This paper explores the difficult clinical situation when a child makes a false allegation of sexual abuse against a therapist. The experience of an allegation being acted upon, involving the child's withdrawal from therapy and full child protection procedures, is contrasted with three cases where it was not found necessary to follow that protocol. Aspects of the child's pathology and history are shown to blur the distinction between acting-out and remembering, to lead to concrete rather than symbolic thinking, and comment is made on early primitive mechanisms and anxieties overlaid by experiences of neglect and abuse. Factors in the child are paralleled in the response of the network, with consequent increased vulnerability of the therapist. Difficulties of containment and issues in continuing therapy are explored.