top of page

No evidence base, and harm caused

  • Nov 17, 2025
  • 1 min read

Updated: Dec 12, 2025

Andy bilson and Alessandro Talia


This chapter is co-produced with parents who were wrongly identified as having Fabricated or Induced Illness in their child.


It provides a brief history of the development of FII from the discredited work of Meadow and the miscarriages of justice at the turn of the century through to its

current form in the 2021 guidance of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health. It shows how the definition has widened increasing the risk of misidentification and how earlier recognition of the limitations of diagnosis and the harm caused by misidentification have been abandoned.


It provides a literature search on FII exposing the lack of evidence for the concept and the harm caused by misidentification.


Finally, it shows the flaws in the current approach of identification using alerting signs showing the significant risk of this leading to serious harm to children who have rare, undiagnosed or hard to diagnose illnesses and their families.

 
 

Recent Posts

See All
FII in detail

The Impact of FII allegations on parents – Report Summary An examination of Fabricated and Induced Illness cases in Gloucestershire; Parent and Carer Alliance C.I.C This report was compiled by the Par

 
 
In the news...

There have been a number of articles in the papers which have highlighted individual cases, the scale of FII accusations and the harm that they can cause. The Sunday Times published: 'We demanded hel

 
 
BASW guidance

Fabricated or Induced Illness and Perplexing Presentations: Abbreviated Practice Guide for Social Work Practitioners Guidance from the British Association of Social Workers, published May 2022 The Gui

 
 
bottom of page