Enrique YAMBAO Galura's Online Review Report Card

Patient presents. Subjective distress recorded. Vital signs of emotion absent. Interaction commenced. Observations logged with procedural accuracy. No engagement detected. Presence registered, comprehension absent. Consultation resembles autopsy: methodical, precise, sterile. The living subject exists only as data points. Attempts to communicate nuance, to convey instability, were met with the clinical equivalent of vacuum. Words articulated dissolve in the cold air of the office; meaning unintegrated, urgency ignored. Politeness, patience, technical correctness — all present, yet hollow. Beneath the veneer lies an apparatus indifferent to the human substrate, a mechanism that catalogues without attending, measures without interpreting, acknowledges without perceiving. During acute psychological fluctuation, the absence of attunement was total. Responses were formulaic, footnotes in a ledger of observation, gestures of engagement without substance. The patient’s voice, the locus of experience, becomes irrelevant; one’s reality exists only as a recorded anomaly, never as a variable in treatment. The atmosphere is glacial. The emotional temperature, absolute zero. Consultation terminates. Subject departs with destabilization, alienation, and acute awareness of existential irrelevance. One leaves not with insight, not with guidance, but with the haunting impression of a living autopsy: observed, measured, recorded — never acknowledged. Polished surface conceals a void of care, where ethical and epistemic imperatives of psychiatry are suspended indefinitely. This experience is not anomalous but structural: clinical mechanics perfected; patient humanity rendered inert. Presence cataloged, voice dissolved, suffering documented but never integrated. Prospective patients should be warned: procedural civility is not synonymous with comprehension. Here, one’s existence is acknowledged only as a footnote, never as a locus of care.

My experience with Dr. Enrique Galura felt, in hindsight, like participating in a forensic examination in which I was the specimen and yet no one bothered to read the report. I described what felt like severe, escalating reactions to lamotrigine with the meticulousness of someone documenting their own decline — symptom by symptom, visit after visit — but each account seemed to dissolve into clinical amnesia. Instead of inquiry, I witnessed what felt like procedural momentum: the dose increased, the distress deepened, and the sense of being observed but not understood tightened around me like a sterile sheet. When I presented in the throes of a manic episode, disassembled and volatile, I expected clinical acuity — a moment of intervention, or at the very least recognition. What I encountered instead felt like an academic duel in which only one side had shown up prepared. His responses landed with the detachment of footnotes: technically present, emotionally absent. Being told he could write “whatever I wanted” struck me not as guidance, but as the clinical equivalent of a blank autopsy summary — a gesture devoid of conclusions, urgency, or responsibility. It was like being handed a scalpel and told to finish the dissection myself. One appointment escalated to such bewildering tension that I left trembling, with the distinct sensation of having been analyzed the way one studies an unidentified body: observed, measured, but not truly acknowledged. The aftermath stayed with me, cold and metallic, like the breath of a morgue drawer sliding shut. The emotional climate of his office lingered long after — a kind of sterile haunting, a hollowed-out echo where care should have been. From my perspective, every encounter carried the chill of an incomplete report: findings unconnected, warnings unheeded, human suffering reduced to peripheral data. I walked into those appointments hoping for stabilization; I walked out feeling spectral — present, speaking, and yet somehow erased. These are my lived experiences, and they were unsettling enough that I cannot recommend this provider. No one seeking psychiatric support should leave feeling like they’ve been rendered a clinical artifact — examined but not heard, charted but not cared for, a living patient treated like an unfinished autopsy.

A Living Autopsy of Care From the first consultation, it became evident that the structure of psychiatric engagement had been hollowed of its essential human function. Dr. Enrique Yambao Galura operates within the procedural shell of psychiatry — a meticulously codified framework where symptoms are logged, affect is noted, and the patient’s subjective reality is systematically excised. Attempts at articulation, at conveying the volatility of lived experience, were met with a formal acknowledgment devoid of cognitive uptake, as if my words were specters, cataloged and discarded in a ledger of clinical procedure.The experience resembled an autopsy conducted on a living subject: data recorded with surgical precision, comprehension absent, ethical obligation suspended. Moments of acute instability, which would demand attunement, intervention, or even minimal engagement, were instead met with a chilling void. Responses arrived as intellectual gestures, footnotes of cognition without content, as if the machinery

Terrible psychiatrist. Threatens patients with locking them up and throwing away the key, taking away their livlihood if you do not do what he says

Trauma inducing doctor This man should not be near people with trauma He did not listen at all he didn’t ask for my history he didn’t ask anything except one or two questions that lead no where -he rushed through the appointment as quickly as he could . instead of communicating he judged I thought I was going to get help what I got was disdain and frankly more depressed . After 15 mins he was done and directed me to make another appointment- I ran from that office and will most likely never visit another behavioral health “professional” ever again.

Incompetent How this man is allowed to “treat” the mentally ill is beyond me .

Disappointing

I went to him back in the 90's. He was excellent

After spending the minimal time with me for Dr Galura to receive payment; this psychiatrist informed my husband he should divorce me and leave me to the care of my home state.

After a single interview with me, Dr Galura urged my husband to divorce me and leave me to the care of my home state.