Addition 16 – Psychiatry’s Syndromes; To Negate/Allow Child Abuse
Psychiatry is not an exact science.
Hale LJ in R (B) v Ashworth Hospital Authority (2005)
Psychiatry: An imprecise science
The late Dr Patrick McGrath, for many years physician superintendent at Broadmoor Hospital, once said that half of his patients could be discharged, but the problem is knowing which half.

What Is Bizarre Delusional Psychosis?
Refers to delusion that is implausible or bizarre.
Author’s note: Authorities insinuate that parental “mental illness” is an invisible shield, which, by their argument, makes that parent’s child un-abusable by another parent. The Authorities, court personnel etc. immediately have a dismissive attitude concerning the child’s welfare upon hearing the words “parental mental illness” from any source, including an accused child abuser, when child abuse has been reported. Authorities abandon child abuse investigations, minimises indicators of child abuse and negates any child abuse warning signs.
The opposite is in fact true. A child who has a “disabled” protector, becomes an ideal target for any child abuser, whether it be another parent or a stranger. That is why the child sex abuser’s specific aim is to debilitate or remove the child’s protector, who is not in agreement with the abuse. This is a simple strategy which enables easier access to the child, enables more control over the child which will ultimately provide more safety for the abuser. That is why, in many reported family child abuse cases, the child abuse reporting protective parent will also disclose having been abused.
Authorities do not see red when an accused child abuser mentions “mental illness” of another person to negate the child abuse accusation. Authorities instead “jump on a new hobby horse” to attack the protective parent.

Case Studies:

Father pleads guilty to avoid death row after rape, murder of teen daughter

Roberta Allen, a domestic violence victim, was described by Santa Clara Country Family court and child protection services as an unfit mother who had battled with depression.
The Santa Clara County Family court judge awarded the father with his lengthy criminal record custody of his kids. It came to an abrupt end when the father, Mark Mesiti, 49, admitted to drugging, sexually abusing and killing his 14-year-old daughter. He killed her less than a year after being awarded custody of her and her brother by Superior Court Judge Vincent J. Chiarello, who was aware of Mesiti’s criminal record. Mesiti sedated his daughter, Mesiti photographed or videotaped more about 40 sexual assaults against her. He also admitted to felony sexual assault counts against two other girls. One was 8 years old; the other was 16 and 17.
IN IDAHO Zachary’s mother is in a mental hospital.
It is suspected that 14 year old Zachary Neagle and his sister were repeatedly sexually abused by their father. A relative reportedly told police he found child pornography on a computer in the Neagle home showing children as young as 8 or 9 engaged in sexual acts.
Zachary called 911 from the house, saying, “My dad’s been shot.” He initially told police he was in his room listening to music when he heard a shot. Jason S. Neagle, 32, Caldwell, died at his home on May 16, 2009. Zachary has been charged with the murder of his father.

The Parental Alienation Syndrome excuse:

Author’s note: This syndrome is regularly utilised by Family/Youth Court personnel as a “punishable crime” on protective parents and their children. Examples of utilisation is: When a protective parent or a child reports parental abuse to authorities. Similar to the use of “mental illness” claims, “parental alienation” claims are used to dismiss the child abuse report. Irregardless of the burden of evidence and testimonies, the Family/Youth Court personnel issue orders that the protective parent’s time with their child be minimised, supervised or that they have no contact.
In most cases full control of the child is handed to the accused abusive parent. A mindset which is saying, “we consider you having reported child abuse an attempt to alienate a parent and now, by the anarchy and vindictiveness of ‘our justice’, you will be completely alienated from your child for life”. The Family/Youth Court in turn not only orders the execution of parental alienation on the protective parent, but also ensures unequal/full control to the executioner – the accused abuser. The accused abuser is of course of such character that they have no problem obeying and even amplifying such an “order”.

The Guardian Ad Litem Scandals- Over 58,000 Children are Court Ordered to live with Abusers and Pedophiles
OVER 58,000 children are Court Ordered every year to live with the Abuser.
Contact: Joyanna Silberg, PhD, Executive Vice President
tel: (410) 938-4974 or email Joyanna Silberg
According to a conservative estimate by experts at the Leadership Council on Child Abuse and Interpersonal Violence (LC), more than 58,000 children a year are ordered by court judges into unsupervised contact with physically or sexually abusive parents following divorce in the United States. This is over twice the yearly rate of new cases of childhood cancer.
Experts at the LC consider the crisis in our family courts to constitute a public health crisis. Once placed with an abusive parent or forced to visit, children will continue to be exposed to parental violence and abuse until they reach 18. Thus, we estimate that half a million children will be affected in the US at any point of time. Many of these children will suffer physical and psychological damage which may take a lifetime to heal. The Leadership Council urges citizens to work with legislators and agencies in their communities to examine this problem, review state agency policies and procedures, and develop legislative and policy solutions that help ensure safety from violence for children following divorce.
In 2009, Sacks, [a mother who lost custody of her children after reporting child molestation by the father] appealed her case and wrote a 112-page Supreme Court petition that was denied in 2011. “I tried everything I could to fight for my children,” Sacks said. [The alleged molester were given full custody of their two daughters and Sacks only 1 hour visitation per month.]
When a family court judge gave California mother Cindy Dumas only supervised visits with her children, she took her fight to the streets. “I told the judge I would continue protesting every week outside family court if she didn’t let me have my kids back unsupervised,” said Dumas. “After one year of that, (the judge) relented and made the deal for me to stop going public, so I stopped and got my kids for unsupervised visits. But still I had no legal custody.”
A New York mother, ordered almost eight years ago to have no contact with her then- 10-year-old daughter after making a report of alleged abuse, told me she is too afraid of her ex-husband and the U.S. family court system to speak publicly about her case. “What the average American doesn’t understand is that these children are hostages.”
This is the fifth in a series of articles for Daily Kos about the treatment of molested and abused children in the U.S. family court system. M.C. Moewe is a former criminal justice and investigative reporter for several newspapers with a B.A. in journalism from the University of North Texas. Email m AT or use this link.
Court Judge Forces Young Wolferts Sisters Back to Allegedly Abusive Father
Friday, April 01, 2016
By Hope Loudon, Speakout | News Analysis
The Wolferts sisters, Danielle and Sydney (ages 15 and 16), ran away during visitation with their mother on July 17, 2014, after reporting abuse by their father and then remained in hiding until found with their mother on January 3, 2016. They have been held without charges in a Utah juvenile detention center, known as Slate Canyon, for more than three months, during which Child Protective Services substantiated their allegations of father Brian Wolferts’ emotional abuse, but failed to substantiate allegations of physical abuse due to insufficient evidence. The sisters have been ordered to return to his custody against their will as of March 23, 2016. Danielle and Sydney and their 20-year-old sister Brittany were prepared to testify to the alleged abuse and their custody preferences, but were prevented from speaking, due to a motion filed by their allegedly abusive father. Judge Bartholomew’s response to the motion states: “It is not in the best interest of the parties’ minor children to testify as to their custody preference.”
A day after 7-year-old Kayden’s body was found – fatally beaten by her father in the final, violent act of a years long custody dispute – Kayden’s death left her family reeling, her Bucks County school numb, and others wondering if law enforcement or the court system should or could have responded differently.
Before he killed his daughter and himself in his Manayunk home last weekend, Jeffrey Mancuso penned a vengeful note that he left on Kayden’s body, according to Giglio. “It said we got what we deserved and he had the final say — something along those lines,” she said.
The order noted that Kayden personally witnessed her father’s violent behavior when he was frustrated or angry. It also recounted Mancuso’s assault conviction for biting off part of a man’s ear at a South Philadelphia bar in 2012, his abusive interaction with Kayden’s teacher and principal at her Lower Makefield Township school, and a psychiatrist’s conclusion that he suffered from major depression.
“My sister (Kayden’s mother) would never have given her to him” except for the judge’s order, Heather Giglio said. “She was legally told she had to.”
In 2011, Peter Jamison wrote an article entitled, “California Family Courts Helping Pedophiles, Batterers Get Child Custody,” for the San Francisco Weekly examining this phenomenon.  One story covered in Jamison’s expose was that of a protective mother, Joyce Murphy, who suspected in 2003 that her ex-husband, Henry “Bud” Parsons, was molesting their daughter. For the next five years, the court treated Murphy like the perpetrator, referring to her as “crazy” and suggesting she was putting these thoughts in her daughter’s head as part of a campaign of parental alienation.
When the court refused to keep her daughter away from her ex-husband, Murphy fled the state, only to be arrested for kidnapping her daughter, which resulted in her ex-husband gaining sole custody of the child. Finally, in 2008, Parsons was arrested for charges including child molestation, sex with a child, and creating child pornography. One of the judges in the case was DeAnn Salcido, who had ruled against Murphy. In time after leaving the bench Judge Salcido saw the error of her ways. A report on Salcido’s mea culpa described what happened:
“From the moment she arrived in family court as a new judge, she says, she was advised by veterans of the system to disbelieve accusations of child or spousal abuse arising in divorces. ‘I was basically told to be suspect of anyone claiming abuse,’ she says. ‘I had senior judges telling me, “Be suspect. The dad probably has a new girlfriend, and the mom’s upset.”’ The concept of parental alienation, she says, arose in private discussions ‘all the time’ among court officials who espoused it.”

Parental Alienation – BBC News – Victoria Derbyshire (10:43)

Making Divorce Pay

Among the most controversial concepts in family court is the term Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS), coined by the psychiatrist Richard Gardner. Among other things, this concept holds that one parent will plant false memories of abuse and molestation in their child as a means of alienating the other parent from the child.
Parental Alienation Syndrome is not listed in the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems produced by the World Health Organisation, nor does it appear in the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.
Richard Gardner, who committed suicide in 2003, [note: rumoured to have stabbed himself to death] is a pedophilia sympathiser. Gardner’s extreme statements on pedophilia is for example, “The determinant as to whether the experience will be traumatic (for the child) is the social attitude toward these encounters,” Gardner wrote in his book, True and False Accusations of Abuse; “there is a certain amount of pedophilia in all of us.” He also wrote, “pedophilia has been considered the norm by the vast majority of individuals in the history of the world.” (When the norm is pedophiles are considered monsters by the vast majority of individuals.)
In a contentious child custody dispute in the suburbs of Pittsburgh a few years ago, three teenage boys begged a family court judge not to force them to continue visits to their father because, they said, he was physically abusive towards them. Rather than believe the boys, the judge relied on the testimony of an expert witness retained by the father, a Columbia University professor of clinical psychiatry, Richard A. Gardner.
Gardner insisted the boys were lying as a result of brainwashing by their mother and recommended something he called “threat therapy” [note: actually coercion]. Essentially, the Grieco boys were told they should be respectful and obedient on visits to their father and, if they were not, their mother would go to jail. Shortly afterwards, 16-year-old Nathan Grieco, the eldest of the brothers, hanged himself in his bedroom, leaving behind a diary in which he wrote that life had become an “endless torment”. Both Gardner and the court were unrepentant even after the suicide, and it was only after an exposé in the local newspaper that custody arrangements for the two surviving boys were changed to the mother.
Gardner’s “threat therapy” was part of a much broader theory of Gardner’s known in family courts across the United States as “Parental Alienation Syndrome”.
The theory – one of the most insidious pieces of junk science to be given credence by US courts in recent years – holds that any mother who accuses her spouse of abusing the children is lying more or less by definition. She tells these lies to “alienate” the children from their father, a shocking abrogation of parental responsibility for which she deserves to lose all custody rights in favour of the alleged abuser.
Pedophiles use ‘junk’ theory to win custody
Pedophiles around Australia may be escaping punishment and retaining custody of their young children by evoking a questionable psychological condition.
The condition, Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS), undermines a child’s complaint of sexual abuse by claiming it is the result of one parent’s influence.
It is cited in Family Court custody battles, and can play a part in a parent accused of sexual abuse, usually a father, getting custody.
It is argued that a child’s complaint of sexual abuse arises because one parent, usually the mother, has become alienated against the other, and then swayed the child.
In 1997, the full bench of the Family Court cited an article supporting PAS and said that it “leaves us in no doubt that Parental Alienation Syndrome is a very real psychological phenomenon…”

Stockholm Syndrome:

Author’s note: When forced, an abused child unhealthily bonds with an abusive parent. The relationship becomes that of a master/handler and a slave. The “slave” initially lives in an environment of fear, torture and oppressive control created by the abuser. Through this severe abuse and control process, the child is programmed to feel the need to please/like their abusive handler for survival, safety and/or to avoid the abuser’s inflicted pain. Assumptions are generally made that, because the child accepts the accused abuser, (the child having learned they have no free choice), no abuse has taken place and the child is “happy and smiling” – this is a false assumption. For survival these children are forced to suppress their own real emotions, which effect normal brain development, especially in the frontal lobe. The abuser will lessen the abuse or control when the child is deemed to be under control and enough power is wielded over the child’s psyche. For example, initially the abusive parent would pinch the child’s ear or neck to such an extent that it is swollen and bruised. After several such treatments all the abuser has to do, is to touch the child’s ear or neck and the child will respond to the abuser’s demands. This applies to all types of physical abuse. In this process, some children will convince themselves that the abuse was “normal” or even “good for them” and they will re-enact that “abnormal” behaviour programmed into them throughout their lives. Some switching from the slave role to becoming the master and then getting the chance to perform the abuse and gain the control they so desperately craved in their misguided childhood. And so the cycle continues.

In a Stockholm syndrome, abused and severe parental alienation combination case an increasing dislike and avoidance for the protective parent with an increased desire to protect or a “show” of liking towards the abusive parent can be observed in the child’s behaviour. This is evident if the child gives adult reasons or repeat unrelated negative gossip about the protective parent, which have obviously been shared, but not been experienced, as justification for their avoidance or shunning behaviour towards the protective parent. The child would also avoid contact with the protective parent, out of fear for what the abusive parent might do in the event of just suspecting a “disobedience” of the abuser’s “laws”. The child could also connect the feeling of fear, created in them by the abusive parent, with the protective parent. So instead of fearing the abuser, the child projects the fear onto the protective parent. Or the child could start angrily blaming the protective parent for the pain and suffering endured at the hands of the abusive parent. In such a controlled psyche, to vent anger on the protective parent is a safe choice, since the child cannot dare to vent anger on the abusive parent out of fear for the retribution. The child is trained into accepting that making contact with the protective parent will always be either forbidden or restrained and they have no choice but to be obedient for the rest of their lives.
This Stockholm syndrome captive, parental alienation scenario is also applicable to a child who is forcibly removed from biological parents and their known environment and placed into State Care for reasons such as “possible future emotional harm”. The degree of isolation, control, severity of abuse and duration determines the degree which the victim is Stockholmed.
From the abuser’s viewpoint, I’m assuming they compare the training of a human child to the training of a dog for entertainment, convenience, power and satisfaction. Having control over a victim/person also provides safety to the abuser.

Stockholm syndrome (sometimes erroneously referred to as Helsinki syndrome)[1][2] is a condition that causes hostages to develop a psychological alliance with their captors as a survival strategy during captivity in a threatening environment.[3] These feelings, resulting from a bond formed between captor and captives during intimate time spent together, are generally considered irrational in light of the danger or risk endured by the victims. Ties develop where one person intermittently harasses, beats, threatens, abuses, rapes or intimidates the other.”[4] The FBI’s Hostage Barricade Database System shows that roughly eight percent of victims show evidence of Stockholm syndrome.[5]
Formally named in 1973 Stockholm syndrome is ostensibly paradoxical because the sympathetic sentiments captives feel towards their captors are the opposite of the fear and disdain an onlooker may feel towards the captors.
There are four key components that generally lead to the development of Stockholm syndrome:

•The victim having had no previous experience or knowledge of a hostage-captor-victim situation.
•Hostages or survivors refuse to co-operate with police forces and other government authorities who are trying to help them.
•A hostage’s belief in the humanity of their captor, developing sympathetic or protective feelings towards their captor. Psychologically the victim ceases to perceive the aggressor as a threat to their person once they can hold the same values as the aggressor.

Nils Bejerot, a Swedish criminologist and psychiatrist coined the term after Stockholm police asked him for assistance with analysing the victims’ reactions to the 1973 bank robbery and their status as hostages. As the idea of brainwashing was not a new concept.

Famous instances:
Stockholm bank robbery
Main article: Norrmalmstorg robbery
In 1973, Jan-Erik Olsson, a convict on parole, and Clark Olofsson took four employees of the bank (three women and one man) hostage during a failed bank robbery in Kreditbanken, They held the hostages captive for six days (August 23–28) in one of the bank’s vaults while torturing them with nooses and dynamite. When they were released, none of the victims would testify against either captor in court; instead they began raising money for their defence.[6]
Patty Hearst[edit]
Patty Hearst, the granddaughter of publisher William Randolph Hearst, was taken and held hostage by the Symbionese Liberation Army, “an urban guerrilla group”, in 1974. She was recorded denouncing her family as well as the police under her new name, “Tania”, and was later seen working with the SLA to rob banks in San Francisco. She publicly asserted her sympathetic feelings towards the SLA and their pursuits as well. After her 1975 arrest, pleading Stockholm syndrome did not work as a proper defence in court. Her seven-year prison sentence was later commuted, and she was eventually presidentially pardoned by Bill Clinton, who was informed that she was not acting under her own free will.[6]
Yvonne Ridley[edit]
Yvonne Ridley is a British journalist who was a reporter for the Sunday Express when she was captured for eleven days by the Afghan Taliban in 2001. Upon release, she became a fervent Muslim, denouncing the typical values and lifestyles of the west and praising Muslim practice. Ridley denies that she suffers from Stockholm syndrome, claiming that she did not bond or empathise with her captors and that she was only awoken and shown how to live a liberated life.[6]
Stockholm syndrome is not merely a condition developed in victims of kidnappings or hostage instances. It can also be applied to a wider variety of situations, afflicting victims of domestic or child abuse, human trafficking, and incest. Prisoners of war, political terrorism, cult members, concentration camp prisoners, slaves, and prostitutes” can also fall prey to Stockholm syndrome.
Typically, Stockholm syndrome develops in captives when they engage in “face-to-face contact” with their captors, as well as when captors make captives doubt the likelihood of their survival by aggressively terrorising them into “helpless, powerless, and submissive” states. This enables captors to appear to be nice people when captors perform acts of kindness on, or fail to “beat, abuse, or rape the victims”.[6]
Evolutionarily speaking, research evidence exists to support the genuine scientific nature of Stockholm syndrome. Responses similar to those in human captives have been detected in some reptiles and mammals, primates in particular. Ideas like “dominance hierarchies and submission strategies” assist in devising explanations for the illogical reasoning behind the symptoms of those suffering from Stockholm syndrome as a result of an oppressive relationship of any kind.
For within hours of Natascha escaping, her kidnapper was found beheaded by an express train.
In what was explained at the time as Stockholm Syndrome, the psychological phenomenon whereby hostages become attached to their captors, Natascha sobbed when she was told about her kidnapper, rapist and torturer’s death.
Even more bizarrely, in the hours after her escape, she asked police if she could be taken to the mortuary where her captor’s remains were awaiting forensic tests and eventual burial.
To the astonishment of the officers, she threw herself over his body and wept.
Now, a decade later, the life of Natascha Kampusch is once more under intense scrutiny.
The story of the 28-year-old, who always carries a photograph of her kidnapper in her handbag.
A friend of the Kidnapper Priklopil – Holzapfel, met the imprisoned girl Natasha at some point when Priklopil came to his home to borrow tools.
‘He turned up with the young lady,’ says Holzapfel.
‘She stood with him in the entrance — he introduced her as an acquaintance. I offered her my hand and she said a very polite hello.
‘She made a happy, relaxed impression. I didn’t, of course, realise that it was kidnapped Natascha Kampusch.
After her kidnapping at age 10, Natascha Kampusch had been imprisoned in a small cellar under a garage, where she was beaten, raped and treated like a slave for 8 years. After a few years of this abuse the captor gradually allowed her more movement.
Adoption & Stockholm Syndrome
Trace A. DeMeyer
“…I’ve been thinking about this concept for a long time. Adopters, when it comes right down to it, count on Stockholm Syndrome. Children who don’t 
succumb are labelled RAD.
Whenever I encounter an infertile woman so desperate to be a mother that she’ll bring home a stranger’s baby and force it to live in her fantasy, I always secretly wonder what she would do if she were single and desperate to be married.
Would she drag some strange man home and force him to watch the Notebook and cuddle? And if she did, would society think it was beautiful and precious?  Or would they think she was delusional and dangerous?  Rhetorical question, of course.  But why? Why is what is clearly a crime between adults viewed in such an overwhelmingly positive way when one of the parties is a child?…”  
- Renee Musgrove
This comment by Renee has been in my head for over a year and I finally did research on Stockholm Syndrome!
What was legally thrust upon us as adoptees is an illusion/fantasy, right? From babyhood, we are supposed to pretend these are our only parents — years pass and if they raised us, they ARE our parents. They are the only people we know that intimately so we call them mom and dad. We don’t know anything else. Of course, years pass…
Then one day you wake up and think, “What about my ancestry, what about my medical history?” and you start to feel despondent since you can’t ask your “parents” since you found out they get upset when you ask about your identity (We chose you, you’re ours…) — and even if you do ask, too often they know absolutely nothing. Why is that?
Eventually you realize that you are really not “their” child. You’re not related in any physical sense or biology.  Then the adoptee realizes and finds out 
quickly enough that lawmakers (and your adoptive parents) are on the side of secrecy – that they don’t want you to know who you are and they DEMAND privacy for the mother who created you.  REALLY?
On my other blog, I wrote about the ADOPTION EXPERIMENT and then my friend Cully Ray did a guest post about Stockholm Syndrome: which is when you are abducted and start to identify with your captors.
Cully wrote:
As do Stockholm Syndrome victims, these Adoptees have great difficulty identifying and expressing their feelings, tragically some are unable to go on with their lives.
Some of the effects that are seen in adoptees and foster children who are objectified by their adoptive parents, foster care givers, and/or communities and peers are:
* Denial of actions by the adoptive parents or foster caregivers that make the child feel inadequate or physically hurt.
* Co-dependency
* Substance abuse
* Minimising their feelings – self-sacrifice
* Disassociation with the idea of natural family or parent-child relationships
* Failure to make realistic relationships in both personal and professional life
* Internalizing – blame and guilt for things they have/had no control over
* Over achieving – fear of not being “good enough”
* Anger/Rage/Overwhelming depression often triggered by birthdays or celebrations
* Suicide
No matter how much I write and think about this – we come back to the lawmakers still demanding sealed adoptions and secrecy again and again. What about you? Do you think they are delusional?

Stockholm Syndrome AKA Trauma Bonding In Narcissistic Abuse (14:50)
Thompson and Venables, age 10 years, kidnapped Bulger, age 2 years, taking him by the hand and leading him out of the shopping centre. They dropped Bulger on his head and he suffered injuries to his face. The boys were seen by 38 people. Bulger was crying, but most bystanders did nothing to intervene, assuming that he was a younger brother.
Venables would later describe in court how Bulger seemed to develop a “liking” to him, holding his hand and allowing him to pick him up on the meandering journey to the scene of his eventual [torture] death [at their hands].

The False Memory Syndrome excuse

Author’s note: A small child under 5 years old, whose memory, speech and understanding has not fully developed, makes an ideal victim for a child sex predator. The easily intimidated, small victim is unlikely to understand the attacks, to remember precise details, for example the date and time, and will most likely not run on their own to the police, screaming rape or sodomy.
Older child might block the shocking memories completely. But children might experience trauma flash backs when older.
To negate these memories the “false memory syndrome” was thought up to create another obstacle for victims. Which was not really necessary, since the implementation of the statute of limitations in most countries already blocked many child victims seeking justice.
The “Parental Alienation Syndrome” concept holds that one parent will plant false memories of abuse and molestation in their child as a means of alienating the other parent from the child. The “False Memory Syndrome” is a concept/excuse that the victim’s therapist, not a parent, is implanting false memories of child abuse in their adult patient.
Adults remembering their suppressed child abuse is taking over the child abuse debate.
SUNDAY 01 MAY 1994
An association called “Accuracy About Abuse” was launched.
Its aim is to ‘counter misinformation in the public mind about child abuse’ memories. In particular, it wants to debunk the False Memory Syndrome (FMS), an American-coined phrase used in the United States and now in Britain by parents who claim they have been falsely accused by grown- up children of sexually abusing them when young.
Advocates of False Memory Syndrome say these ‘memories’ are often ‘confabulations’
Implanted by therapists after their children went into therapy for other problems.

On the contrary, say the therapists: adult survivors have repressed their memories of childhood sexual abuse for many years (they forget, in order to survive); they are enabled to ‘recover’ the memories in therapy by using techniques which range from hypnotherapy to regression therapy.
Accuracy About Abuse was presented to the Press and on television as an objective and accurate voice of moderation and reason in an increasingly polarised debate.
Marjorie Orr believes that a lot of ‘damaging nonsense’ is being talked. FMS, she writes, is ‘a syndrome which exists nowhere in psychological literature. It has been spread by people anxious to portray themselves as innocent parents wrongly accused of child abuse. Some are innocents maligned – which is a tragedy, but many are not …