Here's an interesting phenomenon one may encounter when advocating. It may be good to be familiar with it proactively, as it is often helpful to be able to recognize and name the dynamics one observes. Especially when opinion may be misrepresented as fact.

It is also beneficial to be aware of the possibility for a parent to have the similar inclination to speak for their child or to label their child. This may underscore the importance for family members to have open discussions and ensure they are all on the same page before advocating.

Originally Posted by article
The Psychologistís Fallacy: Itís Wrong to Assume that Your Interpretation Must Be Right

- The psychologistís fallacy is a logical fallacy that occurs when an external observer assumes that their subjective interpretation of something represents the objective nature of that thing.

- Most notably, this is associated with the mistaken assumption that your (third-person) interpretation of someone elseís mental state (e.g., how they feel or what they think) is necessarily correct and identical to their (first-person) experience of it.

- For example, the psychologistís fallacy occurs when a psychologist assumes that their interpretation of how a patient feels must be true, and that the way they describe the patientís feelings must perfectly capture the exact nature of those feelings.


- An example of the psychologistís fallacy is a psychology researcher who writes a report about a participant in an experiment after observing them, and assumes that the report is necessarily a full and correct representation of how the participant felt.

- Other examples of the psychologistís fallacy are the following:
A parent who assumes that their interpretation of their childís emotional state must necessarily be correct.