In the absence of child abuse, parents have the right to parent according to their cultural values, their personal values, and their religious values.
In the absence of child abuse, each parent should have as much time and involvement with their child as possible.
In the absence of child abuse, to restrict either parent’s time and involvement with their child would damage the child’s attachment bond to that parent, thereby harming the child and harming the parent.
Is there child abuse? Let’s get a proper risk assessment for possible child abuse.
1) child abuse by the targeted parent accounting for the child’s attachment pathology toward that parent,
2) child psychological abuse by the allied parent, i.e., a shared persecutory delusion created by the collapse of a narcissistic-borderline personality parent surrounding divorce.
One way or the other, we’re looking at a likely child abuse diagnosis. We need a proper risk assessment for possible child abuse.
From Walters & Friedlander: “In some RRD families [resist-refuse dynamic], a parent’s underlying encapsulated delusion about the other parent is at the root of the intractability (cf. Johnston & Campbell, 1988, p. 53ff; Childress, 2013). An encapsulated delusion is a fixed, circumscribed belief that persists over time and is not altered by evidence of the inaccuracy of the belief.” (Walters & Friedlander, 2016, p. 426)
From Walters & Friedlander: “When alienation is the predominant factor in the RRD [resist-refuse dynamic}, the theme of the favored parent’s fixed delusion often is that the rejected parent is sexually, physically, and/or emotionally abusing the child. The child may come to share the parent’s encapsulated delusion and to regard the beliefs as his/her own (cf. Childress, 2013).” (Walters & Friedlander, 2016, p. 426)
Walters, M. G., & Friedlander, S. (2016). When a child rejects a parent: Working with the intractable resist/refuse dynamic. Family Court Review, 54(3), 424–445.
What is the diagnosis? Is there a shared persecutory delusion? We need an answer to that question.
If the mental health person cannot answer that question – is there a shared persecutory delusion? – then they are pointless to the situation because we need an answer to that question.
IT… IS… SIMPLE. Is there a shared persecutory delusion? Yes? No?
How do they know if they don’t even look to see? Do the child’s symptoms meet diagnostic criteria for a persecutory delusion? How about we use Item 11 on the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale for Unusual Thought Content (delusions), “one of the oldest, most widely used scales to measure psychotic symptoms,” to rate the delusional quality of the belief.
Or you can write the answer on a napkin. Tell us by smoke signals for all I care… we just need an answer, is there a shared persecutory delusion – a fixed and false belief in supposed “victimization”?
The treatment for cancer is different than the treatment for diabetes. Diagnosis guides treatment. If we treat cancer with insulin then the patient dies from the misdiagnosed cancer.
What is the diagnosis?
“I don’t diagnose, I don’t like to pathologize” Then you’re a pretty worthless person to the situation because we need a diagnosis.
Is there child abuse? V995.51 Child Psychological Abuse? Why are we not routinely getting an answer to that question for court-involved family conflict?
They deserve to lose their license. Look at all they’re putting you through because they won’t diagnose Child Psychological Abuse (V995.51) when it’s warranted. They have duty to protect obligations, and they are not protecting your child.
Knowledge is power. Planning is power. The pathogen is now-reactive. Plan ahead, move step-by-step on a linear path to the goal. You want a written treatment plan to fix things please.
Google mental health treatment plans and read the first two returns – one of those please.
Craig Childress, Psy.D.
Clinical Psychologist, CA PSY 18857