Advocates for Children in Therapy (ACT) is a U.S. advocacy group opposed to attachment therapy and related treatments. The organization opposes a number of psychotherapeutic techniques which it considers potentially or actually harmful to children who undergo treatment. The group's mission is to provide advocacy by "raising general public awareness of the dangers and cruelty" of practices related to attachment therapy. According to the group, "ACT works to mobilize parents, professionals, private and governmental regulators, prosecutors, juries, and legislators to end the physical torture and emotional abuse that is Attachment Therapy."
The group is led by Linda Rosa, Executive Director; Larry Sarner, Administrative Director; and Jean Mercer, President of its Board of Professional Advisors. 
Opposition to attachment therapy
Attachment therapy is an ambiguous term with no precise professional meaning but popularly used to describe controversial, non-mainstream "treatments" for children allegedly suffering from attachment disorder, in itself an ambiguous term. (APSAC, 2006, p78) There are many variants, for example “holding therapy,” “compression therapy,“ “corrective attachment therapy,” “the Evergreen model,” “holding time,” “rage-reduction therapy”, and somewhat erroneously, “rebirthing therapy.” .
ACT states that attachment therapy frequently involves "the imposition of boundary violations — most often coercive restraint — and verbal abuse on a child, usually for hours at a time … typically, the child is put in a lap hold with the arms pinned down, or alternatively an adult lies on top of a child lying prone on the floor" and as "a growing, underground movement for the 'treatment' of children who pose disciplinary problems to their parents or caregivers." The group further notes that attachment therapy "almost always involves extremely confrontational, often hostile confrontation of a child by a therapist or parent (sometimes both). Restraint of the child by more powerful adult(s) is considered an essential part of the confrontation" and refers to attachment therapy as "the worst quackery in our nation today."
ACT has seven criteria for defining attachment therapy as follows:
"For our purposes, we have identified several distinguishing characteristics, any one of which qualifies a practice to be called Attachment Therapy:
- "Practices, teaches or recommends restraint (or other violations of interpersonal boundaries) for an allegedly therapeutic purpose. The things mentioned are often deliberately confrontational and intrusive.
- "Principally treats, or is concerned with, a condition of 'Attachment Disorder' (distinct from the DSM-recognized diagnosis of Reactive Attachment Disorder), and assesses for that condition using unvalidated diagnostic tools, or uses no tools at all for objective assessment.
- "Practices or recommends treatment based on a belief in the efficacy of any of the following: re-traumatization; catharsis, especially through expression of rage, fear, sadness, or other 'negative' emotion; recapitulation (re-enactment, re-living, or 're-doing') of stages of development; or repatterning of the brain.
- "Adheres to unvalidated notions about child development or attachment, especially the so-called 'Attachment Cycle' (aka Bonding Cycle, Need Cycle, Rage Cycle). Though reference may be made to the Attachment Theory, pioneered by John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth, Attachment Therapy shares very little with that empirical work (and indeed runs counter to it in almost all important respects).
- "Claims that AT practices are safe and efficacious when there is a near complete lack of scientific support.
- "Practices or teaches harsh parenting and respite methods, based principally upon combinations of deprivation, isolation or humiliation for the child.
- "Uncritically recommends materials (such as websites, books, videos, lectures, and conference presentations) which do any of the above."
ACT also challenges the diagnosis of attachment disorder, stating, "A large fringe element of pseudoscientific psychotherapists — Attachment Therapists (AT) — have invented the dubious, unrecognized diagnosis of 'Attachment Disorder' (AD) and its cure. AD is thought to be a child's inability to form a close, loving relationship with his caregiver, typically because of early childhood abuse or neglect. Many, if not most, undesirable behaviors seen in childhood supposedly stem from AD."
ACT has advocated for the elimination of attachment therapy and specifically criticizes the referral of children for government-funded attachment therapy by courts and state workers, referring to such practices as "state-sponsored torture."
The group reports that its three leaders were directly involved in prosecution of the Candace Newmaker case. "All three authors assisted the prosecution in the “rebirthing” trial that resulted in historic 16-year sentences for therapists Connell Watkins and Julie Ponder." Both Connell Watkins and Julie Ponder were unlicensed in the state of Colorado. ACT has also entered statements into the record at United States Congressional hearings on mental health issues. Attachment Therapy on Trial: The Torture and Death of Candace Newmaker (Praeger, 2003), was written by "ACT authors" Jean Mercer, Larry Sarner, and Linda Rosa. The book has been criticized in the media for various errors  Mr. Charles Hannasch stated,
As part of the Newmaker trial coverage for a national news service bureau in Denver, one day during the trial while coming out for lunch I cornered lead prosecutor Steve Jensen and asked him what his prosecution was based on.Was it going to put "attachment therapy on trial?" Jensen's answer was simple and straight-forward. "No!"He intended on pursuing a very narrow prosecution to prove that Watkins and Ponder were responsible under the terms of the state's child abuse / homicide statute for the death of Candace Newmaker. Child abuse/homicide is the most serious felony in the Colorado state criminal code.Thus, with the title, the authors are fraudulenty trying to assert something which simply is not true. The only part of the Newmaker trial that was concerned with the value of Attachment Therapy was the defense. And, unfortunately, that was because of the existence of a videotape which showed Watkins and Ponder "in the act." The defense had no other alternative than to assert that it was simply a mistake of the therapy. Certainly, if the videotape did not exist, the defense would have probably have opted for a different defensive strategy.And, unfortunately, the book does have several factual errors ... such as the notation by Mr. Patterson. A check with the local Midvale, Utah police department shows Krystal's date of birth as December 7, 1991, and her date of death as July 7, 1995, making her three years, eight months old at her death.
ACT sporadically publishes an electronic newsletter, "AT News", although much of this material is either out of date or lacking in a factual basis.
Articles from ACT sometimes appear on the controversial and fringe website of Stephen Barrett's Quackwatch, although this material is several years old and may be outdated.
In mid-2009, two blogs supportive of ACT's positions (childtorture.wordpress.com and attachmentquackery.wordpress.com) were suspended due to violations of WordPress' terms of service. Larry Sarner has been extremely critical of WordPress' decision.
The number of members is unknown since membership statistics are not available on the ACT website, but Colorado Corporation filings only show the three leaders as active in the group.
Acceptance by Mental Health Profession
Advocates for Children in Therapy is not recognized nor accepted by the American Medical Association, American Psychological Association, American Psychiatric Association, National Association of Social Workers, or any other large professional organizations. A review of those organization's websites shows no mention of ACT. Those large, well-respected professional organizations do seek input from various groups, but not from Advoctes for Children in Therapy. As such ACT is not part of the mainstream mental health professional community and its advice is not sought by these groups, although ACT does attempt to influence such groups.
ACT has a few of its articles cited by and posted on Quackwatch which is run by Stephen Barrett, although the material is several years old and may be outdated. Both ACT and Quackwatch are controversial advocacy groups.
In the late 1990s, Larry Sarner was involved in a business venture to develop and deploy voting machines. This blog contains a screenshot from the US Patent and Trademark Office documenting this.
It is reported that his voting machines did not work.
Sarner filed an appeal. In it, he claimed that a private individual, a state court judge, and a court appointed receiver had conspired against him to deprive him of property. The court refused to hear his arguments.
- ↑ Advocates for Children in Therapy (2004). Mission statement.
- ↑ http://www.kidscomefirst.info/vita99.pdf
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 Chaffin M, et al. (February 2006). Report of the APSAC Task Force on Attachment Therapy, Reactive Attachment Disorder, and Attachment Problems. Child Maltreatment 11 (1): 76–79.
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 Advocates for Children in Therapy (2003). Overview of attachment therapy.
- ↑ Advocates for Children in Therapy (2003). Government Subsidies for Attachment Therapy.
- ↑ New Book Examines AT
- ↑ Siegen, Barry. Seeking Child's Love, a Child's Life is Lost, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 4 Feb 2001, p A1,A22-A24
- ↑ Auge, Karen. Alternative therapies not new in Evergreen, Denver Post June 17, 2000
- ↑ Sarner LW, Mercer J (2003). Statement Before Human Resources Subcmte of US House Ways & Means Cmte.
- ↑ 2003b
- ↑ 
- ↑ Maloney, Shannon-Bridget. Quackwatch on Attachment Therapy. Quackwatch. URL accessed on 2007-02-12.
- ↑ http://larrysarnerpseudoscience.wordpress.com/2009/08/29/larry-sarner-calls-for-the-excoriation-of-wordpress/
- ↑ https://chris.dod.net/?p=261&cpage=1#comment-27
- ↑ http://axisofquackery.wordpress.com/2009/07/16/larry-sarners-patents/
- ↑ http://www.westword.com/1996-04-18/news/machine-politics/
- ↑ http://larrysarnerpseudoscience.wordpress.com/2009/07/15/confounding-the-doubters/
- ↑ http://axisofquackery.wordpress.com/2009/07/11/linda-rosa-litigation-history/
- ↑ http://openjurist.org/129/f3d/131/sarner-v-luce-3