using the best availablescience, to maximize physical and psychological safety, facilitate the recovery of thechild and family, and support their ability to thrive.”

Dr. Childress Second Opinion ConsultationThis handout describes various options for incorporating the second-opinionconsultation of Dr. Childress on an assessment, diagnosis, and treatment plan for court-involved family conflict. I am able to provide second opinion consultation to the involvedmental health professionals if they or the court believe this would be helpful in theresolution of the family conflict through my HIPAA compliant online telehealth office atdoxy.me/drchildress.

child may otherwise appear to be independent and com-petent, even an academic and social “star.”

UNDERSTANDING INTRACTABLE RRD FAMILIES

WHEN A CHILD REJECTS A PARENT: WORKING WITHTHE INTRACTABLE RESIST/REFUSE DYNAMICMarjorie Gans Walters and Steven Friedlander

Deutsch, R., Drozd, L., & Saini, M. (2021). Trauma as a Potential Distractor or Illuminatorin Exploring Resist/Refuse Dynamics, Association of Family and ConciliationCourts, annual convention, Boston, June 7, 2021.Deutsch, R., Drozd, L., & Ajoku, C. (2020). Trauma-informed interventions in parent-childcontact cases. In B. Fidler & N. Bala (Eds), Parent-child contact problems:Concepts, controversies & conundrums. Family Court Review, 58(2), 470-487.Drozd, L., Saini, M., & Deutsch, R. M. (2018). Assessment and intervention in resist/refusecases: A trauma-informed approach. [Presentation] Presentation at AFCC 55thAnnual Conference, Washington, DC

Don’t necessarily trust your gut

Swift decisions on little evidence – too often gut responses are basedupon personal experience and maybe clouded by emotions

High conflict, entrenched, slow court system

Is the therapist part of the problem?

“Don’t Treat the Trauma without (a finding of) Trauma:Treatment without a finding of trauma perpetuatesdysfunction.• Evidence-based or evidence-informed trauma treatment isthe treatment of choice

Child becomes increasingly anxious

Refusal of treatment / Previous attempts fortreatment unsuccessf

Chronic parent-child disruptions

No or very infrequent contact between child and RP

Rigid / extreme child reaction to rejected paren

Reconciliation – is rejected

Regret and Remorse – absen

Revision – history is revised to eliminate positiveexperiences

Radical – child’s rejection is extreme and unrelenting

Repetition – of parent’s words

Rigidity – refusal to consider alternate views

Reasons – trivial, frivolous, unelaborated

Reactions – unjustified or disproportionate

Domestic Abuse in the Context of RRD cases•Screening•Criteria that may disqualify a case from “family systemapproach”•Current & active coercive-control dynamics (with or withoutphysical violence)•Legitimate safety risks•Active substance abuse•Certain types of mental health diagnoses

Multi-FactorTheory of3DUHQW&KLOG&RQWDFW3UREOHPV3&&3

What’s the Research Say?2020 Survey of Resist and/or Refuse Dynamics• Collaboration between National Council of Juvenile andFamily Court Judges (NCJFCJ) and the Association of Familyand Conciliation Courts (AFCC) in 2020• Represents the largest sample of responses on this topic.Over 500 pages of comments were submitted by participants.• Aim – to ‘take the temperature’ of the professional cultures.• Most participants indicated receiving no more than 4 hours oftraining on resist/refuse dynamics• Most (+85%) were unaware of tools available to differentiaterealistic estrangement from alienating behavior by a parent15Saini, 2021Knowns1516Saini, 2021Knowns16

Characteristics of RRD cases

most mental health professionals get it wrong

Targeted parents may present as anxious, depressed, and angry. At the same time, beneath these desperate situational reactions generally lies psychological health. Alienating parents, by contrast, generally often calm, cool, and charming and therefore look more attractive. They lie convincingly. Alienator and child appear credible by telling similar stories. THE BASICS What Is Parental Alienation? Find a therapist near me

When a child's negative reaction stems from verbal, phyiscal or sexual abuse, children still want a relationship with the abusive parent. In addition however, accusations that a targeted parent has been abusive need to be assessed thoroughly to be certain that these kinds of abuse are not occurring, and if so, addressed directly. In contrast, when a child's negative reaction stems from the abuse of alienation, the child becomes resistant, increasingly hostile, and eventually rejects altogether the targeted parent.

DSM-5(3)Childpsychologicalabuse(995.51),whichincludes“harming/ abandoning...peopleorthingsthatthechildcaresabout.”DSM-5, pg. 716,719(5thed. 2013); WilliamBernet,et. al. , ChildAffectedbyParentalRelationshipDistress55J. oftheAm. Acad. ofChildandAdolescentPsychiatry571-579(2016)

DSM-5(2)Parent-childrelationalproblem(V61.20),whichincludes“negativeattributionsoftheother’sintentions,hostilitytowardorscapegoatingoftheother,andunwarrantedfeelingsofestrangement.”DSM-5, pg. 715,719(5thed. 2013); WilliamBernet,et. al. , ChildAffectedbyParentalRelationshipDistress55J. oftheAm. Acad. ofChildandAdolescentPsychiatry571-579(2016)

DSM-5DSM-5 hasTHREEspecificdiagnosesunderwhichParentalAlienationmayfall,albeitbydifferentnames:(1)Childaffectedbyparentalrelationshipdistress(CAPRD)(V61.29),which“shouldbeusedwhenthefocusofclinicalattentionis thenegativeeffectsofparentalrelationshipdiscord(e.g., highlevelsofconflict,distress,ordisparagement)ona childinthefamily,includingeffectsonthechild’smentalorothermedicaldisorders.”DSM-5, pg. 716,719(5thed. 2013); WilliamBernet,et. al. , ChildAffectedbyParentalRelationshipDistress55J. oftheAm. Acad. ofChildandAdolescentPsychiatry571-579(2016

SEVERE: thepreferredparentis obsessedwiththedesiretodestroythechild’srelationshipwiththeotherparent; thebehaviordoesnotrespondtotypicaloutpatientcounseling

World Health OrganizationQE52.0:Caregiver-childrelationshipproblem= “substantialandsustaineddissatisfactionwithinacaregiver-childrelationshipassociatedwithsignificantdisturbanceinfunctioning.”INDEXTERMS◦Parent-childrelationshipproblem◦Parentalalienation◦Parentalestrangemen

Bernet, W. et al. (2018), An Objective Measure of Splitting in Parental Alienation: The Parental Acceptance-Rejection Questionnaire(PARQ

The Five-Factor Model for the Diagnosis of Parental AlienationAuthor links open overlay panelWilliam Bernet MD a, Laurence L. Greenhill MD b

Five-Factor ModelThe Five-Factor Model (FFM) is a method for diagnosing PA byunderstanding and identifying the components of this mental condition. TheFFM includes the following criteria:¢ Factor One: the child manifests contact resistance or refusal, i.e.,avoids a relationship with one of the parents.¢ Factor Two: the presence of a prior positive relationship betweenthe child and the now rejected parent.* Factor Three: the absence of abuse, neglect, or seriously deficientparenting on the part of the now rejected parent.¢ Factor Four; the use of multiple alienating behaviors on the partof the favored parent.* Factor Five: the child exhibits many of the eight behavioralmanifestations of alienation.

Although the actual words “parental alienation” are not in DSM-5 or ICD-11, the concept of PA is found in those diagnostic manuals. In the DSM-5,there are three diagnoses that can be used when PA has been identified in achild or a family. For example, a new diagnosis in DSM-5, child affected byparental relationship distress, can be used in cases involving PA, which wasexplained in an article by Bernet, Wamboldt, and Narrow (2016). Otherdiagnoses in DSM-5—that ts, parent-child relational problem and childpsychological abuse—may also be used in cases involving PA. Likewise, withregard to ICD-11, the diagnosis of caregiver—child relationship problem canbe used in cases involving PA.

PA-detractors seem to think that somewhere thereis arule or a commandment to that effect, but there is no such rule. There aremany examples of medical and psychiatric ailments being routinely diagnosedbefore those conditions were officially included in diagnostic nomenclature.For example, Tourette’s syndrome was described and identified in 1885, longbefore it was officially included in DSM-III in 1980. Human immunodeficiencyvirus (HIV) and autoimmune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) were described,identified, and diagnosed in the early 1980s, years before they found their wayinto ICD-9 (1991).

Conclusions:Indoctrinating a child to hate or fear a parent without a goodreason is a form of child psychological abuse. Clinicians should use theDSM-5diagnosis of child psychological abuse when an alienating parent is deter-mined to cause parental alienation in his or her children. Child protectionpersonnel should investigate cases of parental alienation as instances of childpsychological abuse

Consider citing information on:Reasonable efforts to reunify

When necessary, argue to the court that by not pro-viding a reunified child with appropriate services, the agency is not making mandated reasonable efforts to achieve permanency

Providing states improved access to federal funds for reunification services aligns with the federal Children’s Bureau’s renewed focus on reasonable efforts to achieve permanency requirements. Families should be provided all needed assistance to ensure the safe reunification of the child. (See reasonable efforts resources in Research to Cite: Reunification Services for the Family.)

Key Federal Laws to Incorporate into Advocacy

Ensure reunification services begin promptly

reunification services that can begin as soon as a child enters foster care

The Title IV-B Family Reunification Services section de-scribes the services that should be provided to a child and family when the child has been removed from the home “to facilitate the reunification of the child safely and appropri-ately within a timely fashion and to ensure the strength and stability of the reunification.”60 These services may include counseling, substance use treatment, assistance to address domestic violence, peer mentoring, visitation, and transpor-tation

Placement determinations using evidence-based assessments

through evidence-based, trau-ma-informed treatment models

Family First Act requires state and tribal child welfare agencies develop procedures and protocols to prevent children from being inappropriately diag-nosed with mental illness

Segrue, Erin. Ph.D., LICSW. Evidence Base for Avoiding Family Separation in Child Welfare Practice: An Analysis of Current Research. Alia Innovations, July 2019

rendered by a “qualified clinician.”

The American Professional Society on theAbuse of Children (APSAC) suggests thatthese children and families deserve anapproach that is collaborative, respectful,and includes interventions that are most likelyto lead to outcomes on family-identifiedand programmatic goals. This individualizedapproach is a focused, assessment-driven, andscience-informed approach that both favorsplans

interventions should be selected based on the needs of the family and the availability of strategies and interventions wi

Principles for Matching Change Strategies and/or Interventions to Key Desired Outcome

It is important to note, however, that only a minority of child welfare-involved children develop clinically significant levels of self-reported, post-traumatic stress symptoms, so assessment is essential (Kolko et al., 2010).

Evidence-based practice is generally meant when the caseworker considers the current best evidence about a particular problem or need, family preferences, the specific family circumstances, and the practitioner’s clinical expertise (Gibbs, 2003; Shlonsky & Benbenishty, 2014)

emphasized throughout this manual, it is crucial that agencies support families to receive tailored interventions or change strategies based on the families’ unique strengths and needs, best available research, practice exper-tise, and available resources

Ten Parental Alienation Fallacies That Compromise Decisions in Courtand in Therapy

Alienated adolescents’ stated preferences should domi-nate custody decisions.Practice recommendations.Custody evaluators and educativeexperts should be aware, and be prepared to inform the court, thatadolescents are suggestible, highly vulnerable to external influ-ence, and highly susceptible to immature judgments, and thus weshould not assume that their custodial preferences reflect matureand independent judgment. If an adolescent’s best interests wouldbe served by repairing a damaged relationship with a parent,evaluators’ recommendations and court decisions should reflectthe benefits of holding adolescents accountable for complying withappropriate authority. Although adolescents protest many of soci-ety’s rule and expectations, they will generally respond to reason-able limits when these are consistently and firmly enforced.8. Children who irrationally reject a parent but thrive inother respects need no intervention.Practice recommendations.Evaluators should be careful notto overlook an alienated child’s psychological impairments thatmay be less apparent than the child’s good adjustment in domainssuch as school and extracurricular activities. Evaluators can assistthe court’s proper disposition of a case by identifying the cogni-tive, emotional, and behavior problems that accompany irrationalaversion to a parent, as well as the potential long-term negativeconsequences of remaining alienated from a paren

need not identify scholastic or social adjust-ment problems outside the family to be concerned about an alien-ated child’s psychological state. Harboring irrational

Children Who Irrationally Reject a Parent ButThrive in Other Respects Need No Interventio

Family Involvement & After Care•Family members will be involved in treatment

level of care assessment is intended to be collaborative with the family, identified family supports and all who may be providing services and supports to the youth/

assessment process, the caseworker must arrange a "Family and Permanency Team meeting”

placement provides the most effective level of care

Counties will continue to use Child Welfare Block, Core and County-onlyfunding to provide services that best meet the needs of theircommunities

FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS FORPREVENTION SERVICES

COLORADO IMPLEMENTATIONCORE VALUES

FEDERAL PREVENTION SERVICESTO KEEP FAMILIES TOGETHER

preventionservices that are evidence-based

FAMILY FIRST 101

arents have the right to both expect and demand professional competence in the diagnosis and treatment of their children and families. That’s all we’re asking for.

Mental health professionals are NOT ALLOWED to abandon children to psychological child abuse

Standard 2.01: Boundaries of Competence In cases of attachment-based “parental alienation” the potential violations likely center on Standard 2.01: Boundaries of Competence, in which the mental health professional failed to possess the necessary knowledge and professional competence in personality disorder pathology, family systems pathology, and attachment trauma pathology necessary to assess, diagnose, and treat the particular type of pathology being evidenced in your family

. I define these domains of professional competence in Chapter 11 of Foundations, specifically on pages 341-351. I did this for you. You can use the description of the required “Domains of Professional Competence” for the pathology of an attachment-based model of “parental alienation” (i.e., attachment-trauma reenactment pathology mediated by narcissistic/borderline personality pathology) to establish the boundaries of professional competence required under Standard 2.01 (and 9.01) of the Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct of the American Psychological Association.

Heitler agrees a support system is vital. Because targeted parents often experience severe symptoms of depression and anxiety as a result of feeling miscast, she is intentional about outlining the difference between warranted estrangement from children (based on prior abuse in the household) and being alienated (based on no factual forms of abuse in the household before separation) to help reality test a client under the spell of manipulation.

“What’s happening in outpatient reunification therapy is not only not helping [but] it’s making things far worse,” Baker stresses. “One major problem in general is that clinicians often let these cases go on and on with middle-of-the-road treatments without getting to the underlying cause. Many therapists let these cases go for years without saying, ‘Gee, I’m not really doing anything good here.’” “There’s this false belief that it’s impossible to tell what’s really going on,” she continues. But “it’s not impossible to tell if clinicians were trained specifically in this subspecialization.”

Bernet developed the five-factor model, which is an effective method to use when diagnosing parental alienation. This model includes five criteria for diagnosis: Contact refusal: Is the child refusing contact with a parent? Previous relationship: Did the child previously have a positive relationship with the rejected parent? Lack of abuse: Does the rejected parent show signs of being abusive or neglectful Alienating behaviors: Is the preferred parent engaging in alienating behaviors? Child symptoms: Is the child manifesting symptoms of alienation?

“Parental alienation leads to highly complicated and difficult cases that require far more knowledge and specialization,” notes Amy Baker, a psychologist and parental alienation expert who has written over 65 peer-reviewed articles on the matter. “In other words, even seasoned clinicians with experience in family systems are still, in a way, a novice when dealing with alienation. Humility would be the most important thing for clinicians to have in this regard.”

however, in describing the models on which their program is based, administrators tend to focus on service delivery characteristics (most notably caseload size and service duration) rather than on the theoretical underpinnings of the service delivery model.

Teenagers often make choices while failing to consider the possible consequences of their actions

The Independent Assessment is completed by a licensed behavioral health professional who completes a full psychosocial assessment, reviews all provided documentation, meets with the child or youth, speaks with a wide variety of individuals, and has completed a robust set of training. The CANS tool is used after the psychosocial assessment to help the behavioral health professional identify key needs and strengths with the family and child or youth. The CANS tool is also used to frame the assessment in a measurable way and to work with all parties involved to gain a consensus of the needs and strengths

Criterion #2: Programs should be based on well-articulated theories

Find a Program or Service

Find a Program or Service

While older youth, like younger children, usually come into care for multiple reasons, the most common reasons for older youth are the Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System (AFCARS) categories of neglect, child behavior problem, and caretaker inability to cope. Effective prevention services for older youth will need to respond to these removal reasons and likely need to enlist the behavioral health system to formulate effective interventions.

Family First requires that states ensure that, “consistent with the agency’s five-year title IV-E prevention plan, section 471(e)(4)(B) of the Social Security Act requires the title IV-E agency [CDHS] to provide services or programs to or on behalf of a child under an organizational structure and treatment framework that involves understanding, recognizing, and responding to the effects of all types of trauma and in accordance with recognized principles of a trauma-informed approach and trauma-specific interventions to address trauma’s consequences and facilitate healing.”

Family First requires that states ensure that, “consistent with the agency’s five-year title IV-E prevention plan, section 471(e)(4)(B) of the Social Security Act requires the title IV-E agency [CDHS] to provide services or programs to or on behalf of a child under an organizational structure and treatment framework that involves understanding, recognizing, and responding to the effects of all types of trauma and in accordance with recognized principles of a trauma-informed approach and trauma-specific interventions to address trauma’s consequences and facilitate healing.”

When a child is at risk of not being safe, this report fortifiesthe call for alternative interventions that strengthen ratherthan undermine the sense of feeling safe, which familyconnections provide

For decades child welfare systems have assessed risk ofphysical safety and made decisions based on the probabilityof physical harm (being safe), without fully considering theeffects psychological and emotional harm (feeling safe).

eelingsafe comes from the love and belonging children receive fromtheir families, and separation undermines this critical piece ofthe two-part safety equation

When a child is at risk of not being safe, this report fortifiesthe call for alternative interventions that strengthen ratherthan undermine the sense of feeling safe, which familyconnections provide

Program eligibility requirements:o Mental health services, substance use services, or parenting skillso Evidence-based & trauma-informed

If a child moves from one QRTP program to another, will a new 30-dayassessment/60-day court review be required?Yes. The assessment and court review process apply to each QRTP setting in which ajurisdiction places a child. [§475A(c)(1)(A); P.L. 115-123 §50742]

How is the child’s family involved in assessment process?Family First requires that, as part of the assessment to determine whether a QRTP is anappropriate setting for a child, the Title IV-E agency work to convene a family and permanencyteam to provide input on the process of determining the most appropriate and least restrictiveenvironment for the child. The purpose of this team is to ensure that those adults closest to achild and who best know the child’s needs can share their perspectives as part of the process ofdetermining the most appropriate setting for the child. A family and permanency team mustconsist of all of a child’s appropriate birth family members, relatives, and other individuals whohave an emotionally significant relationship with the child but are unrelated by birth or marriage,known as fictive kin. The team must also include, as appropriate, professionals who are aresource to the child’s family, including teachers, medical or mental health providers who havetreated the child, or clergy. The team’s role is to provide input during the assessment process,particularly during the determination of whether a child’s needs can be met with family membersor in a foster family home, or if not, what type of non-family setting is appropriate to meet theirneeds. The team also helps to develop a list of child-specific short- and long-term mental andbehavioral health goals. To ensure the voice and perspective of youth is a part of this process, forchildren 14 and older, the team must include individuals that the young person selects from theirpermanency planning team as required by Sec. 475(5)(C)(iv). This youth engagement practicebuilds upon pre-existing policies in federal law that promote youth engagement (See Youthengagement in case plans - what Federal Law Requires). The qualified individual conducting theassessment will work with the family and permanency team when making the assessment.[§475A(c)(1)(B)(i); P.L. 115-123 §50742

What happens if a jurisdiction places a child in a QRTP, but the assessmentdetermines that is not an appropriate setting for them?Title IV-E FCMPs may continue for no longer than 30 days following a determination that theplacement is no longer recommended or approved for that child.

Are there requirements that the Title IV-E agency document how it engaged thefamily in the assessment process?Family First requires that a child’s case plan include documentation on how to contact the familyand permanency team members, as well as evidence that the meetings are held at times andplaces convenient to the family. If a child’s assessment outcome is different than the wishes of

the family and permanency team, the case plan must also outline why the assessment does notrecommend those preferences. [§475A(c)(1)(B)(iii)(VII); P.L. 115-123 §50742]

As part of the QRTP model, Family First creates a new process for ensuring that a Title IV-Eeligible child needs the level of treatment intervention that a QRTP offers. Within 30 days ofentering a QRTP, a child must receive an assessment from a qualified individual using anappropriate functional assessment tool to determine whether they need care in a QRTP andwhether that particular QRTP can meet their specific treatment needs. The purpose of thisprocess is to acknowledge that QRTPs are a treatment intervention, and that through the processof specialization, not every QRTP will be appropriate for each child’s specific needs

Effective training of assessment professionals in child development, childtrauma, and the types of particular QRTPs and how they meet the needs of individual childrenwill be essential to the effective implementation of this aspect of Family First.

What if our jurisdiction does not have anyone available who meets the qualifiedindividual criteria?There is a process for Title IV-E agencies to obtain from the HHS Secretary a waiver from therequirement that a qualified individual conduct the assessment. Title IV-E agencies must submitdocumentation to the HHS Secretary certifying that trained professionals or licensed cliniciansconducting these assessments shall maintain objectivity in determining the most effective andappropriate placement for a child. This certification process is required to prevent conflicts ofinterest in placing children in QRTPs

AFCC Guidelines for Court-Involved Therap

Children may have become accustomed to avoiding problemsrather than dealing with them and may never have developed the active coping skills that are so criti-cal to developmen

. Avoidance is a powerful, if extremelyunhealthy coping strategy and in court-involved families there may be an even greater impetus toresist change

hildren who resist contact with a parent may be more likely to come to the attention of the court,as the excluded parent may seek orders to enforce the parenting plan, provide counseling, a child custo-dy evaluation, or an order for some of the more specialized milieu programs that address disrupted rela-tionships. Many of these families are also poorly served, as they may initially be referred to therapythat is not adequately structured or specialized for this situation. Outmoded and often demonstrablyineffective treatment approaches, such as counseling that is limited to the rejected parent and child, areoften among the first to be attempted. (This is a common structure when courts order “reunificationtherapy,” but a one-sided approach is rarely successful and may exacerbate the problem.

responsive to treatment or fail to elicit the sympathy of authority figures. This underscores

others.Critical among these abilities is that the childactivelyengages with others, in an appropriate way,to get his/her needs met.

(Dunn, Davies, O’Connor, & Sturgess,2001; Pedro-Carroll, 2005; Pedro-Carroll, Sandler, & Wolchik, 2005; Sandler, Tein, Mehta,Wolchik, & Ayers, 2000). These include both coping abilities and coping efficacy, as well as accessto the normal peer and developmental activities that other children enjoy (Pedro-Carroll, 2005). Cop-ing abilities include, but are not limited to, the ability to differentiate one’s own feelings from some-one else’s, appropriately express independent needs and feelings, regulate emotions, managedistress, recognize danger, know the difference between anxiety or discomfort and danger, ask forhelp, and form healthy relationships with others

studies underscore commonelements in successful outcome

symptoms.Trained professionals can identify problem behaviors and intervene early, before problems become entrenched

investigation and litigationmay precede any meaningful attempt at intervention, based on the questionable belief that all elements of causality (or blame)must be established before any effective treatment can occur. Children’s functioning may continue to deteriorate during thistime, undermining their future adjustment and reducing the chance of successful intervention later.

CATCHING THEM BEFORE TOO MUCH DAMAGE IS DONE: EARLYINTERVENTION WITH RESISTANCE-REFUSAL DYNAMICSLyn R. Greenberg, Lynda Doi Fick, and Hon. Robert A. Schnider

Treatment Necessary health care services must be made available for treatment of all physical and mental illnesses or conditions discovered by any screening and diagnostic procedures.

Diagnostic Services When a screening examination indicates the need for further evaluation of an individual's health, diagnostic services must be provided. Necessary referrals should be made without delay and there should be follow-up to ensure the enrollee receives a complete diagnostic evaluation. States should develop quality assurance procedures to assure that comprehensive care is provided.

Other Necessary Health Care Services States are required to provide any additional health care services that are coverable under the Federal Medicaid program and found to be medically necessary to treat, correct or reduce illnesses and conditions discovered regardless of whether the service is covered in a state's Medicaid plan. It is the responsibility of states to determine medical necessity on a case-by-case basis.

Toni spent months reading up on federal Medicaid law, and she learned the state-federal health insurance program is supposed to cover all medically necessary treatments for eligible children.

To Get Mental Health Help For A Child, Desperate Parents Relinquish Custody

The lowest value for false positive rate was 0.8%. Allow me to explain the impact of a false positive rate of 0.8% on Pillar 2. We return to our 10,000 people who’ve volunteered to get tested, and the expected ten with virus (0.1% prevalence or 1:1000) have been identified by the PCR test. But now we’ve to calculate how many false positives are to accompanying them. The shocking answer is 80. 80 is 0.8% of 10,000. That’s how many false positives you’d get every time you were to use a Pillar 2 test on a group of that size.

He added that while it would not be possible to check every test to see whether there was active virus, the likelihood of false positive results could be reduced if scientists could work out where the cut-off point should be.

Your Coronavirus Test Is Positive. Maybe It Shouldn’t Be.

If we are now going to hold our nation hostage because of this obsession over PCR (polymerase chain reaction) swab tests, we should at the very least make certain they’re accurate. What happens when we have expedited and chaotic test results driving an epidemic curve rather than actual symptoms? You get what happened to Ohio Governor Mike DeWine last Thursday. He tested positive for the virus after experiencing absolutely no symptoms. But because he is such a VIP, he got a second, more accurate test that showed he was in fact negative for SARS-CoV-2. The same thing happened to Detroit Lions quarterback Matthew Stafford, who tested negative after receiving a false positive and was therefore allowed out of coronavirus prison.

Although public health officials have warned that the presence of antibodies does not guarantee immunity from the disease, the common perception that this is the case makes the issue of bogus tests nothing short of a matter of life and death.

One Test May Spot Cancer, Infections, Diabetes and More