As mention several times before, Sandra Glenney chooses therapists that have a less than stellar reputation and questionable tactics.  Primary among them is Dr. Joyana Silberg, who has questionable tactics. She has been identified by the watchdog group Grey Faction, as a therapist to be wary of.  Either Sandra Glenney is so desperate to win cases that she is wiling employ therapists of dubious reputations or she believes what they are selling. neither one is a good scenario.

Below are example of cases where her testimony was disallowed due to its biased nature.

Holt v Holt (No. 1064, September Term, 2017), 2018
Dr. Silberg’s testimony was deemed to be biased and suffer from “tremendous analytical gaps,” and was deemed by the court to lack credibility.

https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3430551134760014963&hl=en&as_sdt=6,47

Marks v Schenk (No. 807, September Term, 2016), 2018
This case was a custody dispute over a child that was alleged by his mother to have been sexually abused by his father. The mother showed many signs of erratic and unstable behavior during the case, and Silberg would be her “staunchest advocate” throughout. The judge in this case had numerous complaints about Dr. Silberg’s own behavior, stating that she “compromised her professional boundaries,” lied to the court, and went beyond her authority in discontinuing court-ordered visitation by the father.

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?scidkt=10092161310836718585&as_sdt=2&hl=en