On Lofty Abuse 'Professionals' Exposed ...
I have received a number of emails over the years - some of them polite, some
of them not so polite - concerning my view that the psychiatric profession is
not an honourable profession and, also, that many child abuse 'professionals'
deserve to be taken to task very strongly for their incompetence and their
For example, in my last short piece concerning this issue (somewhere on the
front page) I expressed much satisfaction that Dr David Southall - a
paediatrician whose various bunglings and false accusations hurt very severely
some innocent parents - was finally struck off the medical register by his own
colleagues and can no longer practice medicine in the UK.
My piece brought in a few emails of mild protest, and so I am now going to respond
by justifying even further my point of view.
Firstly, amongst other things, Dr Southall actually accused a father of
killing his own child following a media interview wherein the father was, in
fact, merely defending the mother (his wife) against an allegation that she,
herself, had murdered the child - something which she had not done.
On the basis of this interview - which I saw - Southall accused the father of
murdering his child! It was utterly ridiculous. There was nothing in this
interview to suggest anything of the sort.
Southall was behaving more like a clairvoyant than a doctor or a man of
science, and, in my view, his behaviour was absolutely outrageous -
particularly given that lofty people like him nowadays have the power to
sway the judges and juries into convicting people of serious child abuse -
And, clearly, I am not alone in thinking that his behaviour was outrageous.
After all, the professional governing medical body - the General Medical
Council - a body which bends over backwards to protect its own members - struck
him off. So I am not alone in finding the antics of this man to be thoroughly
unacceptable. There are, clearly, many professionals who agree!
Furthermore, I also heard him being interviewed after he was struck off - and
I was not impressed. He is an arrogant man who not only believes that he is far
more 'expert' than, in fact, he is, but he is quite prepared to ruin the lives
of innocent others on the basis of his erroneous beliefs.
But he is not alone in doing this. In other words, he is not an
When it comes to the child-abuse industry (and, as we know, in the abuse
industry in general) there are many 'professionals' who are very
determined to convict as many people as possible - men mostly - in order to
expand their empires, to make money, and to empower themselves. These people are
not trustworthy, and they are not honourable; (e.g. see Shameful Therapists).
And I am going to prove it to you.
In the mainstream media, following the striking off of Dr Southall, the
'professional' defenders of Southall - and he himself - kept claiming that the
reason that there was so much outrage over what he had done was because there
were various activists who were conspiring against child-protection
paediatricians (such as himself) in order to tarnish their reputations and -
here it comes! - that these activists claimed that there was NO SUCH THING as child
abuse! i.e. that child-abuse never happened.
I heard Southall make this claim in an interview, as well as two other
This is an outrageous and dishonest claim, and it is designed to portray as
idiots and/or as liars, all those people who think that the
child-protection industry has gone too far.
Furthermore, there was some implication that those who complained about the
antics of the child-abuse industry were, themselves, merely trying to cover up
their own abuse of children.
In other words, these paediatricians have been purposely implying that those
people who disagree with what they are doing are, themselves, child abusers.
Indeed, after Southall was struck off, a
letter was sent to the Guardian newspaper from a large group of lofty
individuals - paediatricians included - who, apparently, are "Professionals Against Child Abuse".
Here is one of the statements that they made in their letter, ...
"There is a determined campaign to deny the existence and reality of
child abuse in all its forms, led by a small group, aided and abetted by some
journalists and politicians."
Read it again. Carefully!
These child abuse 'professionals' are stating, quite categorically, that
Southall - and professionals such as themselves - are being persecuted by a
group of individuals (which includes journalists and politicians) who
deny the existence and reality of child abuse in all its forms!!!!!
Well, let me tell you. There is no such campaigning group.
It does not exist.
And if, indeed, there did exist such a group, then it would have absolutely
no power of persuasion at all - and certainly it could not launch any effective
campaigns - because no-one who was to claim that there was no such
thing as child abuse would have any credibility at all.
And so what we have going on here is a smear campaign being conducted by the "Professionals Against Child Abuse"
in an attempt to discredit and demonise all those people who are concerned about
And they are trying to smear very horribly all those people who are unhappy
about some of the things that they are doing - viz; by suggesting that these
people are so stupid that they do not believe that there is such a thing as
child abuse and/or that they, themselves, are abusers of children and that they
are simply trying to cover this up.
This is the kind of smear tactic that the abuse industry has employed - with
much success - for decades - and it is designed to intimidate people away from
protesting about what they are doing.
"If you do not support us, then you must be an idiot, a child abuser, or
a wife-beater - or whatever."
And this was no single error of judgement made by Southall and his cronies. I
have heard the same type of accusatory messages touted across the media by the
same type of 'professionals' over very many years.
Indeed, the above letter to the Guardian was signed by about 25 of these
So, this was no error of judgement. It was a purposeful attempt to demonise
all those people who are not happy about the way in which these professionals
are making abuse accusations on the basis of the flimsiest of evidence - in
Southall's case, an innocent TV interview!
Now, most readers of this website - and other intelligent folk - are not
going to be bamboozled by these nasty tactics but, unfortunately, the world is
not made up of such people. Mostly, the world is made up of people who have not
got a clue about the devious machinations of the abuse industry, and they will
readily believe whatever 'doctors' claim - no matter how outrageous these claims
Indeed, one only has to recall the general public's willingness to believe in
all the Satanic ritual abuse nonsense that many of these very same
'professionals' were talking about not so long ago in order to see just how
gullible are most people.
And then there was all the recovered-memory hocus-pocus.
And - if I might remind you all - the thoroughly-discredited ink
blot test is still used by many 'professionals' working in the
But - lest I lose the point - let me re-state that there is no
"determined campaign to deny the existence and reality of child abuse in
all its forms, led by a small group, aided and abetted by some journalists and
And, even if there was such a group, the majority of people who are
complaining about the antics of those in the child-abuse industry are, clearly,
not any part of it.
In other words, this letter to the Guardian is an attempt to deceive, and it has been endorsed by some 25 "Professionals Against Child Abuse"
- the idea being to intimidate and demonise decent people who think that
the child-abuse industry has gone too far.
And this deception was no mistake. It was an unconscionable tactic that many
'professionals' in the child-abuse industry have used time and time again over
the past few decades in order to intimidate into silence those people who might
wish to complain about them; many of whom, I am sure, have been falsely accused
- or had suspicion cast upon them - by such 'professionals'. And for these
'professionals' to try to cast even further suspicion on to such people is
PS John Humprhys on the BBC's Today programme on R4 referred to these people
as "child-abuse zealots".
PPS I suppose I should state that, of course, there are very many 'abuse
professionals' who do a damn good job - I know some of them! - but, quite
frankly, unless they get their houses in order and stand up against those in
their own profession who are prepared to damage most horribly the lives of innocent
others on the basis of insufficient evidence then they will only end up bringing
themselves and their profession into further disrepute - and deservedly so.
My advice is that professionals do not damage horribly the lives of innocent
others in their various quests; because, if they do this, they can hardly complain should
others decide to do the same to them.