PUBLISHER'S NOTE: On March 8, 2012, this Blog published a post on a Channel 4 News investigation which concluded that around 20 per cent of psychologists acting as expert witnesses for the family courts are not qualified, according to a Channel 4 News investigation broadcast tonight, writes producer Phil Carter. The gist of the post was as follows: "Channel 4 News spoke to families across the country involved in court proceedings and heard time and again concerns about the experts used by the courts to determine whether children are at risk and should be removed from their birth parents. But because of the secrecy of the family courts - designed to protect the identity of the children at the heart of proceedings - the experts used have largely been beyond scrutiny. This research is the first time these concerns have been to some degree independently substantiated. The research found serious concerns across a range of issues beyond the startling finding that around a fifth of so-called psychologist expert witnesses are not qualified. The assessments of the expert reports found that some 20 per cent of the psychologists were working beyond their area of knowledge; around a third had no experience of mental health assessments; and some 90 per cent of experts were not in current practice. The net result was that the research concluded that around 65 per cent of expert reports in the study were of either 'poor' or 'very poor' quality. Professor Ireland told Channel 4 News: "I think we were very concerned and perturbed by some of the reports that we read, not just in terms of qualification but also the quality of the reports that we read ...Prof Ireland and her team were given unprecedented access to psychologists' expert witness reports from three undisclosed courts across England by the FJC, an arm's length body of the Ministry of Justice. Experts play a critical role in family court cases: research suggests that at least one expert is used in 90 per cent of public law children's proceedings and many cases involve three or more experts...The findings are based on research published on Wednesday for the Family Justice Council (FJC). It was led by Professor Jane Ireland, a forensic psychologist at the University of Central Lancashire. Prof Ireland and her team were given unprecedented access to psychologists' expert witness reports from three undisclosed courts across England by the FJC, an arm's length body of the Ministry of Justice...Nigel Priestley, a lawyer closely involved in family proceedings, told of the gravity of the research's findings. "After the death penalty the most draconian act that the state can do is remove a family's child," he said. "What is at stake for many carers is the loss of their children and on the basis of a report which might or indeed might not be questionable."The entire previous post can be found at:http://smithforensic.blogspot.ca/2012/03/family-justice-council-report-channel-4.html
Now, four years later, Professor Jane Ireland, a forensic psychologist whose research was at the heart of the Channel 4 News investigation, has come under attack by her professional body, as reported in the following story published by the Lancashire Evening Post. (The timing of the hearing is no doubt coincidental - but I couldn't help thinking about the recent attack by Britain's medical profession on Dr. Waney Squier, for her counter-establishment research and findings on 'shaken baby syndrome.)'
Harold Levy; Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog;
STORY: " Psychologist probed over study that hit national headlines; Prof Jane Ireland, from the University of Central Lancashire; A psychologist who poured doubt on the validity of family court decisions has been dragged before a fitness to practice hearing, published by the Lancashire Evening Post on May 25, 2016.
GIST: "Professor Jane Ireland, who lectures at UCLan, claimed in a study for the Family Justice Council that one in five expert witnesses in family cases were unqualified or unreliable. Her findings were published on Channel 4 and in the Daily Mail in 2012. A 10-day hearing began yesterday by the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC) into Prof Ireland’s conduct after a raft of complaints about her study were raised. Regarding the study, Prof Ireland acknowleged she made use of court documents without informed consent but claimed it wasn’t required, denied she failed to properly redact personal and sensitive information from her research, denied her methodolgy was flawed, denied she failed to declare a conflict of interest and denied her conclusions were unsubstantiated. The hearing heard from retired educational pyschologist Sam Westmacott, who had been an expert witness in family hearings for 12 years and had made a complaint about Prof Ireland’s study. It was put to Mrs Westamacott by Prof Ireland’s representative that she had complained in order to protect her own position. She replied: “I spent many years working as a writer for broadsheet and tabloid papers and producing current affair shows for the likes of TVam and consequently I realised within seconds of watching the Channel 4 programme the extreme damage that could be done to the reputation of all psychologists in this country and what concerned me most of all was the knock-on effect for families and children we work to serve."
The entire story can be found at:
http://www.lep.co.uk/your-lancashire/pyschologist-probed-over-study-that-hit-national-headlines-1-7930760
PUBLISHER'S NOTE:
I have added a search box for content in this blog which now encompasses several thousand posts. The search box is located near the bottom of the screen just above the list of links. I am confident that this powerful search tool provided by "Blogger" will help our readers and myself get more out of the site.
The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at:
http://www.thestar.com/topic/
Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:
http://smithforensic.blogspot.
Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com;
Harold Levy;
Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog;
