The aim of this paper is to debate the performance of therapists in Family Courts through the determination of psychological study to evaluate and detect alleged acts of parental alienation (PA) to ponder about childhood trauma denial of kids enmeshed in litigation. This dissertation attempts to establish an accurate careful over the intersection between Psychology and Law, considering the challenges in therapists practice in Family Courts. Moreover, it intends to evaluate, under Ferenczi s theory on trauma perspective, the possibility of the trauma denial reproduction by the court on the child, with psychological expertise demanded by the Judiciary. Through this theoretical foundation, it was possible to arouse reflections regarding the psychologists practice potentials and the urge to a critical work concerning the requirements from the Judiciary, invariably preserving the rights envisaged by the law for protection of the child and the adolescent. To achieve this aim, the study presents two pieces from cases treated by the researcher in the judicial branch to enhance the theoretical discussion by integrating it with her professional practice. This paperwork enables to identify that the pathologizing punitive approach from the Parental Alienation Act (LAP in local acronym) consolidates the family judicialization process. As a result, there is a children s secondary role perpetuation in the parental litigation process. This scenario convenes psychologists to operate under a sensitive critical method regarding the received demands to mitigate the risks of another traumatic experience for children and adolescents, this time committed by court.