Tell Them You Love Me

At the beginning I was like "oh, how amazing! The possibilities are great and his life has changed". But little by little you start to see that things are not okay and that every achievement raises questions.

The way that the woman believes blindly that their relationship was normal and all was fine is just horrendous. She can't think critically and therefore thinks everyone is wrong. The way that the communication works and how his intelligence develops extremally fast is very unlikely. When the assistance starts he barely communicates, but soon he starts to read papers and give political opinions?

The documentary shows how science and study are important to prevent misinformation and charlatans to take advantage on others.

"Tell Them You Love Me" is guaranteed to blow your mind. This thought-provoking documentary tells the extraordinary and controversial story of Anna Stubblefield and Derrick Johnson, challenging our perceptions of disability and consent. Anna, an esteemed university professor, claimed to unlock Derrick's mind from his body through facilitated communication, sparking a complex and shocking relationship that led to a sensational criminal trial. The film skillfully uses exclusive footage and interviews to create a narrative that is as riveting as it is nuanced, exploring deep themes of communication, race, and sexuality.

"Tell Them You Love Me" sucks you in from the very start, making it impossible to take your eyes off the screen. The way it's filmed captures the raw and unexpected turns of this fascinating case in human psychology, offering a unique perspective on true crime. It draws you into a story that is both shocking and profoundly interesting. The documentary not only highlights the ethical and legal dilemmas faced by those involved but also raises important questions about the nature of love and agency in the context of severe disability. This is a must-watch for anyone interested in the complexities of human psychology.

Why did the judge not ask Derrick to answer questions with the help of the keyboard after passing the simple IQ-test where Derrick is shown an apple and the keyboard assistant/facilitator is shown a spoon? If the answer would have been "apple" then the real questioning could proceed. If the answer would be "spoon" then we know the facilitator talks. Alternatively, the assistant/facilitator should not have been shown a picture of apple/spoon at all. It's Derrick that needed to answer in court, right? It looks like Anna was talking to herself through her patient Derrick. By letting Derrick move away from his home to a new home (with Anna) the gov subsidies would have moved too. Anna gets out of an unhappy marriage and becomes a heroine that made an intellectual out of a non-verbal man that was over-protected / locked away by his mom and bro for way too long. It's so simple : let Derrick prove in court that he really wrote those essays etc? Most probably the judge and jury saw that Derrick really wasn't and will never be capable. That's how Anna ended up in jail.

It's important to remember that as caregivers to a severely disabled person, the government subsidies are maximized. Therefore reallly, there are no incentives for the family to seek out further beneficial aides, educational assistance or anything else that will help D. J. to use or try to various ways to communicate because it will just rock the boat. They've been given all they need in terms of functional assessment, which is D. J.'s life sentence of severe disability and intelligence of a toddler, so they feel no guilt in not trying to help him.

The other thing, it's pretty clear that Anna was in a position of power and trust and made a bad choice, a series of bad choices. And deserved to be held to account. However, I don't doubt her feelings and that D. J. shared them, and that their intimacy was consensual.

Further, it's a very difficult film but it's important. It sparks thoughtful consideration of many aspects at the intersection of race, disability and sexual consent. I do hope we all open our hearts and minds to the hidden lessons and wish all parties involved many blessings.

From the beginning, it was made clear that, to tell this story, we had to present all angles and involve all those who were part of it. Newark ethics professor originally convicted in 2015 of sexually assaulting Derrick Johnson, a nonverbal man with cerebral palsy. The two met in 2009 through his brother, John Johnson, a student of Stubblefield's. After John Johnson approached the professor, then 39, about his brother's condition, Stubblefield offered to help Derrick Johnson, then 28, with his communication skills. He soon learned to use a keyboard with an LED screen to type and, with Stubblefield's assistance, began taking a university class. The film explores the unsettling case of Dr. Anna Stubblefield, a white Rutgers University philosophy professor and disability theorist who began working with Derrick Johnson, a non-verbal Black man with cerebral palsy and intellectual disabilities, using a scientifically questionable method to help him communicate. That method, called Facilitated Communication, involves supporting the hand of a person with motor skill issues so they can point to letters on a board or tap letters on a keyboard to express thoughts.