Schneiderman

Not to mention when he began implying that she wanted to jump her own son.

While he did appear to cross some lines (for instance, going to her house that first night and pretty much all his behavior towards the end of the film), asking about her sex life was not one of these moments. Here we have a woman whose "delusions" are extremely sexual in nature. Her sex life, especially any prior traumas, fears, and repressed urges, would play a very important role in why her apparent psychosis would exhibit itself as an invisible rapist.

Add to that the fact that she states two smaller figures were the ones to restrain her legs for the entity to rape her in the bathroom, his observation about the kids isn't completely misplaced. He didn't address this using the most wise method, but the logic does hold up.

The problem is he didn't treat her like a typical patient. He should have emotionally distanced himself. Also, seeing as she was suffering major "delusions", had a " suicide attempt" via car, and her son was injured during one of these episodes, he had plenty of basis to have the kids removed from the situation -- thus removing them from possible danger -- and put her under psychiatric observation. The fact that he didn't is appalling from a medical professional. If she was indeed suffering a mental breakdown and her children came to any harm due to her mental state, he would be accountable.

I don't think he had any right to imply such things about Carla and her son. I don't know what he was hoping to accomplish with that. Instead of helping her it clearly would've only driven her away so it wasn't necessary to say that. I can see where he was coming from trying to dig deep into her life to get to the root of her "issues" but that really crossed a line.