2019 is going to kick off with an interesting thing… I’m going to file an ethics complaint with the APA Ethics Committee against all of forensic psychology, the entire field, for violations of:
Standard 2.01a: Boundaries of Competence
Standard 9.01a: Competent Assessment
Standard 3.04: Harm to the Client
Standard 2.03: Maintaining Competence
Principle D: Justice
Duty to Protect
This same ethics complaint will also formally allege that the APA itself is colluding with the violation of ethical standards by covering up the violations of forensic psychology through not responding to the Petition to the APA.
That should be interesting, shouldn’t it… an ethics complaint to the APA alleging the APA is colluding with the violation of the APA ethics code by an entire field of psychology.
The media loves uncovering a cover up.
The Petition to the APA, signed by over 20,000 parents, was delivered to the APA offices in June of this year. It’s been six months. They’ve had more than enough time to respond.
Our first of three remedies in the Petition to the APA was for the APA to issue a simple press release affirming its support for Standard 2.01a of its own ethics code. That’s it. That’s all we’re asking for with the first remedy… a simple press release affirming that psychologists must know what they are doing.
The APA refuses to support its own ethics code requiring professional competence. Their silence speaks.
So that should be interesting, an ethics complaint to the APA that the APA is colluding with the violation of its own ethics code.
That starts 2019. Then… in February of 2019 I’m traveling to the Netherlands to present at a Symposium on February 25, at Erasmus University Medical Center in Rotterdam. I will be presenting on AB-PA, it’s foundations, assessment, and diagnosis.
I have the great pleasure to be joined in this Symposium by Dr. Ad Oud who will present on trauma, along with presentations from Prof. Dr. Louis Tavecchio, Prof. Dr. Corine de Ruiter, and Prof. Dr. Maurits Barendrecht regarding the psychological, family, and legal issues surrounding “parental alienation” pathology in the Netherlands.
Knowledge is knowledge. Science is international.
van der Kolk (complex trauma),
Minuchin (family systems),
Beck (personality disorders)
This is established professional knowledge. There is zero-nothing “new” about AB-PA. There is only knowledge and ignorance.
The force of knowledge is powerful, and it is relentless.
I know the established knowledge in all four of these professional domains; attachment, complex trauma, family systems therapy, and personality disorders. All mental health professionals who are working with your children and families (court-involved attachment pathology) should know all four of these professional domains of knowledge as well. If not, why not? What’s their justification for their ignorance?
Curriculum Knowledge Checklist
I am taking the quietude of the holiday season to read, in preparation for the coming days. Here is my December’s reading list:
Treating Complex Traumatic Stress Disorders: Scientific Foundations and Therapeutic Models. Courtois & Ford.
Principles of Trauma Therapy: A Guide to Symptoms, Evaluation, and Treatment. DSM-5 Update: Briere & Scott.
Born for Love: Why Empathy is Essential and Endangered. Szalavitz & Perry.
Healing the Incest Wound: Adult Survivors in Therapy. Courtouis.
Changing Relationships: Strategies for Therapists and Coaches. Madanes.
I already know the trauma literature. But it’s time that everyone who works with your children and families knows this information, so I want to brush up.
Four trauma books, one family systems. The Madanes book is just a treat-bonus that was published earlier in the year. It just dropped in from heaven. Cloe Madanes is a top-top tier family systems therapist, and her linkage of family therapy and coaching is wonderful for what we are doing here in developing court-involved family solutions.
As for the trauma books, I already know the trauma literature (Perry, Briere, van der Kolk, Courtois, etc.) from the actual research studies they’ve published. Their books are based on their research and as a clinical psychologist working in any field (trauma, ADHD, autism, etc.) we are expected to know and stay current on the actual research.
But I’ve been away from complex trauma for a while, over here in court-involved clinical psychology, so I’m freshening my knowledge and looking for good quotes for the coming days.
To my professional colleagues: I’m reading this, why aren’t you? Have you read Bowlby when you’re working with an attachment pathology? Have you read Beck and Millon and Linehan and Kernberg when you’re working with personality disorder pathology? Have you read Minuchin and Bowen and Haley and Madanes when you’re conducting family therapy?
And have you read Briere and van der Kolk and Perry and Courtois when you’re working with the generational transmission of complex trauma?
Why not? Don’t you think it would be useful to know what you’re doing? I do. These children and families are placing their entire lives in your hands. Don’t you think you should know what you’re doing?
To my professional colleagues: Going forward, we’re going to see which one of us the administrative bodies of our society agree with, you or me. We are going to ask the APA, your licensing boards, and the legal system to render their opinions about that question; Do you need to know stuff or not? Let’s find out their opinion on the matter.
Bowlby – Minuchin – Beck – van der Kolk; attachment, family systems – personality disorders – complex trauma.
To my professional colleagues: I know this information and I am asserting that it is essential that all mental health professionals working with court-involved attachment pathology know this information. Your position is what? That you don’t need to know this information? That ignorance is acceptable?
That’s an interesting position to take, that ignorance is acceptable and that knowledge is unnecessary.
To my professional colleagues: I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree on that, and we’ll just have to see which one of us the APA and your licensing boards and the courts agree with; you… or me. Is the standard and established knowledge of professional psychology required for the practice of psychology or not? Is ignorance acceptable?
Oh… and to my professional colleagues, one more thing… If you’re wrong… then you may have failed in your “duty to protect” by not conducting an appropriate (trauma-informed) assessment of the family pathology – because of your ignorance. Yikes, you missed diagnosing child abuse – failing in your duty to protect – because of your ignorance of the standard and established knowledge in professional psychology.
2019 is looking to be an interesting year.
Craig Childress, Psy.D.
Clinical Psychologist, PSY 18857