Reading Dr. Mary Lindahl’s article “Reunification in intrafamilial Child Abuse Cases” in the April 2016 issue of the Family Court Review Journal, one is surprised at the contradiction between what is written and what is practiced. There is so much to point out , this will be a series of blogs. Take a note, when it comes to Dr. Lindahl you and your attorney need to dig deep and understand her tactics. In some cases her testimony or written articles doesn’t match her practice.
Lets take the first sentence in the paragraph above “Current independent psychological assessments of both parents are ideal”. On the surface it is a very valid statement, both parents should agree to an assessment. In practice she is being untruthful , in a case involving Monica Zveare. Dr. Lindahl made no such recommendation to the Court.
This failure , despite Zveare’s childhood background , which would suggest suffering severe trauma as a child . Zveare made very bizarre statements to Dr. Lindahl, which to most observers would suggest problems. I am not quite sure how this article was fact checked or verified. In the Zveare case, Dr. Lindahl was blinded by her dedication to help Sandra Glenney win her case so much that she ignored the numerous red flags with Zveare.
It would be beneficial for you and your attorney to cross-examine Dr. Mary Lindahl with this article In that you can use this to bolster your motion to have the accusing parent evaluated . Lindahl would be in the unenviable position of refuting her article. Again, you have to get all of Dr. Lindahl’s notes and compare them to her testimony, they may not match,