The only psychologists subject to legislation in the UK are those registered with the Board of Health and Care Professionals (HCPCs), although experts who do not qualify for registration can be appointed, within the legal framework, at the discretion of the courts. . However, there are growing concerns that some experts in this category are making life-changing decisions about families and young children based on what the ACP-UK has described as “inappropriate diagnoses”. An Observer investigation now raises questions about what the group’s president described as a “closed-door scandal” in which some parents in England and Wales – more often but not always – without a previous bad history are deprived of any contact with their children, after being accused of “parental alienation” or PA. Details of these cases are rarely made public due to strict rules on reporting in family court proceedings, although measures are taken to improve transparency in family courts. There is no legal definition of parental alienation, which has become a highly contested term. The Counseling and Support Service of the Children and Family Court describes it as “unjustified resistance or hostility from one child to one parent as a result of psychological manipulation by the other”. Proponents of PA say it is a widespread problem and a form of child abuse. However, critics claim that in some cases it is used as a tool of litigation or as a trump card to silence allegations of domestic abuse. They are particularly concerned about unregulated experts who specialize in PA and are appointed by the courts in often arduous and costly private family proceedings involving child contact arrangements. “These cases are extremely complex and what is happening is one of the most scandalous things I have ever encountered,” said Professor Mike Wang, Chairman of the ACP-UK Board. Prof. Mike Wang, Chairman of the ACP-UK Board. In an interview with the Observer, he said: “The organization is aware that unchecked experts are making findings about so-called parental alienation and doing terrible harm. I have seen children being removed from the power of the state based on the PA. “But what the public needs to know is that there is an international consensus that the evidence base for parental alienation is not strong enough to make decisions about childcare arrangements.” Not all self-proclaimed “PA experts” or those involved in parental alienation cases. But Wang says: “What I disagree with is a group of experts who I think are making exaggerated claims about their qualifications while operating with vague or false titles that are not protected and could mislead the level or scope of their experience.” . To enroll in the HCPC, psychologists must be qualified to hold one of the nine statutory qualifications, such as forensic psychologist or clinical psychologist. “My view is that family courts should only appoint approved experts,” said Wang, who is fighting for legislation to protect the title of psychologist. The Joint Guidelines of the Family Justice Council and the British Psychological Society state that courts should ‘expect all UK-based psychologists who provide evidence in family proceedings to be regulated by the HCPC and / or… have legal BPS ». The guidelines were updated in May and include a new line that states that “a lack of understanding and awareness has led to the use of various titles in the family court system. Such titles do not have a specific meaning, nor are they protected or regulated by the CSR “. They include a “child psychologist” and an “evaluation psychologist”. The ACP-UK first warned of unregulated experts who could cause “harm to the public” in a statement issued in December. He states that only a medical psychologist registered with the HCPC, such as a clinical psychologist, can diagnose or make recommendations for treatment, adding: “ACP-UK is aware of several cases in which ‘specialist psychologists’ who do not suggests inappropriate diagnoses and have made recommendations to remove children from their mothers… » Separately, Family Division President Sir Andrew McFarlane issued a memo last October, Experts in the Family Courts. He noted that “pseudoscience that is not based on any established set of knowledge will be unacceptable in family court.” Mr McFarlane was quoted as saying in a speech that month: ». According to ACP-UK, an unregulated academic psychologist may be helpful in court to address specific issues in his or her area of expertise, but should not be used to evaluate individuals, make diagnoses or ask for help. to recommend treatment. When there are allegations of alienation, a PA expert may advise the court to remove the child or children from the “alienating” parent until that parent undergoes costly treatment, which is sometimes supervised by that specialist. Wang says: “We are concerned that there is a group of people who refer to their own therapists they prefer to work with. “We know that these people are charging thousands of pounds to vulnerable parents who are left to pay the bill.” There have been wider concerns about this issue. Last month, the Family Justice Council issued interim expert advice in cases of allegations of alienation and conflict of interest. It states: “The court should be extremely careful when asked to consider the evaluation and treatment packages offered by the same or affiliated providers.” The Family Justice Council recently set up the Response to Allegations of Alienation Behavior Working Group. A spokesman for the judiciary said it was mandatory for all judges to complete training in domestic abuse. They added: “The welfare of the child is of the utmost importance and remains at the center of family court proceedings. “Every day, family judges deal with some of the most complex and sensitive issues.” Parental Alienation UK stated: “We welcome any reasonable legal action taken against experts in child proceedings. “This can only be to the benefit of those involved, especially children.”
