Advocates for Children in Therapy

Advocates for Children in Therapy, commonly known as ACT, is a United States advocacy organization focused on the protection of children from therapeutic practices that it regards as physically or psychologically harmful. Its principal target is attachment therapy, a loosely defined set of controversial interventions sometimes marketed for children described as having attachment problems or attachment disorder. ACT argues that many practices associated with this field are not part of evidence-based treatment and can involve coercive restraint, prolonged confrontation, humiliation, deprivation, isolation, or other violations of a child's physical and emotional boundaries. The organization was founded in 2002 by Jean Mercer. Its formation followed the wider public and professional controversy surrounding the 2001 death of Candace Newmaker during a purported attachment-therapy session in Colorado. Some ACT members had been involved in efforts connected with the prosecution of people responsible for Newmaker's death before the organization was established. The case became a major reference point in debates about unregulated or fringe psychotherapy for children, and a book about it, Attachment Therapy on Trial: The Torture and Death of Candace Newmaker, was published in 2003. ACT describes its mission as increasing public awareness of the dangers and cruelty associated with attachment-therapy practices and mobilizing parents, clinicians, regulators, prosecutors, juries, legislators, and other decision-makers to prevent their use. The organization has also criticized the referral or financing of such interventions by courts, public agencies, and child-welfare personnel, characterizing government-supported use as a form of state-sponsored abuse or torture. A central part of ACT's work is conceptual and educational. It distinguishes attachment therapy from the research-based attachment theory associated with John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth, arguing that the two are frequently conflated despite substantial differences. ACT has proposed operational characteristics for identifying attachment therapy, including the use or recommendation of restraint for therapeutic purposes; reliance on an unrecognized or unvalidated diagnosis of attachment disorder; claims involving re-traumatization, catharsis, developmental recapitulation, or brain repatterning; use of unsupported theories of child development; assertions of safety and effectiveness despite weak scientific support; and harsh parenting, isolation, deprivation, or humiliation. The organization has also challenged the diagnosis of attachment disorder as used by fringe practitioners. It argues that the label is often presented as an explanation for a wide range of difficult childhood behaviors and is assessed with tools lacking adequate validation, in contrast to recognized clinical diagnoses such as reactive attachment disorder. ACT's public materials report on cases that it believes contain elements of attachment therapy, including matters in which members assisted authorities. It also submitted a statement to the record of a Congressional hearing concerning a child-starvation case. ACT is best understood as a specialized advocacy and public-information organization rather than a commercial product brand. Its public-facing output consists primarily of educational materials, case reporting, policy advocacy, and criticism of controversial treatment models. Its current organizational status, legal structure, staffing, and headquarters are not established by the supplied reference material.

Advocates for Children in Therapy emerged in the United States in 2002 amid continuing debate over attachment therapy and other unconventional interventions used with children. Jean Mercer founded the organization, and some of its early members had previously been involved in activities related to the prosecution arising from the 2001 death of Candace Newmaker. Newmaker died during a purported attachment-therapy session in Colorado in which she was subjected to a coercive process. The case became one of the most prominent examples cited by critics of attachment therapy and helped focus attention on the potential consequences of poorly regulated treatment methods. ACT's central purpose is preventive advocacy. It seeks to warn parents, professionals, public officials, and the broader public about practices that it believes can cause physical injury, emotional trauma, or both. The group does not use attachment therapy as a precise professional diagnosis or treatment category. Instead, it describes a family of practices that may include holding therapy, compression or restraint-based methods, confrontational sessions, rage-reduction techniques, rebirthing-related practices, and other models associated with the so-called Evergreen or holding-time approaches. ACT maintains that the term is often used ambiguously, while the practices themselves may share recognizable features. The organization's definition emphasizes conduct and underlying claims rather than a single branded technique. ACT identifies restraint or other boundary violations for therapeutic purposes, intrusive confrontation, unvalidated attachment-disorder assessments, claims about re-traumatization or developmental re-enactment, unsupported theories of brain repatterning, harsh parenting methods, deprivation, isolation, and humiliation as warning signs. It also objects to claims that such interventions are safe and effective when credible scientific evidence is limited or absent. A recurring theme in ACT's educational work is the distinction between attachment therapy and attachment theory. The group argues that fringe practitioners invoke the language of attachment while departing from the empirical traditions associated with John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth. It likewise challenges the use of an alleged attachment-disorder diagnosis that is not equivalent to the recognized diagnosis of reactive attachment disorder. In ACT's view, the unvalidated label can be used to attribute many forms of childhood difficulty to a supposed failure of attachment and to justify aggressive treatment. ACT has sought to influence several audiences at once. Its stated objectives include mobilizing families, clinicians, regulators, prosecutors, juries, legislators, and government agencies. It has criticized the use of public funds, court referrals, and state child-welfare channels to place children in attachment-therapy programs, describing such institutional involvement as state-sponsored abuse. The organization has also reported on individual cases that it considers relevant and has stated that members assisted authorities in some matters. In addition, it placed a statement into the record of a Congressional hearing involving a child-starvation case. In 2003, the book Attachment Therapy on Trial: The Torture and Death of Candace Newmaker provided a published account of the Newmaker case and its significance to the broader controversy. ACT's work has remained centered on public education and opposition to coercive or unsupported treatment rather than on commercial services. The supplied reference material does not establish a formal headquarters, corporate ownership, current executive roster, revenue base, or definitive present-day operating status.

• 2003

  Publication of Attachment Therapy on Trial

  [1]Advocates for Children in Therapyen.wikipedia.org

  A book about the Candace Newmaker case and attachment therapy was published, helping document the controversy that informed ACT's advocacy.

• 2002

  ACT founded by Jean Mercer

  [1]Advocates for Children in Therapyen.wikipedia.org

  Advocates for Children in Therapy was established as a United States advocacy group opposing attachment therapy and related practices considered harmful to children.

• 2001

  Death of Candace Newmaker during an attachment-therapy session

  [1]Advocates for Children in Therapyen.wikipedia.org

  Candace Newmaker died during a purported attachment-therapy intervention in Colorado. The case later became a central reference in ACT's opposition to coercive attachment-therapy practices.

A child-protection and consumer-advocacy voice opposing coercive, abusive, and scientifically unsupported forms of attachment therapy.

• 2001

  ACT members connected with prosecution efforts in the Candace Newmaker case

  Before ACT's formation, some people who later became members were involved in efforts connected with the prosecution of those responsible for Candace Newmaker's death during an attachment-therapy session.

  Source

Read more

• Opposition to attachment therapy

  United States

  ACT conducts public education and advocacy against attachment therapy and related interventions. Its materials describe warning signs such as coercive restraint, hostile confrontation, unsupported attachment-disorder claims, deprivation, isolation, and humiliation, and seek action by families, professionals, regulators, prosecutors, legislators, and courts.

  Source
• Challenge to public and governmental referrals

  United States

  The organization has criticized referrals to attachment therapy made by courts and state workers and has opposed the use of public resources for practices it characterizes as abusive or unsupported.

  Source

1. 1Advocates for Children in Therapyen.wikipedia.org
2. 2Official Advocates for Children in Therapy websitechildrenintherapy.org