I've covered Dr. Finn as well, but beyond that, here is an email I got from another victim about Dr. Finn, "I have a case where Dr. Finn is trying to force my daughter (17) into therapy with her dad who cause loads of emotional and mental abuse. To the point she pulled most of her hair out and her dad has had no consequences and many people have spoke out against him but finn has been biased towards the dad who suggested him for the eval. Out older daughter threatened suicide due to the abuse by her dad and Dr. Finn didn’t even care."
Since Dr. Finn would be an idiot and a fool to answer your “questions” which are not a sincere attempt to gain understanding, I will answer for him despite never meeting or having any discussion with him. In no way am I representing this man for full disclosure and I have never met him or talked with him. However, I am sure I am providing answers he would most likely agree with.
1. Fabrication of Reports
- The FCVFC alleges that you fabricated elements of your court-submitted expert reports, including psychological evaluations. How do you respond to these claims? The FCVFC is a scam organization that is not recognized by any legitimate government agency. I believe the FCVFC might be a child sex trafficking front.
- Were your reports ever subject to peer review or independent scrutiny? No child custody evaluation is ever subject to peer review or independent scrutiny. By its very nature they would not be to protect the confidentiality of the participants. This is a common question asked by the attorneys for the parents whom the forensic has determined are not in the best interest of the child to have custody of.
2. Use of Discredited Theories
- It is stated that your evaluations relied heavily on the theory of “parental alienation,” which has been widely criticized and is not recognized by the DSM. How do you justify using this theory in your work? The fact that parental alienation is not recognized as a disorder by DSM is irrelevant. It is not a disorder in the sense that it can be recognized and treated. It is one characteristic out of many that may be considered in determining child custody,
3. Secrecy and Withholding Evidence
- The FCVFC alleges that your reports were withheld from protective parents, preventing them from addressing or challenging findings in court. Was this standard practice, and if so, why? Again, the FCVFC is a scam organization not recognized by any authority; all reports are available to parents as the court directs. It is not up to me to release any reports; it is up to the courts. That is the law. If you have an issue with the law, take it up with the legislature. If I gave the reports to the parents, I would be in violation of the court order. Seriously you don’t know this?
4. HIPAA and Confidentiality Violations
- Claims have been made that you disclosed confidential information without consent and withheld information from the subjects of your evaluations. Can you clarify how you handle sensitive information in your practice? All subjects of my evaluations understand that anything that they tell me can be communicated to the courts according to law. If someone tells me they are suicidal, I have an affirmative duty to report this.
5. Conflict of Interest
- Allegations suggest you have financial or undisclosed professional ties to legal representatives or firms involved in cases where you were appointed. Do you disclose any potential conflicts of interest to the courts or clients? I have never had any undisclosed professional ties to anyone involved in cases where I am appointed. Due to the nature of my work, I am often familiar with attorneys and firms that I have dealt with before. If there were ever any conflicts of interest, I would have recused myself from any work.
6. Ethical Concerns in Child Cases
- The FCVFC describes specific cases in which children under your evaluation were placed in the custody of alleged abusers. How do you ensure your assessments are free from bias and accurately prioritize child safety? Again, the FCVFC is a scam organization not recognized by any authority; Child safety is of paramount concern.
7. Financial Incentives and Title IV-D/E Funding
- Critics argue that the child custody system is influenced by financial incentives tied to federal funding. Have you ever been made aware of or influenced by such incentives in your court-appointed work? I am not involved with the creation of the laws of the child custody system. I receive no such incentives, and my desire would be for all children to be raised by two loving parents. Unfortunately, that is not always possible.
8. Direct Communications with Minors
- Reports claim you engaged in unauthorized communication with children as young as four years old. Can you explain the purpose and legality of such actions? All communications I engage in with anyone are always by court order. Any information otherwise id false. The only concerns with pedophilia I have are possibly among the members of FCVFC.
9. Professional Accountability
- Are you currently facing or have you faced any disciplinary actions or malpractice claims related to your work in family courts? That information would be in the public record. Certainly, parents whom I found not to be the better parent have complained in public forums which is their right.
10. General Response
- How do you respond to FCVFC’s overall characterization of your work as fraudulent and harmful to children and families? Again, the FCVFC is a scam organization not recognized by any authority; Child safety is of paramount concern.
- What steps do you take to ensure the accuracy and integrity of your evaluations? I take far more steps to ensure the accuracy and integrity in my evaluations than you do in your blog.
I am not involved with the creation of the laws of the child custody system. I receive no such incentives, and my desire would be for all children to be raised by two loving parents. Unfortunately, that is not always possible.
INCOMPLETE!
So when one parent is flush with money and the other is not, I am inclined to participate in “designer child trafficking” to ensure that my fees are paid and the attorneys and family court judges remain happy.
I have never had any undisclosed professional ties to anyone involved in cases where I am appointed. Due to the nature of my work, I am often familiar with attorneys and firms that I have dealt with before. If there were ever any conflicts of interest, I would have recused myself from any work.
WRONG!
I am often familiar with attorneys and firms that I have dealt with before and will deal with again. I know what “magic words” must be said to keep them and the Family Court Judges happy, thus justifying my continued usefulness. This bias fuels my entire existence as a court-appointed professional. It is a key element to the systemic fraud in the family courts.
The FCVFC is a scam organization that is not recognized by any legitimate government agency. I believe the FCVFC might be a child sex trafficking front.
WRONG!
The FCVFC is a 501(C)(3) charitable organization. It is recognized by the UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT, which is not a child trafficking front. I understand your confusion because a day ago, under the Democrats, you could make both arguments - that the US Government was illegitimate AND that they were covering for the pedophiles.
The fact that parental alienation is not recognized as a disorder by DSM is irrelevant. It is not a disorder in the sense that it can be recognized and treated. It is one characteristic out of many that may be considered in determining child custody,
WRONG!
Dr. Finn was tasked to give a MEDICAL OPINION. MEDICAL OPINION is scientific in nature and separate and distinct from the application of the facts to the law, which is a LEGAL OPINION.
Courts need to use psychiatrists with medical licenses, not psychologists who have zero accountability and do not take an oath to do no harm.
Those without a medical license are somehow given power by the court to undermine reports from medical professionals.
Family courts overrule medical findings all the time. Court appointed psychologists impersonate medical doctors and without the required license to do so, make medical diagnoses to flip custody of children to the less favored parent.
Why are family courts accepting medical diagnoses that psychologists do not have a license to make?
And where is the medical literature regarding brainwashing? Why didn’t the medical professionals make this same conclusion of it were valid? Why hire someone else to “undo” conclusions of the hospital in this case?
I've covered Dr. Finn as well, but beyond that, here is an email I got from another victim about Dr. Finn, "I have a case where Dr. Finn is trying to force my daughter (17) into therapy with her dad who cause loads of emotional and mental abuse. To the point she pulled most of her hair out and her dad has had no consequences and many people have spoke out against him but finn has been biased towards the dad who suggested him for the eval. Out older daughter threatened suicide due to the abuse by her dad and Dr. Finn didn’t even care."
Having a poll here is like asking the Nazis if they think Jews are the devil or just really bad people.
Thanks Patrick!
Since Dr. Finn would be an idiot and a fool to answer your “questions” which are not a sincere attempt to gain understanding, I will answer for him despite never meeting or having any discussion with him. In no way am I representing this man for full disclosure and I have never met him or talked with him. However, I am sure I am providing answers he would most likely agree with.
1. Fabrication of Reports
- The FCVFC alleges that you fabricated elements of your court-submitted expert reports, including psychological evaluations. How do you respond to these claims? The FCVFC is a scam organization that is not recognized by any legitimate government agency. I believe the FCVFC might be a child sex trafficking front.
- Were your reports ever subject to peer review or independent scrutiny? No child custody evaluation is ever subject to peer review or independent scrutiny. By its very nature they would not be to protect the confidentiality of the participants. This is a common question asked by the attorneys for the parents whom the forensic has determined are not in the best interest of the child to have custody of.
2. Use of Discredited Theories
- It is stated that your evaluations relied heavily on the theory of “parental alienation,” which has been widely criticized and is not recognized by the DSM. How do you justify using this theory in your work? The fact that parental alienation is not recognized as a disorder by DSM is irrelevant. It is not a disorder in the sense that it can be recognized and treated. It is one characteristic out of many that may be considered in determining child custody,
3. Secrecy and Withholding Evidence
- The FCVFC alleges that your reports were withheld from protective parents, preventing them from addressing or challenging findings in court. Was this standard practice, and if so, why? Again, the FCVFC is a scam organization not recognized by any authority; all reports are available to parents as the court directs. It is not up to me to release any reports; it is up to the courts. That is the law. If you have an issue with the law, take it up with the legislature. If I gave the reports to the parents, I would be in violation of the court order. Seriously you don’t know this?
4. HIPAA and Confidentiality Violations
- Claims have been made that you disclosed confidential information without consent and withheld information from the subjects of your evaluations. Can you clarify how you handle sensitive information in your practice? All subjects of my evaluations understand that anything that they tell me can be communicated to the courts according to law. If someone tells me they are suicidal, I have an affirmative duty to report this.
5. Conflict of Interest
- Allegations suggest you have financial or undisclosed professional ties to legal representatives or firms involved in cases where you were appointed. Do you disclose any potential conflicts of interest to the courts or clients? I have never had any undisclosed professional ties to anyone involved in cases where I am appointed. Due to the nature of my work, I am often familiar with attorneys and firms that I have dealt with before. If there were ever any conflicts of interest, I would have recused myself from any work.
6. Ethical Concerns in Child Cases
- The FCVFC describes specific cases in which children under your evaluation were placed in the custody of alleged abusers. How do you ensure your assessments are free from bias and accurately prioritize child safety? Again, the FCVFC is a scam organization not recognized by any authority; Child safety is of paramount concern.
7. Financial Incentives and Title IV-D/E Funding
- Critics argue that the child custody system is influenced by financial incentives tied to federal funding. Have you ever been made aware of or influenced by such incentives in your court-appointed work? I am not involved with the creation of the laws of the child custody system. I receive no such incentives, and my desire would be for all children to be raised by two loving parents. Unfortunately, that is not always possible.
8. Direct Communications with Minors
- Reports claim you engaged in unauthorized communication with children as young as four years old. Can you explain the purpose and legality of such actions? All communications I engage in with anyone are always by court order. Any information otherwise id false. The only concerns with pedophilia I have are possibly among the members of FCVFC.
9. Professional Accountability
- Are you currently facing or have you faced any disciplinary actions or malpractice claims related to your work in family courts? That information would be in the public record. Certainly, parents whom I found not to be the better parent have complained in public forums which is their right.
10. General Response
- How do you respond to FCVFC’s overall characterization of your work as fraudulent and harmful to children and families? Again, the FCVFC is a scam organization not recognized by any authority; Child safety is of paramount concern.
- What steps do you take to ensure the accuracy and integrity of your evaluations? I take far more steps to ensure the accuracy and integrity in my evaluations than you do in your blog.
I am not involved with the creation of the laws of the child custody system. I receive no such incentives, and my desire would be for all children to be raised by two loving parents. Unfortunately, that is not always possible.
INCOMPLETE!
So when one parent is flush with money and the other is not, I am inclined to participate in “designer child trafficking” to ensure that my fees are paid and the attorneys and family court judges remain happy.
I have never had any undisclosed professional ties to anyone involved in cases where I am appointed. Due to the nature of my work, I am often familiar with attorneys and firms that I have dealt with before. If there were ever any conflicts of interest, I would have recused myself from any work.
WRONG!
I am often familiar with attorneys and firms that I have dealt with before and will deal with again. I know what “magic words” must be said to keep them and the Family Court Judges happy, thus justifying my continued usefulness. This bias fuels my entire existence as a court-appointed professional. It is a key element to the systemic fraud in the family courts.
The FCVFC is a scam organization that is not recognized by any legitimate government agency. I believe the FCVFC might be a child sex trafficking front.
WRONG!
The FCVFC is a 501(C)(3) charitable organization. It is recognized by the UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT, which is not a child trafficking front. I understand your confusion because a day ago, under the Democrats, you could make both arguments - that the US Government was illegitimate AND that they were covering for the pedophiles.
Thanks for playing Patrick!
The fact that parental alienation is not recognized as a disorder by DSM is irrelevant. It is not a disorder in the sense that it can be recognized and treated. It is one characteristic out of many that may be considered in determining child custody,
WRONG!
Dr. Finn was tasked to give a MEDICAL OPINION. MEDICAL OPINION is scientific in nature and separate and distinct from the application of the facts to the law, which is a LEGAL OPINION.
He’s just taking the path of lease resistance, just like they all are so they can line their pockets
Think of all the players involved before it even gets to a psychological evaluation
Courts need to use psychiatrists with medical licenses, not psychologists who have zero accountability and do not take an oath to do no harm.
Those without a medical license are somehow given power by the court to undermine reports from medical professionals.
Family courts overrule medical findings all the time. Court appointed psychologists impersonate medical doctors and without the required license to do so, make medical diagnoses to flip custody of children to the less favored parent.
Why are family courts accepting medical diagnoses that psychologists do not have a license to make?
And where is the medical literature regarding brainwashing? Why didn’t the medical professionals make this same conclusion of it were valid? Why hire someone else to “undo” conclusions of the hospital in this case?