This is a letter I wrote to a parent and their attorney in response to their question, What should I do?
<date>
To: <parent>; <attorney>
Re: Questions
This letter is to confirm the information we discussed in our consultation. You asked me a question: what should you do?
Caveat 1: I have not interviewed anyone involved and therefore cannot respond specifically to your situation. I am licensed in Washington state. I conduct second opinion reviews of mental health reports and court-related documents.
I will describe the patterns of pathology in the family court. You will need to apply these patterns to your specific situation.
Pattern 1: Diagnosis guides treatment.
Question-1: What should I do?
Answer-1: That depends on the diagnosis. What you do for cancer is different than what you do for diabetes. You tell me the diagnosis, and I’ll tell you what to do.
-
- Question-1A: There is no diagnosis.
Answer-1A: Then you should get a diagnosis, then you will know what to do. The DSM-5 diagnostic concerns for the family courts are:
-
-
- 297.1 Delusional Disorder, persecutory type;
- 300.19 Factitious Disorder Imposed on Another
- V995.51 Child Psychological Abuse
- V995.82 Spouse or Partner Abuse, Psychological
-
Barriers: you will likely face the following barriers to obtaining a diagnosis:
-
- Barrier 1 Institutional Betrayal (Freyd): the psychologists in the family courts (forensic custody evaluators) are financially exploiting the parents (a vulnerable population) by offering ONLY (worthless-awful) forensic custody evaluations that do NOT provide a diagnosis, and they withhold diagnostic assessments from parents and the courts.
Consequence – No Diagnostic Assessment Available:
Parents (and their attorneys) cannot obtain a diagnosis because the psychologists in the family courts refuse – refuse – to provide diagnoses (because if they diagnose and treat the problem, the problem is solved by diagnosis and treatment and no one needs what they do, of an expensive forensic custody evaluation that does NOT diagnose pathology). This barrier means you are unlikely to find a mental health professional who will agree to conduct a diagnostic assessment for the differential diagnoses involved.
Solution – Class Action Lawsuit – Legislative Action
It will likely take a class-action lawsuit (naming 50 state licensing boards, the APA, the AFCC, and the forensic custody evaluators as the defendants) and/or action by state legislators.
-
- Barrier 2 Professional Incompetence: the psychologists who work in the family courts (i.e., forensic custody evaluators) are ignorant, incompetent, and unethical (ignorant = lack of knowledge and information; incompetent = in attachment pathology and delusional thought disorders; unethical = violations to Standards 2.01, 2.04, 9.01, and 3.04). Even if you find someone to agree to conduct a diagnostic assessment, they will likely misdiagnose the pathology because they are incompetent (in attachment and delusional thought disorders.
Consequence – Child Abuse & Spousal Abuse:
If child abuse and spousal abuse are not diagnosed, then children will be abused, and the normal-range targeted parent will be spousally abused by a pathological narcissistic-borderline-dark personality parent.
Solution – Consultation
Standard 2.01(c) of the APA ethics code instructs incompetent psychologists to seek consultation. I am competent in attachment pathology and delusional thought disorders and I am available for consultation to anyone who asks – I even have a YouTube Diagnosis Series they can watch. However, they don’t consult because they are unethical and no one (licensing boards, APA, AFCC, the individual’s personal value systems) enforces ethical standards in the family courts. This is called Institutional Betrayal (Freyd) and Regulatory Capture (Stigler).
Competence Solution 1: Provide any involved professionals with my email address and ask them to consult with me.
Competence Solution 2: Provide any involved professionals with my YouTube Diagnosis Series and YouTube Vignettes.
-
- Barrier 3 Minor’s Counsel: involved legal professionals (minor’s counsels and GALs) routinely misdiagnose the persecutory delusion because they are practicing beyond the boundaries of their competence as legal professionals when they extend their opinions to diagnostic issues. The obligation of the child’s attorney SHOULD be to ensure that their client-child has an accurate diagnosis that leads to effective treatment – the obligation of the child’s attorney SHOULD be to protect their client-child from child abuse… the role of an attorney is NEVER to diagnose psychiatric pathology. But they don’t perform their attorney role and instead make their own diagnosis that the child’s beliefs and reporting reflects a normal-range situation instead of a psychiatric disorder (i.e., induced/shared persecutory delusion)
Consequence – Participation in Child Abuse
As a consequence of attorneys making mental health diagnoses surrounding possible delusional disorders (induced/shared) and child psychological abuse by a (manipulative) narcissistic-borderline-dark personality parent, the minor’s counsel attorney believes the shared delusion as if it was true. When the attorney believes the shared delusion, they become PART of the shared delusion, they become PART of the pathology. When that pathology is child abuse by a narcissistic-borderline-dark personality parent, the minor’s counsel becomes PART of the psychological abuse of their client-child, the minor’s counsel becomes a participating child abuser (because of their misdiagnosis).
It is deeply troubling when the child’s attorney is a colluding participant in the psychological abuse of their client-child because the attorney is practicing beyond the boundaries of competence when they diagnose pathology.
Solution – Obtain an Accurate Diagnosis & Effective Treatment
The role of legal professionals (minor’s counsel, attorneys for both parties, GALs, the Court) should be to obtain an accurate diagnosis for the cause of the child’s attachment pathology (i.e., which parent is abusing the child) and to protect the child from the abusive parent.
-
- Barrier 4 Age of Child: the Court tends to defer to the expressed wishes of older adolescent children. The Court should receive an accurate diagnosis BEFORE decision-making because if the Court believes a shared/induced persecutory delusion and acts as if that false-belief is true, then the Court has been manipulated by the narcissistic-borderline-dark personality parent into becoming the active agent for inflicting the child abuse (and spousal abuse).
The Court’s decision-making surrounding the child will be substantially improved if it has answers to the relevant diagnostic questions (Appendix 1: Diagnostic Questions to be Answered ).
Consequence – Child Abuse & Spousal Abuse
When the Court acts without diagnostic information, the chances of misdiagnosis rise considerably. Misdiagnosis of a shared/induced persecutory delusion created by a pathological narcissistic-borderline-dark personality parent will lead to the Court’s (unintended) participation in the psychological abuse of the child, and in the spousal abuse of the targeted parent by the pathological narcissistic-borderline-dark personality parent.
-
- If we do not protect children from child abuse – then children will be abused.
-
- If we do not diagnose child abuse – then children will be abused.
Solution – Obtain a Diagnosis (Answer-1).
The solution is to obtain an accurate diagnosis for the cause of the child’s attachment pathology that can 1) guide the Court’s decision-making, and 2) guide development of an effective treatment plan to fix the problem, that protects the child from abuse, and that will restore to the child a healthy and normal-range childhood (note: Institutional Betrayal and professional competence barriers will prevent obtaining a diagnosis).
Manipulation of Dark Personalities: what is being encountered by the courts is the “Machiavellian manipulation” of the dark personalities: Dark Triad (narcissistic, psychopathic, manipulative) – Dark Tetrad (narcissistic, psychopathic, manipulative, sadistic) – Vulnerable Dark Triad (vulnerable narcissism, manipulative, borderline). The legal system and legal professionals are being “played” – manipulated – by a narcissistic-borderline-dark personality parent to enact that parent’s child abuse and spousal abuse of the targeted parent.
-
- The legal professionals are being manipulated by a master-manipulator: the Dark Triad, Dark Tetrad, Vulnerable Dark Triad personality.
Pattern 2: Giving Up
Question-2: given the barriers of Institutional Capture, incompetence and unethical practice by the mental health professionals, a minor’s counsel seemingly colluding with the child abuse and spousal abuse, and the later adolescent age of the child, should the targeted parent give up trying to form a healthy and normal-range attachment bond to the child – should the targeted parent give up their legal battle?
Answer-2: No. The targeted parent should continue to press their fight to protect the child – with two caveats:
Caveat 1: Spousal Abuse
The pathology is the brutal and savage spousal psychological, emotional, and financial abuse of the targeted parent by a narcissistic-borderline-dark personality ex-spouse who is using the child, and the child’s induced pathology, as the spousal abuse weapon. Consideration must sometimes be given to protecting the targeted parent from the devastating emotional and psychological suffering inflicted on them by the spousal psychological abuse.
-
- Coping Consideration: to cope (somewhat) with the spousal abuse, the spousal abuse first needs to be acknowledged, and then coping strategies can be developed to limit the parent’s suffering to the extent possible – while still engaging in the legal fight to end the spousal abuse by ending the child abuse. The targeted parent should be taught coping skills of compartmentalizing actions from emotion – do what can be done and then lead a normal-ish life in-between.
-
- Ending Legal Battle Consideration: in severe instances of Institutional Betrayal, protection from spousal psychological abuse may take precedence over the protection of the child from child abuse by the allied narcissistic-borderline-dark personality parent and their professional allies who are manipulated into enacting the spousal and child abuse. This is a highly problematic option because it abandons the child to child abuse – we should NEVER abandon children to child abuse – yet it may sometimes become a consideration because there are two abuse victims, the child AND the targeted parent. When the involved legal and mental health professionals who should protect… don’t – then extremely difficult safety-related decisions emerge and warrant complex considerations.
Caveat 2: Financial
The targeted parent may not have the financial ability to continue the legal battle. The financial expense is the attorney. Some parents may begin to represent pro se, however this places them at a disadvantage in the legal system (note how the dark personality parent manipulates the legal system into financial spousal abuse and drains the ability of the spousal abuse victim to defend themselves against the spousal abuse – Machiavellian manipulation).
Abuse pathology seeks to isolate their victims from reporting and rescue.
-
- Ineffective Attorney Consideration: a pro se parent can be as ineffective as an ineffective attorney at a lot less financial cost. If the involved attorney is going to be ineffective in protecting their client’s child from child abuse, and their client from spousal abuse by a dark personality (narcissistic, psychopathic, manipulative, sadistic) ex-spouse, then a pro se parent can be equally ineffective for a lot less money. The consequence, however, is continued child abuse (and destruction of the child’s life) and continued spousal abuse (and destruction of the parent’s life).
-
- Effective Attorney Consideration: if the attorney is going to be effective as a zealous advocate for protecting their client’s child from child abuse and their client from spousal abuse, then the attorney is earning their fees. Too often targeted parents get “litigators” as their attorneys who seek agreements, rather than “zealous advocates” for the safety of the child and their client, the targeted parent. The pathology is child abuse. The pathology is the psychological, emotional, and financial spousal abuse of their client-parent by a dark personality ex-spouse (narcissistic, psychopathic, manipulative, sadistic). Targeted parents – and the children – need a zealous advocate for their protection.
Q2-A: If the targeted parent decides to end the legal battle (and abandon the child to child abuse because the power of the ex-spouse and their professional allies is too strong), should the targeted parent write a letter to the child explaining the decision?
A2-A: Perhaps – however this is fraught with psychological dangers that need precise navigation.
-
- NOT an Apology Letter to a Delusion: if the diagnosis is a shared/induced persecutory delusion – do not apologize for a reality that did not happen, i.e., do not validate the delusion. Validating delusions is NOT the treatment for delusions. Seek consultation on how to navigate a letter sent to an actively delusional child who is potentially surrounded by psychologically abusive adults (i.e., the allied parent and their professional allies).
-
- Abandonment of the Child: A letter that abandons the child to their child abuse will always be perceived by the child as their being abandoned to the child abuse – even though they don’t understand the psychological abuse yet. The wording for any “Abandonment Justification Letter” needs to be carefully selected to appropriately navigate the abandonment issues involved.
Preserving the Record for the Child’s Legal Options
Even if there is no currently available solution (because of Institutional Betrayal), the child may have legal rights once they reach adulthood relative to suing the involved professionals for failure in their duty to protect the child from child abuse by the narcissistic-borderline-dark personality parent. Consideration should be given to ensuring a cleanly documented record of professional failures for the child’s potential lawsuits against the professionals once the child becomes an adult, for failure in their duty to protect the child from child abuse.
Advocacy
The mental health system in the family courts is dysfunctional – Institutional Betrayal (Freyd). The dysfunctional mental health system creates a dysfunctional legal system (no diagnosis of child abuse on which to rely for its decision-making).
-
- Class Action Lawsuit: a class action lawsuit may be required naming all 50 state licensing boards, the APA, the AFCC, and forensic custody evaluators as the defendants.
-
- Legal System Advocacy: the attorneys and the judges in the family courts need to effectively advocate to the mental health system (APA; AFCC; state legislators) to supply competent mental health professionals for court-involved diagnostic assessments.
-
- Legislative Advocacy: parents need to advocate with their state legislators to mandate diagnostic assessments for child abuse in the family courts to the differential diagnoses involved (Appendix 1: Diagnostic Questions to be Answered).
Summary:
Targeted parents, their children, and the Court in this matter, need an accurate diagnosis regarding which parent is abusing the child to 1) effectively protect the child from abuse, and 2) guide the Court in its decision-making surrounding the child (and the child abuse considerations). There are barriers, the major barrier is Institutional Betrayal (Freyd), with a second barrier of professional incompetence.
-
- What should you do? Obtain an accurate diagnosis.
-
- Will that be possible given the barriers? Based on the patterns of problems in the family courts, probably not (Institutional Betrayal; professional incompetence and unethical practice – violations to Standards 2.01, 2.04, 9.01, 3.04).
-
- Given the substantial barriers, should targeted parents give up trying to protect their children from child abuse? No, we never abandon a child to child abuse.
-
- Are there times when giving up the legal battle may be warranted? Perhaps. There are multiple complex considerations involved.
-
- In impossible situations, what should the targeted parent’s attorney do?
The client-parent and their child need the attorney to be a zealous advocate for protecting the child from child abuse, and for protecting their client-parent from spousal abuse by a narcissistic-borderline-dark ex-spouse. The targeted parent’s attorney should be mindful to document into the record the incompetent and negligent practices of the involved professionals that result in their failure to protect the child from child abuse, and in which these professionals may have contributed to the child abuse, for possible future litigation by the child in lawsuits filed against these negligent and incompetent professionals.
Craig A. Childress, Psy.D.
Licensed Clinical Psychologist
WA 61538481
Appendix 1: Diagnostic Questions to be Answered
| DSM-5 Diagnostic Questions to be Answered | ||
| Targeted Parent Abusive: Is the targeted parent abusing the child in some way, thereby creating the child’s attachment pathology toward that parent? | o yes | o no |
| If yes, identify the DSM-5 Child Abuse diagnosis involved:
o Child Physical Abuse (V995.54) o Child Sexual Abuse (V995.53) o Child Neglect (V995.52) o Child Psychological Abuse (V995.51) |
||
| Allied Parent Abusive: Is the allied parent psychologically abusing the child (DSM-5 V995.51 Child Psychological Abuse) by creating a shared/induced persecutory delusion (DSM-5 297.1) and false/factitious attachment pathology in the child (DSM-5 300.19)? | o yes | o no |
| Sub-Component Diagnoses | ||
|
o yes | o no |
|
o yes | o no |
|
o yes | o no |
|
o yes | o no |
Dr. Craig Childress: Attachment Based "Parental Alienation" (AB-PA) 