Parental and Forensic Risk
President of Family Division Resets the Framework for Expert Evidence
In Re Y (Experts and Alienating Behaviour: The Modern Approach) [2026] EWFC 38, the President of the Family Division Sir Andrew McFarlane revisited a 2019 case in which a mother had been found to have alienated her children from their father, with the children subsequently removed from her care. Read more
Read MoreA Landmark Ruling on Unregulated Experts
On 20 February 2026, the President of the Family Division, Sir Andrew McFarlane, handed down judgment in Re Y (Experts and Alienating Behaviour: The Modern Approach) [2026] EWFC 38, involving a mother’s application to set aside findings of fact made in 2019 — findings that led to her having no contact with her children for nearly six years, following an expert assessment by Melanie Gill, who was neither registered with the HCPC nor chartered by the BPS. Read more
Read MoreMother Vindicated After Top Judge Overturns Unregulated Expert’s Evidence
A Scandal Far Bigger Than One Woman
Writing in the wake of the Re Y judgment, TBIJ’s lead reporter argued that the real issue is not about any one individual, but about a family justice system that operated for years without proper checks on the people it allowed to advise judges on the futures of vulnerable children. Read more
Read MoreUndercover Investigation Exposes Views of Influential Family Court Expert
Why Are Unregulated Psychologists Still Acting as Expert Witnesses in Family Courts?
Anyone can call themselves a “psychologist” in England and Wales — the title is not legally protected. This explainer, written with a consultant clinical psychologist, sets out why that creates serious risks in the family courts: unregulated individuals can be appointed by judges to carry out assessments and draw conclusions that lead to life-changing decisions, including the removal of children from their parents, despite having no verifiable qualifications or regulatory oversight. Read more
Read More