Narcissist Discard Their Children


Narcissists discard their children when they’ve been exposed for who they really are. In my experience outward appearances count for everything in the life of a narcissist. Narcissistic parents expect (in fact insist on) absolute loyalty from their children. A child may be well aware of his/her parents’ lying, cheating, and manipulative ways, but he/she is expected to remain “on side,” always. If the children dare to cross to the “other side,” and take a principled stand, they should be prepared for the inevitable outcome; alienation. A child will be treated with the same (or greater) contempt as anyone else outside the family who has dared to cross them. They will be made to suffer the consequences of exposure. After the perceived “injury,” narcissistic parents will set a deliberate course to rally as many “flying monkeys” as possible to their side, adeptly portraying themselves as victims of their children’s ungrateful, self-serving treatment of them. Their attempts to discredit their children to preserve their image will know no bounds. Accept that those who really know you will not be convinced, and those that don’t, simply don’t matter in the grand scheme of things. Supporting one another in our decision to go “no contact” with our parents has not only strengthened our relationship, but has also allowed us to heal together.

  • Joanne Hill, Hon B.A., B.Ed Psychology & Sociology (1984)

Much higher Numbers Affected

“Dr Carol Golly, a child and family psychotherapist, believes children can be damaged if contact with grandparents is stopped.
“Children who become cut off from grandparents with whom they enjoyed prior close relationships may have lifelong difficulties with trust, relationships, and emotional health,” she says, citing evidence that self-devaluation and relationship cut offs “may become an intergenerational pattern”.”

Childress on Writing Journal Articles

Writing Journal Articles

I’ve finished the first draft of my first article to submit for journal publication. It’s directed toward an Ethics journal. That’s where I’ll start.

I plan to write articles for submission to an Ethics journal, a Clinical Journal, and a Cultural psychology journal. Then I’ll come back to the Forensic journals after that, maybe.

Notice I haven’t written any journal articles yet. There’s a reason. Now it’s time. There will be about an 18-month lag time from my writing to their appearance in a peer-reviewed journal. I work ahead. In about a year or two, the arrival of these articles will be useful.

It’s not my job to educate them, they should already know – Standards 2.01 and 2.03 of the APA ethics code. They weren’t motivated to solve anything. We’ll see what we can do about that.

I’m coming for the licenses, I want their licenses revoked for being child abusers.

As a clinical psychologist, I am acting pursuant to my ethical obligations under Standard 1.05. The Standards of the APA ethics code are mandatory for all psychologists – ethical practice is not optional, it’s required.

Standard 1.05: “If an apparent ethical violation has substantially harmed or is likely to substantially harm a person or organization and is not appropriate for informal resolution under Standard 1.04, Informal Resolution of Ethical Violations , or is not resolved properly in that fashion, psychologists take further action appropriate to the situation.”

The conditional clauses of Standard 1.05 are met. What “further action” is appropriate to this situation? I will be providing parents with the information they need for their malpractice lawsuits against forensic psychologists for violations to Standards 2.04 and 9.01 of the APA ethics code, and for failure in their duty to protect obligations.

I am required by Standard 1.05 of the mandatory APA ethics code to “take further action appropriate to the situation.” There is a reason for ethical Standards. This is it. Unethical practice is the problem, the ethical Standards of the APA are the solution.

The forensic psychologists currently control the licensing boards, they review themselves and they all do the same thing. We will need to take this into the courts as malpractice litigation.

I want their license to practice revoked for participating in the psychological abuse of the child.

The lion is a stalking hunter. I’ve always known we would get here. I hoped we wouldn’t. I had to give them every opportunity to correct their actions and protect the child. They’ve had their time.

The savanna belongs to the parents, to the lions protecting their cubs, not to the jackals and hyenas. We’ll see what we can do about that.

I have fulfilled my due-diligence obligations each step of the way. I told the AFCC directly in 2017. I told the APA directly in 2018. I told the Trust malpractice insurance carrier in 2020 that this would be going into the courts by necessity.

I am now actively working as the expert witness on possible malpractice cases involving forensic psychologists. I will be the expert for the prosecution at their malpractice trial. I’m not here to make friends. I’m here to protect the child.

Why are they here?

I don’t like moving dark energies. Sometimes it’s necessary.

I have developed lines of questions for the cross-examination of testimony from forensic psychologists. I provide these lines of questions to attornesy when appropriate to the situation. The lines of questions have the goal of leading the forensic psychologists into openly acknowledging their unethical malpractice in their testimony, under oath, with a court reporter present.

The subsequent malpractice lawsuits become so much easier when the forensic psychologist admits to the malpractice under oath with a court reporter present. That’s my goal. We’ll see how successful I can be, I’m just getting started, I’m just coming out of the gates.

Give me about a year or so… we’ll see where we are at that point.

I’m also involved in other ways on these court cases seeking a more directly current resolution of the family conflict, but I also have an obligation to my clients to provide them with the documentation support they need for accountability with the forensic psychology people once the matter of direct concern is settled.

Attacking the license of another psychologist is a serious-serious undertaking. I don’t like moving dark energies, but sometimes it’s necessary. I have performed my due-diligence obligations every step of the way.

It’s necessary.

I’m anticipating this is going to be a professional bloodbath, at least that’s my goal. I’m hoping that sometime next year there will be a peer-reviewed article in an Ethics journal parents can use to support their malpractice lawsuits.

In the meantime, while the malpractice lawsuits formulate and emerge, licensing board complaints should fall like rain when they are warranted for ethical violations to Standards 2.04 and 9.01, and for failure in their duty to protect.

The weather’s changing, looks like rain.

Licensing Board Complaints

Make the forensic psychologists on the licensing boards cover-up their negligent and unethical practice over-and-over again on exactly the same grounds every time – violations to Standards 2.04 Bases of Scientific and Professional Judgments and 9.01 Bases for Assessment, and for failure in their duty to protect.

Then follow-up with your state legilative representative, asking them to look into the corruption and cover-up of the licensing boards for the unethical malpractice in forensic psychology.

Come together and fight for each other and each other’s children. If they did it to you, then they did the same thing to the parent and child before you, and they will do the same thing to the parent and child who follows – unless you stop them.

Movement made by one is movement by all. You are not alone. It’s time to let them hear your roar. The savanna belongs to the parents, these are your children, not theirs.

In the absence of child abuse, parents have the right to parent according to their cultural values, their personal values, and their religious values.

The only question to answer is… is there child abuse? – V995.51 Child Psychological Abuse, the creation of a shared persecutory delusion that then destroys the child’s attachment bond to the other parent.

Negligent Malpractice

I’m not from here. I’m not from this court-involved pathology world. Look at my vitae. I’m a trauma psychologist out of child abuse and foster care, I’m here to protect chidlren from child abusers.

Not from the other parent, they’re just pathological. It’s the child abusing forensic psychologists I’m after. The betrayers – the ones who should protect… and don’t. The ones who particpate in psychologically abusing the child because of their ignorance, incompetence, and unethical practice.

I want their license to practice revoked for participating in the psychological abuse of the child. That’s my goal. We’ll see how successful I can be in a couple of years. I’m just starting, Covid and chaos are ending and we are reemerging into the world in 2022, and I’m not going anywhere. By 2024, this should be interesting.

I’m on the savanna now, I’m in the courts as a testifying expert witness. I will meet them in the courts. I read their reports. I write my reports about their reports. I don’t think they’ll like being peer-reviewed by Dr. Childress. It’s likely to be a surprising event in their world, to have their report peer-reviewed by Dr. Childress.

I read my reports about their reports. I don’t think they’ll like my reports. I’m not here to make friends. I’m here to protect the child from the child abusers.

Do you hear that rustling in the grasses? They don’t. When you see the lion, the hunt is already over.

So that’s what I’ll be doing to round out my professional career.

I’m peer-review from clinical psychology of their professional practices. The standards of practice in forensic psychology are substantially beneath those of clinical psychology. I suspect they’re in for a surprise.

In a year or so I’m anticipating I’ll be standing on hill made from their bones, at least that’s my goal. We’ll see how successful I can be.

Child Abuse

In clinical psychology, we abide by the Standards of the APA ethics code… but forensic psychologists do something different. They don’t abide by the ethical Standards of practice mandated by the APA.

They’ll even testify that forensic psychology is different. That’s their downfall but they don’t comprehend that yet. They will.

Clinical psychologists comply with the ethical Standards of the APA ethics code. Forensic psychologists do something different, they don’t comply with the ethical Standards of the APA.

Clinical psychologists diagnose child abuse and fulfill their duty to protect obligations. Clinical psychologists protect children from child abuse.

Forensic psychologists do something different. They don’t diagnose child abuse and they don’t protect the child. Instead, forensic psychologists particpate in the psychological abuse of the child. That represents a prominent failure in their duty to protect obligations.

Google negligence: failure to take proper care in doing something.

Did they conduct a proper risk assessment for possible Child Psychological Abuse (DSM-5 V995.51)? Did they conduct a proper assesment for a possible delusional thought disorder in the parent imposed on the child, a shared persecutory delusion?

I am stone-cold serious, look at me. I’m not a happy psychologist. I am going after their license to practice for being a child abuser – the betrayer, the one who should protect… and doesn’t.

Dr. Childress becomes very unhappy when people abuse my children, and all children are my children. Dr. Childress becomes especially unhappy when the child abusers are other psychologists. That is not okay.

I’ve hired an assistant to help me get my articles into APA format and submitted to various journals, and then to track the submissions through journal rejections until we find its location.

That way I can remain focused on my task at-hand.

If they change, then they admit that I am right – about everything – including their current and prior unethical practice and their collusion with child abuse.

If they don’t change, then they await the malpractice lawsuits that are coming for violations to Standards 2.04 and 9,01 of the APA ethics code, and for their negligent failure in their duty to protect obligations.

It’s called a double-bind, either way they are in trouble. You parents are familar with double-binds, the no-win situations that surround you no matter which way you turn.

Double-binds are abundant surrounding you, it’s a feature of trauma pathology. I know. I’m a trauma psycyhologist. This is my pathology. I’m reorganizing things, shifting around a lot of things to their proper locations.

It’s what I do. I’m a clinical psycholgist. We do something different. We create change, and we know exactly how to do that.


I’ll be turning to my YouTube channel next. It’s time to unload that Internet medium of communication. Everyone is currently using it to upload information. I’m not going to use it that way. I’m a clinical psychologist, I do something different.

It’s a communication medium. Can psychotherapeutic change agents be delivered using the Internet communcation medium of YouTube? I suspect they can. Not your typical change agents we use in our day-to-day face-to-face therapy work, but I think there’s change agents appropriate to this new medium of communication.

Let’s find out.

I’m planning to organize the information into various lines because I will be doing various things directed to various audiences. I’m anticipating that the structure of the information sets will gradually unfold as the lines take shape.

I’m an Internet psychologist. I’m the first. Wheee. No one’s ever done this before. How many other psychologists have solved everything about child custody conflict in the courts? No one. How may other psychologists have killed an entire field of psychology? No one.

I think I’m the goat of clinical psychologists. Now I’m going where no one has gone before – I’ll be exploring if the Internet commucation medium of YouTube can be used to deliver psychotherapeutic change-agents.

I need an outcome measure. How about we use the fall of forensic psychology? That sounds like a good outcome.

I’m going to start my YouTube channel by answering your questions. If you have a question for Dr. Childress, send it to I don’t need your story, I know your story, what’s your question? I’ll know your story by your question.

A question ends with a ? thing. Your stories don’t.

If you have that question, so do a lot of other people, and once things are posted to YouTube they remain for everyone. The information sets build. Let’s get busy.

It’s time to take this Internet thing out for a spin and see what it can do. You just have to know your medium, don’t think flat-lander, the Intenet is way different – know the limitations and use the advantages.

The world is changing – because we are changing it – because it needs to change.

Craig Childress, Psy.D.
Clinical Psychologist, CA PSY 18857

Childress on pathology

“I don’t diagnose pathology.”

That is the most ridiculous things I’ve ever heard a licensed mental health person say. What do you think the license is for? Honest to god…

Look, seriously, you are a licensed mental health professional who is – licensed – by the state to do exactly that, diagnose and treat pathology. If you don’t diagnose pathology, who does, a plumber?

If so, can you refer me to a plumber to diagnose the pathology because we need a diagnosis. This could be a diagnosis of Child Psychological Abuse (DSM-5 V995.51), i.e., a shared persecutory delusion created in the child by the distorted parenting of the allied parent.

We need to find out if that pathology is present or absent, we need a diagnosis… and if you don’t diagnose pathology… then you’re pretty useless, aren’t you. Who does?

Because if you don’t diagnose pathology then there is absolutely no point in having you involved as a mental health person, because that’s what we need, a diagnosis for the treatment plan.

A plumber doesn’t diagnose pathology, nor does a school teacher. Who does? Hmmm, let me think… a licensed mental health professional? But just not you because you’re pretty useless.

We don’t need a plumber to fix the family conflict either. We need a diagnosis.

Who should I go to for a diagnosis if not a licensed mental health professional? Ask them. If they say this ridiculous thing to you, ask them who you SHOULD go to for a diagnosis, who would that be? I’d be curious what answer they’d give you… maybe they’d respond with just a blank stare.

Early in my training, way early, I was told by my mentor to always-always put a diagnosis.

Even if there is no diagnosis, there’s a diagnostic code for No Diagnosis, V71.09 No Diagnosis on Axis 1, that’s what you put when there is no diagnosis. Always put a diagnosis, even when there’s no diagnosis. Do you know why?

Malpractice. To start treating something before you’ve diagnosed what it is would be malpractice, and to conduct an assessment without a identifying the problem (diagnosing the pathology), even if it’s No Diagnosis (V71.09), would be malpractice.

How do you know what you’re treating if you have no diagnosis? That’s why I was told to always-always give a diagnosis, because otherwise is is automatically a misdiagnosis, which becomes the foundations for the malpractice, i.e., a negligent misdiagnosis because of an inadequate assessment.

There’s a second reason to identify no diagnosis, V71.09 No Diagnosis on Axis 1, it documents that you looked. Without that diagnosis of No Diagnosis, did you even look for a possible psychiatric disorder?

Here’s the rule-of-thumb regarding documentation in a medical record, if it’s not documented it didn’t happen.

Did you assess for a possible Bipolar Disorder, or possible ADHD? Unless you indicate you did, you didn’t. Did you assess for Generalized Anxiety Disorder and for Oppositional Defiant Disorder? Unless you say you did, you didn’t.

If it’s not in the patient’s medical record, it didn’t happen. So… document what you did and the outcome. If I conducted an assessment for possibly the relevant psychiatric disorders and there were no psychiatric disorders present… then I say so, 71.09 No Diagnosis on Axis I.

Otherwise… according to my chart… if I have nothing then I never even assessed for any possible psychiatric disorders. Document, document, document. If it’s not in the medical record, it didn’t happen.

If the patient says they are depressed, document that you asked about suicide. If they report any suicidal ideation, document that you conducted a proper risk assessment for suicide and its outcome.

When I say there is No Diagnosis, I’m saying I looked. But if I never even looked… that could be negligent malpractice.

That’s why I was told by my mentor as I entered clinical training, always-always give a diagnosis – protect yourself.

“I don’t diagnose pathology” is the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard from a mental health professional. Who does then? Please tell me because I need a referral to that architect or school teacher, because we need a diagnosis.

“I don’t diagnose pathology.” That is insane.

If I’m a lawyer on TV and this is my episode, I’d get them to say that first thing – “I don’t diagnose pathology” – and they’ll say it all proud like jt’s a good thing – they don’t “pathologize” people. I’d let them swell-up into their delusional beliefs.

They’re the guest star on the episode and I want to give them their moment, before….

Then I’d ask them, “Do you mean like schizophrenia, if one parent had schizophrenia, you wouldn’t diagnose that and wouldn’t tell the judge that one parent was psychotic and had schizophrenia?” I suspect they’ll begin to see the problem and back-track a little,

“Well, something like that I’d definitely diagnose and include it in my report, but there was no schizophrenia.”

What about a delusional disorder, is that a diagnosis you’d diagnose and tell the court about, or is that something you’d ignore and withhold from the court? Ouch, the words are getting sharper.

Is there a diagnosis of V995.51 Child Psychological Abuse on page 719 of the DSM-5? Is that a diagnosis you would diagnose, or is that a diagnosis you would ignore and withhold from the court?

So you do diagnose pathology sometimes, but you don’t diagnose pathology other times, sometimes you report relevant diagnostic information to the courts and sometimes you withhold relevant diagnostic information from the courts, based on how you feel, is that what you’re saying?

Oh, I see, if it’s relevant you’ll make the diagnosis and tell the court, but if you believe it’s not relevant then you withhold the diagnostic information from the courts, is that what you’re saying? That you decide what is relevant and non-relevant information for the court’s consideration, and then you tell the court what you think is important for the court to hear, and you withhold information that you decide is not important?

Is a diagnosis of a shared persecutory delusion relevant for the court’s consideration? Is a diagnosis of Child Psychological Abuse relevant to the court’s consideration?

“I don’t diagnose pathology.” That’s the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard. Too bad I only play a lawyer on TV, just lemme at that nonsense. Then how do you know what you’re treating if you don’t make a diagnosis – is it cancer or diabetes?

“I don’t diagnose pathology” from a mental health professional… if you hear that, just start laughing, just laugh, and laugh, and laugh as you turn around and walk out the door.

Go find yourself a good plumber or school teacher to diagnose what’s going on, because we need a diagnosis. Is it child abuse? Is there a shared persecutory delusion?

Please, someone… is there a doctor in the house? A rodeo clown? A lawyer? Who diagnoses pathology? Because whoever that profession is, that’s who we need and it’s obviously not you… so that makes you’re pretty pointless, doesn’t it.

Frontal lobe deficits in linear-logical reasoning, they actually say this stuff with a straight face. That’s where my TV lawyer guy would let the forensic mental health person swell on their first answer -“I don’t diagnose pathology” – all proud of themselves like that’s a good thing. Give the week’s guest star their moment before the dramatic collapse on the witness stand.

Okay then… would you diagnose schizophrenia if a parent had schizophenia, do you think the court should know that a parent has schizophrenia? How about a delusional disorder? What is a persecutory delusion? What is a shared persecutory delusion? Would creating a shared persecutory delusion in the child that then destroyed the child’s attachment bond to the other parent be a diagnosis of Child Psychological Abuse?

Would that be relevant for the court to know?

TV-lawyer: Hypothetically speaking, just a hypothetical question, doctor, purely hypothetical not related to this case at all… if… IF… a psychologist missed making a child abuse diagnosis because they failed to conduct a proper risk assessment, could that become negligent malpractice?

I’d use “could” if I was the TV-lawyer guy because of course it “could”, it’s a less strict word as “would” – could it? Yes, of course it could. But what do I know about asking questions, I’m just a psychologist. I’m not a real TV-lawyer guy.

“Did you order the Code Red! Did you order the Code Red?” – looks fun.

Honest to god, stupid pathogen. It comes from an inhibition to the frontal lobe executive function systems for linear-logical reasoning, along with deficits in foresight and planning ahead, and in self-reflective insight.

Linear-logical reasoning – find the point of illogic and stay linear on the question line with yes-no questions. The pathogen will want to escape into associational-emotional thinking, don’t let it, remain on yes-no questions – linear and logical. This will tie it up in knots when it reaches the thought-diorder part of the illogic.

Foresight and planning ahead – The pathogen doesn’t., they are very now-reactive. They won’t know the package is arriving until it’s at their doorstep, no foresight.

Because they are entirely now-reactive with no forsight, they will say what seems best in the moment. This will lead them into making contradictory statements in different contexts. Once they start contradicting themselves, put their own statements side-by-side and ask them to reconclie the contradiction.

Self-reflective insight – they have none. They are arrogant and overly inflated with the self-importance of their opinions. They think they’re important… just because. Everytime you expose them, you create a narcsisistic injury.

Be careful, they may try to retaliate using their power. That should never-never happen. But it does. Be careful.

They can’t because it’s illogical. The licensed mental health person who says, “I don’t diagnose pathology” is illogical – of course you do, that’s your training, that’s what the license is for. Honest to god…

They have to testify and testimony is all about linear lines of questions. They could be in trouble if their thinking isn’t as linear-and-logical as the line of questions.

They don’t diagnose pathology… well, that makes you pretty irrelevant then, doesn’t it, because that’s what we need. If we need our Tarot cards read, we’ll be sure to think of you.

Craig Childress, Psy.D.
Clinical Psychologist, CA PSY 18857

Devastating Effects of Parental Alienation on Children

Millions of children have been the victims of parental alienation, in which one parent turns them against the other without cause. New research highlights the long-lasting effects.

Parental Alienation – Science and Law

The two authors William Bernet and Demosthenes Lorandos will be interviewed tonight January 27, 2022 Forwarded information by Lena Hellblom Sjögren from Family Access – Fighting for Children´s Rights Families Divided TV Airs Tonite @ 9 PM EST! Dr. William Bernet and Dr. Demosthenes Lorandos!! Please Join Us! Family Access – Fighting for Children’s Rights […]

Parental Alienation – Science and Law

Sherrie Campbell: Independence from Toxic Family

If you do anything to demonstrate a willful desire to be independent and separate from toxic family members, you will be threatened financially, threatened with emotional abandonment, and saturated with accusations coming your way about what a horrible person you are.

This type of coercive treatment from your family will leave you feeling shocked and disgusted at how low your family members will go to keep you dependent upon them.

When you stand against their manipulation and all those who remain complicit to your abuse, you will undoubtedly go through of time of great loss and confusion. You will also feel a certain sense of liberation. Over time and with much healing, you will see that there was no real loss when you have regained the full rights to your life. The time of pain and confusion is what leads you to this wisdom.

Childress : it is child abuse ; it is abuse of partner thru child

I want to make a recommendation to Dorcy Pruter.

Hi Dorcy, I want to talk to you personally so I thought I’d post it to my Public Facebook page, you’ll understand why.

I recommend you take the 4-day seminar from PESI by Bessel van der Kolk with an added bonus hour of Ed Tronick. Take if for Ed, you’ll love Bessel… but you’ll love Ed more.

You don’t actually need to know this stuff because you already do. I know you do because it’s the same thing you say and do. I just think you should have the scientific support available for what you say and do.

You’re not a psychologist, duh, so there’s no requirement… there will be for them though, the psychologists. I’m going to be looking for this seminar in my vitae reviews of forensic psychologists. You already know the material, but you should be aware of the scientific support you have in what you say, and for what you do.

To everyone else… What Dorcy Pruter tells you is accurate and correct. It’s backed up by the state-of-the-art scientific knowledge. I know. I’ve known van der Kolk and Tronick for decades.

I’m a trauma psychologist out of foster care. I had a sexy poster of Bessel hanging on my bedroom wall as a kid. I know this information and always have since I’ve been here in the court-involved family conflict.

Dorcy has too, she just hadn’t read the books, and she’s not a psychotherapist – thank god. But you see how I hold my professional colleagues to task for their knowledge and competence. Dorcy meets and exceeds my standards.

Ms. Pruter and the Conscious Co-Parenting Institute have my full support. She’s not a psychologist, she’s is a businesswoman and family coach, successful at both. I am a clinical psychologist, we do different things. I am well familiar with the professional work of Dorcy Pruter, it is excellent. What she says is accurate and correct.

I have twice co-presented with her at professional organizations, at the AFCC national convention in 2017, and at the APA national convention in 2019. There’s a reason.

I have personally reviewed the Higher Purpose Parenting course curriculum and it has my full endorsement and support. No parenting skills you learn will work if you don’t use them. If you use the parenting skills taught in Higher Purpose Parenting, the skills will be successful. I consider the Higher Purpose Parenting curriculum to be the only trauma-informed parenting curriculum available.

I am familiar with the research methodology used in compiling data for the Custody Resolution Method. The qualitative research methodology used in the Custody Resolution Method, called “coding”, is a standard, reliable, and valid research methodology.

I have personally reviewed the protocol for the 4-day High Road workshop, and I have personally observed all four days of the workshop. I understand how it achieves its consistent and remarkable success. The High Road workshop is effective and gentle, the kids love the workshop and love Dorcy.

I have also received a client into my private practice from the High Road workshop for follow-up care. The High Road workshop obtained a full and complete recovery of the 15 year-old adolescent from three years of documented child psychological abuse – documented by three separate psychologists.

When the High Road workshop is available for the resolution of child psychological abuse, the High Road workshop is my first recommendation.

Ms. Pruter is a family and parenting coach of skill, accomplishment, and knowledge. When she entered the field of court-involved family conflict, she studied and learned about the pathology, her profession, and her craft in creating effective solutions. Her body of professional work is both remarkable and highly successful in solving the pathology surrounding court-involved child custody conflict.

Ms. Pruter is the most experienced professional working with court-involved child custody conflict. We all need support. Bessel van der Kolk and Ed Tronick provide Dorcy with all the support she needs. You need to take Bessel’s four-day course, Dorcy – for the support it provides.

I know trauma and child abuse. I know van der Kolk and Tronick and more. I know Kohut and self psychology, Dorcy doesn’t even know she’s a Kohutian, but she is. I know the work of Dorcy Pruter and the Conscious Co-Parenting Institute, Ms. Pruter’s work is excellent, everything she says is true and correct, and scientifically supported.

Dorcy is offering a Facebook group, the Chosen Parent Collective. My recommendation for parents is to join the Collective and acquire as much knowledge and wisdom from Dorcy as you can. Everything she says is accurate and correct.

I’d recommend that mental health professionals also listen to Ms. Pruter’s consultation. She’s not a mental health professional – thank goodness – everything she says is true and accurate. She is the most experienced professional working in the family court system in recovering children from complex trauma and child psychological abuse.

If Ms. Pruter is involved on any matter where I’m a consultant, I would consider Ms. Pruter part of my treatment team, the trauma recovery specialist on the team. We’d want a family systems therapist for the maintenance care and family therapy. I’d want Dorcy’s input and consultation throughout.

Bowlby – Minuchin – Beck – were the first three points on the line. I used them for the structure of Foundations. But van der Kolk and complex trauma, and Tronick and child development, are at the core of the pathology and its solution.

I will be opening them next, their information and their knowledge, and applying it. Parents don’t need to take this course… I’d recommend it for all humans. Knowledge is a good thing, especially knowledge about children.

So I’d recommend parents take this 4-day seminar from Bessel van der Kolk… and the bonus from Ed Tronick. Or obtain the same information in a more accessible form through Dorcy Pruter. We use different words for the same constructs, I like her words better.

Porges and the vagal nervous system, van der Kolk on complex trauma and child abuse, Tronick on connection and the dyadic state of consciousness in childhood and in all of us – this is not new information. It’s 20 years old.

I first became aware of Porges, van der Kolk, and Tronick, around 2004. I know this information, I’ve known it for the past 20 years. The problem is not that we don’t know what the pathology is and what to do about it… the problem is you don’t listen.

I’ll be awakening “forensic” psychology to their obligations under Standard 2.04 and 9.01, the Bases for Scientific and Professional Judgments and Bases for Assessment. This will extend into Standard 2.01 Boundaries of Competence that would be evidenced on their vitae.

In my review of a psychologist’s vitae, I will note the presence or absence of this 4-day training from Bessel van der Kolk through PESI as evidence of professional competence under Standard 2.03,

2.03 Maintaining Competence
Psychologists undertake ongoing efforts to develop and maintain their competence.

As we move into solutions, it is time to address another required ethical Standard of the American Psychological Association, Standard 2.03 Maintaining Competence.

Standard 2.04 – Standard 9.01 – Standard 2.01 – Standard 2.03 – mandatory for all psychologists. There are reasons for ethical standards of practice. There are avenues to redress grievances.

I’m an old guy like Bessel. We know the field. We know the barriers in professional ignorance, apathy, and sloth. It’s part of the pathology in our collective culture of child abuse.

You, the mental health people… are insane.

It needs to end. We will end it because it must end – we never abandon a single child to child abuse, not in my world, not where I come from. The world is changing – because we are changing it – because it needs to change.

This is child abuse. This is spousal abuse using the child as the weapon. It needs to stop. Now.

Craig Childress, Psy.D.
Clinical Psychologist, CA PSY 18857