My goodness Karen, I was simply saying that I was confident that you had properly cited my work. I haven’t even read your book yet. I’m on vacation and ordered it. It’ll probably be waiting for me on my doorstep when I get home.
I’m not accusing you of plagiarism. I’m simply saying that if you derived any of the constructs you discussed in your book from my work, then I’m confident that you gave me proper professional citation. If you’re asserting that all of the ideas put forward in your new book are original to you and that none of them are derivative of my work, that’s fine.
But when I read in the Chapter snapshot you provided in a recent blog, your references to the attachment system, and specifically your reference to the “trans-generational transmission of trauma,” the parallels to my work in Foundations seems striking.
Prior to my work, I am not aware of any other mental health professional ever linking the pathology of “parental alienation” to the trans-generational transmission of attachment trauma, yet the trans-generational transmission of attachment trauma is a central and primary construct of Foundations as representing the source origin of the pathology. Chapter 7 of Foundations is entitled: The Trauma Reenactment Narrative.
This construct of the trans-generational transmission of attachment trauma through the parallel concurrent activation of two sets of representational networks in the attachment system, one for the current family members and one for the internal working models from the past childhood attachment trauma, was also elaborated in my 2014 online Masters Series Lectures through California Southern University:
In the Treatment Powerpoint handout from 2014 that’s up on my website, I’d call your attention to pages 6-8 where I discuss in detail the trans-generational transmission of attachment trauma.
I am not aware of any prior reference to “parental alienation” being the trans-generational transmission of attachment trauma.
I didn’t accuse you of plagiarism, Karen, I simply expressed confidence that you would provide the proper citation credit for my insights into the attachment-related pathology of “parental alienation” for material you derived from my work. If you assert that all the ideas put forward in your book, including the trans-generational transmission of trauma, are original to you, that you developed these linkages entirely on your own, fine.
I haven’t even gotten your book yet, Karen. I’m on vacation in Oregon, we took my daughter back to college, watched the eclipse (amazing), and now we’re headed over to the Oregon coast. I anticipate your book will be waiting for me on my doorstep when I get home. At that point we’ll see what’s up.
But to be clear, in my prior Facebook post I did not accuse Karen Woodall of plagiarism, I simply asserted confidence that Karen would provide proper citation credit to my work when discussing constructs first put forward by me in 2014 and 2015.
Apparently Karen Woodall is asserting that all the constructs she put forward in her book are original to her. Okay. Haven’t read your book yet. Curious though… the trans-generational transmission of trauma is original to you? I’ll have to wait until I get home from vacation and read your book to see how that’s an original construct you independently developed and without deriving the idea from my prior work.
But apparently, judging from Karen’s response, she did not provide any citation credit to my work. Well, that’s unfortunate. She is apparently maintaining that the trans-generational transmission of trauma (and other constructs surrounding personality disorder pathology and delusional belief systems) is original to her. It will be interesting to see her reference to her prior discussions of the trans-generational transmission of trauma that predate 2014 or to hear her explanation of how she came up with linking the pathology of “parental alienation” to the trans-generational transmission of trauma.
As a side note, Karen also cites Bill Bernet’s 2015 Commentary on Foundations: Old Wine in Old Skins. Unfortunately she didn’t also cite my response to Bill Bernet’s commentary published in the same newsletter edition:
Of Wine and Elephants: Response by C.A. Childress to Drs. Bernet and Reay Commentary on Foundations. Both Dr. Bernet’s commentary and my response are on my website:
But for now, my wife and I are headed over the Oregon coast for a couple of days, then down through the California Redwoods. When I get home, I’ll look through Karen Woodall’s book and see what’s up.
Karen Woodall is absolutely correct in identifying that appropriating ideas that were first introduced by another and then claiming these ideas as original to oneself without proper citation credit to the original author of these ideas is an extremely serious action within the scientific-professional community. It essentially destroys one’s credibility.
As for allegations? I’m not making allegations of plagiarism. I haven’t even read her book yet. I simply asserted confidence that if she derived any of the ideas put forward in her book from my work surrounding an attachment-based formulation for the pathology, then I’m sure she provided me with proper professional citation credit.
Apparently she’s asserting that all of the ideas she put forward in her book, including the trans-generational transmission of trauma, are original to her. Okay. I’m eagerly looking forward to reading her book to understand how her ideas differ so substantially from mine surrounding the trans-generational transmission of trauma that citation credit to Foundations is not appropriate, and how Karen independently developed the linkage between the pathology of “parental alienation” and the trans-generational transmission of trauma.
In the meantime, I’m not going to worry about it all that much. I’ll let people look at my work, look at Karen Woodall’s work, and people can reach their own conclusions.
If you look over to my posts on the Alliance to Solve Parental Alienation page, and my recent booklets: