I think I’m going to talk about your surrounding mental health professionals this Sunday over Coffee & Crumpets w/ Dr. Childress here on Facebook Live.
What do you do about the involved mental health people surrounding you? They might be custody evaluators (I hope not), they might be “reunification therapists” (there’s no such thing), they might be individual child therapists who are colluding and participating in the psychological abuse of the child.
What do you do about them? I should talk about that this Sunday over coffee.
You want documentation of their diagnosis and treatment plan. They don’t have one and they will resist telling you what their diagnosis and treatment plan is – BUT – you will want to challenge their diagnosis as a misdiagnosis and you will want a second opinion.
Think healthcare – think medical doctors. If the doctor says you have cancer and you don’t think so, what do you do? You get a second opinion. That’s what you want to do, you want a second opinion on their diagnosis because you believe they have misdiagnosed (misidentified) the pathology (problem) in your family.
And they have. The pathology in the family courts is a shared (induced) persecutory delusion and false (factitious) attachment pathology imposed on the child by a pathological narcissistic-borderline- dark personality parent.
Did the involved mental health professionals conduct a proper risk assessment for possible child abuse to the appropriate differential diagnosis for each parent?
No they did not.
Did the involved mental health professionals conduct a proper assessment for a possible shared (induced) persecutory delusion?
No they did not.
Did the involved mental health professionals misdiagnose (misidentify) the pathology (problem) in the family?
Yes, they did.
Was it a negligent misdiagnosis?
Google negligent: failing to take proper care in doing something.
The allied parent is accusing the targeted parent of abusive-range parenting that is creating the child’s attachment pathology toward the targeted parent – a two-person attribution of causality.
The targeted parent is accusing the allied parent of psychologically abusing the child by creating a shared (induced) persecutory delusion and factitious attachment pathology in the child for secondary gain to the pathological allied parent – a three-person triangle attribution of causality.
A proper risk assessment for possible child abuse needs to be conducted to the appropriate differential diagnosis for each parent. Was a proper risk assessment conducted by the involved mental health professionals?
No. You will want to begin the process of exposing their negligent misdiagnosis resulting from their practice beyond the boundaries of their competence in 1) the diagnostic assessment of delusional thought disorders, 2) their diagnostic assessment and treatment of attachment pathology, and 3) their diagnostic assessment and treatment of family systems pathology.
All ethics codes for all professionals have Standards prohibiting practice beyond the boundaries of competence based on their education, training, and experience.
The assessment for a possible persecutory thought disorder is a Mental Status Exam of thought and perception – Martin, 1990 – they are dead in the water.
Mental Status Exam
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK320/
Their additional absence of competence in attachment pathology and family systems layers on additional violations to ethical standards of practice.
Because they are incompetent, they have misdiagnosed the pathology in the family and are treating cancer with insulin… and the patient is dying because of their negligent (failure to take proper care) misdiagnosis.
You will want to begin collecting your documentation to challenge their diagnosis and subsequent “treatment” plan by obtaining their diagnosis and treatment plan… in writing.
They will resist. They must disclose their diagnosis and treatment plan. Ask for a Treatment Progress Update report, then watch them avoid providing one.
You will need to become familiar with the laws in your state regarding disclosure of information – if you share consent rights for the child’s treatment, then you have the right to know what the child’s diagnosis and treatment plan are.
Think healthcare – think medical problems. If your child has a medical problem, you have the right to know what the diagnosis and treatment plan is. Same exact thing, you don’t need to prove something to someone, you just need them to do their job.
What is their diagnosis and treatment plan? Get that in writing. Then challenge it as a misdiagnosis because they failed to conduct a proper risk assessment to the appropriate differential diagnosis for each parent.
Understand this… if they believe a shared delusion, they become PART of the shared delusion, they become part of the pathology. When that pathology is child abuse, they become PART of the child abuse – they – the involved mental health people become participants in the psychological abuse of the child…
…because they are practicing beyond the boundaries of their competence in violation of ethical standards of practice for their profession.
I should talk about that this Sunday over coffee, what do you do about your involved mental health people?
You have rights. They have obligations.
A patient should NEVER have to explain the pathology to the doctor, they should already know. If you have to explain the pathology, document that you are explaining it to them – learn Letter to a Stranger.
WrightsLaw Letter to a Stranger
https://www.wrightslaw.com/advoc/articles/Letter_to_Stranger.html
You’re not writing to the involved mental health person, you’re documenting them into the record for the magistrate who will hear their malpractice lawsuit, or board complaint, or court testimony.
Plan ahead. The pathogen can’t. Stop being now-reactive. You’re the healthier parent. We need your leadership for the family. You need support. Let’s get you the support you need.
We’ll start by getting rid of the incompetent and unethical child abusing mental health people that surround you. The mental health professional should NEVER be a participant in the psychological abuse of their client-child… but they are.
They deserve to lose their licenses for practice beyond the boundaries of competence in violation of ethical standards, resulting in their collusive participation in the psychological abuse of the child… and the spousal psychological abuse of the targeted parent.
You have rights. They have obligations. We’ll talk more on Sunday over coffee here on Facebook Live at 8:00 Pacific.
Craig Childress, Psy.D.
Clinical Psychologist, CA PSY 18857
GreatCosmicMothersUnite 