Woman who lost custody of children has expert’s evidence overturned

[IwantToRetire]

A mother has won a landmark legal battle to overturn the evidence of an unregulated psychologist that resulted in her losing custody of her daughters.

For the last five years, Sarah* has only been allowed to see her children under strict supervision once a fortnight after Melanie Gill told a family court judge she was a “narcissist” who had alienated her kids from their father.

As a result, the judge ordered that the girls should live with their dad – a decision made against the advice of a social worker and despite allegations by the children that he had mistreated them.
The success of the case to disregard the evidence – which was supported by our reporting – could open the door to challenges to other decisions influenced by Gill, an unregulated expert believed to have given evidence in hundreds of family court cases.

Article continues at https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/stories/2025-10-23/mum-who-lost-custody-of-children-has-experts-evidence-overturned

@FancyLilacHare A Chsrtered Pschogist will have undertaken years of training and of course many are employed by the NHS and others are Educational Psychologists. Like a number of professions (Chartered Engineers for example) any old person can call themselves a psychologist without the full training, which takes years. How many times do we say the “engineer” came out and fixed my dishwasher. They are no more a professional Chartered Engineer then she was a professional Chartered Psychologist. No one called as an expert witness should be unqualified. It’s easy enough to check whether they are Chsrtered or not via the BPS. Like engineering, holding the degree is not a professional qualification. These people are employable but certainly don’t have the academic standing or professional qualifications to be experts. I’m amazed the barristers didn’t run rings round her.

Thank you, this was all about 4 months ago, since then the father has been sectioned, so there have been no problems, but the fallout from the father's actions still has some effect on the child. Luckily his school are amazing. My SiL is just so angry that the court completely ignored what they were being told. The counsellor had given the child enough confidence to say that he didn't want to see his father, but would speak in the 'phone. Even that was disregarded to allow this abusive man to have access to his child

No idea what her personal history is.

But there is clearly a market for helping violent and abusive men to enact revenge on women. The US outfit she's associated with is perhaps motivated by religious reasons. Appears to be 'anti divorce'.

The thing I find most depressing about this is the fact that the decision makes no recommendation that these girls should resume contact with their mum.

i get that it may not be in the best interests of the girls to go to 50/50 now, but the mum is now at the start of a battle to increase contact with her daughter.

id be interested in any view from people who work in this area about the way women are treated vs men?

it’s basically impossible for a dad not to get 50/50 even if they’re abusive. So why do women get their kids taken off them so readily?

Misogyny

The issue is that an all singing all dancing proper psychologist is regulated by the BPS and many of those are also clinical psychologists with a PhD. Frankly no one should be giving expert testimony in court unless they are at the very least a chartered psychologist and ideally a clinical practitioner with years of experience in properly monitored children's setting.

I thought that. Didn’t Gill’s so called “Expert Report” cost £10,000?

I agree it’s misogyny, but what is the excuse?

There’s a real contradiction in the way courts work. It’s supposed to be child centred, which is the reason given for fathers being given access as ‘children need fathers’, but so many kids taken from mothers- even though that is the most important relationship there is.

I know it’s misogyny but how do judges and courts justify it to themselves?

the fact the judge awarded costs to the father shows there’s a punitive action taken. This goes against what the court is supposed to be about.

it’s a scandal

Easy they tell themselves that the women are liars and bad mums for trying to keep the dc away from their father ie protect them and then theres the so called experts like Gill.

Basically its easier to blame the mother than the father or accept that most men in custody battles are wrong uns, its the same in all vawgs the men must never be forced to face the full consequences of their actions because women made them do it

Melanie Gill is quoted as saying “I have been challenged and questioned on my qualifications in every single private law case I have ever undertaken and I have never been criticised.”

If challenging her and questioning her on her qualifications are not critical of her, what are they? Seems to me that by her own admission, she has been criticised in one way or another in every single private law case she has ever undertaken.

@Quantumfisiks DD is a family law barrister. I don’t think what you assert is correct. Many men don’t get 50/50 and get supervised contact. Don’t believe all the hype.

Please don’t talk about ‘hype’ in regard to the dreadful experiences women have had through family courts.

I think it’s often because they don’t want it though.

my ex is / was abusive. I very much got told by my barrister that when men go for 50/50, they get it - even if they’re shit dads / have taken little interest and don’t intend to.

but 50/50 is usually the starting point and it’s very hard to argue it should be less

I was talking to a woman only last week whose words were twisted out of all recognition by a psychologist and as a result, her daughter will probably have to do visitation with the man who raped and beat the woman for the five years of their relationship.

I'm going to send her the link to the case - thank you.

It's very easy to get into your legal bubble and believe the system you're a part of isn't misogynistic to the core.

Your DD is a barrister, an awful lot of women facing Gill & her fellow cranks are litigants in person. The restrictions on Legal Aid in the Family Division means that in too many cases, there's a parity of arms problem from the outset.
I doubt that she has not seen bias & incompetence from Cafcass.

Does she have a good barrister?

As for the cost!

From the article in IWant's post of 20th Feb:

''On Gill’s recommendation it was ordered that Erin should have no contact with her children until she had undergone costly therapy, which is not available on the NHS and that she was unable to access.''

So cruel. You need to do this thing, before you may see your children again, oh dear you're not able to do the thing, shrug, off you pop.

@HildegardPI totally get that’s the issue. She’s seen poor judgements - of course.

I have friends who thought they knew everything advise their dd on her child case. It was complex. It took years. They were too arrogant to employ a barrister - even though they could afford one. DD doesn’t do much of this type of case these days but litigants in person should beg or borrow money to get a barrister. The problem is that judges can be a bit rogue too, not just experts!

litigants in person should beg or borrow money to get a barrister.

Do you really believe people go to court without a barrister because they haven't tried hard enough to raise the money?

I think there was someone on this thread who said she knew someone who could have afforded a barrister but didn't. So I suppose some must fail to realise they might need that representation.

Beg or borrow?! …thats a bit ‘Let them eat cake’ is it not?

My barrister cost £2,500 + VAT a DAY 10 years ago.

The average appearance in court costs about £15k.

Many abusive men drag matters through the court as a means of punishment.

I’m in a well paid career and I balked at the cost. It cost me £100k, and I still have ongoing issues with my ex. You can buy a home in some parts of the country for that.

It’s easier to ‘beg or borrow’ if you have a network of wealthy friends and family, or earn enough to qualify for a loan, but many people don’t. And these women are often supporting their kids alone without any financial help from their shithead exes.

you should really check your privilege.

but litigants in person should beg or borrow money to get a barrister.

Just the most basic case will easily come to £30,000. With complications it could easily get to far, far more.

@ScrollingLeaves DD is a barrister. No the fees don’t come to this. You have no idea. Basic cases are 1 or 2 days.