My first contact with Mr. Seabaugh came in the form of a phone call one early afternoon. Mr. Seabaugh informed me he was treating my son. He was calling to request I refrain from contacting my son. I politely declined his invitation and informed him that perhaps he did not have a full grasp of the facts at hand. I also questioned whether his judgment was valid, given his ability to render such an opinion without ever speaking to me. My next contact with Mr. Seabaugh was in the form of a declaration in support of my son's mother's court filings which, among other things, demanded visitation with my son be terminated. The court ignored Mr. Seabaugh's opinion and, among other things, enforced my visitation rights. My next contact with Mr. Seabaugh was some time later. My son's mother had again made the same plea of the court. Mr. Seabaugh provided a declaration again stating his same opinion. On the day of that court hearing, my son was present and evaluated by the court. The court evaluator found no cause to substantiate such action, even repeating my son's own words, 'Everything is OK' between he and his father. The very same day, Mr. Seabaugh took the witness stand, again stating his same opinion. An opinion supposedly formed through his treatment of my son, yet in direct contradiction of my son's own words to the court that very day. Mr. Seabaugh was questioned by council, asking the basis from which he formed his opinion. When asked to produce notes, writings and similar documentation, Mr. Seabaugh explained they had been 'lost by computer error'. As Mr. Seabaugh is a licensed psychologist in the State of California, this is in direct violation of his Code of Professional Ethics. Again, the court ruled in my favor. What appears above is fact. What appears above can be substantiated by sworn testimony, by court transcripts and by other similar credible documentation. What follows below is my opinion based upon those facts. Mr. Seabaugh's effect on my relationship of with my son: It is clear Mr. Seabaugh's treatment of my son lent emotional support to my son's rejection of a relationship with his father. It provided a trusted third-party validation to a young child in conformance with the desires of his bullying mother. I can only speculate how that emotional support affected my son. Although clearly obvious to me, I can only speculate how my son's true feelings of wanting a relationship with his father were manipulated and suppressed in contradiction to every natural childhood desire. Mr. Seabaugh lent his professional reputation to the process. Mr. Sebaugh's abilities as a expert witness: Should you require an opinion to substantiate your cause of action, I would highly recommend Mr. Sebaugh. He has shown the ability to render his expert judgement and opinion based solely upon the limited facts which you supply. Mr. Seabaugh is perhaps indifferent to the concept of performing an independent investigation, clearly resulting in the opinion required. And if you are compensating Mr. Seabaugh on an hourly basis, substantial savings will result in his not spending billable time gathering and assimilating facts contrary to those requirements. Perhaps in certain circumstances, he can also be counted upon to obliterate any documentation which led to his opinion - something very important to council. Mr. Seabaugh's treatment of non-adults: If you are the parent of a child under Mr. Seabaugh's treatment, you may rest assured his diagnosis and treatment may be dictated to your benefit. Should you require your child to foster certain feelings and emotions, Mr. Seabaugh is adequately trained to elicit and support that emotional content. He may neither seek influences contrary to your needs nor assert objective opinion. He is fully capable of rendering opinion and performing treatment conforming to your desired outcome. If you are a child under the treatment Mr. Seabaugh however, you may wish to carefully consider the direction of that treatment. You should consider whether the trust you place in your patient-therapist relationship is valid. Mr. Seabaugh may be considering the desires of your parent over your objective needs. After all, it is your parent who is paying the bills. Mr. Seabaugh has shown by past behavior that such a consideration may exert substantial influence over the direction of your therapy. Your treatment may well be to the needs of your parent and in the financial interest of your therapist instead of being to your objective benefit. Mr. Seabaugh's character: I have contacted Mr. Seabaugh to point out his clear lapses in professional conduct. I have pointed out that his actions were a part of series of events resulting in my inability to maintain a consistent relationship with my son. Clearly, Mr. Seabaugh participated and supported a case of parental alienation. When confronted with these facts and told of the consequences of his behavior, he simply chose to ignore any further involvement. Mr. Seabaugh even failed to reply to my inquiries, which also may be indicative of his ability to feel empathy. Mr. Seabaugh has an opportunity to help correct a past wrong. One which continues to affect my life. Yet he has made the choice to do nothing. Michael O.L. Seabaugh, practicing in Santa Monica and Santa Barbara, CA supports parental alienation and practices in a manner inconsistent with responsible professional standards. My email address is TJSpenceSM@***.com.