Practitioners — Therapists¶
Open directory of therapists, psychologists, and clinical social workers who work parental-alienation cases — with stance characterization, named programmes/publications, and verified contact paths. CC BY 4.0.
Coverage¶
| Country / Region | Markdown | Machine-readable JSON | Schema | Entries |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| United States | us.md | us.json | v2.0 | 19 verified + 12 excluded |
| United Kingdom (E&W) | uk.md | uk.json | v2.0 | 12 verified + 8 excluded |
| Canada | ca.md | ca.json | v2.0 | 17 verified + 16 excluded |
| Australia | au.md | au.json | v2.0 | 12 verified + 9 excluded |
| New Zealand | nz.md | nz.json | v2.0 | 16 verified + 3 excluded |
| Germany | germany.md | germany.json | v2.0 | 16 verified + 9 excluded |
| Spain | spain.md | spain.json | v2.0 | 16 verified + 3 excluded |
| France | france.md | france.json | v2.0 | 17 verified + 6 excluded |
| Italy | it.md | it.json | v2.0 | 19 verified + 4 excluded |
| Netherlands | nl.md | nl.json | v2.0 | 17 verified + 5 excluded |
| Belgium | be.md | be.json | v2.0 | 17 verified + 6 excluded |
| EU (DE/FR/ES/IT/NL/BE) | eu.md | eu.json | v1.0 (legacy) | 22 verified across 6 countries (superseded by per-country v2 deepenings) |
| Brazil (focused v2 institutional regulators) | br.md | br.json | v2.0 | 3 institutional entries (CFP NT 4/2022 + CFESS + IBDFAM) |
| Brazil (legacy v1) | brazil.md | brazil.json | v1.0 (legacy) | 15 verified + 7 excluded — superseded by br.json focused v2 + jurisdiction:brazil sidecar |
| México (focused v2 institutional regulators) | mx.md | mx.json | v2.0 | 4 institutional entries (SMP silente documentado + CNDH + INMUJERES + DDHPO Oaxaca promovente AI 11/2016) |
| Mexico (legacy v1) | mexico.md | mexico.json | v1.0 (legacy) | 15 verified + 9 excluded — superseded by mx.json focused v2 + jurisdiction:mexico sidecar |
| Argentina | ar.md | ar.json | v2.0 | 14 verified + 9 excluded |
| Colombia | co.md | co.json | v2.0 | 13 verified + 6 excluded |
| Chile | cl.md | cl.json | v2.0 | 16 verified + 7 excluded |
| LATAM (BR/MX/AR/CO/CL) | latam.md | latam.json | v1.0 (legacy) | 18 verified across 5 countries (superseded by per-country v2 deepenings) |
| India | india.md | india.json | v2.0 | 14 verified + 21 excluded |
| Asia (non-IN: SG/HK/JP/KR) | asia.md | asia.json | v2.0 | 8 verified + 16 excluded |
| Africa (ZA + KE/NG/EG) | africa.md | africa.json | v2.0 | 20 verified + 6 excluded |
19 country/regional files are now schema v2.0 (JSON-canonical). The .md is rendered from the JSON by bin/aa-build render. The legacy v1.0 format is largely migrated; brazil.json + mexico.json + eu.json + latam.json remain as backwards-link continuity legacy files superseded by per-country v2 deepenings + jurisdiction sidecars. See /ARCHITECTURE.md for the architecture spec and /manifest.json for the canonical enumeration for downstream consumers.
LATAM5 v2 institutional coverage complete (AR + BR + CL + CO + MX all with v2 institutional / professional-regulator entries + jurisdiction sidecars). Brazil + Mexico operate as focused-institutional v2 with deeper individual-clinician deepening pending in legacy v1 files.
LATAM5 bloc fully deepened (BR / MX / AR / CO / CL all standalone). The legacy latam.md aggregate is now superseded by the per-country files — kept for backwards-link continuity.
EU6 bloc fully deepened (DE / FR / ES / IT / NL / BE all standalone). The legacy eu.md aggregate is now superseded by the per-country files — kept for backwards-link continuity.
Structural findings¶
LATAM5 institutional anti-SAP comparison¶
| Country | Professional regulator | State authorities | Apex court | Statutory hook |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brazil | CFP NT 4/2022 + CFESS | — | — | Lei 12.318/2010 (codifies AP — recognition direction) |
| Mexico | Soc. Mex. Psicología: silent | CNDH + INMUJERES | SCJN AI 11/2016 (Oaxaca) — invalidated only automaticity | CDMX 323 Septimus derogated 2017; state-level remains |
| Argentina | FePRA Pronunciamiento 14.12.2019 + 7 provincial Colegios | ASAPMI + Defensoría del Pueblo CABA | CSJN: no AP/SAP apex ruling | CCyC art. 671 + Ley 24.270/1993 (indirect) |
| Colombia | COLPSIC Posición Gremial 16.11.2023 (deliberate pivot from 2017 recognition-leaning) | ICBF + MinSalud + Procuraduría + Defensoría | Corte Constitucional T-526/2023 | Ley 1098/2006 + Ley 21.430 (children's rights) |
| Chile | CdPCh: silent | ANMM + SernamEG + Cámara de Diputadas (Boletín 10.516-18 rejected 58-45-26, abril 2024) | Corte Suprema: no proscription (then-vocera Vivanco publicly defended SAP, Jan 2023) | Ley 21.675/2024 substitutes violencia vicaria for SAP-as-VIF |
- Chile — inverted institutional pattern: The CdPCh has issued NO PA-specific gremial position — silence of the professional regulator is itself the structural anomaly. Rejection runs through Executive (SernamEG / Min. Antonia Orellana) + ANMM (Verónica Vymazal) + Legislature (Cámara de Diputadas rejected Boletín 10.516-18 in April 2024) + Ley 21.675/2024 — NOT through the psychology college or constitutional court. Two institutional silences converge: CdPCh + Defensoría de la Niñez. The Corte Suprema is NOT a critique anchor — its then-vocera Ángela Vivanco publicly defended SAP in January 2023; CS Sala Cuarta has incorporated gender perspective + violencia vicaria (Ley 21.675/2024) but never proscribed SAP. Chile lacks a T-526/23 equivalent. Recognition camp is geographically decentralized (Concepción, Antofagasta, Arica), inverse to metropolitan critique camp. Nelson Zicavo (UBB Concepción) ZICAP scale is unusually strong recognition instrument development for LATAM. Institutional 7 / Critique 5 / Recognition 3 / Middle 1.
- Colombia — widest institutional critique coalition in LATAM: five converging state authorities (COLPSIC + ICBF + MinSalud + Procuraduría General + Corte Constitucional) all cited as convergent técnico/jurisprudential concepts in T-526/2023. COLPSIC 2017 was recognition-leaning; the 2023 Posición is a deliberate institutional pivot.
- Belgium — critique anchor at gender-equality regulator, not psychology regulator: The IEFH/IGVM Recommandation 2023/001 is structurally unique in EU6 — a single federal bilingual (NL+FR) gender-equality regulator with an explicit institutional position that "le syndrome d'aliénation parentale ne peut être utilisé pour minimiser la violence entre (ex-)partenaires." Belgium is the only EU6 jurisdiction where the critique-camp position is articulated at federal-regulator level rather than only at professional-association or judicial level. Combined with BFP-BPF + Psychologencommissie silence (parallel to the NL pattern), the Belgian signature is: critique-camp institutional anchor lives at the gender-equality regulator, not the psychology regulator. No Cour de cassation apex PA-specific ruling exists. Critique 5 / Middle 5 / Recognition 2 / Institutional 5.
- Netherlands — positional weight in documents, not associations: Neither NIP (Nederlands Instituut van Psychologen) nor NVvP (Nederlandse Vereniging voor Psychiatrie) has issued any public PA/PAS position statement. Dutch debate is anchored by three documents: (1) NJI Richtlijn Scheiding (2020, van der Valk); (2) Expertteam Ouderverstoting advisory report (Jan 2021, chair: Catrin Finkenauer, UU); (3) Kinderombudsman advisory KOM003/2014. Structurally distinct from IT / ES / BR / AR / CO patterns where professional associations have anchored the debate. The Lorentzhuis programme (van Lawick + Visser, Kinderen Uit de Knel) explicitly rejects the ouderverstoting terminology as suggestive of "a conscious and aggressive process" and prefers geblokkeerde ouder-kindrelaties — classified middle, not recognition. Critique 3 / Recognition 1 / Middle 6 / Institutional 7.
- Italy — strongest EU statutory-and-caselaw stance against PAS-CTU: Cassazione I Civile ordinanze 13217/2021 → 9691/2022 → 4595/2025 + Riforma Cartabia (D.lgs. 149/2022). See Cassazione 13217/2021 + Cassazione 9691/2022 case studies.
- Argentina — institutional inadmission without statutory inadmission (inverse of Spain): densest LATAM critique routed through colegios profesionales. The 2024 Milei restructuring shifted the anchor from federal executive to universities + colegios + civil society.
- Brazil and Spain are the world's only two statutory PA jurisdictions — pointed in opposite directions.
- France — institutionally asymmetric: no French autorité publique has ever endorsed SAP.
- Germany — institutional inflection 2023-2026: BVerfG 17.11.2023 – 1 BvR 1076/23 + DJI 2023 + OLG Frankfurt 7 UF 88/25. See BVerfG case study + OLG Frankfurt case study.
- Mexico — uniquely fragmented: Soc. Mex. Psicología issued no public PA-specific position.
- Spain — terminological-arbitrage gap: LOPIVI targets only the SAP label by name.
- Brazil: only LATAM jurisdiction where institutional critique pole and clinical recognition pole are roughly equal in institutional weight.
- India: ZERO individual critique-camp clinicians with peer-reviewed PA-critique publication.
Editorial standards¶
See ../README.md. Primary-source verification on every entry; stance characterization must be sourced.
Excluded practitioners (regulatory / safeguarding disclosure)¶
- Randy Rand, EdD (US) — CA psychology license inactive since 2009. See us.md.
- Melanie Gill (UK) — unregulated; Re Y [2026] EWFC 38 set aside her findings. See uk.md.
- Reinhart Wolff (DE) — excluded for safeguarding reasons. See germany.md.
Canonical JSON: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/AntiAlienate/antialienate-knowledge/main/practitioners/therapists/<country>.json