necessarily involve sexual predators.
18 U.S.C.875(c) criminalizes the making of threats via Internet.

5
★★★★★

18 U.S.C.875(c) criminalizes the making of threats via InternetLegislation against cyberbullying

Main article: Cyberstalking legislation
United States
Legislation geared at penalizing cyberbullying has been introduced in a number of U.S. states including New York, Missouri, Rhode Island and Maryland. At least seven states passed laws against digital harassment in 2007. Dardenne Prairie of Springfield, Missouri, passed a city ordinance making online harassment a misdemeanor. The city of St. Charles, Missouri has passed a similar ordinance. Missouri is among other states where lawmakers are pursuing state legislation, with a task forces expected to have ??cyberbullying? laws drafted and implemented.[23] In June, 2008, Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.) and Rep. Kenny Hulshof (R-Mo.) proposed a federal law that would criminalize acts of cyberbullying.[24]
Lawmakers are seeking to address cyberbullying with new legislation because there's currently no specific law on the books that deals with it. A fairly new federal cyberstalking law might address such acts, according to Parry Aftab, but no one has been prosecuted under it yet. The proposed federal law would make it illegal to use electronic means to "coerce, intimidate, harass or cause other substantial emotional distress."
In August 2008, the California state legislature passed one of the first laws in the country to deal directly with cyberbullying. The legislation, Assembly Bill 86 2008, gives school administrators the authority to discipline students for bullying others offline or online.[25] This law took effect, January 1, 2009.[26]
A recent ruling first seen in the UK determined that it is possible for an Internet Service Provider (ISP) to be liable for the content of sites which it hosts, setting a precedent that any ISP should treat a notice of complaint seriously and investigate it immediately.[27]Definition

The term "cyberbullying" was first coined and defined by Canadian educator and anti-bullying activist Bill Belsey, as "the use of information and communication technologies to support deliberate, repeated, and hostile behavior by an individual or group, that is intended to harm others."[1]
Cyberbullying has subsequently been defined as "when the Internet, cell phones or other devices are used to send or post text or images intended to hurt or embarrass another person".[2] Other researchers use similar language to describe the phenomenon.[3][4]
Cyberbullying can be as simple as continuing to send e-mail to someone who has said they want no further contact with the sender, but it may also include threats, sexual remarks, pejorative labels (i.e., hate speech), ganging up on victims by making them the subject of ridicule in forums, and posting false statements as fact aimed at humiliation.
Cyberbullies may disclose victims' personal data (e.g. real name, address, or workplace/schools) at websites or forums or may pose as the identity of a victim for the purpose of publishing material in their name that defames or ridicules them. Some cyber-bullies may also send threatening and harassing emails and instant messages to the victims, while other post rumors or gossip and instigate others to dislike and gang up on the target.
Kids report being mean to each other online beginning as young as 2nd grade. According to research, boys initiate mean online activity earlier than girls do. However, by middle school, girls are more likely to engage in cyberbullying than boys do.[5] Whether the bully is male or female, their purpose is to intentionally embarrass others, harass, intimidate, or make threats online to one another. This bullying occurs via email, text messaging, posts to blogs, and Web sites.
Though the use of sexual remarks and threats are sometimes present in cyberbullying, it is not the same as sexual harassment and does not necessarily involve sexual predators.
18 U.S.C.875(c) criminalizes the making of threats via Internet.

Was this review helpful to you?
Ratings_icons Ratings_icons

.

Punyamurtula Kishore MD aka Mad Dog Millionaire is a Crook .

Punyamurtula Kishore MD aka Mad Dog of Preventive Medicine Associates and Carl Smith of New Horizons House are CROOKS .

A Suffolk Grand Jury returned indictments against Dr. Punyamurtula Kishore, age 61, of Brookline, his company Preventive Medicine Associates, Inc. (PMA), as well as three others charged in connection with allegedly running an intricate ??kickback? scheme and fraudulently billing MassHealth nearly $3.8 million. Dr. Kishore, and Preventive Medicine Associates, are both individually charged with Medicaid Kickbacks (8 counts), and Medicaid False Claims (8 counts).

Dr. Kishore owns and manages PMA, a network of 29 medical branches throughout Massachusetts, some of which include physician office laboratories. Based on the AG??s investigation, Dr. Kishore allegedly used bribes or ??kickbacks???taking several different forms??to induce sober house owners to require their residents submit to urine drug screens performed by PMA??s physician office laboratories a minimum of three times a week. Drug screens generally are billed to the MassHealth program at a price of approximately $100 to $200. Dr. Kishore allegedly manipulated those business relationships to bill MassHealth for tens of thousands of ??medically necessary? urine drug screen testing of Medicaid eligible residents.

The Grand Jury also returned indictments against the following individuals in connection with their involvement in Dr. Kishore??s scheme to defraud the Massachusetts Medicaid Program.

?Carl Smith, age 65, of Dorchester, manager of New Horizon House, LLC, located in Dorchester, is charged with receiving Medicaid Kickbacks (one count).

?John Coughlin, age 31, of Carver, president of Gianna??s House Inc., which operates several sober houses located in Wareham, New Bedford, and Sandwich, is charged with receiving Medicaid Kickbacks (one count).

?Thomas Leonard, age 56, of Malden, the part owner and manager of the Marshall House, a sober house located in Malden, held in the name of the 18 Maplewood Malden Trust, is charged with receiving Medicaid Kickbacks (one count).

On September 20, 2011, State Police assigned to the AG??s Office arrested Dr. Kishore at his Brookline residence. He was arraigned the following day in Malden District Court on one count of Medicaid Kickbacks at which time he pleaded not guilty. Bail was set at $150,000 and Dr. Kishore was ordered to surrender his passport and inform probation of any travel plans. A Superior Court judge subsequently reduced Dr. Kishore??s bail to personal recognizance and ordered him released with monitoring of a GPS bracelet. The investigation is ongoing.

Carl Smith, was arrested last night in Dorchester and will be arraigned today in Suffolk Superior Court. The other defendants will be summonsed for arraignment at a date to be determined.

These charges are allegations, and the defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty.

The case is being prosecuted by Assistant Attorney General Nancy Maroney and was investigated by Investigator Brian Robinson, both of the AG??s Medicaid Fraud Division. Massachusetts State Police assigned to the Attorney General??s Office, Examiners from AG Coakley??s Computer Forensics Lab, Special Agents from the Boston Office of the United States Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Inspector General, and investigators from the Massachusetts Insurance Fraud Bureau also assisted in this case

helpful (0) not helpful (0) comment share

helpful (0) not helpful (0) comment share

0
★☆☆☆☆

Punyamurtula Kishore MD aka Mad Dog Millionaire is a Crook .

Punyamurtula Kishore MD aka Mad Dog of Preventive Medicine Associates and Carl Smith of New Horizons House are CROOKS .

A Suffolk Grand Jury returned indictments against Dr. Punyamurtula Kishore, age 61, of Brookline, his company Preventive Medicine Associates, Inc. (PMA), as well as three others charged in connection with allegedly running an intricate ??kickback? scheme and fraudulently billing MassHealth nearly $3.8 million. Dr. Kishore, and Preventive Medicine Associates, are both individually charged with Medicaid Kickbacks (8 counts), and Medicaid False Claims (8 counts).

Dr. Kishore owns and manages PMA, a network of 29 medical branches throughout Massachusetts, some of which include physician office laboratories. Based on the AG??s investigation, Dr. Kishore allegedly used bribes or ??kickbacks???taking several different forms??to induce sober house owners to require their residents submit to urine drug screens performed by PMA??s physician office laboratories a minimum of three times a week. Drug screens generally are billed to the MassHealth program at a price of approximately $100 to $200. Dr. Kishore allegedly manipulated those business relationships to bill MassHealth for tens of thousands of ??medically necessary? urine drug screen testing of Medicaid eligible residents.

The Grand Jury also returned indictments against the following individuals in connection with their involvement in Dr. Kishore??s scheme to defraud the Massachusetts Medicaid Program.

?Carl Smith, age 65, of Dorchester, manager of New Horizon House, LLC, located in Dorchester, is charged with receiving Medicaid Kickbacks (one count).

?John Coughlin, age 31, of Carver, president of Gianna??s House Inc., which operates several sober houses located in Wareham, New Bedford, and Sandwich, is charged with receiving Medicaid Kickbacks (one count).

?Thomas Leonard, age 56, of Malden, the part owner and manager of the Marshall House, a sober house located in Malden, held in the name of the 18 Maplewood Malden Trust, is charged with receiving Medicaid Kickbacks (one count).

On September 20, 2011, State Police assigned to the AG??s Office arrested Dr. Kishore at his Brookline residence. He was arraigned the following day in Malden District Court on one count of Medicaid Kickbacks at which time he pleaded not guilty. Bail was set at $150,000 and Dr. Kishore was ordered to surrender his passport and inform probation of any travel plans. A Superior Court judge subsequently reduced Dr. Kishore??s bail to personal recognizance and ordered him released with monitoring of a GPS bracelet. The investigation is ongoing.

Carl Smith, was arrested last night in Dorchester and will be arraigned today in Suffolk Superior Court. The other defendants will be summonsed for arraignment at a date to be determined.

These charges are allegations, and the defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty.

The case is being prosecuted by Assistant Attorney General Nancy Maroney and was investigated by Investigator Brian Robinson, both of the AG??s Medicaid Fraud Division. Massachusetts State Police assigned to the Attorney General??s Office, Examiners from AG Coakley??s Computer Forensics Lab, Special Agents from the Boston Office of the United States Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Inspector General, and investigators from the Massachusetts Insurance Fraud Bureau also assisted in this case

helpful (0) not helpful (0) comment share

helpful (0) not helpful (0) comment share

 

Wait, you're the expert.

If you've been to or used Arbour Counseling Services, Norwell, leave a review.

It's easy, only takes a couple of minutes and you'll help thousands make an informed decision.



Write a Review