Paul Reitman Had Recently Been Released from Suspension When Appointed to the Rucki Case

(Paul Reitman screenshot from 2013 local Minneapolis Fox broadcast)

As of June 2013, just months before he was appointed by Judge David Knutson to the Rucki case, he was still finishing a suspension by the Minnesota Board of Psychology.

Reitman Paul Agreement for ... by mikekvolpe on Scribd

The letter stated in part, "This letter is notification that the Minnesota Board of Psychology Complaint Resolution Committee has completed its review of your compliance with the Agreement for Corrective Action, dated April 15, 2011, and has determined that you have successfully completed the corrective action agreed upon. Therefore the complaint referenced in the Agreement is dismissed."

In the original complaint, the Minnesota Psychology Board noted that Reitman had previously created a conflict by wearing several hats during another custody matter. 

"Licensee engaged in multiple professional relationships within a post-dissolution custody dispute. Licensee provided psychological services while simultaneously serving as the Parenting Time Expeditor (PTE). The resulting dual relationship impaired Licensee's objectivity, creating the potential for harm to the clients, and therefore constituted a departure from minimum standards of acceptable and prevailing standards."

In the Rucki case, Dr. Reitman met with Sandra "Sam" Grazzini-Rucki and four of her five children for less than a half hour on August 29, 2012. 

Later that same day he wrote a report in which he stated in part, "The children appear very depressed and browbeaten. I am very concerned for them remaining in this situation. The mother seems to be out of touch and suffering from a personality disorder."

He recommended, "therapeutic foster care and immediately begin therapy/deprogramming to try to repair the damage that's been done by the alienation."

As a result of his report, an emergency telephonic conference was held on September 5, 2012- though he did not attend the conference- and then on September 7, 2012, by court of Judge David Knutson, Sandra Grazzini-Rucki was ordered out of her home. 

In the complaint to the Minnesota Psychology Board, Reitman was also accused of coming to a conclusion with no basis. 

"Licensee submitted a Psychological Review and Recommendation in family court which presented findings and recommendations. Licensee's report failed to provide a description of all assessments on which his findings were based. Licensee's report failed to note  any reservations or qualifications concerning the validity or reliability of the conclusions formulated. Licensee's report also failed to contain a notation concerning any discrepancy, disagreement, or conflicting information which may have a bearing on the case."

An April 12, 2013, Reitman wrote an article in Minnesota Lawyer.

He noted, "Parental Alienation Syndrome, while rejected by the fifth edition of the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, or DSM-V, still remains to be a real phenomenon in my own professional opinion.  Of course, parental alienation will occur naturally in any type of adversarial marital breakup.  It does not mean that a parent will intentionally alienate a child from the other parent.  Instead, the post-marital conflict certainly is experienced by the child and/or adolescent and because of their cognitive development at any particular stage they typically will align themselves with one parent or the other."

Indeed, every time PAS or parental alienation tries to get into the DSM it is rejected.

Later on in the same article, he appears to reference the Rucki case, "I had a case whereby I recommended such a placement regarding a mother who was entrenched in resisting any type of reunification therapy, and the five children, ranging from 16 to 5, refused to see the father.  The mother, after resisting reunification therapy, then alleged sexual abuse by the father to the children.  The judge in the case did remove the children from the home. If the children are placed in a neutral environment, they will be more likely to disentangle their thoughts about the parent who has not seen them from the alienating beliefs they currently have, and reunification therapy cannot progress until this begins to happen."

This, interestingly enough, also appears to violate another cannon of his ethical code. 

Here is part of the ethical code on confidentiality from the American Psychological Association (APA).

"Confidentiality is a respected part of psychology's code of ethics. Psychologists understand that for people to feel comfortable talking about private and revealing information, they need a safe place to talk about anything they'd like, without fear of that information leaving the room. They take your privacy very seriously.

"Laws are also in place to protect your privacy. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) contains a privacy rule that creates national standards to protect individuals' medical records and personal health information, including information about psychotherapy and mental health."

Even though he never mentions the Rucki case by name, he gives all sorts of identifiers, things he is not supposed to release, it appears.

The Rucki girls ran on April 19, 2013, just seven days after this article was written.

I discussed this further on Northwest Liberty News.

 Finally, in May 2013, the local Fox did a story on the Rucki case in which Reitman appeared again. His suspension was not noted in the story.


It's noteworthy that story done in May 2013 was done with the two Rucki girls- Samantha and Gianna- missing. Even though the station managed to snag an interview with two missing girls, they were given approximately one out of the nine minute broadcast while parental alienation was given approximately half the broadcast.

More recently, Reitman went on a bizarre email storm to me on July 8, 2019.

Among the things he said, he claimed that the court was biased against SGR, "Because the court hated her don't you know that of course I was court appointed by the judge and given a $100000 didn't know that."

He further claimed that despite already being sanctioned by the Minnesota Psychology Board, he still made $250,000 yearly as a court whore, "You have no life you have no future euro failure a big failure I'm making $250000 a year working on cases like yours you son of a b****'s."

Other things he said included, "Role laughing hear that your cowardice your spineless you are a moron you are a sick person who deserves to die I'd love to do it....I want to tell you if you ever text me again I will find you and when I find you we will settle this stop texting me I mean it if you ever want to go on in life stop texting me....What's the matter Mr. Cop you won't mean the 1 on 1 boy I would love to meet you 1 on 1 and take it on you are a fool and a coward all your friends know that I've talked to your friends your ex Klopp's you slide back."

Reitman, for some reason, thought I was a cop and also this is not the first time he has threatened me.

In another email, he threatened to call the cops if I continued to email him.

Here is part of an email from March 29, 2018. "I am contacting the police as I have in the past this is harassment."

That was after the first couple emails I had ever sent him. 

Finally in 2015, Reitman was convicted of driving while intoxicated (DWI).