In my opinion, Karen Woodall is of very bad character. Karen Woodall and her husband Nick Woodall had a massive influence over the sabotage of the British child support system, adversely affecting over a million families. Through the Family Separation Clinic, and before that through the Centre for Separated Families, they have worked with separated families involved in family court proceedings since 2010 or earlier, sometimes forcibly removing children from one parent against the children’s will.
“I would give up working in the field of family separation tomorrow if I could. When one is bombarded with personal and professional attack on all sides, it is oh so easy to dream of better things to do. “
“We argued, and continue to do so, that the whole of the architecture around family separation should be dismantled and rebuilt in ways that support both parents to share the care of their children and be supported in doing that. Whilst that is not good enough for some (who trumpet triumphantly that the Centre for Separated Families does not support shared parenting), and others who judge that we are only in it for the money (which caused a ripple of merriment when I last looked at my bank account), it is good enough for me and it is good enough for the children that we work with and that, at the end of the day, is the only thing that really interests me.”
Replying to Paul Manning, the Fathers 4 Justice protester who defaced Constable’s painting, The Haywain, in 2013, Karen Woodall wrote:
“Paul, thank you for your support, I am not perturbed, just tired of being told what to do and what to think and how to go about my business! I know you know me, you can trust that what you know is what I am. I don’t want to be involved in splits and fights.. And as for that old chestnut that I am only in it for the money….all I can say is why would anyone but solicitors be in this for money..being a lowly therapist, I am the least well paid of the lot but I do more work and get better outcomes!”
On 9 July 2015 the Custody Minefield website published this:
“The British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy (BACP) has published findings of professional malpractice in respect of Karen Woodall, a therapist specialising in work with families where parental alienation is a factor. The BACP is the UK’s largest professional body representing 40,000 counsellor/therapist members.
Parts of the complaint (upheld) relate to Ms Woodall providing a written assessment on the family including opinion that the child ‘is suffering from…’ and ‘I make this diagnosis…’ when she had not in fact met the child at that time. Other findings relate to a lack of clarity in respect of fees and the nature of services offered.
The BACP Panel was unanimous in its decision that the findings amounted to “professional malpractice on the grounds of recklessness and the provision of inadequate professional services in that the service for which Ms Woodall provided fell below the standard that would reasonably be expected of a practitioner exercising reasonable care and skill.”
The Panel also found that ‘Ms Woodall lacked the personal moral qualities of Sincerity, Integrity, Competence and Wisdom to which all practitioners are strongly urged to aspire.’
The above comments from the BACP Professional Conduct Panel are taken from their published findings which can be viewed at: BACP Professional Conduct: Hearing Findings, Decision & Sanction; Reference 704956 [July 2015} (Link no longer active)”
In response, Karen Woodall, as ever full of righteous fury and self pity, wrote in her blog:
“This has been a surreal 48 hours for me, as running parallel to my work in Brussels, I have been subject to an unfolding drama in which the publication of a two year old complaint against me by the British Association of Counselling and Psychotherapy has been seized upon, not by the opponents of work with parental alienation, but by people in the UK who purport to work for families. Re-published in a somewhat sensational manner (in my view) by The Custody Minefield, complete with the judgement that I was found to have contravened the voluntary code of ethics laid down by BACP and thus lacked personal moral values of sincerity and honesty, this news was tweeted with what appeared to me to be salacious like glee. Joining the mob enjoying the spectacle were some one would expect to be there and some who one would not. The truth of the matter being that you only know who your real friends are when the going gets really tough. Watching this unfold from Belgium and observing the behaviour of the proprietor of the Custody Minefield in his justification for publication, I found myself once again understanding the reality of life for those parents with whom I work and the parallel learning process for me was expedited once again. The underlying theme for this man is that he is acting in the public interest and that the law, as it is encompassed, for him, by BACP has been contravened. This is not for him (he says) a matter of enjoying what he is doing, it is a matter of helping parents to choose the right counsellor and for him, the law of the land in counselling and psychotherapy is set and monitored by BACP.
So it seems important to me, given that my practice is being so publicly picked over, to examine the law of the land and the role of BACP in monitoring and setting standards in counselling and psychotherapy. (This is not because I do not accept the sanction set against me by BACP, I do and have done and will continue to comply with the requirements of that sanction which are to write a reflection of the judgement set against me and to attend a training day and to write a reflection of my learning from that training day (on close contracting). I will comply even though I have not been a member of BACP since 2013, because for the period of time which is governed by this complaint, I was a member and therefore chose to subject myself to the voluntary code laid down by this organisation and so compliance, as part of my personal moral code, is necessary).
BACP’s code of ethics for counsellors and psychotherapists is a voluntary code, it has no legal standing but invites members to adhere to the guidelines it sets out for practice. Whilst it is the largest such body it is by no means the only body and there are many discussions and arguments about it within the field. My experience of traversing the complaints procedure as the therapist complained about was extraordinary and at times utterly bewildering and I could not help but experience the parallels with the parents with whom I work. In 2013, some eight months after I was first notified of the complaint in June 2012, my membership of BACP was due for renewal and I decided that I could no longer justify spending over £100 to continue being a member when my experience was so poor. Nonetheless, regardless of being a member or not, I resolved to continue to deal with the complaint and to go through the whole process to the end. This I did. Two years after the complaint was first made against me, a delay which was not my responsibility but that of BACP and after two days of hearing and the submission of my comprehensive responses, including my appeal the complaint was partially upheld and the judgement was published.
There is much within the process which is not in the public domain however. In responding publicly I am not challenging the sanction set against me but the extraordinary consequences of that judgement which are that the work that I undertake with families could be widely damaged by the use of the judgement against me. (Ironically not by those expected opponents but by those who purport to support alienated children and their families).
It has been stated that I was tried by a group of my peers in the process. BACP set down in their own ethical guidelines, the promise that any counsellor or therapist complained about will be heard by a panel of peers, one of whom will have experience of working in the same field as the person complained about. None of the panel hearing this complaint had any experience of working with parental alienation, I made submissions on this fact, they were dismissed. I was told that I would have to accept that. I did so.
It has been stated by some that this was an in court case, it was not. This was a privately contracted case between myself and two parents, one of whom was happy with the outcome of my work, one of whom was not.
I was sanctioned on the basis that my contract with the complainant was implicit and that I carried out an assessment of a family dynamic without seeing the child. In my in court work with families I carry out such assessments regularly, the issue of implacable hostility residing in the dynamics around the child and not in the child per se is accepted by the family court. It is not accepted by BACP. Thus the dissonance between the work that I do in the court process and the view of that by BACP, renders any therapist undergoing the same work vulnerable.
The sanction has however, helped me to understand that implicit contracts from the perspective of BACP are not the same as those from a legal perspective and to recognise what BACP require in contracting in therapeutic relationships. Whilst I am no longer a member of BACP, I have learned from the process of undertaking the sanction and will continue to do so as I complete it.
The experience of this complaint, the duration of time it took to complete it and then the publication of this by the Custody Minefield has brought me closer, much much closer, to the clients with whom I work. My concerns, which are always for the children with whom I am working and their right to a balanced and healthy relationship with both of their parents, are that the lack of public understanding of the reality of the BACP sanction plus the use of it by those opposed to the work in the field of parental alienation, may leave these children and their families without the support that they need. This has certainly felt like a blow against the work that I do, not by BACP but by those who have so enjoyed the spectacle of what is, for them, a public humiliation.
What would Freud say about all of this? I think he would say that my unconscious drivers have created for me the perfect mirror experience of the clients I work with. That is not to lose empathic understanding for the complainant in this process, for there too lies another concentric circle of parallel process. All parents matter to me, be they parents I agree with or parents that I do not agree with. I learned much about the complainant from the complaint that was not readily visible to me, this aids my empathic understanding further.
What would Freud say about the publication of the sanction by the Custody Minefield? I think he would say that the intention of that lies in the words not said. I think he would say that someone who slavishly works within a system is bound to judge others who fall short of or challenge that system. I think he would also say that change for children will never come by working within systems, it will come through the courage to challenge the system and face the consequences of that. This is what I try to do every day of my working life.
I care about alienated children. I know that working for them requires me to take risks and to push boundaries. I know that this is disliked by many people but I do it regardless because my personal moral code requires me to do so. Only this, will, in my view, create the change we need in the UK and the conditions in which the children who need help will get it.
I would like to make it very clear that in writing this blog today I am not seeking to challenge or change the BACP sanctions against me. I have accepted them, I understand them and I will learn from them. Even though I am no longer a member of BACP by choice. I am writing the blog so that the outcomes of the intended consequences, conscious or otherwise, of the publication by the Custody Minefield are addressed. I have the right to do that. I am not transgressing any ethical or moral code by doing so.
I am grateful for all of the support that has been shown to me as a result of what has happened. It has given me the strength to keep going and keep fighting for alienated children and their families everywhere.
From sunny Brussels, with love.”
On 19 July 2018 Karen’s self pity remained undimmed:
“As a founding member of EAPAP this project is dear to my heart. It is a dream which began three years ago when I was sanctioned by the British Association of Counselling and Psychotherapy in an out of court case in which I was not even working as a therapist but as an advisor to a family. The risks inherent in being a therapist in this field, (where therapy looks very different to what is recognised by existing membership bodies) became very clear to me throughout a three year period when I was waiting for BACP to hold its hearing. What happened afterwards, when the sanction was used by a newly qualified psychologist to try and damage my reputation further, left a scar in my life which at times I have wondered if I will ever recover from. It was the warmth, the sharing of experiences and the support and interest in our work at the Child Protection Centre of Zagreb, which encouraged the dream of a membership body for practitioners in this field. Now, as we prepare to welcome Professor Gordana Buljan Flander and her team to London for the first EAPAP conference, I can look back and recognise that from harm done to me, comes a wealth of positivity. And with that, I can also see, that the scar which caused such harm, is fading.
I do not want any other practitioner in the world to go through what I went through with BACP. Not only was it a horrifying experience, the damage it could have done to my work with alienated children and families is frightening. Even now, on occasion, the continued publication of the sanction on a now defunct internet site, is raised by people who believe that BACP hold the high ground in ethics. Given that BACP themselves have been subject to scathing attacks by the UK High Court and are currently waiting to hear whether their submissions to the Professional Standards Authority will be enough to allow them to keep their accreditation, their role in ethical governance, is, for me, defunct.”
As always when she feels attacked, Karen Woodall attacks back, implying that the detractor (or, my reading of this, the impartial reporter) has personality issues of his own. But what is really interesting about this blog post is the self justification and the refusal to acknowledge that her practice was unacceptable. She admits that she made a diagnosis - presumably of parental alienation, as that is what she and her husband work in - without meeting the child. And she implies that she does this regularly and fully intends to continue doing so:
“I was sanctioned on the basis that my contract with the complainant was implicit and that I carried out an assessment of a family dynamic without seeing the child. In my in court work with families I carry out such assessments regularly, the issue of implacable hostility residing in the dynamics around the child and not in the child per se is accepted by the family court. It is not accepted by BACP. Thus the dissonance between the work that I do in the court process and the view of that by BACP, renders any therapist undergoing the same work vulnerable.”
In 2012 Professor Jane Ireland of the University of Central Lancashire produced research revealing very poor practice by some expert witnesses used in the family courts. Among her criticisms were experts who supplied court reports without meeting parents: In this Channel 4 News report, Professor Ireland insists:
“You should never be in a position where you diagnose somebody or make judgements on them if you haven’t seen them. It goes completely against code of conduct and ethics, and it is impossible. You can’t do a paper assessment on a human being. You have to meet that person, understand their interactions, build a rapport, and then take your judgement on the basis of that.”
Added to what else we know about Karen Woodall, I find this extremely worrying. Another point of interest is the love bombing she receives from her fans below the line, among them Vincent McGovern, a senior member of Families Need Fathers.
Brief details of Karen Woodall’s sanction were published in the September 2015 BACP’s Therapy Today magazine. Unfortunately the link I used is dead, and you need a subscription to view back copies.
On 4 May 2016 Karen Woodall reported that her BACP sanction had been lifted. Again, her blog post was full of marvel at her own fortitude. Among the congratulations from her dedicated band of fans was one from Leigh Hyatt, who was one of the directors of Isle of Wight Separated Families, the company that Karen Woodall set up in 2010 to persuade Maria Miller, the minister in charge of child maintenance, that the Centre for Separated Families headed a “consortium” of charities supporting separated families and that they would be ideal candidates to head a national network of “family hubs” modelled on Australian family relationship centres.
Incidentally, I tried numerous times to speak to someone at Jigsaw, the charity on which Karen and Nick Woodall piggybacked with Isle of Wight Separated Families, but the individuals I asked to speak to were always mysteriously in meetings or otherwise unavailable and never called me back as promised. I even sent a letter by Royal Mail, which I know they received because I sent it by recorded delivery, with a stamped, self-addressed envelope and a few questions. I never received a reply. It is decidedly odd that a charity that once seemed so keen on Karen Woodall should be so keen to disavow any knowledge of her that it stonewalled me until I gave up.
Unwittingly exposing her earlier poor practice, on 23 June 2018 Karen Woodall blogged:
“In parental alienation assessments, it is not possible for any practitioner to give a view on the whole dynamics within a family unless the child is clinically observed with the rejected parent. Many assessments are currently completed without this inclusion of clinical observation and this simple omission, which in itself is an opportunity for immediate intervention by a practitioner, can add weeks, months and even years to the length of time the rejected parent waits to be reunited with their child. Given that all mental health practitioners should be aware of the capacity to ask the court for direction that the child is clinically observed with the rejected parent, this simple standard of practice could readily be codified as within the realm of acceptable practice for anyone who calls themselves a parental alienation expert. These are the principles of practice which EAPAP will govern and educate others upon. These are the standards which will, in time, provide protection for all parents affected by this problem.”
On 19 July 2018 Karen Woodall was still venting her self pity and rage about BACP:
“I was sanctioned by the British Association of Counselling and Psychotherapy in an out of court case in which I was not even working as a therapist but as an advisor to a family. The risks inherent in being a therapist in this field, (where therapy looks very different to what is recognised by existing membership bodies) became very clear to me throughout a three year period when I was waiting for BACP to hold its hearing. What happened afterwards, when the sanction was used by a newly qualified psychologist to try and damage my reputation further, left a scar in my life which at times I have wondered if I will ever recover from… It was the warmth, the sharing of experiences and the support and interest in our work at the Child Protection Centre of Zagreb, which encouraged the dream of a membership body for practitioners in this field. Now, as we prepare to welcome Professor Gordana Buljan Flander and her team to London for the first EAPAP conference, I can look back and recognise that from harm done to me, comes a wealth of positivity. And with that, I can also see, that the scar which caused such harm, is fading.
I do not want any other practitioner in the world to go through what I went through with BACP. Not only was it a horrifying experience, the damage it could have done to my work with alienated children and families is frightening. Even now, on occasion, the continued publication of the sanction on a now defunct internet site, is raised by people who believe that BACP hold the high ground in ethics. Given that BACP themselves have been subject to scathing attacks by the UK High Court and are currently waiting to hear whether their submissions to the Professional Standards Authority will be enough to allow them to keep their accreditation, their role in ethical governance, is, for me, defunct.”
“I write from my heart and soul because honesty about myself and about the world I live and work in, has stood me in good stead for so many years of my life.”
“ It’s that madness that I work in every day, with families where alienation strikes. Far from the hallowed halls of power, distanced from the mirage of charitable care for what happens to real people and dislocated in time and space from the band of ever hopeful brothers and their equivalent self satisfied sisters. Floating like flotsam and jetsam, in the maelstrom of family separation, fed from by the family justice system, including the likes of me, are parents and their children for whom the process of separation has created opportunity, motive and method to kill the love a child feels for both parents. Its a godawful sphere of existence and its a godawful place to be working, but this is where I spend most of my working days, doing what I can to help.
Feeling sorry for me yet? Wondering if I have entered into the one way street of delusion never to return? Fear not, this is merely me, mapping out the terrain of family separation, in at the thick of it, the only place it is possible to gain the knowledge and the power to effect change in my view.
Which leaves me with me. At the end of the day that’s all I’ve got really, when it comes to doing this work, my knowledge, my skills, my perspective and me. On this blog you get a very heavy dose of me, sometimes disguised, often toned down, sometimes so blatantly in your face I can almost see you wincing as I write the words, but me, always me. Because if I wasn’t me in this work, if I dressed myself up as something other than me, put on my fancy suit and pretended to be not me, I would be doing you all a disservice. I have been me at tea with Ministers and me with CEO’s of those charities I am so dismissive of, I have been me with the Family Justice System and me with the ever hopeful band of brothers and resolutely me with the self satisfied sisters. And most of all I have been me with those families I have worked with, always just me, as I have already said, its all I have got and at the end of the day, its all any of us really have…
“Transparency. I am who I am and you can rely on me being that consistently until the bitter end. You may not like some of who I am or you may like parts of me but not others, but you can rely on me being me absolutely to the end.
And in the thick of it, where your child is turning into someone you don’t know and the person you used to love has become someone you never knew existed and the justice system has its hands in your back pockets and the ever hopeful band of brothers and self satisfied sisters continue their conjoined dance and the charities that are supposed to support you turn out to be less interested in you than the tick in the box that will garner them another big hand out and government appears to be listening and then at the last minute throws you the crumbs of the promises they once made.
I will still be here, warts and all, just me, being me.”
“Maybe I am just deluding myself, after all nothing I have done made anything change. But if by speaking about it I make just one person’s life different that is enough for me at the end of each day. I never wanted to be a world leader, just honest and transparent.”
“For me honesty and transparency as a practitioner (I should also clarify I am not Dr Woodall but plain old Karen Woodall), is the very foundation of what it takes to be a successful advocate in this field. Having felt the stab of a couple of UK based alienation ‘experts’ knives in my back this year, I wouldn’t want Dr Childress or anyone else to feel the same sense of shock and horror that came with that experience… Fighting those who are supposed to work in the same field as well as everyone else and the systems that enable alienation is frankly, more than most could bear. I bore it and came through it tougher, sharper and amazingly, more skilled, more able and more determined than ever.”
“Caring what happens to children who are alienated means utilising everything and anything to create liberation routes, it means being courageous enough to keep on keeping on even when the family court professionals are heckling and dismissive and even when governing bodies are labelling one’s practice as deficient (and other so called experts are trying to use that to ill effect). Caring about what happens to children is what keeps us going at the Clinic.
And keeping going is what we will be doing today and every other day, regardless. Because families depend upon us to do so and because children’s lives are changed because of it. Which at the end of the day, is the only thing that really matters at all.”
29 November 2015
“Children are my absolute focus and providing them with the safe and unconscious childhood they all should have is my goal.”
“My practice with families which demands of those of us who do it, the deepest levels of patience, the greatest self awareness, the willingness to challenge others and something I have been introduced to this week which is attributed to Richard Warshak which is the word humbition, a combination of humble and ambition. I feel humbition in my work. Humbled by the opportunity to do it and ambition for better, always for better, chances and choices for the families I work with. “
“Working as I do in a highly conflicted area, in which I am the target of a lot of hostility as well as assumption, blame and at times malicious attack, finding people to work with who are supportive and nurturing, has been a wonderful experience. Having been the subject of an ongoing online campaign to harm my work by someone who was recently in court described as ‘one of those obsessive types with a vendetta’ I have become aware this year that whatever I do, someone somewhere will dislike it. Living congruently has meant that I have learned to accept the by product of being someone who has challenged the boundaries in work with families and reset them in many places. In this time in between I see that this work of challenging the accepted norms, will be something I continue for the rest of my working days. Learning to judge other’s worth on the basis of their response to my work rather than what is published online about me, I have a heart full of gratitude for those loving people who have come to support us in our work in London and beyond. People for whom rules and the belief in abiding by them, are simply outward expressions of a timidity of the spirit and soul. Ethics are not something to be set by others but something to live congruently by. In my work, the only ethical framework to live by is assisting children and that is not something which will ever waver in me. Leaving behind those things which I no longer need on this journey, shame, allowing others to judge who I am, belief in hierarchies of authority and acceptance of other people’s negative views of me, is a liberating and powerful experience. Let those who wish to live in their ivory towers of self righteousness get on with what they are doing, I have far too much to do to worry about them. In this time in between, living more congruently allows me to be bolder, brighter and better than ever before. Change comes in stages, this year I have shed skins of old habits as well as formed new ones and I have built bright new horizons.“
“I take a whole lot of personal and professional attack for doing what I do. This has never been about money for me, never ever. I get by and live a decent life by dedicating myself to what I do but I can tell you, the money is the least of it and if before I die I can make myself unnecessary in this field of work I will die happy and don’t you ever forget that because it is the truth. I hate the fact that people have to pay but the money they pay goes to those who can’t pay in our model and to research and to developing new ideas and ways of working. I give 12 hour days and seven day weeks to this work and do a whole lot for nothing because I care about families.”
“Narcissists are incredibly fragile people in reality, their ego strength is extremely weak and they rely upon others to shore up this fragmented sense of self which lies beneath their arrogant self assurance. The insecurity that a narcissist feels drives them to pull people to them only to leave those same people stranded when they are not needed anymore.”
“It heartens me that this place IS still a safe place, protected from those who spend their time diagnosing others (including me) with personality disorders in a sort of pseudo defene of their own inability to resolve the split state of mind in themselves… Thank you to all of my readers who journey with me, you help more people than you can know (62,000 page views and 41,000 visitors so far this year). K”
“I see vulnerable people being whipped up into a frenzy of belief that there are people who are keeping solutions from them and gurus who are selling those same vulnerable people stories about how only one way works and everyone who doesn’t do it that way is crooked or trying to make money. And then those same gurus ask those same vulnerable people for money and tell them that if they don’t pay they are not really caring about their children. Some of it sickens me if I am honest because it is all manufactured and it keeps extremely vulnerable people in extremely vulnerable places.”
In 2017 Karen Woodall bullied and humiliated one father who commented in an unusually self aware manner and reflective manner on her blog.