Linked is a published Judgement, which makes interesting reading. It as about the request by the Father, for a Judgement of a Fact Find to be published. The Judge in this decision is setting out how she reached her decision not to publish the Judgement of the Fact Find (to protect the children in future, even if it was anonymised). The Father's anger at various professionals is clear and understandable. I think the Judge's decision was probably the right one because we do need to remember that children grow up and might read things. Instead there is this Judgement explaining why the other Judgement wasn't published.
Along the way it describes the history of the case and it's clear the Father was really wanting the Fact Find judgement published due to things on "social media" being negative about the existence of parental alienation. He thought it would help other cases. At the fact find it was found the Mother was the cause of the difficulties with the Father (she claimed it was his behaviour that was the problem) so her behaviour was found to be the issue and that's why the Father wanted that to be published.
This paragraph near the end stood out to me
"There is nothing in the facts of the case that is especially unusual or unique. The fact finding judgment records a depressing history of what might be described as parental alienation, which is quite frequently found in family cases. The public interest in knowing about the generality of these cases is met both by the publication of other non dissimilar judgment, but also by the publication of this judgment, and the fact that this is yet another such case."
It acknowledges that parental alienation is frequently found in family cases, but is wary of using that terminology by the sound of it (possibly due to the media bashing of the term from various factions who published articles saying it's pseudo science).
Along the way it describes the history of the case and it's clear the Father was really wanting the Fact Find judgement published due to things on "social media" being negative about the existence of parental alienation. He thought it would help other cases. At the fact find it was found the Mother was the cause of the difficulties with the Father (she claimed it was his behaviour that was the problem) so her behaviour was found to be the issue and that's why the Father wanted that to be published.
This paragraph near the end stood out to me
"There is nothing in the facts of the case that is especially unusual or unique. The fact finding judgment records a depressing history of what might be described as parental alienation, which is quite frequently found in family cases. The public interest in knowing about the generality of these cases is met both by the publication of other non dissimilar judgment, but also by the publication of this judgment, and the fact that this is yet another such case."
It acknowledges that parental alienation is frequently found in family cases, but is wary of using that terminology by the sound of it (possibly due to the media bashing of the term from various factions who published articles saying it's pseudo science).