Dr Isuzu is knows to a lot of it is criminal physician and how I personal knew

Did criminal things

“In my case he would say sexual abuse and the outting of the ‘star metro criminal Alberta medical system’ never happened in 2012”

Stating that’s his opinions that he had zero proof mattered more then

Reality evidence

Has blacked listed information on me

In 2012
Forced medication ground up in water
Causing a medical comatose

“He support people in the criminal Alberta medical system”
No matter what

These are the legal laws for my civil case against ahs, about human trafficking and child prostitution, which they undermines justice
Over reality to a h s physicians opinions


They took me in 2018
To say i wa threat to community and society
For ousting the criminal Alberta medical system

“They would to listen agree with non reality reporting
And as well criminal malpractice
To have zero evidence to mental health”

Rejecting all forms of reality evidence

THESE ARE THE LAWS FOR MY CIVIL CASE
THEY WENT AGAINST

C-46: “no one can’t be ignorant of Canadian law”
Bill 201- patient rights
Criminal code public mischief/ lying to police officers/ obstruction of justice
140 (1), (a) (b) (c) (d)
Perjury 131
Fabricating evidence 137
Obstruction of justice 139 (2)
Under bill-201 patient bill of rights
(2) “dignity and respect “ & (3) “improved communication with care”
Charters of rights
Section 7, 9, 10, 12
“Cruel and unusual punishment and detention”
“ guardianship and trusteeship”: “for decision making”
-Division 6 protective measures
74(1) “believes risk or harm”
Bill c 36: protector “duel role” 8(1), 13(1)(a)(b), 19 (1)(2)
“as prostitution in Canada agrees” in layman terms, “I’m allowed protect myself by any means From abusers”; “Lying to the police creating obstruction of justice…as well committing false reality reporting by ahs case worker adam Harrison and act team”
Therefore, I am able to reopen the civil case trial. From the perjury charges, zero wittiness called and evidence, that would of changed the civil court judge decisions

Bill c 36: protector “duel role” 8(1), 13(1)(a)(b), 19 (1)(2)
“as prostitution in Canada agrees” in layman terms
“I’m allowed protect myself by any means”
“For abusers”
-“The civil court did accept all bill c 36 evidence

Submitted April 27, 2022

Some of the things commentors complain about are exactly the traits I found helpful.
Direct , intelligent discussion /assessment. Guidance in the form of actions to take and issues to observe and consider. When you're ready to do the hard and uncomfortable work a "no bs " resource like Dr. Izu is invaluable.
And maybe it was our personalities and commumication styles that helped us work well together.
My experience with Dr. Izu was great.

Submitted Feb. 19, 2021

Please keep yourself safe and ask for someone else. I won't mince words - Dr. Izu showed narcissistic traits and I was unacceptably uncomfortable by the end of the session. If you don't feel seen or heard by him, you are not alone and please don't gaslight yourself because he has a formal education. I sought help at the clinic after experiencing something traumatic - thank goodness I had already done some research on trauma and on narcissism. I came out of that first appointment physically shaking, confused and upset. From the beginning, he clearly had no respect for my knowledge and authority on myself, and spent the full 2 hours making vaguely insulting suggestions and blame-filled questions, and rerouting the conversation to inconsequential details. When I tried to correct him (on my own life!) he said that was a sign of perfectionism - um, no, I would like him not to rewrite my life. He was 20 minutes late because he had to, in his words, clean his desk because he has OCD tendencies, which was unprofessional, and then suggested I might have the same, which was unacceptable. He started the chat with the ball in my court about how I'd like the session to proceed, but shut me down when I started talking to redirect the conversation back to the way he wanted. Contradictions like that were continuous - he said he wanted to choose his words carefully so as not to lose the empathy, but clearly was not empathic in the least (especially by that statement, like ok, you've just admitted your words could lack empathy, so why say them), and he said my process would be directed by me, but refused to acknowledge me when I explicitly said I'd like to meet with a different psychologist moving forward (like literally turned his back on me and asked when I wanted to see him next, like dude did you not hear me). I felt silenced, manipulated and thrown off-center, which would have been very beneficial to him if I hadn't recognized the manipulation in the moment, because he could have swooped in and "helped" when I was vulnerable and feeling ungrounded. I see a therapist and NEVER feel like that with my therapist. Please don't be fooled by the nice suit or the condescending tone or his promises that his method helps people. I also won't lie and say I didn't notice him staring at my chest. The introductory appointment was retraumatizing for me and I'm writing this review to prevent other people from being treated the same way. If you do see him (and please don't, he's not an emotionally safe person), PLEASE pay attention to how he talks past you and how he diverts any attempts to stand your ground. I will be taking this to the clinic, but I don't expect it to yield any results on the end of the clinic - I'm writing this primarily to warn anyone considering seeing him to be cautious, know the red flags, and don't hesitate to advocate for your health if you don't want to work with him. He's supposed to be there to help you, you're not there to play his game, so if it's not feeling like it's helping or about you, just leave and ask for a different doctor.

Submitted June 10, 2020