Timeline of Correspondence
The complete record of attempts to hold the FJC accountable
84 Parents Raise Concerns
A joint letter signed by 84 parents was sent to the Family Justice Council raising serious concerns about research misrepresentation in their guidance on alienating behaviours.
Key Points Raised:
- • Misrepresentation of Hine et al. (2024) research findings
- • Incorrect characterization of alienating behaviours as "rare"
- • Impact on vulnerable children and families
- • Request for correction and acknowledgment
FJC Defends Their Interpretation
The Family Justice Council responded, defending their interpretation and claiming consistency with research findings. However, they failed to address the core methodological issues.
Problem: The response did not engage with the fundamental distinction between frequency ratings and prevalence assessment.
Point-by-Point Response Sent
A comprehensive rebuttal was sent showing fundamental misinterpretation of methodology, supported by direct quotes from the research authors.
Evidence Provided:
- • Detailed methodological analysis
- • Direct statement from Professor Ben Hine (lead author)
- • Real-world impact documentation
- • Request for formal correction
Dismissive Response Received
The FJC's final response was deeply disappointing, claiming prevalence "is not the focus" and completely avoiding addressing the core misrepresentation issues.
What the FJC said:
"The Family Justice Council is of the view that the prevalence or frequency of alienating behaviour is not the focus of the guidance, rather the guidance sets out clear guidance on how such cases should be conducted to protect children."
Why This Response Is Inadequate:
- • Dodges the core issue: Whether prevalence is their "focus" or not is irrelevant
- • Ignores the research author: No acknowledgement of Professor Hine's contradiction
- • False dichotomy: Accurate research representation IS essential to protecting children
- • No engagement: Completely ignores detailed methodological critique
The Story Continues
The FJC's refusal to engage with legitimate concerns about research misrepresentation demonstrates why public accountability is essential.