I do not recommend Dr. Alissa Sherry at all; in fact, I recommend just the opposite. (Run!) Dr. Sherry hangs her hat on her superfluous contract (potential client, be wary), knowing that she is liable for these faulty diagnoses, reports, and testimonies in family law cases. Be cognizant that the attorneys who repeatedly refer and contract her are her clients – not you|your ex-partner|children; her reports are tailored toward their needs as the evaluations are instrumental tools (exhibits) used in family court. Don’t be surprised if she holds your report hostage for more money. Per an email sent to me by her billing personnel, “As a reminder, Dr. Sherry does not release final reports until payment has been received and retainer balances are replenished.” Unfortunately, sometimes custody time and communication with your child are withheld until the parent pays more money (which is, basically, extortion; malpractice, to say the least).
What’s also concerning about the above-mentioned, I was charged for test administrations on two children that are not mine! If anyone is the parent of Abigail and April, please contact me! I have one child (a son). Dr. Sherry did not perform a forensic child custody evaluation for my ex-husband and me; so, how these charges got mistakenly added to our statement is gross oversight and, perhaps, negligence.
There is absolutely no way Dr. Sherry is able to accurately diagnose people and their complex dynamics, such as those presented in adversarial family law cases, in such brief, limited visits. She speculates, which is not what you want a professional doing in these highly sensitive, expensive, and tremendously important and impactful circumstances. Dr. Sherry does not have an evidence-based practice (as most of it is very subjective in nature – he said/she said); and *there are no established baselines of the individuals being assessed. *They should not be admissible in court!
Also, correlation does not equal causation. Any good psychologist or therapist will know that in these adversarial family law cases, people, especially concerned parents, will misbehave or demonstrate out-of-the-ordinary behaviors as the Complex Trauma, fear, grief (perceived loss of a child or children); and the stress of litigation can present similar symptomatology as some personality traits/disorders.
Again, unusual, heightened, traumatic experiences produce abnormal behaviors, which are “normal” reactions. However, Dr. Sherry exploits these normal behaviors (and in some cases, causes them as mentioned above – withholding the release of reports until payments are made) and misdiagnoses them as personality traits and/or disorders in her reports and testimonies, which can have a lasting, devastating impact on a family. Yes, a family…even after divorce, it’s still a family – just a different configuration of the dynamic and the child is in the middle, linking the two parents. Dr. Sherry’s psych evals are instrumental tools to further accuse, penalize, disadvantage, and, in some cases, abuse the other parent (Power & Control; aspects of family violence).
This Power & Control dynamic and the outcomes create or further foster ACEs (Adverse Childhood Experiences) in the child[ren]; the “losing” or alienated/targeted parent continues to experience Complex Trauma for as long the other parent controls the dynamic. Important to note: Parental Alienation can create attachment-related disorders in the children. Research Dr. Craig Childress’ AB-PA work and TCU’s TBRI program regarding RAD and attachment-related disorders.
Another concerning result of these faulty reports are confirmation bias. Once she has reported a diagnosis, professionals involved in these cases begin looking for evidence of that diagnosis, even if it does not exist! (=confirmation bias)
Potential clients, take heed. Apply your critical thinking skills and be cognizant of the limitations of all these paradigms. Consider – “What’s In It For Dr. Alissa Sherry?” (from ATXchangeagent at gmail dot com)
http://family-court-corruption.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/sG9Uoa3xIn4.jpg7201280adminhttps://family-court-corruption.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/fcc-logo-jpg.jpgadmin2019-05-10 03:36:272022-08-04 16:02:10TSBEP Complaint Process Part 1 – Considerations and Suggestions for Rule Changes
My name is Lauren Walker and I am a parent whose life was devastated by an unethical custody evaluator.
I have a beautiful 6-year old daughter, and we haven’t seen each other since July 2018, when a jury terminated my parental rights. I went from my daughter’s primary caregiver to being removed from her life altogether in a mere 2 years. My family spent over $1,000,000 defending me in this custody battle – 17 hearings in all — that was fueled by the custody evaluator’s continual recommendations to the judge.
I was beaten badly by my ex-husband. I experienced a traumatic brain injury from him kicking me in the head with his boot. My daughter and I, at one point, received a protective order to keep us safe from my ex-husband. When I left him, he continued to use the court system to abuse me. The termination petition was instigated by my ex-husband – not the State. And, the idea to terminate my rights originated from the custody evaluator, who grossly exceeded her scope, and violated rules as well as the code of ethics.
Not once did any other professional recommend that it was in my daughter’s best interest for my rights to be terminated. Yet, that’s what happened … due to the custody evaluator’s actions and ongoing manipulations in the courtroom.
Dr. Johnathan Gould, who is a renowned forensic psychologist, reviewed Dr. Alissa Sherry’s evaluation reports. I have a 27-page report with details of his findings. He concluded that her report was completely flawed and did not qualify as a custody evaluation.
Dr. Gould cited:
Concerns about the information included and excluded from the report
For example, the inclusion of speculation and hearsay opinions, and the exclusion of direct observation of parenting
Failure to assess critical parenting attributes, which was the purpose of the evaluation
Misuse of psychological tests
Use of unreliable methods and lack of scientific-based findings
Notable differences in the treatment of the parents
Dr. Gould recommended that the jury should not use the evaluation as evidence to support its decision.
My daughter’s and my story is terrifying and heart-breaking.
In closing, I plead with this Board to conduct strenuous oversight and investigation of its forensic psychologists involved in family court cases to prevent this tragedy from happening again, and to correct cases that have already ended in tragedies.
Thank you.
Lauren Walker
This is part of the Expert Opinion Summary from Dr Jonathan Gould::
It is my professional opinion, within a reasonable degree of professional certainty, that Dr. Sherry’s evaluation is seriously flawed. Dr. Sherry provides a robust understanding of the dynamics and chaotic organization of the families.
She does not, however, provide information relevant to answering questions about parenting attributes, abilities, or capabilities.
She does not provide information relevant to answering questions about the nature and quality of parent-child interactions.
She does not provide information relevant to answering questions about the psychological and emotional needs of the child.
She does not provide information relevant to answering questions about the fit between the parenting attributes, abilities, or capabilities of each parent and the psychological and emotional needs of the child.
Dr. Sherry’s interview procedures neglect gathering information about critically important areas of parenting, parent-child interactions, parent-to-parent communication, and child’s perception of each parent.
Dr. Sherry’s information gleaned from collateral interviews was essentially absent of information describing third party observers’ personal knowledge and behavioral descriptions of parenting behavior or parent-child interactions.
None of the parent interview data and none of the collateral interview data were organized around factors identified in the professional and scientific literature pertaining to positive parenting.
Dr. Sherry’s uses of psychological test results were of questionable value. Her use of computer-generated reports raises concerns about use of hearsay and concerns about the admissibility of opinions based upon the computer-generated interpretive reports. She did not integrate psychological test results with empirical knowledge of parenting factors associated with those results that would lead to hypotheses about each parent’s parenting strengths and weaknesses.
I’ve witnessed the corruption in family courts and have experienced first hand the traumatic effects that this can have on children and their families.
Francis Sanchez: It is pretty sad when individuals in control abuse the power they are given. The victims that they hurt are the powerless and they are afraid to tell their stories. Lets continue to be the voice of these victims and erase abuse of innocent victims.