Donate Child Support Calculator
Skip navigation

Dr McIntosh - UPDATE!

UPDATE!

All,

I live in England so it is hard to keep abreast of what is going on in Australia, so I must apologise if this sounds patronising.

Sometime ago I wrote with the support of SPCA to the Attorney General to complain about the Australian government using the work of Dr McIntosh. It is all well and good in party politics to lean to the left or right but when you represent the law, as the Attorney General, then you should represent all Australians because justice is impartial.

However Dr McIntoshes Guidelines for Toddlers were so sexist it was clear she was operating according to her own gender political motives. These guidelines necessarily disqualified her from any participation as a government adviser because they showed she could not be objective. Thus the letter.

My own expertise is on the study of Child Psychology and Child Sociology research and my major criticism was that she had based her work on Bowlby's flawed theory of 'maternal deprivation'.

Subsequently I discovered Dr McIntosh was a guest editor for the journal Family Court Review on Attachment which showed she did indeed take her ideas from the work of Bowlby.

At the time I argued with some 'mad' woman on this forum that McIntoshes views were in fact a load of baloney.

I also went onto 'Dads on the Air' to tell people that her Toddler Guidelines are nonsense.

But she had the support of the journal, as guest editor, and the ear of the judiciary in Australia. So who am I to say?

Anyway fast-forward to Wednesday when I was notified of an article that appeared in the same journal defending McIntosh.

Of course this caught my interest and I investigated.

What has apparently happened is that the special guest edition has caused a controversy. Notable academics such as Michael Lamb have taken the highly unusual step of contacting the journal to complain.

In my earlier posting on this forum called, tongue in cheek, 'The rise and rise of Jenn McIntosh' I drew attention to the controversy going on in academic circles. YOU MUST GO TO THAT POSTING TO GET LINKS TO THE RELEVANT ARTICLES!!!

I was also sent an article specifically criticising Jenn McIntosh which I also posted on the forum as 'Have the wheels come off Jenn McIntosh PhD?'. GO TO THAT ARTICLE TO READ WHAT AN ACADEMIC HAS TO SAY ABOUT DR MCINTOSHES SEXIST ACCOUNT. (I have not changed the article or commented). BASICALLY IT SAYS THERE IS NO (NONE!) RESEARCH EVIDENCE TO SAY THAT CHILDREN SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED OVERNIGHT CONTACT WITH THEIR FATHERS!!!! HONEST!!! YOU WILL HAVE TO GO THAT POSTING TO READ THE ARTICLE IN 2 PARTS BECAUSE IT WAS TOO LONG.

I do not know. This may be old news to you. Perhaps you have ditched the Toddler Guidelines and McIntosh is locked up in prison somewhere?

However if you need ammunition to put her there then get a copy of the journal and read Michael Lamb's comments!!!!!

Anyway, I have had to clarify my previous postings because the SPCA Secretary contacted me to say they did not make much sense.

I hope this goes some way to clarify my earlier postings and thank him again from the bottom of my heart for the support he gave me at the time when contacting the Australian Attorney General.

I hope SPCA's faith in me has been amply vindicated by the comments that are now being voiced by academics far more knowledgeable than myself about the work of Jenn McIntosh.

Kingsley Miller kip

LINK to letter on forum to Attorney General;

http://www.familylawwe...18/index.php&kfs138=0

Last edit: by Kip


Kingsley Miller is the author of 'even Toddlers Need Fathers', a critique of the principle of 'Maternal Deprivation' as applied in family courts, which Professor Sir Michael Rutter described as an, 'interesting and informative guide'. He has also received a letter from Buckingham Palace stating, 'It was thoughtful of you to enclose a copy of your book 'even Toddlers Need Fathers' and Her Majesty has noted your concerns'.
Dr McIntosh is speaking in Sydney on 20th August. Guess what it is about?

Executive Member of SRL-Resources, the Family Law People on the site (Look for the Avatars).   Be mindful what you post in the public areas. 
monteverdi,

We need to start a collection now to pay for me to visit Australia for the meeting!

Seriously I am very grateful for your reply because it means somebody understands my posts.

I do not have access to the Michael Lamb article, only the abstract which I posted previously, but somebody from SPCA needs to gen up on it and go along to the meeting.

Once  again thank you for your kind interest.

kip

PS My next post on the forum will be called CANDID CAMERA when I will cite my favourite funny bit from Dr McIntoshes work

Kingsley Miller is the author of 'even Toddlers Need Fathers', a critique of the principle of 'Maternal Deprivation' as applied in family courts, which Professor Sir Michael Rutter described as an, 'interesting and informative guide'. He has also received a letter from Buckingham Palace stating, 'It was thoughtful of you to enclose a copy of your book 'even Toddlers Need Fathers' and Her Majesty has noted your concerns'.
Kip,

I would like to hear more about what you say about Our lovely Dr. Mac. Can you provide info at an academic level and properly referenced?

I do think that she has an academic and gender agenda. However, clear and reliable evidence is required to take her on.

Executive Member of SRL-Resources, the Family Law People on the site (Look for the Avatars).   Be mindful what you post in the public areas. 
Monteverdi,

Please go to my first posting on the 'Rise and Rise of Jenn McIntosh PhD' for LINKS. As I say you cannot (CANNOT) get more academic than Michael Lamb. The 2 page article on the forum is also about McIntosh which is also referenced.

If you can get a copy of the Michael Lamb article please can you send me one?

PLEASE ALSO SEE MY ORIGINAL LETTER TO MRS ROXON ALSO ON THIS FORUM!

kip

PS Funniest bit yet to come!

Kingsley Miller is the author of 'even Toddlers Need Fathers', a critique of the principle of 'Maternal Deprivation' as applied in family courts, which Professor Sir Michael Rutter described as an, 'interesting and informative guide'. He has also received a letter from Buckingham Palace stating, 'It was thoughtful of you to enclose a copy of your book 'even Toddlers Need Fathers' and Her Majesty has noted your concerns'.
monteverdi said
Dr McIntosh is speaking in Sydney on 20th August. Guess what it is about?
Can you post details as I will diary to attend.


Executive Secretary - Shared Parenting Council of Australia
 Was my post helpful? If so, please let others know about the FamilyLawWebGuide whenever you see the opportunity
 

VIDEOS

ALL,


These are videos I made as a result of Jenn McIntoshes Special Edition of Family Court Review;-


Dr McIntosh and the Neuroscience of Shared Parenting - Dr Allan Schore and Dr Daniel Siegel

http://youtu.be/rj56-vip6_Qhttp://youtu.be/rj56-vip6_Q


Professor Alan Sroufe and Shared Parenting -Divorce and Attachment Relationships

http://youtu.be/dmwRGE535YIhttp://youtu.be/dmwRGE535YI


Dr Jennifer McIntosh and the Bowlby / Ainsworth Paradigm


http://youtu.be/rS8Jo3oJo-Yhttp://youtu.be/rS8Jo3oJo-Y


THIS IS A PLAYLIST FOR MY APPEARANCE on THE RADIO PROGRAM FOR 'DADS on THE AIR' IN WHICH I 'DEBUNK' McINTOSHES GUIDELINES


http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL7B9290DF907A0E3C&feature=plcp


Hope these are helpful.


kip

Kingsley Miller is the author of 'even Toddlers Need Fathers', a critique of the principle of 'Maternal Deprivation' as applied in family courts, which Professor Sir Michael Rutter described as an, 'interesting and informative guide'. He has also received a letter from Buckingham Palace stating, 'It was thoughtful of you to enclose a copy of your book 'even Toddlers Need Fathers' and Her Majesty has noted your concerns'.
What both Monteverdi and myself (and I would suggest many other interested parries) require is not a lot of verbage on the subject but concise considered and referenced material.

The published material we are seeing is largely opinion (yes some is valid, I do not say it is not) and I think what is required here is a statement and a rebuttal to that statement which is fully referenced.

Just dumping a squillion pages of material into various web pages won't help. We are both completely time bankrupt and wading through the considerable verbage to get to authorative and a communicable diatribe in the 30 or 40 seconds we will have when speaking to authorities simply cannot be gleaned by hours of reading through forums posts that are not at all well formatted. (Regardless Kip that it is someone elses material)

I will be forced to have to visit all the various web sites, download the articles in a formatted style, try and make some sense of the youtube videos and from the metre high pile of paper create one A4 size summary with three or four key statements. Perhaps that is my penance for offering to moderate here.

More material is simply a complete waste of time on the subject. Many posters have made their views known on both sides of the void… There is more material that one could ever hope to use. Authoratative and cited material on an A4 page is what is required here I think. There has to be some middle ground when dealing with under two year olds (maybe three) and it is not reasonable to expect this age to be shunted on a week about basis from one home to another. It is completely unworkable, not practicable and not in anyones interests let alone a baby. The answer I think sits in flexible arrangements, through the making of properly crafted orders that force wayward parents into workable arrangements, very frequent contacts probably every other day where able, increasingly graduated contact times as relationships develop and ability to interact with the child in a caring environmenmt…
 

Executive Secretary - Shared Parenting Council of Australia
 Was my post helpful? If so, please let others know about the FamilyLawWebGuide whenever you see the opportunity
 
Moderator and Executive Secretary,

You have written,

Executive Secretary SPCA said
More material is simply a complete waste of time on the subject. Many posters have made their views known on both sides of the void… There is more material that one could ever hope to use. Authoratative and cited material on an A4 page is what is required here I think. There has to be some middle ground when dealing with under two year olds (maybe three) and it is not reasonable to expect this age to be shunted on a week about basis from one home to another. It is completely unworkable, not practicable and not in anyones interests let alone a baby. The answer I think sits in flexible arrangements, through the making of properly crafted orders that force wayward parents into workable arrangements, very frequent contacts probably every other day where able, increasingly graduated contact times as relationships develop and ability to interact with the child in a caring environmenmt…
But the real significance of this topic is about the credibility of Jenn McIntosh as an expert. In February Samba said, 'God, please dont give this crackpot anymore airtime. Its dangerous and damaging, he's not even qualified' yet now even Michael Lamb is saying roughly the same thing.

Therefore who is the real crackpot and 'dangerous and damaging' to our children?

Here is a link on this forum to the open letter written in January to the Australian Attorney-General, The Honourable Nicola Roxon MP, warning her about Jenn McIntosh. This letter was written with the support of the Shared Parenting Council of Australia SPCA 

LINK; http://flwg.com.au/forum/pg/topicview/misc/7318/index.php&kfs138=0

If you want 'authoratative and cited material on an A4 page' you can go to the original material because I do not think I can manage it and I will put together a website on the Special Edition of the Family Court Review for general consumption.

kip

PS

You also said,
Executive Secretary SPCA said
My question is where do they get the sort of misinformation that is promulgated as absolute fact. Where do our Australian courts HAVE to apportion "equal time" or "define the nature" of parental relationship…  Perhaps the good old English phrase "bs (censored) !" comes to mind…
On 2 May I was lucky enough to attend a seminar at the Houses of Parliament given by Professor Parkinson who tried to put the record straight about the Australian experience. I have made a webpage with his paper at;

http://www.eventoddlers.biz.nf/TodProfParkR.html

The Nuffield Foundation charity ran a campaign with the slogan 'Shared Parenting legislation is not in the interests of children' largely based on the misleading claims about the Australian experience. For those interested I have made an application for a Judicial Review based on these claims. You can see some of the documentation on faceBOOK at;

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10151069903943203.506481.538163202&type=3

For those still interested; It is from coming on this forum and seeing the comments that I was able to mount this legal challenge!

Kingsley Miller is the author of 'even Toddlers Need Fathers', a critique of the principle of 'Maternal Deprivation' as applied in family courts, which Professor Sir Michael Rutter described as an, 'interesting and informative guide'. He has also received a letter from Buckingham Palace stating, 'It was thoughtful of you to enclose a copy of your book 'even Toddlers Need Fathers' and Her Majesty has noted your concerns'.
Kip

What SEC SPCA and Monti are saying is that they have limited time to raise all the issues. They need a clear concise document which highlight the issues.

Think of it this way, would you be able to digest everything in a 12 hour talk fest on the European Money Crisis which goes on about monopolistic competition, equilibrium of comeptitive economies, Oligopoly, game theory, Perfect monopoly, structure, and conduct performance.

Or would you be better able to digest someone saying to you in one sentence, the money crisis has "occurred because we have spent to much money".

Executive Member of SRL-Resources, the Family Law People on the site (Look for the Avatars).   Be mindful what you post in the public areas
Liberi Primoris


Thank you for your kind intervention which I feel was well intentioned.


Could you explain the European Money Crisis which goes on about monopolistic competition, equilibrium of comeptitive economies, Oligopoly, game theory, Perfect monopoly, structure, and conduct performance on an A4 piece of paper?


I could not. That was the point I was making.


The blind former Home Secretary, and dad, David Blunkett, sent me a personal message saying, "I am very grateful to all those, like yourself who have written and particularly where you have been able to demonstrate your own thinking from the experiences you have had. Congratulations on your battle" . I have also received the comments below I have placed in my signature on the forum.


I did not receive these comments for no reason.


If I construct my own website (which I have started) I can develop my ideas. That does not stop anybody else writing their own summary.


Once again thank you for your interest.


kip

PS I will post a LINK to my website when completed.

Kingsley Miller is the author of 'even Toddlers Need Fathers', a critique of the principle of 'Maternal Deprivation' as applied in family courts, which Professor Sir Michael Rutter described as an, 'interesting and informative guide'. He has also received a letter from Buckingham Palace stating, 'It was thoughtful of you to enclose a copy of your book 'even Toddlers Need Fathers' and Her Majesty has noted your concerns'.
Kip

Ideas need to be backed up with cold hard succinct facts.

I commend your endeavors.

LP

Executive Member of SRL-Resources, the Family Law People on the site (Look for the Avatars).   Be mindful what you post in the public areas
Liberi Primoris,

What a thoroughly nice thing to say.

Here is a private link to my McIntosh website which is under construction. For your amusement! - You can watch it take shape!

http://eventoddlersdrmcintosh.wordpress.com/

Also you maybe interested in two new updates of sites;

Legal arguments against Shared Parenting legislation

http://sharedparentingdad.wordpress.com/

Shared Parenting and the Tender Years doctrine

http://eventoddlers.wordpress.com/

I would be interested in any constructive comments.

kip


Kingsley Miller is the author of 'even Toddlers Need Fathers', a critique of the principle of 'Maternal Deprivation' as applied in family courts, which Professor Sir Michael Rutter described as an, 'interesting and informative guide'. He has also received a letter from Buckingham Palace stating, 'It was thoughtful of you to enclose a copy of your book 'even Toddlers Need Fathers' and Her Majesty has noted your concerns'.

'Defrocking' Dr McIntosh Page ONE

'Defrocking' Dr McIntosh - Page ONE

Jennifer McIntosh PhD is a clinical child psychologist, family therapist and research consultant. However the reason she has risen to prominence, is for directing several research projects for the Australian Government Attorney General's Department, including three studies into the Shared Parenting reforms. These studies are notable because they go against the evidence in favour of 'Shared Parenting' legislation.

In June 2011 Dr McIntosh was made the guest editor for a Special Issue of the 'Family Court Review' which drew the spotlight on her own abilities to advise the Australian government about these reforms. In particular, concern has been expressed about her reliance on the work of Dr John Bowlby. Although his book 'Maternal Care and Mental Health'(1951), which was abridged into 'Child Care and the Growth of Love'(1953) went on to be a best seller and was translated into over a dozen languages, his view of child development is now considered by mainstream experts as a 'sociological artefact'.

In a damning review of the opinions expressed by Dr MicIntosh as guest editor, Michael Lamb calls the Special Issue a, 'Wasted opportunity to engage with the literature on the implications of attachment research for family court professionals'. He says,

The Family Court Review Special Issue edited by McIntosh provided a misleadingly narrow view of attachment theory and of previous attempts to explore the implications of that theory and related research for family court professionals. For example, the editor chose to interview professionals whose opinions seemed likely to accord with hers, and when they dissented, she failed to explore the implications. She thus represented Bowlby's notion of monotropy as though it was an established and accepted fact; neither the research (which shows the idea to be incorrect) nor Bowlby's own later disavowal of the idea were addressed, although the implications are profound. More generally, the extensive relevant scholarship was ignored and unrepresented, leaving the unchallenged focus on the editor's own research and on opinions that accord with her own. As a result, the Special Issue became a platform for opinion, rather than a forum for critical examination of the literature.

The implication is that if Dr Mcintosh truly believes in this obsolete interpretation of the attachment theory, How can she be qualified to advise the Australian government or families and their children?

Michael E. Lamb, professor and head of the Department of Social and Developmental Psychology at the University of Cambridge, specializes in the study of social and emotional development, and the determinants and consequences of adaptive and maladaptive parental behaviour. He was also the head of the section on social and emotional development of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development in Washington DC for seventeen years. He is the author of numerous books and academic articles, including 'The Role of the Father in Child Development', which is now in its fifth edition (Wiley, 2010).

Kingsley Miller is the author of 'even Toddlers Need Fathers', a critique of the principle of 'Maternal Deprivation' as applied in family courts, which Professor Sir Michael Rutter described as an, 'interesting and informative guide'. He has also received a letter from Buckingham Palace stating, 'It was thoughtful of you to enclose a copy of your book 'even Toddlers Need Fathers' and Her Majesty has noted your concerns'.

Maternal Deprivation

'Defrocking' Dr McIntosh - Page TWO - Maternal Deprivation

A fundamental criticism levelled at Dr McIntosh is that her view of attachment is not impartial or objective and she is using the Special Issue as a thinly veiled attempt to promote her own gender political opinion of child development.

In his review Michael Lamb takes the opportunity to remind family court professionals working with parents and their children, that;
  • Relationships with both their mother and father profoundly affect children's adjustment, whether or not they live together.
The Special Issue on attachment theory gave the editor the opportunity to put the record straight. Dr McIntosh says,
This Special Issue went in search of a shared praxis of meaning about attachment. The resulting collection of papers and interviews documents the views of multiple, eminent attachment experts, who discuss advances in the theory and consider guidelines for legal and mental health practitioners in applying attachment concepts to post-separation decision making.

But instead of advocating current research on attachment theory as highlighted by Michael Lamb, Dr McIntosh promotes Bowlby's discredited views. Nowhere is this more evident in the Special Issue than in her conversation with Dr John Bowlby's son, Sir Richard Bowlby, who inherited the title through an uncle. In this interview Sir Richard makes the statement that,

"My father's first book was Child Care and the Growth of Love".

But this is not so. His father's first book was called, 'Maternal Care and Mental Health'.

So why does Dr McIntosh, as guest editor, let Sir Richard get away with such an obvious mistake?

To find the answer we have to go to the end of the interview, when Dr McIntosh reminds Sir Richard that he promised her an anecdote about his father. In reply he says,


Interestingly, many people get their names associated with a theory they develop, so why is it called attachment theory and not Bowlbian theory? I'll tell you why it is not called Bowlbian theory. He said at supper one evening, and Ill never forget this:

"I have to find a new term, because traditionally what happens is a theory gets named after the person who first came up with the explanation. And if that happens, when I die, will basically stop developing at that point because I am not there to sanction the new concepts. So I have to divorce myself from getting my name on it. I used to call it love, then I called it a tie, now I am thinking of calling it attachment".

The reason Sir Richard said at the beginning of the interview that his father's first book was 'Child Care and the Growth of Love' is because he wanted his father to take credit for the attachment theory.

If Dr McIntosh had corrected Sir Richard and said his father's first book was in fact called 'Maternal Care and Mental Health' it would follow that he was responsible for the theory of 'Maternal Deprivation' and highlight readers to her own gender political views.

John Bowlby's theory of 'Maternal Deprivation' said that,

  • A child has an innate (i.e. inborn) need to attach to one main attachment figure usually the mother (i.e. monotropy).

  • A child should receive the continuous care of this single most important attachment figure during a critical period during the first two or three years of life.

  • The long term consequences of maternal deprivation might include the following: delinquency, reduced intelligence, increased aggression, depression, affectionless psychopathy
Michael Lamb claims that Bowlby adapted some of his ideas later in his career. But in December 1986 when he was asked to chose his 'citation classic' Bowlby cited 'Maternal Care and Mental Health' because it 'focused attention on the relationship of a young child to the mother as an important determinant of mental health.'

This transcript of the interview illustrates the underlying relationship between participants and the editor in the Special Issue. Dr McIntosh allows Sir Richard Bowlby to give credit for the attachment theory to his father whilst at the same time remaining silent about the implications of his views to current decision making on attachment.

As a result of this style of interview technique, as Michael Lamb comments, the Special Issue is a, 'platform for opinion, rather than a forum for critical examination of the literature'.


LINK to PAGE ONE;

http://flwg.com.au/forum/pg/topicview/misc/7999/index.php&start=0#post_50318

Moderator Note

This post has been moved from another topic you started
Kip, the Moderators have given you some latitude, now kindly follow the rules.
See the first site forum and Sisyphus posts.
Double posting is not allowed because it is blogging and starting new topics is blogging
Much of your material could be condensed into pdf format for attachments


Kingsley Miller is the author of 'even Toddlers Need Fathers', a critique of the principle of 'Maternal Deprivation' as applied in family courts, which Professor Sir Michael Rutter described as an, 'interesting and informative guide'. He has also received a letter from Buckingham Palace stating, 'It was thoughtful of you to enclose a copy of your book 'even Toddlers Need Fathers' and Her Majesty has noted your concerns'.
Kip we need to work on our definitions of keeping everything to one A4 page. KISS – except remove the simple and replace it with short

Executive Member of SRL-Resources, the Family Law People on the site (Look for the Avatars).   Be mindful what you post in the public areas
Liberi Primoris,

I am not sure how familiar you are with my postings?

At the beginning of the year I posted about Dr McIntoshes Toddler Guidelines as well as her contributions to the Family Court Review. I even wrote to the Attorney General with the support of SPCA.

At that time I was on this forum arguing my corner.

I had opposition from APRIL and SAMBA who thought I was mad.

As you can see from those discussions on this forum I focused on the John Bowlby angle about which I am most familiar.

As you can also see from my previous postings I have subsequently been busy in England and even had the pleasure of meeting Professor Parkinson at the Palace of Westminster.

I was recently informed of a new edition of the Family Court Review which included rebuttals of Dr McIntoshes work along the similar lines of the postings I made on this forum.

Therefore I returned to this forum to see whether this correspondence was familiar?

I think the rebuttal by Michael Lamb is quite important because he was taught by Mary Ainsworth who was John Bowlby's colleague! This rebuttal, in the form of a review, demolishes Dr McIntoshes views on Shared Parenting legislation.

I do not think my posts are too long and somebody has commented that the last one I posted hit the 'nail on the head'.

I post these pages on here first because they are about Australia and this is a FORUM and it is the best place to get them corrected. As it turns out people in Australia are not familiar with Dr McIntoshes contribution as Guest Editor of the Special Issue and therefore I believe my posts have proved interesting to others.

This topic on RESEARCH was started at my suggestion and I think that my posts seek to engage others. I am not quite sure what the A4 page is about? As I have explained I do not feel I could explain the subject in such a summary and I would be interested to see what is meant. If these posts are an embarrassment please say so and I will stop posting but the rules seem to keep changing.

Once again thank you for your kind interest.

(Please note I cannot post or reply on this thread until you post!)

kip

PS These are some threads from the same subject on this forum at the beginning of the year;

Is 'assessment' the key to understanding attachment?

Linear regression modelling as applied by Dr McIntosh

The Attachment Theory and 'Maternal Deprivation' - Sexism and Guidelines for Infants and Overnight Care

Dr Jennifer McIntosh and the Bowlby / Ainsworth Paradigm

http://flwg.com.au/forum/pg/topicview/misc/7489/index.php&kfs138=0

Kingsley Miller is the author of 'even Toddlers Need Fathers', a critique of the principle of 'Maternal Deprivation' as applied in family courts, which Professor Sir Michael Rutter described as an, 'interesting and informative guide'. He has also received a letter from Buckingham Palace stating, 'It was thoughtful of you to enclose a copy of your book 'even Toddlers Need Fathers' and Her Majesty has noted your concerns'.

'EXPERTS' IN FAMILY PROCEEDINGS

PERSONAL MESSAGE

Dear All,

In the past I have received a letter from Buckingham Palace which said, "It was thoughtful of you to enclose a copy of your book 'even Toddlers Need Fathers' and Her Majesty has noted your concerns". The former Home Secretary, and dad, David Blunkett also wrote to say, "I am very grateful to all those, like yourself who have written and particularly where you have been able to demonstrate your own thinking from the experiences you have had. Congratulations on your battle".

But my campaign is not intended for royalty or politicians. It is intended for ordinary dads!

Although the title of my book sounds naff 'even Toddlers Need Fathers' it is in fact a critique of Dr John Bowlbys theory of maternal deprivation and a foremost expert on children's welfare, Professor Sir Michael Rutter, described it as an 'interesting and informative guide'.

Those who know me will be able to confirm that from the beginning my campaign has sought to contradict the 'Tender Years' doctrine which is prevalent in UK proceedings.

Believe it or not so called 'experts' in family proceedings base their advice on a flawed understanding of child development. Bowlby's theory, which encouraged mothers to stay at home to look after their children, had a tremendous impact on families in the 1950's and was even encouraged by the government at the time. His book 'Maternal care and mental health' which was abridged as 'Child Care and the Growth of Love' (1953) was a best seller and translated into more than a dozen languages. The only problem is, it is wrong!

Even at the time child care professionals disputed the findings but unfortunately it was Bowlby's theory that stuck in the public consciousness and still prevails in family courts around the world today.

In the recent debate in the UK on Shared Parenting legislation opposition from the Nuffield Foundation was fanned with references to the Australian experience which also seemed to be based on Bowlby's old fashioned ideas. However it became apparent that his view of child development was given fresh impetus by the work of Jenn McIntosh PhD who directed several projects for the Australian Attorney General's office.

Because of my interest I contacted the Australian Attorney General with the support of the Shared Parenting Council of Australia SPCA to complain about the work of Dr McIntosh.

Professor Parkinson an Australian government adviser also gave a seminar at the Houses of Parliament which contradicted many of the arguments about Australia used by opponents of Shared Parenting legislation.

But more recently Michael Lamb, an acknowledged expert on Shared Parenting, has written a damning review of Dr McIntoshes work based on her production of a Special Issue of the journal Family Court Review which promotes Bowlby's view of child development.

Earlier in the year I was contacted by a father from Australia who told me about his Family Court Welfare Officer citing Dr McIntoshes guidelines for Toddlers which uses a theoretical 'ascending ladder' of contact that only gives the father parity of esteem with the mother in principle, but never in reality.

The trouble with his so called expert is that she actually believes in what she is saying. Bowlby said that children need their mothers and what he says generally goes in family proceedings. But there is a whole 'back story' to explain how Bowlby got it wrong.

Now Michael Lamb has now come out to say, more or less, what I have been trying to say for all these years.

The point for fathers in family proceedings is to listen for a few buzz words which should warn you that the court is trying to railroad you, such as Bowlby, 'Tender Years' doctrine and 'ascending ladder' of contact. I suggested to the father from Australia that he checks with the court officer what she thinks of Bowlby's work and if she has heard of Professor Sir Michael Rutter? This should give him a good indication of what he maybe up against.

Below is the abstract from Michael Lamb's review of Dr McIntoshes publication. Take it from me, he is really saying, 'She does not know what she is talking about'. Unfortunately there are a lot more 'experts' out there like her. I hope this helps.

Kingsley Miller kip (even Toddlers Need Fathers)

The Family Court Review Special Issue edited by McIntosh provided a misleadingly narrow view of attachment theory and of previous attempts to explore the implications of that theory and related research for family court professionals. For example, the editor chose to interview professionals whose opinions seemed likely to accord with hers, and when they dissented, she failed to explore the implications. She thus represented Bowlbys notion of monotropy as though it was an established and accepted fact; neither the research (which shows the idea to be incorrect) nor Bowlbys own later disavowal of the idea were addressed, although the implications are profound. More generally, the extensive relevant scholarship was ignored and unrepresented, leaving the unchallenged focus on the editors own research and on opinions that accord with her own. As a result, the Special Issue became a platform for opinion, rather than a forum for critical examination of the literature.

Michael E. Lamb, professor and head of the Department of Social and Developmental Psychology at the University of Cambridge, specializes in the study of social and emotional development, and the determinants and consequences of adaptive and maladaptive parental behaviour. He was also the head of the section on social and emotional development of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development in Washington DC for seventeen years. He is the author of numerous books and academic articles, including The Role of the Father in Child Development, which is now in its fifth edition (Wiley, 2010).

Ref; Lamb, M. E. (2012), A wasted opportunity to engage with the literature on the implications of attachment research for family court professionals. Family Court Review, 50: 481485

Ref; McIntosh, J. E. (2011), Guest editors introduction to special issue on attachment theory, separation, and divorce: forging coherent understandings for family law. Family Court Review, 49: 418425

Websites

'Defrocking' Dr McIntosh


http://eventoddlersdrmcintosh.wordpress.com/


Legal arguments against Shared Parenting legislation


http://sharedparentingdad.wordpress.com/


even Toddlers Need Fathers


http://eventoddlers.wordpress.com/


 The Shared Parenting Council of Australia SPCA

 The Shared Parenting Council of Australia fully endorses this letter written by Mr Kingsley Miller, author of even Toddlers Need Fathers, citing major concerns with the various studies conducted by Psychologist Jennifer McIntosh.

 We support this letter because it brings some clarity, reason and logic to the emotive report being circulated that suggests young children under two should not have overnight contact with fathers.

 The Council agrees that many of the findings published by Dr McIntosh are based on statistically small and unreliable samplings, often lacking in clear logical reasoning, leading to false conclusions about children and shared parenting. The SPCA is concerned that Jennifer McIntosh presents as a self-styled expert in childrens matters, and appearing as an authoritative voice, yet erroneously and repeatedly makes findings that are highly subjective, counter-intuitive and simply wrong.

 Her report findings often fail the test of common sense, and are accepted as authoritative documents that find their way into the hands of litigants. It is of particular concern these reports find themselves presented as fact in court and in some cases are taken on notice by judicial officers. These untested papers are picked up by organisations such as the Australian Association for Infant Mental Health (Who we have been unable to contact)and published as factual authorities further confusing separating parents who may otherwise make amiable arrangements which are clearly in the best interests of children.

 The most comprehensive recent study by the AIFS supported the legislative change in 2006, and made positive findings about children and their relationships with their mother and father. The AIFS report contradicts the negative assertions of Dr Jennifer McIntosh and draws on the real lived with experiences of parents, both intact and separated through its very large numeric sampling.

 Authorised for publication on behalf of the SPCA

 Wayne R. Butler

 Executive Secretary, Shared Parenting Council of Australia.

 Member Law Council of Australia, Family Law Section.

Last edit: by Kip


Kingsley Miller is the author of 'even Toddlers Need Fathers', a critique of the principle of 'Maternal Deprivation' as applied in family courts, which Professor Sir Michael Rutter described as an, 'interesting and informative guide'. He has also received a letter from Buckingham Palace stating, 'It was thoughtful of you to enclose a copy of your book 'even Toddlers Need Fathers' and Her Majesty has noted your concerns'.

THIRD letter to the Attorney-General the Honourable Nicola Roxon MP

All,

You can see the second letter on the forum at;-

http://www.familylawwe...18/index.php&kfs138=0

Comments welcome!

Many thanks,


kip


FAO; The Honourable Nicola Roxon MP,
Attorney-General
Parliament House
Canberra ACT 2600
45 Roberts Road
Shirley
Southampton
UK
SO15 5DF
7 August 2012
 

 Dear Mrs Roxon,


 Re; (3) Australian Family Law: The contribution of Dr Jennifer McIntosh and Dr John Bowlby

Although I live in the UK I have previously written to your office twice with the support of the Shared Parenting Council of Australia SPCA about the continuing involvement of Dr McIntosh as an Australian government adviser and policy-maker. Because of similar concerns raised more recently in particular by Michael Lamb of Cambridge University, I feel obliged to try to contact you for a third time.

Lord Justice Thorpe, Vice President of the Family Division in the UK, said that I have a, 'history of responsible campaigning and writing on issues relating to family relationships' and the former Home Secretary, and dad, David Blunkett has written to say, 'I am very grateful to all those, like yourself who have written and particularly where you have been able to demonstrate your own thinking from the experiences you have had.' I have also received a letter from Buckingham Palace which said, It was thoughtful of you to enclose a copy of your book even Toddlers Need Fathers and Her Majesty has noted your concerns. It is because of these concerns it is with the greatest of respect that I am again contacting your office.

Since the previous correspondence, Dr McIntoshes role as guest editor for a Special Issue of the academic journal Family Court Review has reinforced concern about the reliability of her opinions. In a damning review, Michael Lamb describes her views expressed in the Special Issue as a, Wasted opportunity to engage with the literature on the implications of attachment research for family court professionals. He states,

The Family Court Review Special Issue edited by McIntosh provided a misleadingly narrow view of attachment theory and of previous attempts to explore the implications of that theory and related research for family court professionals. For example, the editor chose to interview professionals whose opinions seemed likely to accord with hers, and when they dissented, she failed to explore the implications. She thus represented Bowlbys notion of monotropy as though it was an established and accepted fact; neither the research (which shows the idea to be incorrect) nor Bowlbys own later disavowal of the idea were addressed, although the implications are profound. More generally, the extensive relevant scholarship was ignored and unrepresented, leaving the unchallenged focus on the editors own research and on opinions that accord with her own. As a result, the Special Issue became a platform for opinion, rather than a forum for critical examination of the literature.

The reason Dr McIntoshes view of child development has found favour is because the discredited concept of 'monotropy' closely corresponds with the 'Tender Years' doctrine which is popular in many jurisdictions. This explains the reason her work is supported by the former Australian family judge Richard Chisholm.

Dr Hamish Cameron, a consultant child psychiatrist who has served as an expert witness in many UK family cases, describes the Tender Years doctrine as,

The belief that young children are best off with the parent with the closest resemblance to the Madonna. Where judges see their first duty as preserving the mother-child dyad, their solution in some intractable cases will be to remove the father from the picture. (The Guardian, 'Children first', By Maureen Freely, 27 March 2002).

It is clear from the articles included in the Special Issue of the Family Court Review that this publication is an attempt by Dr McIntosh to legitimise the Tender Years doctrine. However, as suggested by Michael Lamb, she has relied upon Dr Bowlby's discredited theory of 'monotropy' which was the lynch-pin of his popular theory called 'Maternal Deprivation'. This theory was encouraged by the UK government after the Second World War so that women, in many ways liberated by their wartime work experiences, would stay at home to look after their children thereby releasing jobs for returning servicemen.

Today the ramifications of adopting this policy for Australian society are far-reaching. McConaghy in the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry from September 1979, asks the question, 'Maternal Deprivation: can its ghost be laid?'

The hypothesis that separation from an established mother figure in early childhood has a detrimental effect on a child's later mental health has been widely promulgated and commonly accepted both in academic and lay circles throughout the Western world. The hypothesis continues to have a significant effect on mothers' decision as to whether they should resume work or not, and on governmental policy concerning the provision of child-care facilities for the children of those mothers who do. The evidence for the hypothesis is reviewed and it is concluded that it does not satisfy the requirements of scientific methodology. The theory that a child's attachment to its mother figure is the emotional basis for its future love relationships, group affiliations and loyalty to the state, is now being accorded similar acceptance without further evidence than that supporting the original hypothesis.

The Australian government should be proud of introducing legislation that recognises the importance to children of both parents. Instead Dr McIntosh is reintroducing this discredited theory once again as a convenient political tool, on this occasion, to oppose Shared Parenting.

My own work even Toddlers Need Fathers is a critique of Dr John Bowlbys theory of Maternal Deprivation as applied to UK family proceedings. In Michael Lamb's review he says that Bowlby was later to disavowal the idea and it is Professor Sir Michael Rutter who is usually attributed with changing his mind and I am very lucky to say that he also described my own book as an, interesting and informative guide.

I hope this is helpful.


Yours Sincerely,



Kingsley Miller

References

McIntosh, J. E. (2011), Guest editors introduction to special issue on attachment theory, separation, and divorce: forging coherent understandings for family law. Family Court Review, 49: 418425

Lamb, M. E. (2012), A wasted opportunity to engage with the literature on the implications of attachment research for family court professionals. Family Court Review, 50: 481485

 McConaghy, N. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 1979 Sep;13(3):209-17. Maternal deprivation: can its ghost be laid?

Cc.Dr Jennifer McIntosh, Family Transitions, PO Box 5130, Alphington, Victoria, 3078, Australia

Professor Michael Lamb, University of Cambridge, Department of Psychology, Downing Street, Cambridge, CB2 3EB, UKProfessor Sir Michael Rutter, PO 80, Institute of Psychiatry at the Maudsley, De Crespigny Park, Denmark Hill, London, SE5 8AF, UK

Professor Parkinson AM, The University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia

Jonathan Djanogly MP, Ministry of Justice, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, 102 Petty France, London, SW1H 9AJ

Tim Loughton, MP Department of Education, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Children and Young Families), Sanctuary Buildings, Great Smith Street, London, SW1P 3BT

The Shared Parenting Council of Australia SPCA

 The Shared Parenting Council of Australia fully endorses this letter written by Mr Kingsley Miller, author of 'even Toddlers Need Fathers', citing major concerns with the various studies conducted by Psychologist Jennifer McIntosh.

We support this letter because it brings some clarity, reason and logic to the emotive report being circulated that suggests young children under two should not have overnight contact with fathers.


The Council agrees that many of the findings published by Dr McIntosh are based on statistically small and unreliable samplings, often lacking in clear logical reasoning, leading to false conclusions about children and shared parenting. The SPCA is concerned that Jennifer McIntosh presents as a self-styled expert in childrens matters, and appearing as an authoritative voice, yet erroneously and repeatedly makes findings that are highly subjective, counter-intuitive and simply wrong.

Her report findings often fail the test of common sense, and are accepted as authoritative documents that find their way into the hands of litigants. It is of particular concern these reports find themselves presented as fact in court and in some cases are taken on notice by judicial officers. These untested papers are picked up by organisations such as the Australian Association for Infant Mental Health (Who we have been unable to contact) and published as factual authorities further confusing separating parents who may otherwise make amiable arrangements which are clearly in the best interests of children.

The most comprehensive recent study by the AIFS supported the legislative change in 2006, and made positive findings about children and their relationships with their mother and father. The AIFS report contradicts the negative assertions of Dr Jennifer McIntosh and draws on the real lived with experiences of parents, both intact and separated through its very large numeric sampling.

Authorised for publication on behalf of the SPCA

Wayne R. Butler

Executive Secretary,
Shared Parenting Council of Australia.

Member Law Council of Australia, Family Law Section.

Kingsley Miller is the author of 'even Toddlers Need Fathers', a critique of the principle of 'Maternal Deprivation' as applied in family courts, which Professor Sir Michael Rutter described as an, 'interesting and informative guide'. He has also received a letter from Buckingham Palace stating, 'It was thoughtful of you to enclose a copy of your book 'even Toddlers Need Fathers' and Her Majesty has noted your concerns'.
Kip have the courtesy to stop creating new topics as if you have special site privileges, you do not.

Your posts have become overly long and boring and some moderators are not pleased with the way you seem to regard this site as your personal Australian blog.

Your continued references to McIntosh appear to have developed into an obsession. We know who she is, what she has written and what she says. You might like to look up the article on this site by Michael Green QC (former President of the SPCA) on 'countering' the high conflict argument.

Writing to the AG is a waste of time as she bears scant regard to federally recognised Australian peer groups, why you think she will take notice of your letters?

McIntosh has had very little effect on Court outcomes in this Country.

Executive Member of SRL-Resources, the Family Law People on this site (look for the Avatars) Be mindful what you post in public areas. 
1 guest and 0 members have just viewed this.

Recent Tweets