The FJC Story
The Family Justice Council claimed research shows parental alienation is "rare" - but they fundamentally misrepresented what the research actually found.
Why This Matters
Research Was Misrepresented
The FJC cited research showing 39.2% of parents experienced alienating behaviours, but claimed this meant such behaviours are "rare" - a fundamental misinterpretation.
The Author Contradicted Them
Professor Ben Hine, the lead researcher, directly stated the FJC misrepresented his work and that the findings show "a significant and concerning number (and not rare)."
Concerns Were Dismissed
When 84+ parents raised detailed concerns with supporting evidence, the FJC dismissed them without addressing the core misrepresentation issues.
Real Impact on Families
This guidance affects training, early intervention, and decisions impacting an estimated 110,200+ UK children experiencing parental alienation.
The Case
Detailed breakdown of how the FJC misrepresented research, the methodological errors, and why it matters for vulnerable families.
Timeline
Complete chronological record of correspondence between concerned parents and the FJC, showing how concerns were raised and dismissed.
Research Evidence
What the academic research actually shows, including the 39.2% prevalence rate and direct statements from the study authors.
Documents
Access all correspondence, research papers, and supporting materials documenting this case of research misrepresentation.
This Isn't Just About One Case
When public bodies misrepresent research in official guidance, it affects real families. This case demonstrates why transparency and accountability in family justice matters.