Mother loses custody of daughter to father based on report of "unregulated" expert

[IwantToRetire]

A mother who was found to have made an “entirely false allegation” about her child’s father has had her daughter removed from her care following a high court ruling.

The woman will initially have only supervised contact with her child, who will be transferred to live with her father against the girl’s wishes. The decision follows adverse findings about the mother’s attitude towards him and the impact of that on the girl of secondary school age.

Three experts gave evidence in the case, which involved a contentious history between two parents who have never lived together and struggled to agree on arrangements for their daughter over many years.

They included Karen Woodall, a psychotherapist who is not registered with any regulatory body and who the mother had tried unsuccessfully to have removed from her case.

Woodall recommended the girl should only have “very restricted supervised contact” with the mother and that the daughter should continue with “therapeutic work”, to be overseen by her.

In a document filed to the court, the mother claimed Woodall’s recommendation was “punitive to the extreme” and the proposed transfer of residency was “motivated by money”.

Very long article here https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/stories/2023-12-16/family-court-files-child-removed-from-mother-after-punitive-recommendation

It seems really extreme to change the child's life from living full time with her mother to go to her father and only have occassional supervised meetings.

I dont think I really understand, but it seems that the mother's crime is that of "parental alienation" ie that even if she is a good mother to the child, this is immaterial to the fact that she is said to be alienating the child from the father.

Is that what has happened?

And is that acceptable? Or as the mother says "punitive"?

Seems fairly straightforward to me, a long history of being obstructive, not engaging with work to support her daughter, making up that dad was sexually interested in his daughter, mum is unworkable and cant be relied on to work with the father by the sounds of it

Making false allegations isnt just about the dad, Ive known of children who believe that they have been sexually abused because of false allegations by their parents or other family members. Its hugely damaging. If she were to continue that narrative for the child, theres no coming back from that

“Parental alienation” is used in custody cases to take children away from their mothers. It’s very effective, unfortunately. It means that even if a mother knows her ex is violent or dangerous she can’t say he is, in case she is accused of “parental alienation” and loses custody.

Note that in this case the child wanted to stay with her mother.

There's already a thread about this in Feminist Chat.

The woman was found by multiple experts to have faked sexual abuse allegations and to have caused harm to her child.

The fact one out of numerous psychologists happens to not be a current member of a regulatory body is completely irrelevant. Saying "unregulated" makes it sound like they just grabbed some random person off the street! Two others who are are regulated agreed that the mother had harmed her daughter and posed a risk to her daughter's wellbeing.

The woman was found by multiple experts to have faked sexual abuse allegations and to have caused harm to her child.

Do you have a link? The info I read said that the mother claimed the father's tendency to walk around naked indicated a lack of boundaries and the "expert" interpreted this as a sexual abuse allegation.

Do you have a link? The info I read said that the mother claimed the father's tendency to walk around naked indicated a lack of boundaries and the "expert" interpreted this as a sexual abuse allegation.

But agree, this seems to be far more about what the expert is the correct behaviour of a mother towards a father. The daughter complained, the mother took her side. The expert then claimed they were saying something different.

The fact one out of numerous psychologists happens to not be a current member of a regulatory body is completely irrelevant

I thought from earlier threads on here that there was a move to not allow unregulated experts provide reports, as too often it seemed they have been used by fathers to get what the want. More often nothing about the child but to punish the mother through the child.

And note, not all the experts of whatever status said the child should be removed.
..
I found the way this was written up really poor. The could have done a chronology.

And I thought nowadays children were asked what they felt. Why wasn't this done?

a number of cases in which mothers, and sometimes fathers, have lost custody of their children after being accused of “parental alienation” (PA) – meaning a child is manifesting unjustified hostility towards one parent as the result of psychological manipulation by the other parent.

The concept stems from the theory of “parental alienation syndrome” coined in the 1980s by US child psychiatrist Richard Gardner. The “syndrome” went on to be largely rejected. But the idea of parental alienation as a pattern of behaviour gained traction and has become complex legal territory in English and Welsh family courts. Julie Doughty, a law lecturer at Cardiff University, notes in a 2018 study: “The argument appears to have created confusion in attaching an unnecessary label to the very rare instances of a parent instilling false beliefs in a child, which is a form of emotional abuse. While such extreme cases are rare, they clearly fall within definitions of significant harm in statutory guidance.”

“There are arguments about whether it is even a concept, or if it is used as a counter-allegation to domestic abuse. There are rows about how to hear the child’s voice and about experts and their qualifications – and there is deep concern about unregulated experts who have an economic interest in both diagnosis and therapeutic intervention.”

When a finding of alienation is made, a PA expert can recommend all contact is cut with the “alienating” parent while therapy is undertaken. They can be prevented from seeing or speaking to their children for several months.

“Resumed contact can depend on the success of therapy recommended by the expert, mandated by the court and either paid for by the parent themselves or another source,” said Dr Adrienne Barnett, senior lecturer in law at Brunel University, London. “In cases where the court instructs the ‘alienating’ parent to foot the bill, they can find themselves held to ransom – either pay up or risk losing their children indefinitely.”

In particular, there has been growing anxiety about the potential conflict of interest presented where an expert could be financially incentivised to make a finding of PA in a system that allows them to recommend their own therapy or that of colleagues.

The victims’ commissioner for London, Claire Waxman, has written to the head of the court, the president of the Family Division, raising concerns about experts who are not regulated and therefore cannot be held to account. In a seven-page briefing, seen by the Observer, she provided a list of experts used by the courts who had been raised in her casework. Subsequently, the Family Procedure Rules Committee concluded that the current rules – which allow unregulated experts to be appointed at the court’s discretion – were sufficient, but that there should be more training for judges.

Full article here - https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2022/jun/12/parental-alienation-and-the-unregulated-experts-shattering-childrens-lives

Thank goodness for FWR as if you only "chat" it is just gossip with no analysis.

Some more context for "parental alienation"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-66531409
https://www.womensaid.org.uk/parental-alienation-a-dangerous-and-harmful-concept/

It's used by abusers against women who want to protect their children from abusers. And it works.

That case is very concerning. The mother had to represent herself, while father had all the money in the world to hire experts and lawyers, including this unregulated psychotherapist who the judge is apparently very fond of, and the judge has ordered the father to pay for that same unregulated pyschotherapist to brainwash the child to give the child ongoing therapy. I would like to know more about the track record of the judge, and of the therapist.

As for the father's habit of walking around naked in front of his daughter, (perhaps by itself it's not concerning, but in a father who's this determined and vicious about trying to remove a child from her mother's protection - well, it's not the only red flag, is it? One might think a father who's trying very hard to gain custody of his daughter would adopt more mainstream clothing conventions.)

Parental alienation is committed by both parents. We have fathers who do this too.

Red flags all over this case

On MN I see threads by women bending over backwards to protect their children by covering for their dad’s erratic behaviour or desperately trying to preserve a child’s relationship with their dad, much more often than I see women trying to prevent access.

It's used by abusers against women who want to protect their children from abusers. And it works.

Exactly. This story from the US demonstrates how it enables abusive men to paint the mother as a liar and unfit to look after a child. In this case, the child reported being sexually abused by his stepdad. The stepdad denied it and claimed his former partner, the child's mother, had turned the child against him. Custody was awarded to the stepfather.

https://www.insider.com/parental-alienation-syndrome-father-alleged-child-abuse-win-custody-case-2023-5

There was a thread about this yesterday.

This was not the result of one expert's testimony. There were three - unanimous in their professional opinion that the mother had caused psychological harm and the DC was in danger of further harm.

I am assuming OP has reposted in the hope of getting a different set of responses.

This was not the result of one expert's testimony. There were three - unanimous in their professional opinion that the mother had caused psychological harm and the DC was in danger of further harm.

Yeah. "Experts" never get it wrong, of course.

Parental alienation is committed by both parents. We have fathers who do this too.

Including this one , according to the judge’s description of his behaviour. Yet he removed the child from her primary carer anyway.

This was not the result of one expert's testimony. There were three

Who selected and hired them? Three “experts” with the same agenda aren’t better than one.