Category: Parential Alienation-Child Abuse

A standardized herbal extract mitigates tumor inflammation and augments chemotherapy effect of docetaxel in prostate cancer | Scientific Reports

Activation of the NFκB pathway is often associated with advanced cancer and has thus been regarded as a rational therapeutic target. Wedelia chinensis is rich in luteolin, apigenin, and wedelolactone that act synergistically to suppress androgen receptor activity in prostate cancer. Interestingly, our evaluation of a standardized Wedelia chinensis herbal extract (WCE) concluded its efficacy on hormone-refractory prostate cancer through systemic mechanisms. Oral administration of WCE significantly attenuated tumor growth and metastasis in orthotopic PC-3 and DU145 xenografts. Genome-wide transcriptome analysis of these tumors revealed that WCE suppressed the expression of IKKα/β phosphorylation and downstream cytokines/chemokines, e.g., IL6, CXCL1, and CXCL8. Through restraining the cytokines expression, WCE reduced tumor-elicited infiltration of myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs), tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs) and endothelial cells into the tumors, therefore inhibiting angiogenesis, tumor growth, and metastasis. In MDSCs, WCE also reduced STAT3 activation, downregulated S100A8 expression and prevented their expansion. Use of WCE in combination with docetaxel significantly suppressed docetaxel-induced NFκB activation, boosted the therapeutic effect and reduced the systemic toxicity caused by docetaxel monotherapy. These data suggest that a standardized preparation of Wedelia chinensis extract improved prostate cancer therapy through immunomodulation and has potential application as an adjuvant agent for castration-resistant prostate cancer.
— Read on www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-15934-0

A Review of the Potential of Phytochemicals from Prunus africana (Hook f.) Kalkman Stem Bark for Chemoprevention and Chemotherapy of Prostate Cancer

A Review of the Potential of Phytochemicals from Prunus africana (Hook f.) Kalkman Stem Bark for Chemoprevention and Chemotherapy of Prostate Cancer
— Read on www.hindawi.com/journals/ecam/2017/3014019/

The medications that change who we are – BBC Future

I can and certainly intend to expand on the toxicity and acceptance

of this inducement of illness , especially mental illness and then heap

more guilt and shame, ignoring abuses , and trauma etc .

No one heard me , medicated I had no rights as the projections

heaped towards my at fault . No one has heard me since , for the same

reasons I’m supposed to be shut up …

The side effects go way beyond reported even here .. #ErasingFamliesForProfit

©️

Blessings & Peace ,

Doña Luna

They’ve been linked to road rage, pathological gambling, and complicated acts of fraud. It turns out many ordinary medications don’t just affect our bodies – they affect our brains.
— Read on www.bbc.com/future/article/20200108-the-medications-that-change-who-we-are

Screentime Is Making Kids Moody, Crazy, and Lazy | Psychology Today

The rapid , high speed of games teaches the world is that frenzied .

So very glad , folks are waking to slowing things down for kiddies

and adults alike , simpler is so much healthier …I still adore the Walton’s

Family shows ..I don’t regret not living the Dallas or Dynasty show

that mask so many …greed is so unattractive and teaches nothing

positive .

©️

Blessings & Peace

Doña Luna

By disrupting sleep, suppressing the brain’s frontal lobe, raising stress hormones, and fracturing attention, daily screen-time harms children.
— Read on www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/mental-wealth/201508/screentime-is-making-kids-moody-crazy-and-lazy

Delusional Belief in the Child -Craig / 71995.51 Child Psychological Abuse

I was blessed to find Childress , in 2012/13. Just after Dad exited ,
as the family structure disintegrated beyond repair , his final
gift 🎁 was that I had done enough, been abused and used
enough, with threats of death , altering his wishes , participating
in hastening his death …goodbye brothers .

In the aftermath , I was kinda allowed to know the

success of our granddaughter’s being , and my determination

to successfully conclude the old business . Clarity , in most

failures and negatives being associated with me..

It’s with a much lighter heart , after 7 years of having the

verification , my heart healing , and reeling as this epidemic

of child abuse escalates , many and mighty WE stand , and

say no more .

Delusional
You’re all delusional.
Yes you are, don’t try to deny it.  All of you.  Still.
When I first came over here in 2010-ish, you all thought you had to “prove something” to someone.  Most of you thought you had to prove this “parental alienation” pathology to a judge.
But it was broader than that – it was this driving need belief that you had to prove something to someone, you had to prove PAS to the American Psychiatric Association so’d they accept it. You had to prove the pathology to a judge so the judge would accept it.
Prove it.
Can you hear the pathogen’s voice in that?  I do.
That’s not true.  You just need a diagnosis.  If your uncle Bob has schizophrenia and you need to put him on a conservatorship, how do you prove to a judge that your uncle Bob has schizophrenia?
You take uncle Bob to a psychologist and get a diagnosis of schizophrenia.  You then take that diagnosis of schizophrenia to the judge as proof that uncle Bob has schizophrenia.
Judges don’t diagnose pathology, psychologists do.  License… that’s that the license means… we are licensed – authorized – by the state to diagnose pathology.  Us.  Psychologists.  Not judges.  Judges are not licensed to diagnose pathology.
If you want to prove that uncle Bob has schizophrenia, you go to a psychologist, not a judge.  if you want a conservatorship for uncle Bob, go to the judge.  The judge will ask you to prove uncle Bob has schizophrenia, so then you take Uncle Bob to a psychologist and get a diagnosis.
Seriously people, you do not have to prove a pathology to a judge…. they are legal professionals… go to a psychologist and get a diagnosis.
Now… do you have to prove a diagnosis to a psychologist?  No. Why not?
Because that’s not how you get a diagnosis.
You don’t prove to me your child has ADHD.  You don’t prove to me that your child has autism.  You don’t prove a diagnosis, you’re given a diagnosis.
You come to me as a clinical psychologist.  You tell me the symptoms, I’ll tell you what the diagnosis is, and I’ll tell you what the treatment is.
If you think I’ve misdiagnosed the pathology, get a second opinion.  That’s how it works.
A parent doesn’t “prove” to me the child has autism, or “prove” to me why Billy has problems in reading.  i examine the pattern of symptoms, I collect information about that pattern of symptoms, and I match that pattern of symptoms to diagnostic patterns, and I make a diagnosis, I assign a diagnosis, I give a diagnosis.
You don’t “prove” a diagnosis to me.
See.  Here you thought you had to prove something to someone.  No.  A psychologist will give the diagnosis… a gift to you of the truth – and you take this diagnosis to the judge as proof that uncle Bob has schizophrenia.
You don’t have to prove anything.  The psychologist sees the pathology, makes a diagnosis, and tells the court that uncle Bob has schizophrenia.  You then ask the court for a conservatorship of uncle Bob because he has schizophrenia.
What about the DSM-5? The pathology of “parental alienation” isn’t in the DSM-5, it’s not real, we have to prove it’s real.
No you don’t.  It’s not in the DSM-5.  So?  Look what is in the DSM-5, on page 719, V995.51 Child Psychological Abuse.  Okay, that works.
Creating a delusional belief in the child is a DSM-5 diagnosis of V995.51 Child Psychological Abuse, Confirmed.  There.  Happy now?  You have a DSM-5 diagnosis.
And, personally, I think that’s a more accurate diagnosis than that “parental alienation” thing of Gardner’s, that was a mess.  Good idea, something’s there, bad execution, he skipped diagnosis.  Shouldn’t do that.
So see.  You don’t even have to prove anything to get a DSM-5 diagnosis for the pathology, you’ve already got that.
So… what do you have to prove?
Oh… you have to educate your mental health person about the diagnosis.
No you don’t. See.  There you go, being all delusional again, “We have to prove something, we have to prove something.”
If you’re concerned about autism for your child, so you want that assessed and diagnosed… do you have to also educate the assessing mental health professional about autism?
Are you simultaneously educating your mental health person about what autism is at the same time that they are assessing your child for autism?  Is that the way it works?  No.
If you’re worried about cancer, so you go to your doctor and say, can you check me out for cancer, I’m worried.  Do you then have to educate your doctor about what cancer is so that you can be assessed for it?  No.
So why do you now have to educate your mental health people about a pathology in order to have it assessed? 
Differential diagnosis, are you an abusive parent or is there a shared persecutory delusion with the other parent as the “primary case”? – the “inducer” (American Psychiatric Association) of the persecutory delusion in the child, “the more passive and initially healthy second person”? 
A persecutory delusion, a fixed and false belief in supposed “victimization.”
From the American Psychiatric Association: “Persecutory Type: delusions that the person (or someone to whom he person is close) is being malevolently treated in some way.”
…or someone to whom the person is close – i.e., the child – is being malevolently treated in some way.
That’s the American Psychiatric Association.
Standard 2.04 of the ethical code of the American Psychological Association states,
2.04 Bases for Scientific and Professional Judgments 
Psychologists’ work is based upon established scientific and professional knowledge of the discipline.
The DSM-5 and ICD-10 are the “established scientific and professional knowledge of the discipline.
You do not have to educate your mental health person. They should ALREADY be educated.  You don’t “prove” a diagnosis, you are given a diagnosis.
If they do not know how to give a diagnosis of autism, if they don’t know what autism is… they are not competent.  By definition, they are not competent.
Ask them for the diagnosis. If they go, “What?” Then that means they are not competent.  By definition, they do not know what they are doing.
See.  You’re all still delusional.  You think it’s your job to now educate the mental health professional so you can prove something to a judge.  
No.  None of that is true.  It is a false problem created by the pathogen’s lie that you believe… prove it.
Don’t you just hear the smug sneer of the pathogen, prove it.  Prove your not a bad parent, prove I am.  Go ahead… try.  I’ll lie, I’ll manipulate, I’ll delay and obstruct… prove it.
I’ll surround you with ignorance and incompetence, no one will see my manipulations, my control of the child. Prove it.
No, stupid pathogen.  Diagnosis.  I see you, I diagnose you.  A shared persecutory delusion, ICD-10 F24 Shared Psychotic Disorder, DSM-5 V995.51 Child Psychological Abuse.  Given… a gift.  We give a diagnosis, that’s my gift to you pathogen, my diagnosis.
The problem is not you, it’s them.  Reorient.  You don’t have to prove anything, you don’t have to educate them.
You do need to be an informed consumer, because these mental health people surrounding you are stone-cold stupid, ignorant, arrogant, incompetent, slothful, lazy, and unethical.  
Google stupid: having or showing a great lack of intelligence or common sense.
Google ignorant: lacking knowledge or awareness in general; uneducated or unsophisticated.
Google arrogant: having or revealing an exaggerated sense of one’s own importance or abilities.
Google incompetent: not having or showing the necessary skills to do something successfully.
Google slothful: reluctance to work or make an effort; laziness.
Google lazy: unwilling to work or use energy.
Google unethical: not morally correct.
Craig Childress, Psy.D.
Clinical Psychologist, PSY 18857

Newborn Dies of Sepsis 2 Months After Vitamin K Shot

The most horrific outcome , totally preventable , the predictable

blame of authorities against the parents ..

A healthy infant dies of sepsis 2 months after receiving the Vitamin K shot. “I got a call from my husband that tore my world apart.”
— Read on www.stopmandatoryvaccination.com/parent/vaccine-injury/newborn-dies-of-sepsis-2-months-after-vitamin-k-shot/

Childress On Persecutory Delusion :A “creation” of the allied parent

You’ll hear me talk a lot about the persecutory delusion, the child’s false belief in “victimization,” created by the allied parent, and how that’s the encapsulated (limited-scope) persecutory delusion of the allied parent, your ex- toward you, that is then being imposed on the child – a shared persecutory delusion with the parent as the “primary case.”

A shared persecutory delusion is an ICD-10 diagnosis of F24 Shared Psychotic Disorder, that’s what a shared delusional disorder is called, a Shared Psychotic Disorder.

The ICD-10 diagnostic system is used throughout the world, it’s a coding system for all medical and psychiatric disorders, it’s used in the U.S. for all insurance billing, medical and psychological, the ICD-10 code is what’s used for billing insurance.

The ICD-10 diagnosis for a shared persecutory delusion between a parent and child, with the parent as the “primary case” is an ICD-10 diagnosis of F24 Shared Psychotic Disorder.

The descriptions for the disorders listed in the ICD-10, like cancer, or depression, or any medical or psychiatric disorder, are pretty brief. It’s mostly just the category system for ALL medical and psychiatric diagnoses, it doesn’t go into a lot of depth explaining each medical and psychiatric disorder.

For psychiatric disorders, the American Psychiatric Association is who you want to turn to for a description of the pathology. The American Psychiatric Association offers a pretty full description of a Shared Psychotic Disorder, let me run through it for a second.

—————

From the American Psychiatric Association:

“The essential features of Shared Psychotic Disorder (Folie a Deux) is a delusion that develops in an individual who is involved in a close relationship with another person (sometimes termed the “inducer” or “the primary case”) who already has a Psychotic Disorder with prominent delusions (Criteria A).” (p. 332)

Dr. Childress: note the two terms for the allied parent, the “inducer” of the child’s delusion (the child’s rigidly held and false belief in supposed “victimization”) and the “primary case” of the shared persecutory delusion, you’ll hear me use those two interchangeably.

“Usually the primary case in Shared Psychotic Disorder is dominant in the relationship and gradually imposes the delusional system on the more passive and initially healthy second person.”

Dr. Childress Comment: This contains two key elements, the first is the power, domination, and influence the allied parent has on the child, and then gradually “imposing the delusional system” on the child, “the more passive and initially healthy second person.”

“Individuals who come to share delusional beliefs are often related by blood or marriage and have lived together for a long time, sometimes in relative isolation.”

Dr. Childress Comment: The parent and child are related by blood, this feature definitely applies.

“If the relationship with the primary case is interrupted, the delusional beliefs of the other individual usually diminish or disappear.”

Dr. Childress: Here, the APA gives direct treatment guidance, i.e., interrupt the relationship with the “primary case” – the “inducer” of the child’s persecutory delusions.

“Although most commonly seen in relationships of only two people, Shared Psychotic Disorder can occur in larger number of individuals, especially in family situations in which the parent is the primary case and the children, sometimes to varying degrees, adopt the parent’s delusional beliefs.”

Dr. Childress Comment: The final part of that description is EXACTLY this pathology, it is a family situation in which the “parent is the primary case” and the children, to varying degrees, “adopt the parent’s delusional beliefs.”

Exactly. An encapsulated persecutory delusion imposed on the child by the “primary case” – the “inducer” – of the persecutory delusion. Here is the definition of a persecutory delusion from the American Psychiatric Association:

“Persecutory Type: delusions that the person (or someone to whom the person is close) is being malevolently treated in some way.”

The American Psychiatric Association also describes additional features of a Shared Psychotic Disorder.

Associated Features and Disorders

“Aside from the delusional beliefs, behavior is usually not otherwise odd or unusual in Shared Psychotic Disorder. Impairment is often less severe in individuals with Shared Psychotic Disorder than in the primary case.”

Dr. Childress Comment: the child goes to school, the allied parent goes to work, “aside from the delusional beliefs,” the shared persecutory delusion relative to the targeted parent, their “behavior is not otherwise odd or unusual.”

Prevalence

“Little systematic information about the prevalence of Shared Psychotic Disorder is available. This disorder is rare in clinical settings, although it has been argued that some cases go unrecognized.”

Dr. Childress Comment: Yes, like here, it is going “unrecognized” here.

Course

“Without intervention, the course is usually chronic, because this disorder most commonly occurs in relationships that are long-standing and resistant to change. With separation from the primary case, the individual’s delusional beliefs disappear, sometimes quickly and sometimes quite slowly.”

Dr. Childress Comment: These are two incredibly important points. If we do not “interrupt the relationship with the primary case” then the situation continues to get worse, it’s chronic, it does not self-improve over time, it keeps getting worse and worse as long as the child is in contact with the “primary case” – the “inducer” – of the child’s persecutory delusion.

Dr. Childress, Comment: If, however, we separate the child from the primary case of the persecutory delusion, the allied parent, then the child’s “delusional beliefs will disappear,” “sometimes quickly” (High Road workshop augmented recovery), “sometimes quite slowly” (psychotherapy or no treatment).

—————

That is my diagnosis for this pathology, an encapsulated shared persecutory delusion, with the parent as the primary case – the “inducer” – who “gradually imposes the delusional system” on the child, “the more passive and initially healthy second person.” American Psychiatric Association; ICD-10 F24 Shared Psychotic Disorder.

Go argue with the American Psychiatric Association and the ICD-10, it’s them that says it, not me. If it fits, I sits.

Craig Childress, Psy.D.

Clinical Psychologist, PSY 18857