April 13, 2010. CPS Part II occurred today. The polite gentlemen from Child Protective Services made his mandatory revisit this afternoon and assured us that his report would state categorically that the school psychologist’s complaint was unfounded. Not a big surprise but a relief to hear all the same. Things really got interesting after that, though, because two extraordinary pieces of information trickled our way. First, the CPS investigator tells us as an aside that someone from the school, a lawyer he thinks, called CPS’ legal department. Apparently the school attorney is trying to convince CPS’ attorneys to require us to meet with the school and CPS as part of the school’s “we think you’re abusing your son because you won’t let him wet his pants” dead in the water campaign. We politely RSVPed our regrets to this little soire. The school obviously is trying to muddy the waters by resurrecting the dead CPS issue due to what they must fear is our prima facie retaliation case against it and the school psychologist. Pat and I find this interesting, even amusing, on several different levels, one of which is that the school attorney must think we have a real case. The second piece of information has to do with the school psychologist herself. After the CPS investigator left, I sat down to check my email before whisking Sophie off to her horseback-riding lesson. She’s in her first horse show this weekend and is terribly excited and nervous. I was expecting an email from her riding instructor but instead found a message from the Office of Professional Discipline regarding the complaint we lodged last week against the school psychologist for using CPS as a retaliatory tool. Pat and I thought it prudent to make the state board responsible for licensing and disciplining psychologists aware of our unfortunate situation. So guess what the email said? Apparently the esteemed school psychologist, who’s been challenging our experts’ qualifications, recommendations, statistical analyses, and diagnostic impressions for the last 2 ½ years, isn’t even licensed in the State of New York! She can’t even practice yet she has the unmitigated gall to dismiss the judgment of our neuropsychologist, Ron Federici, the undisputed world’s authority on kids like Peter? Undoubtedly there’s some exemption or educational certification that allows her to fulfill the role of a psychologist in a school setting, New York is notorious for its lack of licensing requirements, but I do find it funny. After all, I wouldn’t even hire a plumber who isn’t licensed. By the way, Peter has achieved daytime dryness for the last ten days, which blows his previous 2010 record clear out of the water. He’s very proud of himself and happy about the reward system we instituted for when he “takes good care of his body.” I guess having him clear the yard of dog poop had its intended effect.