A new name for Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy: Defining Fabricated or Induced Illness by Carers The deliberate production or fabrication of physical or psychological symptoms in a child by a parent or carer is defined as “Fabricated or Induced Illness by Carers” (FIIC). Professionals typically begin to suspect that a carer has fabricated or induced an illness in their child when children are repeatedly presented to medical practitioners or hospitals with difficult to explain illness symptoms.The authors describe this somewhat controversial phenomenon and explore some implications of FIIC for practitioners working to protect children from harm. Background to the paper Since mid-2004 the National Child Protection Clearinghouse has had several queries in relation to Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy (MSbP).Issues associated with MSbP were also popular among discussants on the Clearinghouse’s “childprotect”email discussion group.Issues raised included: whether MSbP was the most accurate terminology to describe cases in which parents were alleged to have fabricated or induced illness in their child;the association between MSbP and multiple unexplained deaths,in particular in relation to Meadow’s Law;and the implications for MSbP of Roy Meadow being struck off the General Medical Register. In addition,several court cases were raised as having implications for bringing MSbP cases before the court with a particular focus on the evidence of expert witnesses.There appeared to be much confusion among practitioners about how recent events would impact upon their ability to intervene in cases in which a parent or caregiver had allegedly fabricated or induced an illness for a child. The aim of this paper is to provide an update on Fabricated or Induced Illness by Carers (formerly MSbP), with a focus on definitional issues of relevance to child protection practitioners.Specifically,this paper will describe: what Fabricated or Induced Illness by Carers (FIIC) is and the history of the phenomenon, including an update Roy Meadow and the current preferred terminology.Given the controversy surrounding the phenomenon,a discussion is presented on whether FIIC exists and its prevalence.The perspectives of the different disciplines involved in FIIC cases are described along with some indicators of how FIIC might present and the characteristics of caregivers who have been found to have fabricated or induced illness in their children. A brief discussion presented on the relationship between FIIC and multiple unexplained deaths and some pertinent legal issues associated with finding that a caregiver has fabricated or induced an illness are discussed.Finally,the paper is closed with a summary discussion on the usefulness of the label FIIC for protecting children from harm in the context of statutory child protection services. PUBLISHED BY THE AUSTRALIAN INSTITUTE OF FAMILY STUDIES N0. SPRING 2005 AUSTRALIAN INSTITUTE OF FAMILY STUDIES 1 23 23 Ellen Fish, Leah Bromfield and Daryl Higgins Join the National Child Protection Clearinghouse mailing list www.aifs.gov.au/nch/nchmailform.html To join the National Child Protection Clearinghouse mailing list please go to the following website and fill out the online form: