A mother who was separated from her children for nearly six years has been reunited with her son after England's most senior family judge overturned what lawyers described as "draconian" court orders based on flawed psychological evidence.
Flawed Evidence Leads to Family Separation
The case centered on the work of unregulated psychologist Melanie Gill, whose recommendations led to the children's removal from their mother in December 2019. At the time, the children were nine and twelve years old, and the court granted sole custody to their father based on Gill's assessment.
Gill's recommendations included that the mother, referred to as Erin* to protect her identity, had turned her daughter and son against their father and should be banned from seeing them. The psychologist also advised that there was no need to investigate cross-allegations of domestic abuse between the parents.
Critical Allegations Ignored
This meant that claims of serious physical and sexual assault made by the mother against the father were never examined by the court. Lawyers told the high court that this flawed evidence led to "extraordinary" orders that effectively terminated the mother's relationship with her children for nearly six years.
Erin described the experience as having "a noose around my neck for six years." In an interview, she explained: "It wasn't just me. The children were cut off from all their family and friends. They had 50% of their identity stripped away overnight."
Dramatic Turn of Events
The case took a dramatic turn in November when Erin's teenage son, referred to as Dylan*, ran away from his father's home and hired his own solicitor. After spending time in foster care, he was reunited with his mother for their first Christmas together in six years.
Unusually, the fifteen-year-old was present in court for his mother's legal bid, represented by his own legal team. Jo Delahunty KC told Sir Andrew McFarlane, president of the family division, how her young client had lost all trust in professionals and become lonely, fearful, and isolated in his father's care.
Courtroom Breakthrough
McFarlane made a new order for the boy to live with his mother and is expected to hand down a judgment that will map out a route for similarly affected families who wish to return their cases to court. The judge emphasized: "Melanie Gill considers this some kind of vendetta against her. This is far bigger than one person. It's about the court properly engaging with allegations and cross-allegations."
After the hearing, Dylan expressed relief, saying: "I'm so grateful to be home with my mum finally and to feel happy again." The children's father, who has consistently denied the allegations against him, chose not to attend the January hearing.
Systemic Issues Revealed
This marks the second time in six months that findings in a case where Gill has given evidence have been dismissed by the high court. Gill claims to have acted as an expert witness in up to 200 family court cases.
Erin's legal team cited "compelling" new information in their successful challenge, including guidance from December 2024 that states courts should not use experts to look for "parental alienation"—the concept that a child has rejected one parent because they have been manipulated by the other.
Regulation Concerns
The guidance also stated that psychologists assessing families on behalf of the courts should be regulated. However, judges are currently permitted to appoint whomever they wish, including experts who are not regulated.
Gill asserts that she is well qualified to perform the role of expert witness in family proceedings and that she has years of specialist training and expertise. Meanwhile, the government is working with the committee that makes rules for the family courts to introduce a ban on unregulated experts, following a public consultation last year that received sixty submissions.
The daughter, who is now eighteen, was not party to the recent case. A previous attempt by the mother to appeal was blocked before she launched a fresh application seven months ago.
*Names have been changed to protect the identities of those involved
