I have tried to change my site to CPA , and will need help doing so.
I’m self taught , with some help from friends on all things computer
Am I clear? I want to be entirely clear. I agree with the American Psychiatric Association.
I’m an old-school conservative clinical psychologist. I apply knowledge, I don’t create it.
The Gardnerian PAS “experts” are a rag-tag group of misfit toys. Am I being vague? I don’t want to be vague, I want to be clear.
They reject the diagnostic guidance of the American Psychiatric Association – they think the APA is wrong and that they know more about diagnosis than the APA – and they reject the ethical guidance of the American Psychological Association – they think ethical standards don’t apply to them.
They’re wrong, they do. Ethical Standards of practice are mandatory. Ethical practice is not optional, it is required.
In 2013 the American Psychiatric Association made its determination on the diagnostic construct of “parental alienation” with the publication of the DSM-5. They said no – the APA said there is no such thing as “parental alienation”. For all professionals, that’s the end of it. That’s the end of the discussion. The APA said no, it does not exist as a diagnostic entity.
I agree 100% with the American Psychiatric Association. The construct of “parental alienation” is the worst diagnostic model for a pathology ever constructed since the beginning of time. It is awful, absolutely awful in so many ways.
The American Psychiatric Association is right. I agree with the American Psychiatric Association, there is no such thing as “parental alienation” – Childress, year 1.
The Gardnerian PAS “experts” assert that the APA is wrong. They assert that they know more about diagnosis and pathology than the American Psychiatric Association does, and they CONTINUE to use a diagnostic construct that does NOT exist in professional psychology.
In continuing to use the construct of “parental alienation” in a professional capacity, the Gardnerian PAS “experts” substantially degrade the quality of mental health services in the family courts.
The Gardnerian PAS “experts” are a fringe group of professionals who reject the diagnostic guidance of the American Psychiatric Association and the ethical guidance of the American Psychological Association.
Meanwhile, the forensic custody evaluators in the family courts are ignorant, incompetent, and unethical – and no one cares. They are simply financially exploiting the parent while solving nothing.
We need a pilot program for the family courts with university involvement for evaluation research to develop standardized high-quality diagnostic assessment and treatment protocols.
Amicus Letter for CA SB-331
Risk Assessment Handout
Craig Childress, Psy.D.
Clinical Psychologist, CA PSY 18857