Psychologists Committing Ethical Violations

How Dr. Mary Baker-Sinclair of Chapel Hill Pediatric Psychology Clinic separated two children from their fit father

18 min readNov 3, 2016

My children’s hands and me, a German father who speaks up for his children and against mental health professionals in the United States committing ethical violations without getting reprimanded.

Have you ever felt that you have been treated unfairly by mental health professionals? Have you felt that your legitimate grievance to the Psychology Board of your State or the The American Psychological Association (APA) has been pushed under the rug? Have you felt powerless to do anything about it? Then

https://www.facebook.com/ethicalviolations/

is the place where you can make yourself heard. Please, help other people to navigate around mental health professionals who mean harm and who are more protected by their Psychological Associations than you or your loved ones … and should not practice at all. Ultimately, I hope to build a community that will help affected patients to speak up and to effectively go after ill-minded mental health professionals.

Here is my case. It is a longer read but I felt that it might help people to better understand the complaint process and to identify the “bad apples” within the mental health community. Ill-minded practitioners don’t get scrutinized like restaurants or traditional family doctors or dentists for example. It is a sad tale involving Dr. Mary Baker-Sinclair, a clinical psychologist in Chapel Hill, who was not reprimanded by the NC Psychology Board for her violations of the ethical code, despite an investigation that took this Board over 9 months. None of my listed witnesses were contacted. They entirely forgot about the 2nd complaint against the Board Chair of Chapel Hill Pediatric Psychology Clinic, Dr. David Riddle. They simply replaced the name on their prior response within a day. I decided to publish my complaint in order to raise awareness for an unbearable situation that protects the interests of psychologists more than the interests of their patients. I hope that many will follow my example and post on our Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/ethicalviolations

Back in 2011, I assumed that clinical psychologists want to heal broken families. How wrong was I with Dr. Mary Baker-Sinclair of Chapel Hill Pediatric Psychology! When I am in the United States I am allowed to see my children for 3 1/2 hours/week. Since the mother refuses any co-parenting I have to transfer my children at a therapist’s office for six years now. I have to pay for these transfers. I have no criminal record, I have never been violent, I don’t take drugs, I pay taxes and child support, I have no points on my driver license. Does a father who was misused as a sperm donor not have a right to be involved in his children’s lives?

NORTH CAROLINA PSYCHOLOGY BOARD | 895 State Farm Road, Suite 101 | Boone, NC 28607 | Telephone: (828) 262–2258

COMPLAINT/INQUIRY FORM

895 State Farm Road, Suite 101 | Boone, NC 28607 | Telephone: (828) 262–2258

1. Person Making Complaint: Hartmut Jahn (*Estimate when I will return to North Carolina: 8/21/2015)

2. Person Complained About: Dr. Mary Baker-Sinclair | Address: 205 Sage Road, Suite 201 | City, State, Zip Code: Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27514–6995 | Telephone: (919)-942–4166 | Website: http://www.chppnc.com

Is this person licensed as a psychologist in North Carolina? Yes

License# (if known/applicable): 2290

3. Give a specific and detailed description of the ethical and/or legal violation(s).

If familiar with the APA Ethics Code and/or the NC Psychology Practice Act, cite the Standard(s) and/or statute(s) which you feel have been violated. (Two additional sheets are available at the end of this document and additional sheets are available as a separate document, if necessary.)

I have reviewed the American Psychological Association (APA) Code of Ethics and believe that the above conduct by Dr. Baker-Sinclair and CHPPNC, violates one or more of the following provisions or principles of ethical behavior:

Principles A-E (beneficence/nonmaleficence, fidelity/responsibility, integrity, justice and respect for other people’s rights and dignity)
2.01, 2.03 & 2.04 (dealing with competency and bases for professional judgments);
3.01, 3.03, 3.04, 3.05, 3.06 and 3.08 (dealing with discrimination, harassment and avoiding harm; representation of multiple parties, conflicts of interest and exploitative relationships);
9.01 and 9.08 (use of current/outdated assessments); and
10.02 (therapy involving families);

For the past five years, Dr. Mary Baker-Sinclair of Chapel Hill Pediatric Psychology (CHPPNC) has been responsible for providing treatment to my daughter, (8), and possibly my son,(5). I am not married to the children’s mother, [SN], and the selection of Dr. Mary Baker-Sinclair was solely the mother’s decision.

As stated on the CHPPNC website, “we take a developmental, practical approach, applying research-based solutions to help. We work with you, the child, the family — and often each other — to create a practical plan toward coping and resolution.”

Nothing could be further from the truth in my case. It appears that Dr. Mary Baker-Sinclair has lost sight of her objectivity. She has aligned herself with the children’s mother and the mother’s assessments and beliefs, and in doing so has created chaos and confusion in my children’s lives.

This is clearly mapped out in the Diagnostic & Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM 5) as “Parent-Child Relational Problem”. Dr. Mary Baker-Sinclair has facilitated the deepening of this “Parent-Child Relational Problem” rather than confronting the truth and helping my children establish and maintain a loving relationship with both parents.

The following is the exact terminology in the DSM 5 for this family dynamic, which is listed under the category of “Parent-Child Relational Problem” and has the diagnostic code of V.61.20. An example of this parent-child relational problem is discussed in the DSM 5 as follows:

“Cognitive problems may include negative attributions of the other’s intentions, hostility toward or scapegoating of the other, and unwarranted feelings of estrangement. Affective problems may include feelings of sadness, apathy, or anger about the other individual in the relationship.” (P. 715.)

Also under the category of “ Parent-Child Relational Problem” is the diagnostic code, V61.29, “Child Affected by Parental Relationship Distress.” The DSM 5 discusses this family dynamic as follows:

“This category should be used when the focus of clinical attention is the negative effects of parental relationship discord (e. g. high levels of conflict, distress, or disparagement) on a child in the family, including effects on the child’s mental or other medical disorders.” (P. 716.)

Although I am not the parent with legal custody or primary physical custody, Dr. Mary Baker-Sinclair has treated me in a manner which I believe is unethical. Specifically, Dr. Mary-Baker Sinclair has not been neutral and detached but has sided with the mother and adopted the mother’s assessment as her own, as noted above. This has occurred to such a degree that Dr. Mary Baker-Sinclair lied/contradicted herself in court. She has either ignored or been unaware of current research; she has ignored the assessments of other therapists, like Bonnie Ferrell, who actually spent time with myself and my children. She has ignored the assessment of my therapist Dr. Cynthia Sortisio. She has ignored my efforts to communicate with her and has thwarted my attempts to meet with her as per court direction.

Although I have complained to the president of Chapel Hill Pediatric Psychology, Dr. David Riddle, of these things, my complaints and those of my legal counsel, have fallen on deaf ears. As a result, I believe that Dr. Mary Baker-Sinclair’s efforts to effectively treat my children has been seriously compromised.

The incidents giving rise to my complaint are more specifically described below. First a bit of background: In September 2010, the children’s mother and I separated. Soon thereafter we began having problems in transferring custody of the children from the mother to myself because the mother began telling my daughter that I was a “bad guy”. The mother also preyed upon my daughter’s fears and told my daughter that I would take her (my daughter) away from her mother. This culminated in an incident that occurred on Christmas Eve 2010*, which I videotaped to show the conduct of the mother and its effect on my daughter. Since the mother denied me access to my children, I requested a visitation schedule in January 2011. The mother retaliated by petitioning for a restraining order based on acts of domestic violence which allegedly occurred while we were still together. As an aside, I committed no such acts and they were purely a fabrication invented by the mother. I believe now that the mother acted in this manner as a ploy to remove me from her and our children’s lives. It was because of these incidents that the mother brought my children to CHPPNC/Dr. Mary Baker-Sinclair for treatment.

* On Christmas Eve 2010, the children’s mother and I agreed that I would take the children to a children’s mass at our church and that we would all go to my home for a Christmas Eve celebration. It was the first celebration at my home with my children and I was excited and very much looking forward to it. I prepared a special dinner for my children and the mother, including presents for all of them. The mother told me the day before she would join the children and I. However, that morning she called to tell me that she would not be able to join us. I knew that my children would be very sad that they were unable to celebrate the festivities with their parents together, but I was not able to change her mind. The children’s mother met me at the church one-half hour later than we planned and informed me that my daughter did not want to see me. My daughter sat crying in her child-seat. This had happened many times before during the prior months. I believe the children’s mother used my daughter as a pawn — repeatedly telling her that I was a “bad guy” and that my daughter should not leave her mother to be with her father. In order to document what was happening, I videotaped the incident. As in the prior months, the mother provided no help to my daughter with the transition. All the therapists, who later reviewed the video, agreed.

My children’s mother asked me to stop and informed me she was taking the children home. I suggested that I take just my son (who I had in Durham the day before), but the mother would not allow that either. I was devastated and disappointed and I suggested to the mother that we talk privately and not in front of the church entrance. So, I got into her car. She threatened that she would call the police. My daughter was just about to calm down, my son was quiet and I told her in a resigning way to go ahead and call the police after I realized that she had “accidentally” locked my door, which prevented me from getting out of the car.

It was calm in the car, there was no reason to call anybody for help. In addition, it was busy around the car with people coming and going. There were no violence or threats by me — why would I do this on Christmas Eve with all these witnesses? In retrospect, I have replayed that fateful afternoon over and over in my head. It was almost like the mother planned this whole charade with me being unaware of things and being a sitting duck for her plans.

My complaints are as follows:

When I showed my video of the Christmas 2010 incident to Dr. Baker-Sinclair, she told me “Oh, that’s just a transition problem! We could have quickly solved that if you guys had come to me earlier!” When I inquired how quickly the “transition problem” could be solved, Dr. Baker-Sinclair said something very revealing about her mindset; she told me: “Oh, if we solved problems too quickly we would not make any money here.” Even though she said it in a humorous way, it provided illumination as to her thinking. She latched onto my children and is “treating” my daughter and maybe my son (a fact which I cannot verify since, despite court order that I be granted access to my children’s records, CHPPNC refuses to provide these to me) for the sole purpose of making money for as long as possible, regardless of whether my children need treatment or not.
Moreover, there has never been any resolution of the alleged “transition” problems by CHPPNC/Dr. Mary Baker-Sinclair. Nothing has ever been done to help with that. The mother is still causing anxiety problems for our children, particularly with our daughter but also our son, by directly or indirectly alienating the affections of my children for me.* Rather than counteract the mother’s efforts, Dr. Mary Baker-Sinclair has aided and abetted the mother by indicating that I have “abandoned” my children and will never see them again. *(After the 2010 incident, there were two other “transition” problems which were even more acute, one of which was witnessed by Nadja, the day-care teacher and temporary babysitter of my children, identified below.)
To the extent any “transition” problems ever existed, they were due solely to the conduct of the children’s mother who has, with Dr. Baker-Sinclair’s help, excised me almost completely from the lives of my children. Dr. Baker-Sinclair refuses to entertain any evidence of parental alienation by the children’s mother and has refused to review my documentation/videos in which my daughter and my son reference that their mother is continuing to talk negatively about me and that the mother used to “brief” my daughter prior to their appointments with Dr. Baker-Sinclair. Likewise, she was not interested in hearing about the mother’s family background and gaining the “whole picture” (in contrast to the claims made on CHPPNC’s website at http://www.chppnc.com, where it is stated that Dr. Baker-Sinclair “believes that understanding children and adolescents within the context of their complete environmental structure (i.e., school, home,) is the most effective way to promote healthy psychological development. As such, she not only interacts with the client individually, but regularly partners with other sources, including parents, siblings, and where appropriate, schools, to obtain pertinent information about her clients.”
Throughout the first two years, Dr. Baker-Sinclair continuously advised me whenever we met alone or with my children “Keep doing what you’re doing!” When I advised her about the parental alienation perpetrated by the mother and letting her know that I never retaliated against the mother, Dr. Baker-Sinclair also used to say to me: “I am glad you are taking the high road!” However, her actions in court were just the opposite. Specifically she lied about the following:

a. she told me, in front of witnesses, that a second therapist (Bonnie Ferrell) would make recommendations to the court going forward; in court, she refuted this;

b. she told me in 2012 that she did not know if she was still responsible for treating my daughter (“I don’t know how much to charge you, I don’t even know whether I am still treating [daughter].”) but denied saying this in court.

c. Dr. Baker-Sinclair further lied by claiming I never told her about my need to return to Germany in 2012 when in fact I informed my attorney and sent her a fax advising her of the same and requested that she help establish contact between myself and my children while I was away.

d. Dr. Baker-Sinclair advised the court, without a shred of evidence to support it, that she believes, along with the children’s mother, that I am a “terrifying” person. For these past five years, she claimed that my daughter is afraid of me and insinuated in an affidavit that I may have behaved inappropriately towards my daughter. This was because during the only joint appointment in 2012 with Dr. Baker-Sinclair, my daughter and me, my daughter seemed to be afraid of Dr. Baker-Sinclair, refused to speak to her in my presence and instead hugged my leg and seemed to hide from her.

When Dr. Baker-Sinclair visited us on Christmas 2011, my daughter rolled her eyes and only unwillingly spoke to her. Mr. [RL] is a witness to this event. Ms. Ferrell assured me after spending half a day with us that my daughter was not afraid of me. Dr. Baker-Sinclair apparently “briefed” Mrs. Ferrell before she ever met my daughter telling her that my daughter is afraid of me;

e. Dr. Baker-Sinclair claimed in court that I did not follow her recommendations. If I failed to follow them, it is because she never made any recommendations to me. She only made small recommendations, such as that I should include a picture of my daughter and her mother in my home. While I always kept pictures of the mother and my children in my home, I find this recommendation curious in that Dr. Baker-Sinclair never required the mother to reciprocate; the mother removed pictures of me and my children in her home when we were together.

f. Dr. Baker-Sinclair claimed that my daughter was distressed when I picked up my children from school upon my return from Germany. But I picked them up from the transition center in Pittsboro on 11–23–12 and, contrary to Dr. Baker-Sinclair’s belief, my daughter was overjoyed to see me.

g. Dr. Baker-Sinclair blamed me for my son’s actions (when he was 2) in acting out while in daycare because he spit, serving as a reason to reduce my short time with him even more; and

(5) Dr. Baker-Sinclair never spent any significant amount of time with myself and my children. Dr. Baker-Sinclair also ignored the favorable reports by another therapist (Bonnie Ferrell) who actually spent time with me and my children. Ms. Ferrell told me on several occasions that she thinks that I am a “great father”. However, Dr. Baker-Sinclair recommended that I be deprived of ALL overnight visits with my children despite never spending any time with my children and I, particularly during the 1.5 years when I had them every other weekend without any problems at all.

(6) Dr. Baker-Sinclair did not respond to my letters, phone calls and faxes. Unfortunately, Dr. Baker-Sinclair does not accept emails.

(7) Dr. Baker-Sinclair refused to review scientific research studies regarding the importance of maintaining frequent contact between non-custodial parents and young children and in fact appears wholly unfamiliar with such work — since she graduated from school and became licensed — in violation of the APA Ethical Code which requires her to keep herself abreast of the latest research studies.

(8) Dr. Baker-Sinclair never seemed to listen to my daughter or my son, both of whom requested to spend more time with me, and the fact that my daughter wished to see her parents together or have at least cordial contact between her parents.

(9) Dr. Baker-Sinclair never followed up on my request for the mother, Dr. Baker-Sinclair and I to meet and come up with a plan to transition the children directly. In fact, Dr. Baker-Sinclair became aggressive/hostile when I suggested that the mother, our children and I meet with her.

(10) Dr. Baker-Sinclair never followed up on what we discussed verbally. Because of this and her actions, I started bringing witnesses to my meetings with her. It still did not prevent her from lying in court. Dr. Baker-Sinclair also refused to meet with me and my daughter together in front of a witness.

(11) Dr. Baker-Sinclair never kept me apprised of any “treatment” being rendered to my children. As per the court order, I am to have access to my children’s health records. I have not received anything to date and I was never told when any “treatment” was to even take place.

(12) Despite CHPPNC/Dr. Baker-Sinclair “treating” my daughter, the majority part of the costs for the “treatment” were not billed to my daughter’s health insurer during the first year but to me and the mother.

(13) Despite my fax from 12–5–2012, Dr. Baker-Sinclair did not do anything to facilitate communication between my children and I when I left for Germany in January of 2013. Dr. Baker-Sinclair told the court that it was her “job” to facilitate communication between myself and my children and yet she took no action when I departed. She also knew about my desperate attempts in Germany to send postcards to my children via their schools, yet she did not do anything to help. Rather, she indicated to my children that I would not return from Germany and she prepared them for this event according to Bonnie Ferrell.

(14) When I returned from Germany in May 2013, after having no contact with my children for 4 months, Dr. Baker-Sinclair did not let me see my children for another 7 weeks despite my repeated calls, my note and a fax from Mr. [DS] (lawyer), and despite her promise to call me back the same day when we met in person in front of her clinic right after my arrival in the U.S. Dr. Baker-Sinclair apparently only relented when Mr. [DS] threatened to file a contempt petition against her.

(15) The court previously ordered me and my daughter to meet with Dr. Baker-Sinclair upon my return from Germany. Dr. Baker-Sinclair intentionally ignored my requests to have this meeting occur because, I then would be in non-compliance with the court order and would lose my visitation/custody rights (having them every other weekend and on Thur/Fri). This is exactly what happened.

(16) Following issuance of the court’s order in 2014, I tried unsuccessfully to arrange a meeting between myself, my daughter, Dr. Baker-Sinclair and Dr. David Riddle; these efforts are detailed in the timeline below:

1–20–14: I called Dr. Riddle several times and left messages for both Dr. Riddle and Dr. Baker-Sinclair.

2–7–14: I left a message for Dr. Baker-Sinclair asking for an appointment with [daughter].

2–11–14: I left a message for Dr. Baker-Sinclair.

2–18–14: I called Dr. Riddle as he said I needed to schedule appointment with him; I left a message for Dr. Baker-Sinclair.

2–19–14: Dr. Baker-Sinclair called and set up an appointment with [daughter] for 3–6–14, 4pm. I asked her to include the mother, as well. She said she did not believe the mother would join. I expressed my concern that there has been no progress in 3 years. She wanted to call me back about the mother’s decision. Dr. Baker-Sinclair called back being “confused” since I called the receptionist previous to our conversation to let Dr. Baker-Sinclair know that the mother could choose any time and location of her liking for the meeting. Dr. Baker-Sinclair disrespectfully ended the call after she raised her voice and talked over me, as had happened before.

2–27–14: Bonnie Ferrell let me know that Dr. Baker-Sinclair changed plans and wanted to meet me with her and the children at Bonnie’s home on 3–1–14. I declined because I wanted Dr. Riddle to watch me with [daughter] and Dr. Baker-Sinclair. I also was concerned about [daughter] coming directly from her mother, possibly with alienated feelings for me.

2–28–14: I left a message for Dr. Baker-Sinclair and Dr. Riddle with the CHPPNC receptionist, Pam. I wanted her to inform Dr. Baker-Sinclair and Dr. Riddle that I would like to meet Dr. Baker-Sinclair and Dr. Riddle with [daughter] as planned on Thursday, 3–6. No response.

3–4–14: I called again at 2:00pm. Pam promised to convey my message. She felt embarrassed for all my futile attempts to set up a meeting.

3–6–14: Dr. Baker-Sinclair called about an appointment, she wanted to reconfirm with the mother and call back later. I reiterated that I wished to meet her and [daughter] only if Dr. Riddle were a witness. I told her that I am afraid that she would again blame me for [daughter] not talking to her in my presence and that she would again express suspicions of sexual impropriety as discussed in her affidavit from 2011. She blamed me again stating that I had chosen not to meet her with [daughter]. I told her why I declined and expressed my surprise that she did not inform me directly about her changed plans. As usual, she started talking fast over me and hung up.

3–6–14: Dr. Baker-Sinclair called again at 11:00 am: I was supposed to pick up [daughter] at 2:30 from school, then [son] from his daycare, and then bring them to her office between 5:00–5:30 pm. I asked her why we could not at least meet with [daughter] alone, without [son], and whether I could record the meeting. She said it would not be necessary. She also rejected my idea to bring a witness to the meeting. I asked why Dr. Riddle could not be present. She said she does not have time for my questions and hung up.

3–6–14:5:00pm: Dr. Baker-Sinclair talked to [daughter] for approx. 5 minutes without my presence, then she, my children and I played “Candyland”, [daughter] then was drawing, I was reading to [son]. Dr. Baker-Sinclair said that Dr. Riddle could not join but would be available for a telephone call.

3–20: I left a message that I would like to reserve an appointment with Dr. Riddle and Dr. Baker-Sinclair after the receptionist had left a message on 3–18–14, finally offering an appointment with Dr. Baker-Sinclair and Dr. Riddle.

4–2–14: Pam (receptionist) confirmed appointment for 4–3–14 but without [daughter].

4–3–14: Pam cancelled due to Dr. Riddle’s illness. I asked Pam to reschedule as soon as Dr. Riddle recovered from his illness.

I never heard back from them.

(17) Dr. Baker-Sinclair has continued her unethical behavior since entry of the court order in 2014. The court’s order requires that all communication with my children go through Dr. Baker-Sinclair/CHPPNC. Dr. Baker-Sinclair and CHPPNC are well aware of this order. Despite this knowledge, she has refused to facilitate any communication between myself and my children while I have been in Germany. My only option has been to use Bonnie Ferrell. Due to the costs and the poor quality of the connections, I was not able to take advantage of more frequent contact with my children.

After more than nine months and after reminding them several time, the NC Psychology Board did not find any violations. They simply “forgot” about the 2nd complaint against Dr. David Riddle. The NC Psychology Board with its Chair Robert W. Hill, PhD (http://www.ncpsychologyboard.org/) has become complicit in protecting the unethical conduct of two of its members.