The Legal Risks of Poorly-Timed or Poorly-Executed Therapy

Professionals working in the family law system need to understand that not all therapy is created equal. Inappropriate referrals can introduce: Power imbalances between therapist, parent, and child Over-interpretation of statements made by children in suggestible or emotionally charged settings

Developmental mismatch, where young children are drawn into interventions that assume abstract insight or emotional maturity they simply don’t possess Confusion about confidentiality, especially when reports are subpoenaed or used as quasi-evidence And perhaps most importantly, a false sense of resolution, where therapy becomes a box-ticking exercise rather than a genuine vehicle for change

A Call for Greater Clinical Discretion

Therapy should never be used as a proxy for parenting capacity assessment, nor should it be relied upon to “fix” the effects of entrenched parental conflict. In fact, some families – particularly those still actively engaged in litigation – may be clinically inappropriate for therapy altogether.

As professionals committed to child wellbeing and procedural fairness, we must move away from the automatic referral mindset and instead ask: What is the purpose of therapy in this case? Is this the right intervention, for this child, at this time?

Looking Ahead

Through multi-disciplinary conversations like those through Pacifica Congress, we must continue to explore the interface between clinical practice and legal frameworks. Understanding when therapy is helpful – and when it may be harmful – is an emerging area of both professional training and ethical scrutiny. This is not about discrediting therapy, but about ensuring its proper application in an already complex system.