NPD do not co parent

😝 Narcissists don’t co-parent. They don’t want to fall in line and do the right thing. They don’t want to be held accountable, follow the rules and regulations, and don’t want to be harmonious. They don’t want to play on a team.

The only thing a narcissist is interested in – is narcissistic supply. This means, “I can affect other people significantly enough to know that I exist.” It’s the attention they crave more than anything else.

So, when you are attempting to co-parent with a narcissist, they are going to trigger you. They’re going to be uncooperative. They’re going to say one thing and do another. They will use the children as pawns, absolutely to trigger you to get a reaction, which means – I’m significant enough to affect you.

A narcissist wants to play games and use all of these tactics to punish you. How dare you leave them? Or how dare you try and get on with your life? Or how dare you tell other people what they are or how they behave? How dare you?

The false self can’t deal with that. So, punishing you by using the children as pawns is a very, very common tactic.

For an answer to all this – have a look at these resources –

Parallel Parenting – https://bit.ly/3bmz9ZO.

All People Co-Parenting With A Narcissist Needs These Tools – https://bit.ly/3k1maRd.

The Thriver’s Guide To Co-Parenting With A Narcissist – https://bit.ly/3k1HWnT.

Like so many other Thrivers – use the Narcissistic Abuse Recovery Program (NARP) to detox from the narcissist to give you the strength and empowerment to give yourself and your children a brighter future.

Full details of NARP can be found here – https://bit.ly/33bIGyY.

Much love xo ❤️

Intimate Truths by Kahlil Gibran

Your children are not your children.
They are the sons and daughters of Life’s longing for itself.
They come through you but not from you,
And though they are with you yet they belong not to you.

You may give them your love but not your thoughts,
For they have their own thoughts.
You may house their bodies but not their souls,
For their souls dwell in the house of tomorrow, which you cannot visit, not even in your dreams.
You may strive to be like them, but seek not to make them like you.
For life goes not backward nor tarries with yesterday.
You are the bows from which your children as living arrows are sent forth.
The archer sees the mark upon the path of the infinite, and He bends you with His might that His arrows may go swift and far.
Let your bending in the archer’s hand be for gladness;
For even as He loves the arrow that flies, so He loves also the bow that is stable.

~ Kahlil Gibran ~

Art by Janice Van Kronkhite

Craig Childress PsyD -APA

Oh boy, the APA has proposed new Guidelines for Child Custody Evaluations in Family Law Proceedings.

They are inviting “public comment” on a website they set up, I’ve got some comments.

They’re only allowing five comments in their five little boxes before they ratify the Guidelines and pass them.

Five’s not enough, there’s way more things wrong than just five. So I’ll be providing them with their five little box-comments, and then I’m doing a line-by-line analysis I’ll be posting to my website.

That’s going to be my first Comment – “See my line-by-line Commentary posted to my website.” Then I’ll give them my four most important critiques:

2) Violation to Principle D Justice

3) Violation to Standards 2.04 and 9.01 and failure in their duty to protect.

4) No inter-rater reliability, so they are not valid assessments of anything.

5) Harm to the client parent and child

If I’m the APA, I’d be worried about a class-action lawsuit with these Guidelines being the smoking gun for their collusion with and cover-up of unethical and negligent malpractice in the industry and practice of child custody evaluations.

And holy cow, if any child custody evaluator follows the Guidelines, they will become immensely vulnerable to a malpractice lawsuit on multiple counts. So that’s going to be kind of a problem for them.

I’m obviously available to testify in a malpractice or class-action lawsuit. I’m not a lawyer, I’m a psychologist, the lawyers need to do what lawyers do. My line-by-line Commentary on the proposed Guidelines for Child Custody Evaluations in Family Law Proceedings is likely to be helpful with that.

In the next day or two, I’ll be posting my little box-comments here on my Public Facebook page. Feel free to use any or all of my comments as your own in your comments to the APA.

Here we go, cowabunga baby.

There is a reason for the APA ethics code. Because unethical practice hurts people, like here.

If you believe the shared delusion, you are part of the shared delusion, you are part of the pathology. When that pathology is child abuse, you, the mental health person are part of the child abuse – you, the mental health person are the child abuser.

If you are a mental health person who is colluding with the psychological abuse of the child, you need to lose your license to practice.

Google ignorance: lack of information or knowledge

Google incompetence: inability to do something successfully; ineptitude.

Google negligence: failure to take proper care in doing something. Law: failure to use reasonable care, resulting in damage or injury to another.

It’s not my license on the line.

Listen to this from the Guidelines: “These guidelines endeavor to provide aspirational direction to those psychologists who are asked to perform child custody evaluations.”

“endeavor” – you either provide or you don’t… they try.

“aspirational direction” – absolutely nothing – these Guidelines provide absolutely nothing – wait – they endeavor to provide absolutely nothing. That’s their goal, we’ll see if they achieve providing “aspirational direction” to child custody evaluators who don’t know what they’re doing; i.e., are incompetent by definition of the English language.

From the Guidelines: “Many training programs offer at least limited forensic exposure to family law, and psychologists are asked to perform child custody evaluations with varying levels of supervised experience in this area.”

Oh good, that’s probably so reassuring to parents, your child custody evaluator may have at least limited training exposure to what they’re doing, with varying levels of supervised experience actually conducting assessments of family conflict.

So for all the child custody evaluators who are incompetent and don’t know what you’re doing, good news. A secret “Working Group” of forensic psychologists are providing you with “aspirational direction.”

Whew. Boy, I’m sure glad these child custody evaluators with at least some limited training and experience in assessing family conflict now have “aspirational direction” in conducting assessments they only have minimal training to conduct.

Oh my goodness, and what about all the child custody evaluators who do NOT have at least limited exposure to assessing court-involved family conflict? I guess the “aspirational direction” provided by the APA for their ignorance and incompetence will help tremendously.

Thanks APA for your endeavor to provide “aspirational direction” (absolutely nothing) for ignorant child custody evaluators in the conduct of child custody evaluations.

From the Guidelines: “These Guidelines provide general recommendations for psychologists who seek to increase their awareness, knowledge, and skills in performing child custody evaluations.”

Are the Guidelines providing “general recommendations” or aspirational direction? Why would competent child custody evaluators need “general recommendations.”

General recommendations: 1) do the right thing, make accurate decisions, don’t be biased. There, all solved. Things are so much better now. I guess that child custody evaluators just start doing evaluations without these aspirational directions, so they get lost and confused about what they’re doing.

It’s so useful to have these aspirational general recommendations for the ignorant child custody evaluators who only have limited (or no) training and experience in assessing family conflict.

Stay tuned – the Dr. Childress Five Comments to the Guidelines for Child Custody Evaluations in Family Law Proceedings are on their way here to my Public Facebook page – share to your heart’s content.

Followed by a line-by-line Commentary from Dr. Childress posted to my website.

It’s time.

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

Narcissistic Threat of Withdrawal of Love to kids is Abuse , Craig Childress PsyD

Ya wanna know how the allied narcissistic parent most powerfully controls the child – the contingent application and withdrawal of love.
If you don’t do what pleases me, I won’t love you anymore.  It’s a loyalty thing.  The allied narcissistic parent demands the child’s loyalty in completely rejecting the other parent.
Can you see the parallel process?  Can you see what happened to Jeff Sessions and Bill Barr – absolute loyalty is demanded or else you’re rejected – not just by the primary case – by the surrounding flying monkeys too – who attack you for being a RINO – gatekeeping what it means to be Republican – the “radicalization” of the Republican party.
Targeted parents… how many of you are familiar with your ex’s “alternative facts” that are simply lies?  Sound familiar?  Same pathology. 
The cult-mind won’t be able to see – the shared delusion cannot see itself, it is neurologically impossible (that’s what makes it a delusion).  For those who can see, use the example to learn the features of the pathogen.
It lies – not some of the time, all of the time.  It attacks threats of exposure with lies and slander.  It levies false allegations of abuse.  It is delusional – a shared persecutory delusion – ICD-10 F24.
It’s supposed to be a rare pathology – not so rare, I guess.  Just not diagnosed because that would typically be considered rude… but in this case, for child abuse and the overthrow of American democracy, I’ll make an exception – a shared persecutory delusion.
ICD-10 F24.  A real thing.
It’s a thought disorder created by unresolved trauma that leads to distortions to thought and perceptions.  The type of thought disorder is called a delusion – a fixed and false belief that is maintained despite contrary evidence. The type of delusion is called a persecutory delusion, a false belief in supposed “victimization.”
This is not political – many-many Republicans have said that the party left them – it’s become radicalized to the extreme far-right where they’re gatekeeping Moscow Mitch as not being loyal enough.
Just like with the allied parent and child, it’s not about truth, it’s about loyalty – the narcissist DEMANDS absolute loyalty – from Sessions, from Barr, from the child.  Disobedience from the control of the narcissistic parent… will be punished.
I love you ONLY if you submit to me… yikes, creepy.  Yeah, I know… it’s a ripple.
Craig Childress, Psy.D.Clinical Psychologist, PSY 18857