Allegations of child sexual abuse in family court cases: A qualitative analysis of psychiatric evidence

Allegations of child sexual abuse in Family Court cases have gained increasing attention. The study investigates factors involved in Family Court cases involving allegations of child sexual abuse. A qualitative methodology was employed to examine Records of Judgement and Psychiatric Reports for 20 cases distilled from the data corpus of 102 cases. A seven-stage methodology was developed utilising a thematic analysis process informed by principles of grounded theory and phenomenology. The explication of eight thematic clusters was undertaken. The findings point to complex issues and dynamics in which child sexual abuse allegations have been raised. The alleging parent’s allegations of sexual abuse against their ex-partner may be: the expression of unconscious deep fears for their children’s welfare, or an action to meet their needs for personal affirmation in the context of the painful upheaval of a relationship break-up. Implications of the findings are discussed

Thinking Together: A collaboration of pediatricians and psychiatrists to improve patient care at the mental-physical interface for children and young people

Only 33 percent of London trainees surveyed felt that their current training program enabled them to achieve curriculum requirements in pediatrics or child and adolescent mental health. Child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS) are increasingly stretched, raising referral thresholds, and making the need for working closer together across disciplines paramount. A working group of pediatric and psychiatry trainees developed the concept of Thinking Together to tackle this training gap. The scheme involves pairing pediatric and CAMHS trainees to share in each other's clinical encounters to foster a joint way of learning and working together, while fulfilling curriculum competencies that are otherwise difficult to achieve