What be done to change this?
This is partly why I posted this. I had sort of assumed that somehow it had been dealt with, but maybe not. Let alone anyone taking responsibility for the children's lives that have been if not ruined far worse than they need have been.
Bea Campbell's article finishes with:
New transparency rules, now operational nationwide, enable a wider audience to access Gill’s idiosyncratic methods, her defiance of judicial practice directions, and her belief that children’s expressed wishes and feelings can be ignored because they have been brainwashed, and don’t have the ‘neurological architecture’ to think about what’s going on in their lives.
This obviously contravenes judicial directions and judgements that stress the importance of a factual matrix and actual behaviour, rather than theory or ideological concepts that was emphasised in the landmark case, Re C (‘Parental Alienation’; Instruction of Expert).
So far, however, judges have decided that the courts are not an ‘appropriate’ forum to assess the honesty of Gill’s CVs. Though P.A. and pseudo science seem to be done for in family courts, the legacy bequeathed to children of ‘draconian’ judgements and ruined lives, proposed by identified and unidentified, registered and unregistered ‘experts’ and accepted by judges, is yet to be addressed.