Mark: Ladies gentlemen, moms and dads, children of appropriate ages, welcome to the Papa Family Court Voice podcast. Our special guest this week is attachment specialist, psychologist and consultant, Melanie Gill. Mainly welcome to the podcast. Melanie Gill: Thank you, it's absolutely fantastic to be here. Mark: thank you for joining us with the today, ⁓ we're going to covering three topics. So three topics are going to be male would like to find out a little bit more about your work, what you do, your work within the courts, your work with children, your experience, and also work and studies parental alienation. The second topic would like to talk about the news because you've been in the news quite a lot over the last five years. So, ⁓ yes, I'd like to discuss the headlines, that you've been creating the head big headline being the unregulated psychologist. Okay. That's, that's the big headline. And reason that we wanted to bring you on is because I've seen in reports written about me and they're completely false. Melanie Gill: Yes. Mark: I'd like to discuss the headlines, Melanie Gill: Yes. Yes. Mark: but we wanted to bring you on and ask you, you what's your story? And the third would be about the courts in general. And ⁓ if there's anything that you can share or tell us your experience within the family courts, would that be okay? Melanie Gill: Yep, that's absolutely fine. You name it, I can answer it. Mark: fantastic. So Melanie, the floor is yours. What do you want to talk about? Melanie Gill: Well, I mean, I'd like to start by just saying, know, how I got involved in campaigning, ⁓ because I am campaigning a lot at the moment since I'm, you know, I can't any more family cases because I've been absolutely pushed out of being able to do what I'm actually expert in. But I actually campaigning to do with, ⁓ well, with children. and then moved into parental alienation. I think it was about 12 or 14 years ago. And I had managed to start working with a number of politicians, people like Ian Duncan Smith. I worked with the Center for Social Justice. And what I was very passionate about at the time was trying to bring psychological knowledge. to politicians to help them make better policy. And when the conservatives came into power, Tim Lawton was made the Minister for Children. This was back in 2010. And he was an immensely effective minister. he really cared about... children and he cared about all the services sort of around children. he was passionate about changing how social workers were being trained. But of the other things that he wanted to help with was shared parenting. And I started working ⁓ on cases where which involve alienation, only it wasn't sort of quite known as that then in 2007, I think it was. So I started bringing my knowledge to him. And he was on policy to ensure that, you know, the right psychological stuff was put in to any bill to do with shared parenting. ⁓ And he you know, did believe that children benefit from contact with Mark: Mm-hmm. Melanie Gill: with both their parents. Yeah, as long as he was, you know, as long as it was and if it wasn't safe, then you had to examine the risk, you had to assess the risk and out if anything could be So he brought from around the world because there were a of people at that time, like Australia was changing their laws to with shared parenting. Mark: I heard about this bill. Melanie Gill: And he wanted to introduce parental alienation into policy. And what were hopefully going to do was put it ⁓ into policy a form of psychological abuse against children, a specific form of psychological abuse against children. And, if you Google this, it's out there. ⁓ Mark: can I ask you a question? Do you think that parental alienation is child abuse? ⁓ Do you think that parental alienation is child abuse? Melanie Gill: Yes, absolutely. mean, even the mild cases harm children. Separation of parents children, I'm afraid, you know, parents, that's their world. That's entire world. When the two people who children love most in the world separate, even the most, the most friendly causes some damage I'm afraid because it's just so mental. Mark: Can you give us, I've asked this question to a few different experts, some of them you've already mentioned off camera, so you know a couple of them. Can you give us your definition of parental alienation? Can you give us your definition of parental alienation? Melanie Gill: It's when a child is basically turned against one of the parents and that can be done unconsciously and consciously. I've been doing these assessments using attachment science over 20 years and what I've found is that some people are reliving trauma, some people are reliving trauma and they don't realise it. And so I've had some cases where, some people find this unbelievable, that when I've able to explain exactly what has been happening in the background and going back to their childhoods and why and what they've been doing, they have pulled themselves up by their bootstraps and followed my recommendations got help, got support, got the right intervention because most interventions in these cases have to be specialist. They have to be done by people who knowledge, experience and training in these cases. Otherwise, it can be completely disastrous. And they turned things round. And in fact, got an email, I it was last year. from a guardian I'd worked for where a parent had written and said, I'd like to write to you and Melanie and just say, it was very, hard at the beginning, but I went and did what was suggested. I had a good look at myself. That's paraphrasing what was said. And I'd like you to know now that things are so incredibly different. And both parents were living near each other. and between the children and the parents was being shared. I mean that's just fantastic. Okay, few and far between. Mark: So going back to what you were telling us about work with Tim Laughton, it? So you were saying that, and again, I've heard about this in the news where bill got quite far down the line and it was due to be passed, right? And then all of a sudden it disappeared. So do you know anything about that? Can you tell us what happened? was due to be passed, And then all of a it disappeared. So do you know anything about that? Melanie Gill: Yep. Yes, I do. Yep. Yes, I do. Yes, I mean, as I said, it was down the line and then very suddenly, Tim Laughton was no longer children's minister and that was nothing to do with his abilities. That was for political reasons. I personally think it was because what they wanted to do was put someone into the position who could debate with gusto their counterpart. and that person they put in was Michael Gove. And I feel that then there was a concentration on education. it became sort of more cognitively biased with children ⁓ rather what Tim was which was to do with, know, child development, child emotional development and ⁓ the science behind bringing that knowledge into, how policy was then made. But it didn't stop him trying to do as much as he could then. So there was an effort to then put parental alienation into the Children's Act, into a part of the Children's Act. It was called the Cinderella Law, I think. And that again was sort of moving forward and then came to an abrupt end. there was an effort to put parental alienation into the Children's Act, and then came to an abrupt end. as well, ⁓ which was a great shame because then everything sort of just, you know, know, drifted. And the problem was then that what priority of politicians became ⁓ all, know, was all to do with the economy. ⁓ And were just sort of, you know, don't know, it just ⁓ all went. But we carried on campaigning. So ⁓ Mark: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Yeah. Melanie Gill: Tim then became chairman of the charity that I had set up, which called the Mindful Policy Group. And again, this was to bring the understanding of child and all development, attachment science, to policymakers. And ⁓ so ⁓ wrote a book. wrote the first book about parental alienation in the country. It was written by one of my other founders, Dr Penelope Leach, who was famous throughout the world, a childcare guru. And she wrote beautifully, she wrote beautifully about children and parents. So she wrote this book, which focused on what happens to children when parents separate, parental alienation, how to, not alienate. And we had a big launch, there was lots of press and a copy of that book was given to every single family court judge in the country and also to the high court judges and the appeal judges. And we got together with Sir Paul Coleridge who ran an organization called the Marriage Foundation, which was obviously, you know, putting out a lot of statistics on what happens with divorce. and separation and that sort of thing. he was a huge help to us. Then we had a conference in parliament and we had the great neuroscientist Alan Shaw speak at that, showing what to children when parents separate. And there are of people didn't have any understanding what happens. Parental separation is ⁓ for especially very children. It's like a death. You know, when one person goes... Mark: So can you tell us a little bit more about that? If you can expand on that, what does happen to children when parents separate? Melanie Gill: Well, they don't understand. mean, you it doesn't matter how much you try and explain to a child. They don't have the neurological architecture to be able to understand the complexity of the relationship between their parents. then especially, you know, when their parents separate and don't like each other, it's an absolute tragedy. ⁓ the ⁓ aren't just psychological. The effects are neurological. because it puts an enormous amount of on their physiology lots of very destructive chemicals which in and cause neurological damage. So, ⁓ as said, are no nice separations such. you know, it might only cause a little bit of damage and then it can be ameliorated later, depending on how the parents are with each other, even if they're just civil, it helps. But if a child is not seeing a parent, it is like a death. And in parental alienation cases, children can't show that. Children can't show their true emotions in parental alienation cases because they don't understand what's going on around them. Mark: Mm-hmm. So the thing that troubles me at the moment and I'm sure you're probably aware of this, but it seems that the family courts, the government, the domestic abuse ⁓ and the committee Charlotte Proudman It seems like they're all trying to make the term prone to alienation dirty word or claiming that it's a pseudo science and it's not real. doesn't exist or trying to switch it around and say people who use the word or phrase parental alienation, they're the real abusers. So are your thoughts on that? Melanie Gill: mean, it's a travesty. It's an absolute travesty, it really is. It's driven by, partly by ideology. But the main thing is, what's it doing? It's taking the focus off the child and making it all about, the parents. And that's where ideology comes into it because there are a large group of radical feminists across the world, a huge group. basically say that all women are victims and men are some form of perpetrator or risky and dangerous. And that's, ⁓ you it's such an anti evolutionary thing to think. you've got to think of the child. What happening with the child? The child is being erased in UK courts. talking in these cases about child's wishes and feelings. It's just, it's ridiculous. A child Mark: So the third person now, third expert that I've spoken to who has said exactly the same thing. It's probably more to do with feminist lobbying as opposed to what's actually right for the child. So it's interesting, especially coming from a female on occasion. Melanie Gill: Well, I the thing is that involved with lot of international organisations to do with parental alienation, false allegations, gender equality that all feed into family court cases. And this is known across the world. in, for Denmark, they are absolutely fighting back. they've parental alienation, it's against the law. But the other thing is they're investigating the sort feminist support groups who validate this false ⁓ narrative parental alienation doesn't exist. Alienation exists societies in all forms. If you just think about, if you're working in an office and there's more than of you, then it's very, very easy for two people to go and alienate another office worker. Within elderly people, dementia, Alzheimer's, vulnerable people, again, we solicitors, hundreds and hundreds of solicitors dealing with cases where these poor, vulnerable old people have been alienated against some of their in order for one child to grab all the family assets. then say, well, parental alienation doesn't exist, it's just ridiculous. We have ⁓ of knowledge on it, judicial knowledge on it, and the actual lived experiences of millions of and millions of children. It's ⁓ common across Western world. Mark: Mm-hmm. Melanie Gill: And it's common in Japan, it's in India. you just only have to look at the sheer number of organizations who are trying to help parents in this situation to know that there's the real world and then there's this completely barking mad world where they're saying it doesn't exist. And you have to think, what is the function of them coming out and saying it's a pseudoscience and ⁓ doesn't exist? What's the function of that? And I would say, and hundreds of other people would say in this that because it pushes a narrative. It pushes a narrative about men harmful and ⁓ as victims. And I said, who's missing in there? Children. And the child's voice. Every single case of alienation, even the mild ones, Mark: Mm-hmm. children yet. Melanie Gill: involves something called triangulation. And as I said, this can be conscious or unconscious. And what that means is that pull somebody in towards your opinion. You pull them in. And that's what happens to children, even a family is just only beginning to split up and people get frightened. Parents get frightened. They need people on their side. So they pull in the children. Mark: Mm-hmm. Melanie Gill: And triangulation automatically means that a child's thought processing begins to be distorted in favour of one side. So at that point, you know, there's no way, absolutely, you can say, well, you know, what would you like to do? How do you feel? You're not going to get anything accurate at all. And the other thing is you shouldn't be asking children sorts of questions anyway. under the age of about 17 because they literally do not have the bits of the brain that are going to allow them to be able to, you know, think about their past, think about the present, think about the complexity of their parents' relationship and then work out what's going to happen in the future. It's absolute ludicrous rubbish. Mark: Mm-hmm. So it sounds like you've got a lot of experience in this particular field. It sounds like you've done a lot of study. I've read through your CV actually. let me just open it up I was talking to you off camera before and saying that, I've studied a lot of human behavior as well, at university degree level, and postgraduate level but This is nothing compared to your CV let me just pull out a couple of things. You've got a degree in psychology, is that correct? Yeah. Melanie Gill: Yeah, that was an interesting degree actually. It was thousands of years ago, I was a four year course. It was immensely scientific. So I have a Bachelor of Science and you did things like evolution. You did genetics. Mark: Shall I read out the date of when you did that? Melanie Gill: And you did proper observation. You were taught ⁓ observation in which you literally and of course we didn't have computers then so you can tell it was back in Dickens time. You know, you had to sit and right every single movement that was made on the the subject of your observation. So it solid hard work and back in those days you had to pass every you you could get kicked out if you failed, you know, if you failed first year, then you couldn't go on to the second year. So I passed, I passed through. the other thing that I did is I did two years practical work. So the first place that I went and worked as a trainee psychologist was in was in a school for children with all sorts of developmental disorders. and I was there to do a mass observation study, which I did. And the second place which I went and worked in for a year and a half was a high security remand home and assessment centre dealing with young teenage girls. And I was actually, although I was a training psychologist, I was employed as a psychiatric social worker, which is when I was given training in diagnostics. there was all sorts of interesting things going on there, but I it and I loved the, you know, the different forms of assessment I was introduced to. But what it clear to me was that that is what I wanted to do, was I wanted to I didn't want to go down the therapeutic route at that stage. I wanted to be able to explain why people were doing and behaving the way they were. And then it came to exam time and I missed one of my final exams. So I didn't get the mark that I was expected because your mark, you your degree was based on how you did in the exams. So I didn't get a particularly brilliant degree then. Mark: Mm-hmm. So did you get a drinker's degree? Melanie Gill: Well, did actually. Yeah. Mark: ⁓ Melanie Gill: what I actually did then was I went into the music business. you do. Mark: so it was after this degree and yet were you a music promoter Melanie Gill: The first thing I became was a plugger. which is somebody who takes records, bands records, record company records into the radio stations. And I was in London, so I would to go into Radio One and Radio One then was the Wild West. You you had people like John Peel and Jimmy Savile. and all sorts, so you can imagine strange that ⁓ But I became a manager. I managed a Black British Act and got them a big record deal. Mark: So were you going into these radio stations with a seven inch pressed vinyl or yeah, Melanie Gill: around about 2000. Yes, I also ⁓ I tried to be a dot entrepreneur. the idea that we had, which was called media, darling, ⁓ was basically giving upfront television information. Mark: Mm-hmm. Melanie Gill: to newspapers, magazines, that sort of thing. And then the person who, ⁓ banker who I was working with, it got cancer. And so everything ground to a halt. And I thought, right, I'm going to go back to ⁓ psychology. I enrolled on a course doing forensic psychology because that's, you know, that was my background working when I'd worked in in the Forensic Assessment Center. So I started on child forensic psychology. And that was, that's amazing. It may not, it's still running today, the course. And actually one of the, best known experts in false allegations in the U.S., Dean Tong did exactly the same degree. And you, learn neuroscience. you absolutely learn neuroscience because you have to understand how memories are formed. child forensic psychology at the end of the day is with children who are within court cases. So Mark: Mm-hmm. So I just read out some of the modules here because they sound very interesting. ⁓ got psychology, attachment, child and adult ⁓ suggestibility, trauma analysis, Melanie Gill: Yes. Mark: forensic of perpetrator analysis. And that's just literally picking out a few that are just jumping out me that relevant for this conversation. Melanie Gill: what was, I came to do my dissertation, I chose my dissertation, and then at point, was becoming, because of everything I've been learning, I was getting more more agitated about the fact that these things were preventable. And I saw an opportunity politically to go and harass ⁓ Mark: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Melanie Gill: the newly formed Center for Social Justice. So I was sort of starting my and went to them and was enveloped and became, everything I to wanted, were interested in and wanted to do. So at that point also my tutor, tutor was back to Greece. So, you they said, ⁓ take PG dip. And I said I did. what I learned, do I regret not doing the dissertation? No, because my god, the opportunity I was given to basically go and get the world's most incredibly knowledgeable experts from the world child development. know, Bruce Perry. ⁓ Shaw and in the UK, Dr. Margot Sunderland, Dr. Felicity de Zulueta, you and I was also invited on to, into many campaigns. So the campaign against online sexual stuff, I became, I was on the board of the Association for Infant Mental Health. I was involved in campaigns to do with children on television, but just learned and learned. And I helped write Break Down Britain and Break Through Britain, which were these seminal documents for policymakers. And the section did, which was all about family, was to bring knowledge about how child develop into policy about children. Mark: Mm-hmm. Melanie Gill: You know, was really serious recommendations. Straight after that, I asked if, well, actually was in the middle of it. I said, let's do a conference. Let's do a conference showing that children are not born evil. Children aren't born evil. And they said, yes, great, let's do that. And now it was known, was, it started with the title, Thugs Beyond Redemption, but it became known as Hug a Hoodie. And David Cameron spoke at it. And even now, it's the thing he's most famous for. it was a hugely influential conference. we had just experts talking about children need and the trauma that children suffer and what actually the etiology of children then going out and committing murders and stabbings ⁓ and have you. Mark: Mm-hmm. Melanie Gill: And understanding of child development, what the government wanted to do was embed it in most of the departments, the government departments, which was phenomenal. And we went straight from that and Margot Sunderland as the sort of chief author, did ⁓ a book on, ⁓ a report, a report on the early years. and brain development in the early years. And that was hugely impactful as well. So, you know, I was just working, working, working. As I said, we, you know, we interviewed organizations from around the world. The knowledge I acquired was stupendous, not just in what's happening, but also in solutions. So I was, I was, you know, observing really fantastic solutions that there were for for vulnerable families, vulnerable children, vulnerable adults, vulnerable adolescents, you name it, I was just sucking it all in like a sponge. then I was asked to, then I started doing my attachment with Patricia Crittenden and this fabulous model which matches all of the neuroscience. And at that point, your world becomes a different place. It really, really does. It opens up, you know, how to be able to explain people to the degree, not just by looking at their behaviour, ⁓ by going, you know, all the way back through their childhoods and where and and how they have been traumatised and how that might now be affecting their behaviour and how they're relating to their children ⁓ and also to partner. ⁓ training as you can see was strange my goodness it was absolutely perfect for these cases. Mark: then did you go on to do a second master's degree or study a second master's? ⁓ you're studying that now. Melanie Gill: I'm in the middle of it. the, I mean, I'm in the middle of it. it's basically, it's behavioral science. And again, ⁓ is needed so much in these cases, credibility analysis. But you're, I you're learning how to read people's not just body language, facial tone of voice. And because I'm trained through the training in something discourse analysis, this adds to it as well. So I'm doing sort of forensic psycho linguistics. There's actually a program on television on Discovery Channel called Faking It. I don't know if you've seen it. Cliff Lansley runs this course and follows the work of Paul Ekman, who developed something called Facial Action Coding System, which I'm trained in. But again, you're learning about neuroscience. You're learning about lying. Mark: Mm-hmm. Melanie Gill: truth and emotions and is so incredibly helpful. The other interesting thing is you about emotional intelligence and boy ⁓ boy would the assessment of emotional intelligence help in these cases? Yes it would. Ridiculously and I don't if ⁓ you experienced this but letter of instruction, the standard letter of instruction I believe now in these cases for psychologists is, is, you know, what's the, it's to do a cognitive assessment of parents. Well, what's that going to tell you? Your IQ, are you good at maths? What's that got to do with anything? But if you examined, you know, emotional intelligence and the ability, you know, is there an ability there to start understanding yourself? Mark: Yep. Melanie Gill: and other people and your effect on other people you know is their capacity to change that would be a game changer for courts Emotional intelligence is basically your ability. It's a bit like empathy, but not. It's your ability to understand the emotional signals that are coming from both you and people and the that there are on each. ⁓ your ability be able to consciously reflect and also the ability to regulate Mark: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Melanie Gill: know, emotions that are not right in the moment. And it's, I the amount of research on emotional intelligence is phenomenal. And there various assessments that focus on seeing and also seeing where the areas of change are needed. You know, ⁓ it's just a area hasn't been looked at before. And I wanted to start including it in my because it would give so much useful information because the way I've trained is to give as much, accurate, information that tells you what is going on in these very, very complex and unique dynamics within a family that has broken down and then, ⁓ all this psychological damage is ⁓ And the damage is happening to the alienator. The damage is also happening to the alienator as well. The level of stress in these families everybody is colossal. And the children have to hide it. They have to hide it from each of their parents. ⁓ know, with ⁓ children's brains. Nowhere else does this happen. Mark: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Melanie Gill: That's not how it is in care proceeding. It's different. These cases are unique and the harm that's being done in them is unique. And courts, to me, seem no longer interested in more about why that should be and looking at forms of assessment that will be able to tell you exactly what's going on. Mark: we've spoken a little bit about your background, some of your work within, and research within the family courts in your study. let's talk about the news headlines that I keep coming across. Cause obviously, ahead of meeting you and ⁓ when we were about having you on the podcast, first thing that I did was I went onto Google and searched your name and found a bunch of articles. and ⁓ the reality is that the headlines are very much the same. are positioning you. The headline is, I can tell you what it is, because I've read a bunch of them. Melanie Gill: It's okay, this happened in here. I know. Mark: You are known as the unregulated psychologist. So what can you tell us about that? Because I've obviously seen your CV. Can you explain that headline? Menly Gill, the unregulated are known as the unregulated psychologist. Can you explain that headline? Melanie Gill: happened in here. I know. Yeah. Mark: psychologist. Melanie Gill: Yeah, it's a complete and utter red herring. And it's interesting because my lawyer wrote to the journalist to do with this outlining fact that this was a complete and utter red herring. So let me just tell you about regulation. Well, actually, I'd like let me ask what do you think regulation means? Mark: ⁓ normally within a professional body would mean you've got a membership with, for example, the psychologist society or something along those lines. It could mean within the family court that you have some sort of associational membership with one of their regulatory bodies. Melanie Gill: What do you think they're regulating? Mark: they're regulating themselves. Melanie Gill: Well, ⁓ is that the Professions Council regulates half the psychologists in this country. That's all, half. ⁓ Half have these very specific, something called protected titles. And these of psychologists work with the public. So they work in prisons, they work in schools, they work in sports centres. Mark: Mm-hmm. Yep. Melanie Gill: and of them have a degree of therapy in them. Now can be very harmful, it can obviously be absolutely fantastic, but at the same time that's the bit needs protecting. the HCP is a statutory regulator which means you really are going to get into a lot of trouble and there are criminal charges that can be brought against you. For instance if you're ⁓ using one of their protected titles when that's not what you've trained in. And what parents to do was say that I was saying I using a protected title, which I never was. I never trained that way. I didn't train that way. I couldn't be regulated the HCPC because I was a specialist psychologist. are probably about 30 different sorts of psychologists in this country. I only assess, I, you know, I wouldn't make a good therapist, but what my assessments do is show you what therapy you need. I've had conversations with HCPC over the years since they were established. And I've made sure absolutely that what, you know, what I was calling myself, which is basically what I was trained in, made sure that it was okay. In fact, Mark: Mm-hmm. Melanie Gill: I've still got the email from last time saying, yeah, that title, that conforms to what expect. I've never the ACPC prosecute me or censure me anything that. So that's one thing. So statutory regulation. An awful lot of other professionals are not statutorily regulated. And to be expert, you ⁓ you didn't need to be, that wasn't the necessary criteria for you to be an expert. ⁓ I was an expert witness, I the training in how be an expert witness in criminal and civil courts and so ⁓ I ⁓ was the of Experts which is an organisation for expert witnesses and you are Mark: Mm-hmm. Melanie Gill: absolutely regulated through their disciplinary procedure and they're run by other experts, judges, high court judges, appeal judges. Now if I'd ever got in trouble with them, you me, I would never have been able to be an expert witness again. The HCPC, if you get in trouble with them and they kick you out, you can go out and work, you can carry on working. Mark: Mm-hmm. Melanie Gill: The other thing about the Healthcare Profession Council is they do not regulate witnesses or the work of expert witnesses. And the other thing, and this they brought up in my High Court case where I was awarded costs against the Association of Clinical Psychologists, they said they don't regulate the methodology that use. So the things that that a lot of accusations coming at me, know, were coming at me, ACPC don't regulate anyway. But as I said, if I got into trouble with the Academy of Experts, then I would have been in trouble. In all the years I was with the Academy of Experts, I didn't have one complaint ever. yeah. ⁓ Mark: Mm-hmm. like I said, this is the headline that I'm seeing across every article about you. Melanie Gill, the unregulated psychologist, they're basically trying to use that tagline and to discredit everything that you've ever done for the last 150, 200 cases. And then I found a really interesting line in one of the articles and it said, where is it here? despite not being registered with the appropriate regulator, which is the HCPC that you're referring to. is not currently a requirement for court experts. So it's basically saying that although they're trying to bury you based on that headline, it's not a requirement anyway, but yet they're still trying to bury you on it when they're basically admitting most of the experts aren't regulated anyway. that, am I reading that correctly? Melanie Gill: Yeah. Yeah, one thought that is. Well, I mean, yeah, but they've stopped that now. What they're saying is that basically there's only certain, you know, it's only HCPC regulated experts that can do these cases, but let's look at that. So clinical psychologists, for example, have to be regulated by HCPC because they work in places like Kafka's, you know, mental hospitals, blah, blah, blah. But as a fundamental part of their training, they do not train in attachment assessment. Mark: Mm-hmm. Melanie Gill: And at the end of the day, attachment relationships within a family, within an individual parent and a child, ⁓ the individual themselves, is the most important thing ⁓ should be being looked at. And yet, they're not trained in assessment. They're also, I suspect, they have a module on attachment theory. And suspect that they're still using the theory which has been invalidated for use with children in court proceedings. You know, it's like, keep up with the research guys and things that actually, are going to tell courts, why is this family doing this? Why is that that mum doing that? Why is that dad doing that? And then uncover the actual harm that's being done to children because it's hidden. It's absolutely hidden. If you only look at behavior, if you just look at what's in front of you, then you're not going to see everything that's going on behind. You're not going to see this person is thinking, how they're thinking about their child, how that child is thinking about that parent. That's what attachment assessment does. So went and trained as many things as I could do, which meant I could more and more and relevant information. to be able to provide really specific and nuanced recommendations for families. every single case that I did, I gave a whole set of recommendations that would help mean that the children could have relationships with ⁓ parents. Even the small number of cases where It was recommended that children should a transfer of residence. I still put in for therapy for everyone. And what I often did after a case was carry on working pro bono, finding the right therapist for each parent. And none of my cases are any different from that. And it must be remembered, I don't make the decision on the removal of children ever. I don't make the decision. I give my data and I give my objective data and my evidence-based data. is not me just looking at behaviour and giving an opinion because that's totally inaccurate. All ⁓ attachment were reviewed by other experts and that's what gives them the evidence base. ⁓ Mark: Mm-hmm. So experts were they reviewed by? Were you hired by the family courts directly or were hired by CAFCAS or social services? ⁓ Melanie Gill: I was always jointly instructed, always. Everybody had to agree on me. one thing I always did, because, you know, yes, I'm not in a standard way. So what was doing was the minute somebody OK, you know, will you accept this instruction? Then I would say the lawyer, here's my CV, really, really look at my CV and come back to me because I'm not trained like other psychologists. are not regulated like other psychologists. So come back. All these conversations were recorded. parents single time, individually obviously in these cases, the first thing would do was send them my CV. And you you think people have said my CV was a ⁓ mess, but what I put was everything I'd been trained in. And I said, scrutinize it. And when we meet, ask me anything you want at all about any element of training. And parents did quite often. But the other thing is I also did was I explained about HCPC and I explained about my regulation and would say to them, is this a problem? And if it is, you need to get in touch with your lawyer. I recorded that as well. HCPC said, you know, was no good. A recording was no good. What about getting something that was signed? So I recorded and also had a sign saying, Melanie Gill has explained her status to us and she has given the CV, blah, blah, blah. And those were by parents. ⁓ So took an expert with this extremely seriously and I wanted to as absolutely transparent as I possibly could. Why I? ⁓ Mark: Mm where things now regards to this story? Because is there any updates you've or what's happened with recent changes within the government? Because obviously this has been going on for, did you say five years? ⁓ Melanie Gill: Yeah, witch hunt in me has been going on and believe you me, this is I am not alone. This is happening across the world and it is a coordinated attack on experts who actually can provide the wise. Why is this happening? Mark: So why do you think they've targeted just targeted people like yourself? Melanie Gill: They target the methodology, I think it's when you're able to explain exactly what's going on. And also, you know, I've been trained most the forensic adult forensic assessments. So risk assessments, assessments of ⁓ psychopathy, of stalking, assessments of, sexual abuse the analysis of credibility. because false allegations in these cases are, absolutely through the roof. And that's worse and worse and worse over the years. So being able to absolutely to the nth degree explain a family is something that flies in the face of the agenda to ⁓ make these cases. a start to deny the existence of parental alienation as we've already talked about, ⁓ also to make a focus on domestic violence as the lens through which these cases should be seen and the child is, where is the child? Where is the child? So it's not just my methodology though that's being attacked and I have heard members ⁓ of ⁓ I them the cabal, say that Mark: Mm-hmm. Melanie Gill: Attachment is an antiquated concept. mean, as I said, you know, it's called back in the real world where science exists. No, it's not. It explains everything. But other methodology they're going for is, of course, reunification. So therapists who are attempting to help families at be civil with each other. and to help, the rejected parent reconnect the alienated children also to the alienator. ⁓ Mark: So he's saying that they are against this. Melanie Gill: Yes, and so what happened in America was targeted ⁓ Mark: Why would they be against reunification? Melanie Gill: Well, you may well ask, why would they be? Why would they be? So they've targeted, you know, whole load of people. I have a colleague who was doing, you know, reunification therapy and was given death threats, death threats, not just death threats. They, you know, came to their home on numerous occasions, tried to force entry. and they ended up having to move country. And this is not unknown. You there are people who are under sustained attack. One had six million negative of their book when it was published. So there was clearly a coordinated thing, but what they introduced in America was something called Caden's Law. And that meant that you're not allowed to use reunification techniques. Mark: Was the negative reviews part of a propaganda campaign? Melanie Gill: ⁓ absolutely. You know, as I said, there is a coordinated effort to say that parental alienation is a pseudoscience. You know, it's backed up, as I said, by decades, ⁓ ⁓ we're also going backwards in terms of science, because being said should be looked at is behaviour. Behaviour doesn't tell you anything. Mark: It's like we're going backwards in time, isn't it? We're going in the wrong direction. Melanie Gill: You know, children hide their behaviour, they hide their emotions. You've got to go deeper than that. You have to go deeper than that. thing I was going to say, in every single case I've ever done of parental alienation when I've been in court, my qualifications and training and my regulatory status are the only things I've been questioned on. Mark: Mm-hmm. Melanie Gill: except for one, ⁓ a very, very complicated case. The for the parent who ⁓ problematic asked all my report, which was great because at the end of the day, that's what the court should be looking at. The court should be looking at the explanation of what on earth went on in this family. And that's just not happening. The other disaster that's happened in family court is making parental alienation something that only a judge can decide. ⁓ No, no, this is it. not allowed as an expert anymore go in and say this is parental alienation. Only the judge can decide. ⁓ Now, the world and in the psychological literature and psychiatric literature, parental alienation Mark: Mm-hmm. Are you talking about the judge's discretion? Melanie Gill: is a psychological construct. talking about a multifaceted problem. It is not a legal problem. And so what that also means is that experts don't actually need to know about parental alienation. They don't need to know about it because they don't take part in the decision. They can describe behaviors. But I've said, behaviors really don't They don't cut the mustard. So we're so out of step with what's going on in countries where more and more and more people are recognising that parental alienation is at pandemic levels. Absolutely pandemic levels. of children are affected freshly each year. And we need to do something about it because The families where parental alienation is happening and the dynamic that exists between certain people who are alienating and their child means that are developing narcissistic thought processing. And what narcissism is, it is extremely complicated. And across 20 years, I've the developmental background of how you start to think Mark: Mm-hmm. Melanie Gill: narcissistically what it basically is is that the more relationally challenged you are, the more sort of traumatic and harmful your relationships with attachment figures and other people become and that can be hidden harm, you know not talking about anything overt which we know in these cases, the that children have to adapt and the way they adapt is by shutting down their understanding of other people, being very cautious of other people and only believing in what's going on inside them. So it is actually a very lonely place to be. it means that what's blocked off is an understanding and empathy for other people. in these cases, we are churning out narcissistic children as if it's from a factory. Mark: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Melanie Gill: I have so much consistent findings on this. And you must remember that all my attachment assessments were looked at by another expert. And I've been talking about this in webinars a couple of years now. And going to be putting out all the I've ever done in one place on a YouTube channel within the next month. So you'll be able to sort of go and see. Mark: Mm-hmm. Melanie Gill: I'll talk about this till the cows come home ⁓ because Mark: is YouTube ⁓ is your channel up already? Or is it going to be coming out soon? It's going to be coming out soon. ⁓ Melanie Gill: No, it will be coming out soon But narcissism is very, very understood. I am not talking about a diagnosis of NPD. Narcissism comes in many different You can have vulnerable narcissism. You can have aggressive narcissism. You can have You can have hard. Every person is different. but I found very specific developmental backgrounds how it develops. And interestingly, can narcissism any time in your life because it relates, as I said, to massive relational stress. you can imagine one of the biggest relational stressors is splitting up, splitting from your... you know, marriage or partner And at ⁓ that your brain goes to protect yourself and it goes, just look after yourself, just look after yourself. So you can have it in a transitory form. You know, you can have it as entrenched traits where it's come up from childhood. You can it as, intermittent ⁓ thought and you can be vulnerable it. Mark: Yeah, of course. Mm-hmm. Melanie Gill: My attachment assessments show exactly what's going on in that regard. Mark: obviously a big for parental alienation. We've got parental alienation day up on April 25th. We're going to be down in Portsmouth putting on the largest light show of the year down there. So if you're able join us, we'd love to have you there and part of the celebration. ⁓ And it'll be nice to see down there and I'll be there all day and hopefully doing some more interviews and raising awareness. if are able to join us there, April 25th, Spinnaker Tower, to see you there, like to invite you there. ⁓ Melanie Gill: I'd love to be there. I will definitely come, but you're not far from me. Mark: ⁓ of course. You're from Sussex, right? East Sussex? Yeah. Fantastic. you're more than welcome to come and meet me. ⁓ yeah. Melanie Gill: Yeah, I could jump on a boat and come along, but I don't have a boat. That would be great. The other thing is, Mark, just wanted to say is that people ⁓ ⁓ to be brave. know, know, doing this sort of thing. More and more people are speaking out because what's happening is terrible. It's absolutely. Mark: Well, it's because it's that can tell you why it's taken me this long to talk about it. And I've been in the system for six years now, but for five years I was off social media because they try and scare you with gagging orders and threats of if you go on social media, you could face imprisonment or fines. So you think, you know what? just, I wasn't thinking of going on social media, but I'm not going to anyway. I'll trust the process and everything will be fine. But I've come to realize it's such a crooked process. I've seen so many lies and false reports and fake headlines and things like that, which is why I wanted to talk to you. I've found that there's, there's no way out of it. Once they've decided on their narrative, as you've pointed out, they're going to write that narrative and they're going to discredit anything that is outside of that narrative and push their narrative, no matter how much a square peg you're trying to get into a round hole. That's the way it is. So I've just thought to now, do you know what? I'm going to get online. I'm going to try and raise awareness in the best way that I know how, which is to talk to as many of the thought leaders that I can find that want to speak and want to tell their story and want to give their advice and try and help everybody raise awareness that way. ⁓ Melanie Gill: And you have to and people shouldn't be frightened. just want to say, when was it? 12, it was probably 12 years ago. There was a program on television which was so appalling and was torturing children basically. It was called Boys and Girls Alone. And I watched it, I so horrified and I was in a good position then knowing experts around the world. And I wrote to them and said, we have to stop this. People were biting my hand off. Mark: Mm-hmm. Melanie Gill: to help this because they watched the programme and they were so horrified at the harm being done to children. the Times ran a campaign against it over a and Dr Felicity de Zulueta wrote a brilliant letter exposing the pseudo-scientific explanation it and it really mattered. We also, within a year, Tim Lawton again changed the child performance laws. to stop children being harmed on television programs. And people were desperate to raise their heads above the parapet. Now, too frightened. They've seen what's happened to me. They've seen what happened to other people, and they're scared, and they're really scared. And that means that people who could be experts on this won't speak out. And so courts are becoming ignorant. Mark: Mm-hmm. find that the courts, the family court in particular will and bury any narrative that doesn't fit within their agenda. And most of the time it's to cover up their own failings. And that's my experience. ⁓ Melanie Gill: I think experience for many, people. mean, know, why isn't anyone asking why there has this been this massive upsurge in organizations catering for people who have had false allegations made against them? You know, everything's increased. these parents who have been and lost their children ⁓ or just their have completely turned against them. You know, people are Mark: Mm-hmm. Melanie Gill: are being harmed on an industrial scale. And it is, as I said, like two parallel lines don't meet. So the agenda in alternative universe is that, parental alienation doesn't exist. It's like, what about all the people over here in the real world? Can't you Don't you understand? Don't you want to understand? Mark: Yep. Mm-hmm. I think they do understand. it goes back to what you were describing earlier, where the economy and profit is more important than maintaining family unit. I think that's the narrative that they're trying to push. I like to ⁓ end podcast with what I call the three by three, which is three questions with three answers. three things are you grateful for? Melanie Gill: I'm so grateful that I became politically active. I'm so grateful that I had the fantastic experience meeting all these brilliant, some people geniuses to do with human development and for allowing me then to be able to help in some way and learning and learning. I'm so grateful for that. Mark: ⁓ second question, ⁓ three things needed to reform family court? Melanie Gill: They need to get experts who have a solid grounding in neuroscience, development, and forensic practice. They need to know so much more they do now. They need to stop looking at just behaviors. They have to have an understanding of this field. If don't have an understanding of this field, you shouldn't be in this business whatsoever. You have to understand how unique these cases are do research, go and read everything and stop denying it. Mark: my final question is three would you use to describe the family court? Melanie Gill: ignorant, harmful, and know, it too late? Mark: Gill, thank you for us on the podcast today. We hope to see you again soon. Melanie Gill: Thank you.