No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Children resisting postseparation contact with a parent: Concepts, controversies, and conundrums
Abstract
This article provides an overview of the key concepts, themes, issues, and possible mental health and legal interventions related to children's postseparation resistance to having contact with one parent. We maintain that the too often strongly gendered polemic on alienation and abuse is polarizing and needs to be replaced with a more nuanced and balanced discussion that recognizes the complexity of the issues so that the needs of children and families can be better met. This article reviews the historical development of the concept of alienation; discusses the causes, dynamics, and differentiation of various types of parent child contact problems; and summarizes the literature on the impact of alienation on children. These are complex cases. A significant portion of the cases in which alienation is alleged are not in fact alienation cases; for those where alienation is present, interventions will vary depending on the degree of the alienation. More severe alienation cases are unlikely to be responsive to therapeutic or psycho-educational interventions in the absence of either a temporary interruption of contact between the child and the alienating parent or a more permanent custody reversal. We conclude with a summary of recommendations for practice and policy, including the need for early identification and intervention to prevent the development of severe cases, interdisciplinary collaboration and further development and research of interventions.
... Attachment to parental figures is another important element when considering a child's capacity level. A secure and healthy attachment is critical in order for a child to have the support they need to develop a strong capacity (Fidler and Bala 2010). Though much is known about attachment patterns of children, the relation of attachment type to a child's capacity development is somewhat understudied within the literature. ...
... Though there is extensive literature that investigates children of divorced parents and their attachment, few studies exist that aim to connect a child's attachment pattern and their capacities. Though it is known that a secure and healthy connection allows a child to feel secure and confident in sharing their ideas, thoughts, preferences, and wishes (Fidler and Bala 2010), research has consistently shown that those children with secure attachments are more likely to have a developed sense of autonomy and increased social skills, both of which are critical to forming a strong sense of capacity and competence (Knight 2005). Alternatively, if a child experiences adverse attachment issues or difficulties in their attachment style, their capacities will evidently be affected and shaped by it (Knight 2005). ...
... It is important these values are relatively stable in order to create a base in which to voice their preference or display their decisional capacity (Lansdown 2005). Children can acquire lasting values from very early ages and these values will be unique and distinct for each child (Alderson 1992;Fidler and Bala 2010). These values are often embedded in a family's cultural beliefs and practices, hence the importance of considering and remaining mindful of each child's unique family structure. ...
This article aims to explore the concept of capacity as necessitated by provisions within the UNCRC such as articles 12 and 5, which emphasize participation, and the evolving capacities of children. In family law proceedings when children are involved, age and capacity are considered in order to assess if the meaningful participation of that child is accessible. There is limited literature to indicate how the capacity of a child is determined, especially for children who are younger than twelve. Rather than relying on age to gauge capacity levels, this paper provides a unique, interdisciplinary evaluation of capacity through a combination of both legal and child development perspectives. This article aims to use a critical lens and rights-based approach to analyze the current literature regarding the capacities of children and proposes that a deeper understanding of what capacity entails is required in order to ensure the meaningful participation of children.
... Despite the growing interest in parental alienation, empirical research on this topic has been regarded as methodologically feeble (Fidler & Bala, 2010;Milchman, 2019;Saini et al., 2016). In fact, this review has identified voids and important methodological weaknesses. ...
... Scientific concern (e.g., Baker & Darnall, 2007;Baker & Ben-Ami, 2011;Baker & Eichler, 2016;Baker & Verrocchio, 2013, 2015Spruijt et al., 2005; with the assessment of parental alienation and with the identification of parental alienating behaviors and strategies strongly contributed to the development of a specific and useful measure of parental alienating behaviors -Baker Strategy Questionnaire (BSQ; Baker & Chambers, 2011). However, it is necessary to deepen the development of more accurate and reliable measures (Saini et al., 2016;Milchman, 2019), which requires greater clarity and less conceptual enmeshment of the concept of parental alienation (e.g., Bernet & Baker, 2013;Fidler & Bala, 2010;Meier, 2009;Walker & Shapiro, 2010). Parental alienation is commonly viewed as the outcome of parental alienating behaviors (Baker & Eichler, 2016), however, this set of behaviors and strategies cannot be decontextualized from the limitations of the empirical studies that support them. ...
... The advance in the research on parental alienation may contribute to form the backbone of court decisions, mental health treatments and psychological interventions (Lowenstein, 2011), furthering a collaborative practice between clinical and law professionals (Johnston, 2003;Templer et al., 2017), offering evidence-based guidance to support decisions (Garber, 2007;Walker et al., 2004) and highlighting the (often cited) standard of "the child's best interest" (e.g., Fidler & Bala, 2010;Priolo-Filho et al., 2019;Warshak, 2003;Mercer, 2019). ...
Scientific literature has pointed to a growing body of empirical studies that contribute to an accurate mapping of parental alienation. This descriptive literature review of empirical research on parental alienation - in peer-reviewed scientific journals between January 2000 and December 2018 – seeks to characterize the research methodologies and to provide a summary of the main research themes. Several academic databases (B-On: Online Knowledge Library–Search, Ovid, ProQuest, Web of Knowledge, PsycINFO and Google Scholar) were systematically searched and the review followed the PRISMA guidelines for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Forty-three studies were included, the majority of them following a quantitative, retrospective and cross-sectional design. Parental alienation was mainly associated with divorce and child custody dispute contexts. Results also revealed the main themes targeted by empirical research: Development and use of assessment measures for parental alienation; Parental alienation patterns; Validation of the parental alienation syndrome construct; Parental alienation impact; Parental alienation viewed as child abuse; Professionals’ voices and maps on parental alienation. Limitations and recommendations for future research on parental alienation are discussed, highlighting common themes and research gaps.
... Parent-child contact problems have also been conceptualized as falling on a spectrum, from developmentally normal and expected, to negative and pathological (Fidler & Bala, 2010). These dynamics of resist and refuse have their roots in one of five categories of parent-child contact problems, each one named for its main driving force, which runs along a continuum of severity. ...
... Delays and the passage of time have been viewed as a significant obstacle in ameliorating resistrefuse cases, as the relationship dynamics and children's attitudes can become increasingly entrenched the longer they remain unaddressed and the longer the period of no contact between the rejected parent and the child (Fidler & Bala, 2010;Smith, 2016;Walters & Friedlander, 2016). Unfortunately, and mainly because of diminishing resources and competing priorities, the family court system is notorious (in most jurisdictions) for operating at a slow pace, which presents another obstacle in delaying efforts to commence a process to heal the parent-child contact problem. ...
... There is often clinical pathology in the parent(s), the child, or both, such as that described in the DSM-5 on Axis I (Mood Disorders, Substance Use Disorders, Psychotic Disorders, Dissociative, Eating, Paranoid Disorders) and/or on Axis II (Personality Disorders). Parents may present with significant personality disorders (Narcissistic, Borderline, Histrionic, Antisocial, Paranoid, Obsessive-Compulsive), profound emotional dysregulation, extreme behaviors, and/or significant distortions in thinking (Fidler & Bala, 2010;Johnston et al., 2005;Walters & Friedlander, 2016). In some cases, a parent may present with an encapsulated delusion (Walters & Friedlander, 2016), described as a fixed circumscribed belief that persists over time and is not altered by evidence that points to contradictory information. ...
There have been significant developments over the past two decades that have expanded our understanding of the dynamics of parent–child contact problems post‐separation, which have resulted in some changes in judicial processes to respond to these cases. One significant advancement is a more sophisticated differentiation of the nature and severity of contact problems, which better assists legal and mental health professionals to provide more suitable legal and clinical interventions. However, the issue of innovative court processes has received limited attention. The authors describe a subgroup of families within the “severe” category, for whom an expanded intervention model, referred to as a Blended Sequential Intervention is proposed. This approach involves a reversal of care with court mandated therapeutic support for the rejected parent and child, but also involves the favored parent in the therapeutic plan from the outset, and is intended to avoid a permanent “parentectomy” of the child from either parent. The authors discuss how the courts should respond to these cases, and posit that until all therapeutic treatments are exhausted, interim orders should be preferred to final determinations, and judges should maintain oversight. The authors discuss the critical role of judicial leadership in working with lawyers and mental health professionals to manage and address the issues in these high conflict cases.
... Although some advocates (usually parents rather than professionals or researchers) seem to focus only on "alienation" while other advocates focus on abuse or partner violence as the reason for a child rejecting a parent, the multi-factorial model initially advanced by Kelly and Johnston in their 2001 article in the Family Court Review is widely accepted. This model has been widely discussed and elaborated (e.g., Drozd, Olesen, & Saini, 2013;Fidler & Bala, 2010;Fidler, Bala, & Saini, 2013;Garber, 2007Garber, , 2011Harman, Kruk, & Hines, 2018;Johnston, Walters, & Olesen, 2005;Polak & Saini, 2015;Saini, Drozd, & Olesen, 2017;Saini, Johnston, Fidler, & Bala, 2012, 2016, and further refined in this Special Issue (Johnston & Sullivan, 2020). There are many reasons why a child may resist contact with a parent. ...
... 423) There is broad agreement as reported by parents, children, young adults, and counselors on the varied and explicit behaviors and strategies a parent can use intentionally and unintentionally having the capacity to impact a child's feelings, behaviors, and beliefs and distance, damage, or destroy a child's relationship with the other parent (Saini et al., 2016, p. 418). Over the last 2 decades many have discussed and catalogued the panoply of these PABs and strategies (e.g., Baker, 2005;Baker & Darnall, 2006;Fidler & Bala, 2010;Kelly & Johnston, 2001;Warshak, 2001Warshak, , 2015. Writers have also recognized that cases vary in level of severity ranging from mild to very severe, and that cases are dynamic and change over time. ...
... As noted previously by many researchers and practitioners (e.g., Fidler & Bala, 2010;Kelly & Johnston, 2001;Warshak, 2001), though separating/divorcing parents often engage in denigrating behaviors of their coparent to their children, and virtually all parents engaged in higher conflict separation do so, often creating loyalty conflicts and alignments, not all children become alienated. Accordingly, while parental denigration is a broad term that may manifest in different ways, it is part of the larger constellation of PABs, beliefs, and attitudes. ...
... Although some advocates (usually parents rather than professionals or researchers) seem to focus only on "alienation" while other advocates focus on abuse or partner violence as the reason for a child rejecting a parent, the multi-factorial model initially advanced by Kelly and Johnston in their 2001 article in the Family Court Review is widely accepted. This model has been widely discussed and elaborated (e.g., Drozd, Olesen, & Saini, 2013;Fidler & Bala, 2010;Fidler, Bala, & Saini, 2013;Garber, 2007Garber, , 2011Harman, Kruk, & Hines, 2018;Johnston, Walters, & Olesen, 2005;Polak & Saini, 2015;Saini, Drozd, & Olesen, 2017;Saini, Johnston, Fidler, & Bala, 2012, 2016, and further refined in this Special Issue (Johnston & Sullivan, 2020). There are many reasons why a child may resist contact with a parent. ...
... 423) There is broad agreement as reported by parents, children, young adults, and counselors on the varied and explicit behaviors and strategies a parent can use intentionally and unintentionally having the capacity to impact a child's feelings, behaviors, and beliefs and distance, damage, or destroy a child's relationship with the other parent (Saini et al., 2016, p. 418). Over the last 2 decades many have discussed and catalogued the panoply of these PABs and strategies (e.g., Baker, 2005;Baker & Darnall, 2006;Fidler & Bala, 2010;Kelly & Johnston, 2001;Warshak, 2001Warshak, , 2015. Writers have also recognized that cases vary in level of severity ranging from mild to very severe, and that cases are dynamic and change over time. ...
... As noted previously by many researchers and practitioners (e.g., Fidler & Bala, 2010;Kelly & Johnston, 2001;Warshak, 2001), though separating/divorcing parents often engage in denigrating behaviors of their coparent to their children, and virtually all parents engaged in higher conflict separation do so, often creating loyalty conflicts and alignments, not all children become alienated. Accordingly, while parental denigration is a broad term that may manifest in different ways, it is part of the larger constellation of PABs, beliefs, and attitudes. ...
There have been significant advances in understandings and practice related parent–child contact problems (PCCPs), with a growing consensus about some issues and continuing controversy about others. It is widely acknowledged that PCCP cases are most fruitfully understood from a multi‐factorial perspective. While some cases may be totally the “fault” of one parent (a parent perpetrating violence or abuse, or a parent exhibiting alienating behavior), in many situations both parents bear some responsibility: focusing on a single cause is rarely helpful. Most professionals and researchers agree that the challenge in practice is to distinguish between false positives and false negatives for both alienation (or unjustified rejection) and realistic estrangement (justified rejection). There is continuing controversy over whether the concept of “alienation” should be used, especially in court proceedings, and a related disagreement about the extent to which family courts are now failing to respond adequately to cases of intimate partner violence (IPV) or child abuse when alienation is also raised. Continuing education, intentional exploration of alternative hypotheses, and active perspective‐taking will contribute to effective professional involvement. Increased parent education and prevention can play an important role, although for the more severe PCCP cases the family courts system will continue to play a critical role. While more research must be done, given the complexity of issues, conclusive findings are unlikely in the near future. Legislators and family justice professionals must make decisions based on a thorough analysis of each family's circumstances in the context of our present knowledge, taking account of the limits of the law. They will often face the conundrum of making decisions in the face of uncertainty.
... Children exposed to parental alienating behavior can experience detrimental consequences to their emotional, cognitive, and social well-being (Baker, 2010;Baker & Darnall, 2007;Boyan & Termini, 2005;Fidler & Bala, 2010;Garber, 2011;Kopetski, 2006;Lowenstein, 1999;Raso, 2004;Sullivan & Kelly, 2001;Warshak, 2015a). Tactics employed by alienating parents can include spurning, terrorizing, isolating, corrupting or exploiting, and denying emotional responsiveness, all of which are included in the five manifestations of psychological maltreatment as defined by the American Psychological Society on Abuse of Children (APSAC) (Baker, 2010;Binggeli, Hart, & Brassard, 2001). ...
... Tactics employed by alienating parents can include spurning, terrorizing, isolating, corrupting or exploiting, and denying emotional responsiveness, all of which are included in the five manifestations of psychological maltreatment as defined by the American Psychological Society on Abuse of Children (APSAC) (Baker, 2010;Binggeli, Hart, & Brassard, 2001). These abusive strategies can contribute to the development of emotional distress, adjustment difficulties, poor reality testing, disturbed social functioning, low self-esteem, self-hatred, aggression & conduct disorders, poor impulse control, disrespect of authority, anxiety, depression, substance use, etc. (Baker, 2005;Bernet et al., 2010;Boyan & Termini, 2005;Darnall, 2011;Dunne & Hedrick, 1994;Fidler & Bala, 2010;Gardner, 1999;Johnston, Gonzalez, & Campbell, 1987;Vassiliou & Cartwright, 2001;Warshak, 2015b). The literature has well documented severe short and longterm effects of exposure to parental alienating behavior and effects of becoming unreasonably alienated from a parent (Baker, 2010;Buchanan, Maccoby, & Dornbusch, 1991;Davies & Martin, 2014;Lowenstein, 1999;Raso, 2004). ...
... The estimated prevalence of alienated children varies depending on the focus and methodology of the study (Harman, Leder-Elder, & Biringe, 2016). Fidler and Bala (2010) estimated that 11-15% of children in divorcing families were alienated from one parent and aligned with the other. Bernet (2010) estimated that 1% of the children and adolescents in the United States were alienated from a parent (Bernet et al., 2010). ...
Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to evaluate the factor structure of the Rowlands Porental Alienation Scale (RPAS). The RPAS was administered to 521 parents along with measures of convergent and discriminant validity. The eight-factor model proposed in the original study, which included the eight domains posited in the literature, and the proposed six-factor model identified in the original study through exploratory factor analysis, which included five of the original eight domains, i.e. campaign of denigration towards the alienated parent, the independent thinker phenomenon, reflexive support, presence of borrowed scenarios, spread of animosity to extended family, and one not included in the original eight domains, lack of positive affect towards the alienated parent, were tested through confirmatory factor analysis procedures. The more parsimonious six-factor model fit the data better than the eight- factor model, i.e. the CFI for the six- factor model was higher and both the RMSEA and the SRMR values of the six-factor model were lower. All constructs had both convergent and discriminant validity. Parents who reported either that a court evaluation or court findings had confirmed the presence of parental alienation scored significantly higher on all six RPAS factors as well as on the overall RPAS score.
... Making the child feel that he or she should be loyal to only one parent, which may include rewarding rejection of the other parent or demonstrating clear preferences that make the child feel guilty about enjoying time with both parents. 17 Not with standing the above, it is crucial to distinguish between parental interference and other types of family conflict, since not all disagreements or tensions between parents qualify as interference as they would: ...
... Studies have shown that children exposed to these dynamics may experience anxiety, depression, and behavioral problems. 17 In addition, the stress associated with custody disputes can lead to less stable court decisions and more long-term litigation. 18 The forensic evaluation should include a thorough review of parental behaviors and their impact on the child. ...
Parental interference in judicial proceedings for variation of custody arrangements is a phenomenon that profoundly impacts family dynamics and the well-being of children. This article addresses this issue from the perspective of forensic psychological assessment, highlighting the critical importance of a thorough and rigorous analysis in these contexts. Custody variation, whether physical or legal, often generates tension and conflict between parents, which can lead to parental interference behaviors. These interferences can manifest themselves in a variety of ways, including emotional manipulation of children, denigration of the other parent, and obstruction of parenting time. The relevance of this article lies in the need to understand how these interferences affect both the children and the adults involved, and the importance of having accurate and objective psychological assessments to inform court decision-making. The work of the forensic psychologist is essential in these processes, providing an unbiased assessment based on standardized techniques and tools to identify harmful family dynamics and their impact on the psychological well-being of children. Throughout this article, the importance of early intervention and the implementation of effective strategies to mitigate parental interference is highlighted. In addition, recommendations for courts and other legal professionals on how to appropriately integrate findings from psychological evaluations into judicial decision making are highlighted. Ultimately, this approach seeks to promote the well-being of children and ensure that custody decisions are based on the best interests of the child, informed by rigorous and detailed forensic psychological evaluations.
... Uočeno je da ta djeca znaju često pokazivati ponašanja kao što je intenzivna nesklonost, ocrnjivanje i otvoreno izražavanje mržnje prema ciljanom roditelju, naglašeno je isticanje kvalitete drugog roditelja, odbijanje posjeta ili kontakata s ciljanim roditeljem zbog trivijalnih opravdanja (Mitcham Smith i Henry, 2007). U literaturi se navodi da su otuđena djeca izložena riziku za emocionalnu uznemirenost i poteškoćama prilagodbe te da su u tom smislu u većem riziku od djece čiji su roditelji u parničnom postupku, ali koja nisu otuđena od jednog roditelja (Fidler i Bala, 2010;Harman i sur., 2019aHarman i sur., , 2019b. ...
... Potrebno je naglasiti da se stručnjaci slažu oko toga da se neka djeca odupiru kontaktu s jednim roditeljem zbog iskustva ili svjedočenja zlostavljanju, zanemarivanju, nasilju u obitelji od strane tog roditelja, ili zbog ponovljenog nasilja ili ispada roditelja tijekom braka ili nakon razdvajanja, ili zbog neposrednog iskustva nasilja i zlostavljačkog ponašanja ovog roditelja (Kelly i Johnston, 2001;Drozd i Olesen, 2004;Fidler i Bala, 2010;Friedlander i Walters, 2010). U situaciji kada postoji objašnjenje djetetovog ponašanja, govori se o udaljavanju ili "opravdanom odbijanju" (engl. ...
Značajan interes znanstvenika i stručnjaka za koncept otuđenja datira od 80-ih godina 20. stoljeća, a u posljednje tri godine zadobio je određenu pažnju i u Hrvatskoj. S obzirom na mnoge rasprave koje se danas vode o konceptu otuđenja, cilj rada bio je prikazati aktualno razumijevanje koncepta te polemike koje se na međunarodnoj razini kao i među hrvatskim stručnjacima, vode o znanstvenoj utemeljenosti koncepta i rizicima njegove primjene u praktičnom radu. Živa diskusija postoji između autora koji se prvenstveno usredotočuju na otuđenje i onih koji se prvenstveno usredotočuju na zlostavljanje djece i obiteljsko nasilje. Nadalje se u radu daje pregled razvoja istraživačkog pristupa konceptu te se konstatira da su istraživanja u području otuđenja sve brojnija, da postoji pomak prema kvantitativnim istraživanjima i sve većem broju istraživanja koja testiraju teorijski generirane hipoteze. Zaključno se naglašava slaganje stručnjaka i znanstvenika oko potrebe za oprezom zbog mogućnosti zlouporabe koncepta otuđenja, oko višefaktorske perspektive otuđenja, kao i potrebe za daljnjim istraživanjima. Na kraju rada daju se preporuke za moguća daljnja istraživanja u svrhu doprinosa metodološkoj jasnoći i boljem međusobnom razumijevanju praktičara i znanstvenika.
... Kirjallisuudessa on yleensä katsottu hyväksi rajata vieraantuminen-termi tilanteisiin, joissa ei ole ollut objektiivista syytä vaikeuttaa lapsen ja vanhemman suhdetta. Tilanteita, joissa on piirteitä sekä etääntymisestä että vieraantumisesta, kutsutaan hybrideiksi (3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12). Tutkimuksessa on tuotu esiin erojen harmaita sävyjä muutenkin (esim. ...
... Kirjallisuudessa on esitetty menetelmiä vieraannuttamisen tunnistamiseksi kuten Bakerin malli (3)(4)(5)(6)(7)19). Niitä ei hieman yllättävästi osoiteta saati esitellä. ...
... Over the past twenty years, many have worked to organize and classify the scope of alienating behaviors and tactics (e.g., Baker & Darnall, 2006;Fidler & Bala, 2010;Kelly & Johnston, 2001;Warshak, 2015). While there is a range of examples, they often vary in severity and can change over time. ...
... Counselors are well-prepared to assist clients with anxiety, depression, substance use, and other intrapersonal concerns; these mental health concerns must be treated uniquely and individuals experiencing HCS/D are no exception. These individuals have characteristics that contribute to prolonging conflict over time and inhibit the creation of functional co-parenting and fluid communication (Birnbaum & Bala, 2010;Fidler & Bala, 2010;Polak & Saini, 2015). These parents tend to be primarily focused on themselves, unable to recognize their role in the conflict, and have few introspective abilities (Gordon et al., 2008). ...
Practicing counselors will, at some point, work with clients from high-conflict separations/divorces (HCS/D); however, often they have received very little educational training for these experiences. To effectively treat these clients/client families, all counselors should have a working knowledge of the major processes and critical factors involved in these situations. This manuscript emphasizes the role of the counselor within HCS/D, seeks to give both an overview of and describe the complexities of HCS/D that counselors need to understand, and identifies areas of concern and focus for counselors functioning within distinct modalities.
... Estimates of the prevalence of PA among children in the United States vary between 0.5% and 4% (Bernet, 2020;Fidler & Bala, 2010;Harman, Leder-Elder, et al., 2019;Johnston, 2003;Warshak, 2015a). Richard Gardner (1985) was the first to identify a constellation of eight distinct manifestations that he labeled "parental alienation syndrome" (Gardner, 1985). ...
... Families harmed by moderate and severe alienation benefit from timely interventions informed by PA dynamics and related best practices. Conversely, traditional interventions or interventions implemented without recognition and understanding of the alienation dynamics can contribute to the alienation and exacerbate the consequences by inadvertently reinforcing the alienation (Clawar & Rivlin, 2013;Dunne & Hedrick, 1994;Fidler & Bala, 2010;Garber, 2015;Kleinman, 2017;Lowenstein, 2015;Moore et al., 2013;Rand et al., 2005). Despite the plethora of research and practice supporting the concept of PA (Harman, Warshak, et al., 2022), the presence and severity of this phenomenon often go undetected or rejected (Warshak, 2020). ...
Previous studies have demonstrated a connection between intimate partner violence (IPV) and a child’s alienation from the abused parent, but little is known about the relationships between the type of IPV, aspects, and severity of a child’s alienation, and the target parent’s gender. This study assessed the presence of an IPV history (verbal and physical aspects) among parents who identify as targets of their children’s unreasonable rejection. Also investigated were associations between the form of IPV and manifestations of a child’s alienated behavior, parent’s gender and type of IPV, and parents’ gender and degree of the child’s alienation. Self-identified alienated parents ( n = 842) completed an online survey that included an IPV screening measurement (Hurts, Insults, Screams, Threatens screening tool) and a measure of the parent’s perception of their child’s alienated behaviors (Rowlands Parental Alienation Scale). The majority identified as IPV victims and reported a higher level of verbal than physical abuse. More mothers than fathers identified themselves as IPV victims. As a group, IPV victims rated their child as more severely alienated than did non-IPV alienated parents. Mothers were more likely than fathers to report physical aggression by the other parent and more likely than fathers to assess their child’s alienated behaviors as more severe. Victims of physical violence reported their children were less likely to withhold positive affection from them. This knowledge may assist in earlier identification of the alienation process and greater recognition, legitimacy, funding, and opportunities for enhanced collaboration among stakeholders. This, in turn, may lead to improvements in prevention, intervention, and accountability, thus helping to interrupt alienation processes.
... Badacze proponują kilka czynników, które mogą mieć znaczenie dla pojawienia się zachowań alienujących: cechy osobowości członków rodziny, jakość relacji między rodzicami, jakość relacji rodzic-dziecko, więzi i kontakty rodziców z ich rodzinami pochodzenia oraz czynniki społeczne (Fidler, Bala., 2010, Fidler, Bala, 2020Verrocchio i in., 2018;Roma i in., 2021a, Harman i in., 2019. ...
... Z badań wynika, że rodzice alienujący posługują się takimi mechanizmami obronnymi jak projekcja, zaprzeczanie, rozszczepienie, idealizacja i dewaluacja (Bernet i in., 2018;Gordon i in., 2008) oraz prezentują cechy i zachowania wskazujące na zaburzenia osobowości (histrioniczne, paranoiczne, narcystyczne i borderline) oraz psychopatologię (nadużywanie substancji psychoaktywnych, psychozy, tendencje samobójcze). Dodatkowo, na rozłąkę z dzieckiem reagują raczej złością niż smutkiem i poczuciem utraty (Demby, 2009;Fidler, Bala, 2010;Johnston i in., 2005;Verrocchio i in., 2018). Inne ujawnione w badaniach cechy charakteryzujące rodzica alienującego to silna zazdrość, (nad)wrażliwość emocjonalna, zależność od innych (w tym także od dziecka), impulsywność, słabe granice ja-inni, czarno-białe spostrzeganie świata i ludzi, brak poczucia winy i wyrzutów sumienia oraz trudność w przyjęciu odpowiedzialności za problemy, które pojawiły się w rodzinie pod wpływem działań tego rodzica (Harman i in., 2016;Harman i in., 2018). ...
Artykuł jest analizą alienacji rodzicielskiej z perspektywy diagnozy psychologicznej umożliwiającej jej odróżnienie od reakcji dziecka na rodzica faktycznie krzywdzące-go. W pierwszej kolejności należy wskazać, że wywieranie na dziecko wpływu prowa-dzącego do alienacji jest formą emocjonalnej przemocy i powoduje skutki podobne do innych form jego krzywdzenia. Opiniowanie i wyciąganie wniosków wyłącznie na podstawie diagnozy dziecka nie jest wystarczające. Opierając się na współcze-snych modelach alienacji rodzicielskiej, proponujemy systemowe podejście do jej dia-gnozowania, w którym konieczne jest uwzględnienie psychologicznej charakterystyki funkcjonowania dziecka, cech funkcjonowania rodziców oraz interakcji między nimi, podłoża motywacyjnego towarzyszącego alienacji, a także relacji każdego z rodziców z dzieckiem. Artykuł kończą wskazówki mogące służyć diagnozie alienacji rodziciel-skiej i różnicowaniu tej sytuacji z innymi formami przemocy oraz sygnalizujące sytu-acje złożone, w których dziecko doświadcza wielu form krzywdzenia. Słowa kluczowe: alienacja rodzicielSka, przemoc, rodzina jako SyStem, diagnoza różnicowa
... For children exposed to these dysfunctional relational dynamics, consequences may manifest in the medium, short, or long terms. According to various studies, during childhood and adolescence, symptoms linked to PA are anger, guilt, hostility, impulse control problems, low selfconfidence and self-esteem, anxiety, depression, phobias, sleep disorders, suicidal ideation, problems in personal and social relationships, identity and image disorders, personality disorders, substance abuse, decreased academic performance (Fidler & Bala, 2010;Gardner, 1992;Johnston, 2005;Lowenstein, 2007;Sher, 2015;Stoner-Moskowitz, 1998). Likewise, children can maintain and/or develop consequences throughout adulthood, consolidating long-term affectation, with interference in development at work, social and psychological levels, hindering the establishment and consolidation of partner relationships, and so forth. ...
... Low self-esteem is closely linked to the individual's self-efficacy, reflected both in poor employment prospects and low education level. These results reflect those in research with children, where among others, minors had difficulties in social relationships, coping deficits, difficulty modulating emotional states, low or defensively high selfesteem, low self-confidence, school difficulties, self-hatred, guilt, mistrust, fear of not feeling loved, pseudo-maturity, and feeling of abandonment (Fidler & Bala, 2010;Johnston et al., 2005;Lowenstein, 2006). The child experiencing PA loses both the ability to trust their own feelings and cognition, sense of reality and self-concept, depending entirely on the alienating parent (Boch-Galhau & Kodjoe, 2006). ...
Although the emotional consequences of childhood exposure to parental alienation behaviors in children and adolescents of divorced parents are known, there is scarce evidence on their long-term consequences in adulthood. Therefore, this work aims to conduct a systematic review of the state of research in this area and its main conclusions and identify gaps and limitations to guide future research. A search of the literature was performed in electronic databases PsycInfo, MEDLINE, SCOPUS, Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Library, DART-Europe, ProQuest, Wiley, TESEO and Dialnet, and a secondary review of the bibliography; in February 2019 updated in December of the same year. Thirteen pieces of research were selected after applying inclusion and exclusion criteria; twelve published articles from journals and one doctoral thesis, both with qualitative and quantitative methodology. Children exposed to parental interference and alienation show in adulthood depression and anxiety symptoms, a higher risk of psychopathology, lower self-esteem and self-sufficiency. As well as, higher alcohol and drug use rates, parental relationship difficulties, insecure attachment, lower life quality, higher divorce rates, feelings of loss, abandonment and guilt. They also report repetition of these alienating behaviors on their children by their partner or their own children's grandparents. Some limitations of the study are described, and proposals are made for future research.
... Recent studies suggest that parents involved in high-conflict situations have individual and interpersonal characteristics that contribute to maintaining conflict over time and to hinder the establishment of functional co-parenting and fluid communication with the other parent (Birnbaum & Bala, 2010;Fidler & Bala, 2010;Leclair and al., 2017;Polak & Saini, 2019). Indeed, these parents are known to have little introspection, to be focused on their own needs, and to not be able to recognize their own responsibility in the conflict (Alary, 2015;Gordon and al., 2008;Paquin-Boudreau and al., 2021). ...
... It might be possible that primitive defense mechanisms (e.g., denial, projection) that are known to be used by parents involved in high-conflict separation, would preserve them from psychological distress. That would be consistent with several studies who suggest that these parents are showing pathological personality traits and primitive defense mechanisms use (Fidler & Bala, 2010;Gordon and al., 2008;Johnston and al., 2005;Leclair and al., 2017;Paquin-Boudreau and al., 2021). However, even if they do not reach the clinical threshold, parents still exhibit significantly more depressive, anxiety, hostile and cognitive symptoms than parents who participated in another type of intervention for high conflict families (Cyr and al., 2016), and than the general population (Konold & Abidin, 2001). ...
In order to meet the crying needs of high-conflict families and professionals who work with them, a Canadian psycho-legal team developed an intervention protocol called Parentalité–Conflit–Résolution. Sixteen parents completed validated questionnaires to measure co-parenting, parental conflict, and psychological adjustment. Nonparametric analyses were performed to measure pre- and post-intervention effects. Results confirm the severity of communication problems and the high degree of hostility in families participating in the intervention protocol. Parents perceived fewer alienating behaviors in the other parent at the end of the intervention. Mothers perceived a more positive alliance with the other parent, whereas fathers perceived less parental conflict and fewer negative interactions. Longitudinal research should be conducted to measure the sustainability of changes over the long term.
... Researchers have proposed several variables as contributing factors to parental alienation, including: the personality characteristics of family members, the nature of the parental relationship, the nature of the parent-child relationship, parents' links with their family of origin, and environmental and social factors (Birgden & Cucolo, 2011;Fidler et al., 2012;Gennari & Tamanza, 2017;Saini et al., 2016;Verrocchio et al., 2018). Studies have also shown that parents who are classified as alienating tend to implement primitive defense mechanisms, such as projection, denial, splitting, idealization, and devaluation (Bernet et al., 2018;Gordon et al., 2008); they also demonstrate maladaptive personality traits (e.g., histrionic, paranoid, borderline, and narcissistic traits) and higher levels of psychopathology (e.g., substance abuse, psychosis, and suicidal ideation), and they tend to respond to the parental separation with anger and hatred, rather than sadness or loss (Demby, 2009;Fidler & Bala, 2010;Johnston et al., 2005;Verrocchio et al., 2018). Preferred parents have also been found to be typically jealous, angry, emotionally vulnerable, and dependent on others (in some cases, even their children) for the consolidation of their self-esteem . ...
... Research has shown that targeted parents may experience depression, anger, withdrawal, passivity, and a sense of disbelief due to the loss of a relationship with their child (Lee-Maturana et al., 2020;Lee-Maturana et al., 2019). These parents may also experience significant emotional distress as a result of several factors, including their attempts to maintain a relationship with their child, feelings of grief due to the loss of this relationship, low expectations of repairing this relationship, shame and humiliation associated with the fear Journal of Child and Family Studies that their social context will presume that their child's rejection is justified, acknowledgement of personal responsibility in the alienation process, and a lengthy adversarial litigation process (Baker & Fine, 2014;Darnall & Steinberg, 2008;Fidler & Bala, 2010;Goldberg & Goldberg, 2013;Whitcombe, 2017). ...
The present study aimed at understanding the personality features of mothers and fathers engaged in parental alienation—a family dynamic in which one parent behaves in a way that foments a child’s unfounded emotional rejection of the other parent. The process is considered a complex form of child psychological maltreatment, with significant negative consequences. In cases of conflictual separation and divorce, parental alienation can be difficult—yet important—to identify. In this context, use of psychological assessment to understand parents’ personality characteristics may facilitate the early identification of parental alienation and related abuses. A comparative analysis of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 profiles of 41 couples engaged in parental alienation and 39 control couples (i.e., not involved in parental alienation) was used to assess the personality characteristics of mothers and fathers engaged in parental alienation. The results indicated that mothers who were classified as alienating presented a faking-good defensive profile, denied hostile and negative impulses, blamed others for their problems, and displayed excessive sensitivity. On the other side, fathers who were classified as targets of alienating behaviors were adapted to chronic depressive states, social isolation, and interpersonal conflict. The results suggest that the personality profile of parents involved in parental alienation may provide useful insight for custodial cases, prevent further abuse, and contribute to improving psychological and rehabilitative programs. Clinical and forensic implications are discussed.
... Types of threats include violence and property damage, as well as intentional damage to reputations, and threats of loss of professional license through board complaints, lawsuits and other forms of harassment (Warshak, 2016). These complex and tumultuous cases may be handed from service provider to provider, creating a lack of predictability and additional turmoil due to inconsistent and often incongruent treatment approaches (Fidler & Bala, 2010). ...
... Individuals may be assessed as having diagnosable problems such as unresolved adjustment disorders, personality disorders, anxiety disorders, depression or other mental illness, in addition to traumatic histories of their own (Kouros, Merrilees, & Cummings, 2008), or parents may simply lack parenting skills (Doolittle, 1999). A child's adjustment problems, and other child-centered conflicts may be cited in the disagreements (Emery, Sbarra, & Grover, 2005;Grych, 1999) and polarization of the child(ren) is also mentioned (Fidler & Bala, 2010). The needs of the children may alter the direction of treatment as specific intervention strategies may be focused toward them and not toward the conflict itself (Doolittle, 1999;Lebow & Newcomb Rekart, 2007). ...
Families, litigants, lawyers, advisors embroiled in cases of complex divorce with child contact issues, manage many stressors at once. Participants involved with these types of cases are often exhausted and burned‐out from the long‐term battles of prolonged litigation. The inability to problem‐solve or even communicate effectively reflects the chaos and traumatic stress of the experience and can be seen as a hallmark of this population. When people are consistently stressed, there is a breakdown of communication skills that can create an immunity to receiving help from any direction. Often all parties involved appear to be both hyper‐alert to potential threat, and hyper‐reactive to one another: no one feels safe. Stephen Porges' Polyvagal Theory is premised on the idea that neuroception plays a key role in the nervous system's ability to assess danger in the environment. Neuroception is a neurophysiological response that does not involve cognitive processing. When cognitive processing is not involved, the result may lead to misinterpretation of, and an inability to accurately assess situations: executive functioning including rational thinking and communication skills are lost to physiological response. Rather than evaluating families and individuals involved in the aforementioned complex divorce cases through the lens of pathology, Polyvagal Theory explains their behavior as an adaptive stress reaction. Utilizing Polyvagal Theory offers a promising path to treatment with these families and diminishing the poor communication and the heightened emotion, assisting practitioners in understanding the impact of neurobiological response in managing stress and trauma. Applying Polyvagal Theory to court involved populations can help both litigants and practitioners recognize the role of the autonomic nervous system, providing the opportunity to understand, to self‐regulate, and to improve communication and decision making.
... As support for this, Mercer cites Fidler and Bala (2010); however, in examining that source it appears that no support is found for Mercer's absolutist statement. Even examining difficult cases, Fidler and Bala (2010) include a discussion of multiple educational and therapeutic approaches involving both parents, and advocate that responses such as "contempt of court orders, reversal of custody and temporary suspension of contact with an alienating parent […] should be last resorts." (p. ...
... 3. Although Walters and Friedlander (2016) appear to be the first to explicitly address the "Resist/Refusal Dynamic" (p. 424), earlier authors such as Fidler and Bala (2010) addressed "resisting postseparation contact" (p. 10), Garber (2007) addressed "resistance and refusal" (p. ...
Legal and mental health professionals face significant challenges when addressing situations in which children resist contact with a parent. There remains only limited empirical research on the differentiation of types and severity of contact problems, the resulting impacts on children and adolescents, and the outcomes of interventions. Often, family justice professionals encounter conflicting information that presents wildly diverging views on the scientific knowledge base used to guide understandings of human interaction. In cases involving resist‐refuse dynamics (“RRD”), the polarized claims, characterized by dichotomous thinking, often assert abuse by the rejected parent, on the one hand, or alienating behavior by the favored parent, on the other hand. When presented with conflicting social science research, understanding basic experimental design methodology is critical to resolving questions of the reliability and utility of the information presented. Equally important, is an understanding of cognitive bias and the human tendency to experience difficulty in modifying belief systems when presented with updated information; this understanding includes changing conceptual frameworks for decision making in family law cases. While polarized and often acrimonious debate in the field may be reflective of larger societal strife, recognizing strengths and weaknesses in the ideas presented in research literature allows for an integrative approach to bring more light, and less heat, to the larger conceptualization of human interactions we have to address in the family court setting.
... There is considerable scholarship that recognizes the complexity of children's resistance or refusal to have contact with one of their separating or divorcing parents and that acknowledges to varying degrees the need to assess child abuse and domestic violence, as well as other forms of parentprovoked or sustaining child rejection (Birnbaum & Bala, 2010;Dalton, Drozd, & Wong, 2006;Deutsch, 2018;Drozd, 2009;Fidler & Bala, 2010;Gordon, Stoffey, & Bottinelli, 2008;Johnston, 2003;Johnston, Walters, & Olesen, 2005;Kelly & Johnston, 2001;Lampel, 1996;Lee & Olesen, 2001;Ludolph & Bow, 2012;Racusin, Copans, & Mills, 1994;Siegel & Langford, 1998). Gardner (1999) himself said cases with child abuse were not alienation cases, and Bernet (2020) re-asserts this and affirms that other alienation advocates agree. ...
... At minimum, a descriptive language is needed that is rich enough to counter decision-making by labeling. To reduce the risk of misclassification, evaluations must be thorough, comprehensive, and objective, as many scholars have insisted (Drozd et al., 2013;Fidler & Bala, 2010;Garber, 2020); appropriate techniques must be used (Benjamin, Beck, Shaw, & Geffner, 2018;Milchman, 2019b) and evaluators must have -or arrange to retain others with -objectively documented specialized expertise in child abuse, child trauma, and domestic violence. ...
This article analyzes rhetorical strategies that are often used to legitimize classifying children's parent rejection as “alienation,” conceived as a mental disorder or diagnosis. Use of evaluative labels or diagnoses instead of descriptions of behavioral functioning is problematic in child custody evaluations. We address Distorted Claims of consensus, Alienation Labeling, Renaming, Proof by Assertion, Misrepresenting Endorsement by Authorities, Reduction Ad Absurdum, and Ad Personam Attacks. Rhetoric distracts from the evidence and observable behaviors required to accurately classify mistreated/alienated children and protective/alienating parents. It creates an ideology that obfuscates the absence of and need for scientific validity studies; reliable prevalence data; non‐conclusory assessment of parent–child relationship quality; empirical evidence testing the coaching hypothesis; and valid, objective evaluations of treatment programs. The article concludes with suggestions to improve dialogue between scholars in order to advance research and custody evaluations.
... Parent-child contact problems (PCCPs) refer to a spectrum of family dynamics that may result in a child developing resistance and sometimes refusal to have contact with one or both of their parents (Johnston & Sullivan, 2020). The frequency of PCCPs within the family justice system is on the rise, especially in contexts involving court proceedings and interventions, such as parenting plan evaluations (Fidler & Bala, 2010;Harman et al., 2019;Harman & Lorandos, 2021;Marques et al., 2020). The professional and academic fields have witnessed a paradigm shift from a dominant single factor hypothesis, parental alienation (PA) vs. domestic violence (DV), to a more comprehensive, multi-factor hypothesis in addressing PCCPs (Garber, 1996;Polak & Saini, 2015). ...
... Most aligned children do not completely reject the other parent; rather, they tend to express some ambivalence toward this parent, including anger, sadness, and love. At the far end of the continuum are children who have extreme alignment with one parent, whereas they strongly and unjustifiably resist or completely refuse contact with the other parent without apparent ambivalence or guilt [7][8][9][10]. ...
Background:
There is an increasing awareness that a child's separation from one parent after the divorce places the child's development and well-being at risk. The aim of this study was to determine how Greek courts deal with the cases of parental prevention of communication with their children and which factors affect the judicial decisions.
Methods:
The Greek legal databases "NOMOS" and "Isokratis" were searched, and associations between judicial decisions, as well as communication prevention ways, and several parameters, were assessed.
Results/conclusions:
A total of 50 parental communication prevention law cases were retrieved for the time period from 1992 to 2019. Results showed that mothers were more frequently alleged to interfere with father-child communication. Both direct and indirect methods of interfering with communication were followed. In cases of a single child, the method of indirect interference was more frequently followed. Judicial decisions were unaffected by the age and gender of the child, the gender of the parent preventing the communication, the number of children, the gender of the child and whether the child is the same gender as the preventing or prevented parent, the way of prevention, and the reference to parental alienation.
... Parental alienation syndrome is a form of emotional abuse which is frequently arises in the context of child-custody disputes. Researches consistly indicate that PAS was seen in one of five custody cases (3), but only about six percent of the cases were found to be of severe type (8). In one study on families involved in cases with high-conflict child custody dispute, parental alienation was detected in 48% of the cases, while the mother and the father was rejected in 5.4%,and 42.5 % of these cases, respectively. ...
... In a review of the scientific literature. Filder and Bala [55] discovered that PA impacts four spheres of the child's life and reverberates at later ages. In the cognitive sphere, alienated children demonstrated simplistic and rigid information processing, difficulty in distinguishing Parental Alienation: In the child's worst interest DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.101231 the internal world of thoughts and feelings from the external world, and illogical manipulation of mental representations. ...
Parental alienation (PA) is a form of childhood emotional abuse in which one parent instrumentally uses the child to inflict psychological harm on the other parent for revenge. The consequences of parental alienating behaviours range from mild (e.g., the child shows a certain resistance towards visiting the targeted parent but warm parenting is still possible) to severe, where the positive affective parent–child bond is severed and extremely difficult to reinstate under family therapy. In PA processes, parenting is disrupted with the targeted parent and dysfunctional with the alienating parent. Consequently, the child is at a high risk of developing internalising (e.g., depression, anxiety) and externalising (e.g., use of drugs/alcohol, violence) problems during later developmental stages and through the lifespan. Although the prevalence and severity of PA cases in our societies are largely unknown, in part because the construct is still an ongoing debate among academics, practitioners and family justice professionals, different authors defend that it should be treated as a public health problem. Early prevention should be the primary objective and family justice, child protection and mental health services must coordinate efforts to support the families and promote the best conditions for the development of affected children.
... One solution at the court's disposal is ordering the child into individual therapy to resolve his/her concerns about the rejected parent. However, practice wisdom in the field has coalesced around the conclusion that individual therapy for a child in such a scenario will be insufficient as it fails to address the relationship and interactional patterns (Fidler & Bala, 2010). This is consistent with what Gardner observed several years earlier when he wrote that, " . . . ...
One hundred and twenty licensed mental health professionals were surveyed about their work conducting court-ordered reunification therapy with moderate to severe cases of children’s rejection of a parent. Four issues were examined in particular: assessment/screening of alienation VS. estrangement, development of treatment goals, definition and measurement of treatment success, and barriers to successful treatment. Predictors of successful treatment were also examined. Results indicate that how success was defined, whether joint sessions are offered, number of barriers, and percent of cases perceived to be hybrids all predicted percent of successful cases. Findings offer many opportunities for refining and enhancing this very challenging work.
... Many estranged children-in contrast to alienated childrenhope for a relationship with their abusive parents. In a commentary on realistic estrangement, Fidler and Bala stated that estrangement "may result from the trauma of witnessing domestic violence or from experiencing physical abuse, sexual abuse, or significantly inept or neglectful parenting by the rejected parent" (15). They continued, "In these cases, children may exhibit symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder rather than a disproportionate or unjustified reaction to their actual experience with the rejected parent." ...
Parental alienation (rejection of a parent without legitimate justification) and realistic estrangement (rejection of a parent for a good reason) are generally accepted concepts among mental health and legal professionals. Alienated children, who were not abused, tend to engage in splitting and lack ambivalence with respect to their parents; estranged children, who were maltreated, usually perceive their parents in an ambivalent manner. The hypothesis of this study was that a psychological test—the Parental Acceptance–Rejection Questionnaire (PARQ)—will help to distinguish severely alienated from nonalienated children. The PARQ, which was used to identify and quantify the degree of splitting for each participant, was administered to 45 severely alienated children and 71 nonalienated children. The PARQ‐Gap score—the difference between each child's PARQ: Father score and PARQ: Mother score—was introduced and defined in this research. Using a PARQ‐Gap score of 90 as a cut point, this test was 99% accurate in distinguishing severely alienated from nonalienated children. This research presents a way to distinguish parental alienation from other reasons for contact refusal. The PARQ‐Gap may be useful for both clinicians and forensic practitioners in evaluating children of separating and divorced parents when there is a concern about the possible diagnosis of parental alienation.
... To promote accountability within the parenting coordination process, a PC is likely to report to the court parents' failure to comply with court orders or their undermining a child's relationship with the other parent, for example, and rely on judicial case management to impose clear consequences for recalcitrant behavior. This function is critical in more severe cases of parent character pathology and in cases involving parent-child contact problems (Fidler & Bala, 2010) and would be undermined by expanding (at least external) confidentiality. ...
This article describes the current state and range of information protection in the growing number of states and Canadian provinces that employ parenting coordination in an effort to reduce repeat custody litigation. The predominant approach—in which what is revealed during the process is not confidential—is analyzed in terms of its compatibility with the parenting coordinator's multiple tasks of educating parents, seeking to facilitate agreements, and, if necessary, providing the court with a report, a recommended decision, or an arbitrated result. Using a case scenario with multiple parts, the article then examines such confidentiality schemes in practice by providing an action‐oriented series of questions that illustrate how much of this topic must be resolved through a parenting coordinator's exercise of discretion in the absence of rule clarity. The article then raises a number of policy questions about whether current parenting coordination confidentiality norms strike the optimal or even the correct balance on information protection and concludes by identifying several policy options that might address these questions. Parenting coordination is practiced in an increasing number of states and Canadian provinces, but the role, functions, and governing authority across jurisdictions lack uniformity. In the great majority of the states that have adopted statutes or rules to govern parenting coordination, the process is a nonconfidential one. While a few states cloak the process in confidentiality in order to encourage (or require) the adoption of a facilitative approach to the role, such schemes differ in coverage and typically include numerous exceptions. Differing models of parenting coordination and lack of consensus regarding underlying theoretical concepts have led to confusion for practitioners and raise important questions for future researchers in establishing the efficacy of the process.
... Other than ruling out rejection of a parent that is justified by the parent's behavior, the current literature offers little guidance to evaluators and courts on how to determine whether a child's negative behaviors toward a parent are pathognomonic of parental alienation. Drawing on parental alienation literature cited throughout this paper (e.g., Fidler & Bala, 2010;Kelly & Johnston, 2001), seven criteria distinguish negative behaviors of moderately or severely alienated children from negative behavior that does not indicate moderate or severe levels of parental alienation. When compared with a child whose negative behavior does not reflect parental alienation, a child with moderate or severe parental alienation displays negative behavior that meets all of the following criteria. ...
Allegations that a parent has manipulated a child to turn against the other parent raise complex issues challenging child custody evaluators, expert witnesses, and courts. A key issue relates to false positive identifications of parental alienation—concluding that parental alienation exists in cases where it really does not. Such mistaken conclusions fuel concerns about the application of parental alienation in family law cases and contribute to skepticism about the concept. This article discusses mistaken conclusions that a child is alienated and that a parent has engaged in a campaign of alienating behavior. The article emphasizes that evaluators should thoroughly investigate reasonable alternative explanations of the children’s and parents’ behaviors, including attention to seven criteria that distinguish irrationally alienated children from children whose negative or rejecting behaviors do not constitute parental alienation. Evaluators should also investigate various reasons for a child’s preference for one parent. Further, alienating behavior—seen in different degrees of intensity, frequency, and duration—can reflect different motivations. Evaluators, experts, and judges who do not attend to the nuances of alienating behaviors are likely to reach false conclusions about the significance of the behaviors and make recommendations that do not serve children’s best interests. Finally, evaluators should attend to their overt and covert judgment biases and to the complexity of parental alienation issues in order to reduce the likelihood of faulty opinions that a child is alienated, or that a parent has engaged in alienating behaviors.
... Frequently, PA proponents cite the presence of some elements of PAS as further support (Bernet & Baker, 2013;Baker 2005Baker , 2007Warshak 2001). Exacerbating the problem, some PA/PAS proponents assert that abused children do not reject their parents, and therefore, whenever a child rejects a parent it must be the result of PA (Fidler & Bala, 2010;Fidler, Bala, & Saini, 2013, pp. xi, 28, 29;Saunders & Faller, 2016;Hare 1999). ...
Despite widespread rejection of Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS), some custody evaluators use the presence of its components to invalidate abuse allegations and blame the preferred parent. Although PAS supporters claim that the elements of PAS are unique to Parental Alienation (PA) and can, therefore, be used to diagnose it, no scientific study has yet demonstrated this. Reanalysis of Gardner’s data, and our current knowledge of children, indicate that the elements of PAS are not unique to PA. Many PA/PAS advocates approach custody cases assuming that when children reject parents, it is probably the result of a denigration campaign by the preferred parent. Confirmation bias then leads the evaluator to spin, value, and vet information so that it support their expected conclusion. Children’s avoidance of significant visitation with a parent is often driven by a desire to remain with their primary attachment figure, rather than a rejection of the other parent. Forcing visitation and cutting the children’s time with the primary attachment figure leads to rejection of that parent, rather than solving it. The article suggests a method of scientifically assessing if a child’s rejection of a parent is due to PA, affinity, or justified rejection.
Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, Çocuk ve Ergen Ruh Sağlığı Adli Kurulumuza sevk edilen velayet olgularının demografik ve klinik özelliklerinin incelenmesidir. Gereç ve Yöntem: Ege Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Çocuk ve Ergen Psikiyatrisi Anabilim Dalı’na Ocak 2011-Aralık 2021 tarihleri arasında velayet nedeniyle yönlendirilen 77 olgunun dosya bilgileri geriye dönük incelenmiştir. Olguların sosyodemografik özellikleri, aile yapıları, adli heyet raporları değerlendirilmiştir. Bulgular: Olguların %62,3’ü (n= 48) kızdır.Yaş ortalamaları 9.09 ±3.79 ‘tur. Olguların %26’sının (n=20) , annelerin %13,6’sı (n= 9), babaların %12,1’i (n= 8) en az bir psikiyatrik tanısı mevcuttur. Olguların % 72,7 ‘sinin velayet , %27,3 ‘ünün kişisel ilişki düzenlenmesi açısından değerlendirilmesi istenmiştir. Boşanma davalarının %27,3’ünün halen sürmekte olduğu, çocukların velayetinin / geçici velayetinin çoğunlukla (%92,2) annelerde olduğu ve olguların büyük çoğunluğunun ( %84,4) anne ile birlikte yaşadığı belirlenmiştir. Rapor sonuçlarına göre velayetin çoğunlukla (%64,3) anneye verilmesi, dört (%7,1) olguda tekrar değerlendirmenin uygun olacağı kanaatine varıldığı görülmüştür. Sonuç: Velayet ve kişisel ilişki kararı, çocuğun yüksek yararı gözetilerek dikkatli bir değerlendirmeyi gerektirir. Boşanma sürecinde çocukların özel ihtiyaçlarının fark edilmesi sonraki yaşamlarında olumsuz sonuçların önlenmesi için önemlidir. Bu nedenle farklı meslek gruplarının objektif ve bilimsel ölçütlere göre, işbirliği içerisinde değerlendirme yapması oldukça önemlidir.
This article argues that in order to intervene effectively and ethically with children who are manifesting Parent–child contact problems (PCCPs) after parental separation, we begin by being mindful of what is normal about divorce transitions and use developmentally appropriate and culturally sensitive analysis to rule out children's common transitory reactions. It is then important to concurrently assess for both family violence (FV) and severe parental alienating behavior (PAB) on the part of both parents, which can co‐occur in some cases. The article asserts that it is also important to consider common problematic parenting responses that may potentiate the PCCP but not necessarily rise to the level of abuse. FV is defined as a child's direct experience of physical, sexual, or psychological maltreatment and indirect exposure to sibling abuse and/or to intimate partner violence (IPV). PAB is defined as an ongoing pattern of unwarranted negative messages on the part of one parent that conveys that the child's other parent is disinterested, irrelevant, dangerous, and not to be trusted. Any one or all of these factors may contribute to a child's strident negativity and sustained rejection of one parent, these being defining features of a PCCP. This article proposes ethical principles and priorities for decision‐making in these cases, considering the growing social science controversy about assessment and intervention for PCCPs. It concludes with an analysis of recent, contrasting policy approaches to PCCPs (e.g., Kayden's Law and the Joint Statement of the AFCC and NCJFCJ) and their potential impact on family justice system professionals and the families they serve.
Cadre de la recherche : Les familles vivant un conflit sévère de séparation utilisent de façon disproportionnée les tribunaux, les avocats et les ressources psychosociales et sollicitent plusieurs systèmes simultanément. Les professionnels se sentent impuissants dans l’intervention auprès d’elles et tendent à entretenir des perceptions négatives à leur égard. Les caractéristiques individuelles qu’ils perçoivent chez les parents doivent être étudiées compte tenu de leur importance pour comprendre à la fois les dynamiques interpersonnelles de ces parents et les défis de l’intervention professionnelle.
Objectifs : La présente étude vise à identifier les perceptions des professionnels des domaines judiciaire et psychosocial quant aux caractéristiques individuelles des parents impliqués dans des situations hautement conflictuelles.
Méthodologie : Une analyse de contenu thématique a été réalisée sur deux types de documents, soit les dossiers tenus par les psychothérapeutes participant au protocole Parentalité-Conflit-Résolution et les décisions judiciaires rendues dans les situations familiales ayant été admises à ce même protocole.
Résultats : Les discours des juges et des psychologues révèlent leurs perceptions quant aux caractéristiques individuelles des parents impliqués dans des situations familiales hautement conflictuelles, telles que la méfiance, l’opposition, le manque d’empathie, l’impulsivité, le manque d’introspection et d’autocritique et des mécanismes de défense immatures.
Conclusions : Cet article met en évidence les perceptions des professionnels des domaines judiciaire et psychosocial quant aux caractéristiques individuelles des parents impliqués dans des situations hautement conflictuelles qui génèrent des difficultés dans les relations interpersonnelles et souligne l’impact des systèmes judiciaires et de services psychosociaux dans le maintien et l’exacerbation de ces caractéristiques.
Contribution : Les résultats de cette étude documentent les perceptions des professionnels des domaines judiciaire et psychosocial quant aux caractéristiques individuelles des parents vivant un conflit sévère de séparation ; ce qui soutient les réflexions sur les besoins de ces familles et les défis auxquels font face les systèmes judiciaires et de services psychosociaux avec elles.
The denigration of one parent by the other would be one of the most damaging effects for the child in situations of family breakdown, although the so-called parental alienation syndrome (Gardner) as a supposed childhood mental disorder, has not obtained acceptance in psychiatric classifications nor the necessary validity and scientific support, so its use by mental health professionals, experts and lawyers should be avoided. Instead, one can use the diagnostic criteria contemplated by the international diagnostic psychiatric classifications that we describe. It is essential to establish the differential diagnosis based on the symptom of rejection of a parent, an issue that involves difficulty and may require the assistance of a multidisciplinary team to adequately evaluate all the evaluable aspects. Professionals must act with knowledge of the limits of their science, providing those data and conclusions that are legitimate and valid according to this premise.
O presente capítulo apresenta a mediação como o processo adequado para tratamento de relações interparentais, sendo um método eficiente para prevenir e solucionar situações de alienação parental. A especificidade reside na abordagem comunicativa das técnicas que devem ser aplicadas pelo mediador, para transformação do conflito e da relação.
Resumen
La denigración de un progenitor por el otro es uno de los efectos más dañinos para el menor en situaciones de ruptura familiar, si bien el llamado síndrome de alienación parental (Gardner) como supuesto trastorno mental infantil, no ha obtenido la aceptación en las clasificaciones psiquiátricas internacionales, ni la necesaria validez y soporte científico, por lo que profesionales de la salud mental, peritos y juristas deberían evitar su empleo. En su lugar, cabe valerse de los criterios diagnósticos contemplados por las clasificaciones psiquiátricas diagnósticas internacionales que describimos. Es esencial establecer el diagnóstico diferencial a partir del síntoma del rechazo hacia un progenitor, cuestión que entraña dificultad y que puede requerir el concurso de un equipo multidisciplinar para valorar adecuadamente todos los aspectos evaluables. Los profesionales han de obrar con conocimiento de los límites de su ciencia, aportando aquellos datos y conclusiones que sean legítimos y válidos según tal premisa.
In the last decade and a half, there have been significant changes in Spanish legislation on marital breakdowns. One of the reforms with the greatest impact has been the possibility of shared custody. However, although regulations have not ceased, there have been no studies, such as this one, that relate to the legislation on joint custody in Spain. The data source used is the Survey of Annulments, Separations and Divorces by the Spanish National Institute of Statistics. The study concluded that the presence of a specific law promotes shared parenting, although it increases in Autonomous Communities where its presence was previously greater. However, other variables are involved, as confirmed by cases in the Balearic Islands and the Community of Valencia.
Divorce is often accompanied by multiple transitions that can be stressful for those involved, and the negative effects of divorce are more pronounced when there are ongoing difficulties, making this a primary area of focus for relationship‐focused therapists. Focusing on typical problems encountered at intrapsychic, interactional, and external levels, recommendations are made for systemic interventions therapists can utilize with divorcing families. Psychoeducation and mediation with divorcing couples are also discussed. Case examples are utilized to demonstrate how the described interventions have been utilized in therapy with divorcing couples.
Transitional objects are those idiosyncratically determined, beloved blankies and stuffed animals that communicate an absent parent’s affection. As such, transitional objects serve the short-term need to cope with separation, and the long-term need to move toward autonomy. This article discusses the value, use, and misuse of transitional objects in the context of coparental conflict. The concept of alienation-by-proxy is introduced. Specific recommendations are provided, including the therapeutic creation and empowerment of transitional objects to assist children experiencing separation anxiety, consideration of the role of transitional objects in child custody evaluations, and the court’s responsibility to encourage litigating parents to respect the child’s needs for transitional objects.
Divorce is often accompanied by multiple transitions that can be stressful for those involved, and the negative effects of divorce are more pronounced when there are ongoing difficulties, making this a primary area of focus for relationship‐focused therapists. Focusing on typical problems encountered at intrapsychic, interactional, and external levels, recommendations are made for systemic interventions therapists can utilize with divorcing families. Psychoeducation and mediation with divorcing couples are also discussed. Case examples are utilized to demonstrate how the described interventions have been utilized in therapy with divorcing couples.
Stručnjaci i znanstvenici u Hrvatskoj, kao i u drugim zemljama svijeta, nemaju jasan konsenzus u vezi s terminologijom za razdvajanje roditelja i otuđenje, bez obzira na izrazito visok broj djece u toj vrlo ranjivoj populaciji. Cilj je ovoga rada ponuditi prijedloge prijevoda i operacionalizacije ključnih pojmova s obzirom na znanstvenu literaturu i uvriježenu praksu, stavljajući položaj djeteta u fokus. Obrađeni ključni pojmovi su: razvod/razdvajanje, visokokonfliktni razvod / razdvajanje, otuđivanje, otuđenje, otuđujući roditelj, otuđivani roditelj, otuđeni roditelj, ovrha, komparativ privrženosti i splitting. Ovaj rad predstavlja prvi prijedlog razjašnjavanja i operacionalizacije ključnih koncepata u jezičnom, ali prije svega u psihološkom smislu.
This study explored the experience of adults who had experienced parental alienation during childhood. Ten alienated adult children participated in 60 to 90-minute semi-structured interviews about their experience of parental alienation. Using Braun and Clarke (2006 Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa[Taylor & Francis Online] , [Google Scholar]) thematic analysis framework, seven themes were identified. Participants described experiencing abuse perpetrated by the alienating parent. They described experiencing anxiety, depression, low self-worth, guilt, attachment problems, difficulty in other relationships, and reduced or delayed educational and career attainment that they attributed to their experience of parental alienation. These results demonstrated that children’s exposure to parental alienation may have lifelong ramifications for their psychological well-being.
The concept of parental alienation (PA) has expanded in popular usage at the same time that it remains mired in controversy about its scientific integrity and its use as a legal strategy in response to an increasing range of issues in family court. In this paper we describe how competing advocacy movements (for mothers, fathers and children) in the family justice field have, over time, helped shape the shifting definitions and widening focal concerns of PA‐ from children who make false allegations of abuse, to those who resist or refuse contact with a parent, to parent relocation, and to the emotional abuse wrecked upon children who are victims of a manipulative parent. In search of common ground for a sound approach to using PA concepts, we argue that the Single Factor model of PA (asserting that an alienating preferred parent is primarily the source of the problem) is inadequate, overly simplistic and misleading. A Single Factor model rests on the fallacy that abuse or poor parenting on the part of either parent have been, or are able to be, ruled out as sufficient reason for the child's rejecting stance. By contrast, multi‐factor models of PA make more useful, valid, differentiated clinical predictions of children's rejection of a parent, informed by basic and applied research on children and families. However, multi‐factor models are complex and difficult to argue in court and to use in assessment and interventions. Suggestions are made for developing intervention‐focused prediction models that reduce the number of factors involved and are applicable across different types of interventions.
High‐conflict parental separation cases associated with child's estrangement or contact refusal take an unusually large amount of court time and generate high emotional costs for parents and children. This paper reports on a study of a research‐based pilot project and protocol, called the Parenting Conflict Resolution (PCR), which is intended to reduce parental conflict, improve interparental communication, and support or restore the parent–child relationship. The protocol was developed at the Superior Court in Quebec City (Canada), and involves single judge case management, and lawyers' commitment to have the child's best interests as their primary consideration and to guide their clients to trust the process. The assigned judge and lawyers have the ongoing involvement of a mandated psychotherapist, taking a family systems approach with the case. The PCR also requires the parents to participate in a psycho‐educational, introspective group program to work on co‐parenting and communication skills. Ongoing communication between the professionals involved in the PCR is required to ensure cohesion and accountability. This pilot project was implemented with 10 high‐conflict families, 6 of which presented with the child's resistance or refusal to see one parent. A qualitative data study was undertaken into the experiences of all the participants. The most salient result is the resumption of parent–child contact in all six contact refusal cases. Discussion highlights key elements to successfully address these cases: (a) interdisciplinary program delivery, (b) systemic understanding of the contact problems, (c) focus on the child's best interest, (d) single judge assigned to the case, (e) lawyers' support of the parents' participation, and (f) psychotherapist reporting to the court.
Had Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's fictional detective, the great Sherlock Holmes, actually engaged in deductive reasoning, he would have solved many fewer crimes. In fact, Holmes' logical progression from astute observation to hypotheses is a model of a type of inductive reasoning. This paper argues that mental health professionals tasked to evaluate why a child is resisting/refusing contact with one parent must approach each family the way that Holmes approached each case, without a presumed suspect, moving systematically from detail to hypothesis, well‐versed in the full range of dynamics that may be at play, and erring in favor of parsimony rather than pathology. By contrast, the custody evaluator who approaches these matters through a deductive process, seeking data that support an a priori theory, is vulnerable to confirmatory bias and doing harm to the child whose interests are paramount. The literature concerned with resist/refuse dynamics is reviewed, yielding 13 non‐mutually exclusive variables that evaluators must consider so as to more fully identify why a particular child is resisting or refusing contact with one parent. On this basis, the hybrid model is expanded to include the full spectrum of contributing dynamics. Specific recommendations are made for judicial officers in the interest of writing orders for custody evaluations that minimize the risk of confirmatory bias.
Key Points for the Family Court Community
• Deductive reasoning seeks to confirm or refute an a priori hypothesis
• Deductive reasoning is highly vulnerable to confirmational bias
• Confirmational bias can corrupt and invalidate forensic evaluation to the detriment of all involved
• Resist/refuse dynamics must be understood through an inductive process that is open to all possible hypotheses
• A survey of the literature identifies at least thirteen mutually compatible hypotheses, all of which must be evaluated
• Courts must take care to word orders for forensic family evaluations in a manner that minimizes confirmatory bias and invites inductive investigation
Razvod ili razdvajanje roditelja pogađa velik broj djece i mladih, a procjenjuje se da je svaki treći razvod roditelja visokokonfliktan, odnosno da se sukob roditelja s vremenom ne smanjuje, nego perzistira ili čak ojačava. Istraživanja i klinička praksa dosljedno upozoravaju na rizike za djecu u visokokonfliktnom razvodu roditelja, koja se često nađu u središtu njihova sukoba, a time su u riziku od emocionalnog zlostavljanja, bilo da se radi o otuđenju, neprimjerenim pritiscima i/ili manipulaciji djecom jednoga ili obojih roditelja. Od svih oblika zlostavljanja, emocionalno zlostavljanje najmanje je istraženo i u svijetu postoji mal broj sustavnih programa koji bi se bavili njegovom prevencijom. Posljedice emocionalnog zlostavljanja jednake su kao i posljedice drugih oblika zlostavljanja, kratkoročno, dugoročno, pa i transgeneracijski, te uključuju brojne negativne ishode za mentalno zdravlje, socijalno funkcioniranje i probleme u ponašanju. U Hrvatskoj ne postoji sustavna prevencija emocionalnog zlostavljanja djece, a da je posebice specifično usmjerena na djecu u razvodima roditelja. U ovom radu razmatraju se mogući razlozi, postojeći programi u Europi, mogućnost njihove implementacije, sustavne i nesustavne mjere u Hrvatskoj te se predlažu daljnji koraci u razvoju sustavne prevencije te problematike na svim razinama putem intervencijskog spektra.
In this chapter, the Missing Person Project (MPP) results are used to investigate which factors may affect the ways in which family members, friends, community residents and leaders, law enforcement personnel, judges, and others view and respond to children who go missing and are abducted by family members during CC and visitation. This chapter discusses incident characteristics and the role of the law and courts in dealing with the problem of missing and kidnapped children during CC is emphasized. In addition, the traumatic impact of this child victimization is discussed.
Parental denigration is a phenomenon characterized by disparaging comments made by one parent about the other parent, in front of their children. It is an emerging area of research with implications that appear to follow from a conflict perspective, rather than a parental alienation perspective. In three prior studies of young adults, sibling pairs, and parents, denigration was found to be (a) measured reliably and validly, (b) reciprocally occurring, (c) related to children feeling more distant from both parents, particularly the more frequent denigrator, (d) associated with various measures of maladjustment, and (e) underreported by divorced parents. These results held across marital status and parent gender, in group and individual analyses, across sibling reports, and across studies. In the current study, parent reports of co-parent denigration behaviors were similar to child reports in both married and divorced families. However, divorced parents consistently underreported their own denigration behaviors compared to child reports, and their reports of parent–child closeness and attachment was not associated with child reports. This is consistent with findings from previous work that divorced parents may be less aware of their harmful behaviors and view co-parents in a globally more negative light than children perceive them.
This article analyzes the evidence for parental alienation (PA) through the lens of construct validity. It defines PA as a theoretical construct. It explains why construct validity is needed to identify PA and reliably differentiate it from other causes of parent rejection. It discusses validity problems in using case examples to support PA and then focuses on empirical research. It makes recommendations for future research. Finally, it proposes a way to present evidence about PA in child custody cases that is responsive to the current state of the evidence regarding construct validity. It concludes that PA is a descriptive concept but is not yet a psychological construct because it has not yet achieved construct validity. The article suggests that the political context for PA has obstructed science. While some PA researchers are overcoming that obstacle theoretically, empirical research and forensic practice in child custody cases have yet to catch up.
The dramatic increase in the number of child-custody disputes since the seventies has created an equally dramatic need for a standard reference work that examines the growing social problem of children who develop an irrational hatred for a parent as the result of divorce. The International Handbook of Parental Alienation Syndrome: Conceptual, Clinical, and Legal Considerations features clinical, legal, and research perspectives from 32 contributors representing eight countries, building on the work of the late Dr. Richard Gardner, a pioneer in the theory, practice, diagnosis, and treatment of Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS). This unique book addresses the effects of PAS on parents and children, discusses issues surrounding reconciliation between parent and alienated child, and includes material published for the first time on incidence, gender, and false allegations of abuse in PAS. Content highlights examines PAS and the roles of family members, the criminal justice system, and the need for public awareness and policymakers to respond to PAS. Descriptive statistics on 84 cases are given, and the factors affecting reconciliation between the child and target parent are listed. The mild, moderate, and severe categories of PAS are explored, and the psychological consequences of PAS indoctrination for adult children of divorce and the effects of alienation on parents are researched. The role of medical reports in the development of PAS, sexual abuse allegations, and future predictions on the fate of PAS children are many of the clinical considerations in this book. The legal issues concern PAS in American law, criticisms of PAS in courts of law, protecting the fundamental rights of children in families, family law reform, International PAS abductions, and the legal requirements of experts giving evidence to courts. The impact and implications of PAS are immense, and no other single source provides the depth and breadth of coverage of the topic than the clinical and forensic chapters in this book.
FACTORS AFFECTING RECONCILIATION BETWEEN THE CHILD AND TARGET PARENT IN SEVERE PARENTAL ALIENATION SYNDROME
Deirdre Conway Rand and Randy Rand
OVERVIEW & INTRODUCTION
This chapter explores factors affecting reconciliation between the child and target parent in severe parental alienation syndrome (PAS), where the parent-child relationship has been seriously damaged or destroyed. “Severe” includes several types of scenarios: child obsessed with denigrating the target parent; child displaying chaotic, destructive and bizarre behavior in response to intense post-divorce conflict over which parent will stay and which parent will go; child abducted by the alienating parent; child involved in false allegations of sex abuse; little or no contact with the target parent for a period of several years or more.
Alienation is the process by which the child’s love for the other parent is extinguished and replaced by an attitude of reflexive hostility. Reconciliation is the process of reversing alienation and becoming open to the relationship once more.
Some severely alienated children eventually seek out the target parent on their own and are able to reconcile, but little is known about how often this occurs. Gardner (2001b) conducted a follow-up study of 99 PAS children in which spontaneous reconciliation appears to have occurred in four of 77 cases, or 5 percent. Stuart-Mills-Hoch & Hoch (2003) estimated that spontaneous reconciliation occurred in 10 percent of severe PAS cases. This chapter provides numerous case examples with this type of positive outcome, as well as descriptions of failed reconciliation attempts, and worst-case scenarios.
Case reports from published sources, and from our own work over the last 30 years are used to explore the factors associated with reconciliation of the child and target parent in severe PAS. The published cases were drawn from the professional and popular literature, including books, articles in journals and magazines, and newsletters of non-profit organizations. The vignettes designated "case known to authors" are based on the accounts of parents, children, and colleagues we have encountered over the years. They were disguised in accordance with the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (2001).
In the 1970s, we were fortunate enough to interface professionally with Wallerstein, Kelly, and Johnston, as their research on children of divorce was getting underway in Marin County, California. This exposure stimulated our interest in high-conflict divorce and interventions that enable children to have relationships with both parents. We learned about parental alienation in the 1980s, when Gardner began writing about PAS. In the 1990s, interventions with severe PAS families became a focal point of our work. The reunification protocol we follow involves the whole family, including the alienating parent. Children who have successfully reconciled with the target parent after participating in our brief, intensive intervention (4 days on average), typically feel that the alienating parent would benefit from the program as well. It all comes back to the idea that children of divorce, like children in intact families, need both parents.
The Parental Alienation Syndrome, so named by Dr. Richard Gardner, is a distinctive family response to divorce in which the child becomes aligned with one parent and preoccupied with unjustified and/or exaggerated denigration of the other, target parent. In severe cases, the child's once love-bonded relationship with rejected/target parent is destroyed. Testimony on Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) in legal proceedings has sparked debate. This two-part article seeks to shed light on the debate by reviewing Gardner's work and that of others on PAS, integrating the concept of PAS with research on high conflict divorce and other related literature. The material is organized under topic headings such as parents who induce alienation, the child in PAS, the target/alienated parent, attorneys on PAS, and evaluation and intervention. Part II begins with the child in PAS. Case vignettes of moderate to severe PAS are presented in both parts, some of which illustrate the consequences for children and families when the system is successfully manipulated by the alienating parent, as well as some difficult but effective interventions implemented by the author, her husband Randy Rand, Ed.D., and other colleagues.
The abstract for this document is available on CSA Illumina.To view the Abstract, click the Abstract button above the document title.
In this study of 74 children ages 5-12 years in custody disputes, child alienation was defined as the expression of persistent, strong negative attitudes and rejecting behaviors toward one parent with corresponding emotional enmeshment with the other parent. According to parents' ratings using the Child Behavior Checklist, alienated children had more emotional and behavioral problems of clinically significant proportions compared to their nonalienated counterparts. Personality assessments using the Rorschach suggest that alienated and nonalienated children differ in a number of ways with respect to how they perceive and process information, their preferred coping styles and capacities, and how they express affect. In these domains there were also some unexpected findings. Clinical intervention and social policy implications of the findings within the forensic context are discussed.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of structural and therapeutic interventions for interrupting parental alienation syndrome (PAS) toward the severe end of the spectrum. Follow-up was obtained on 45 PAS children from a custody evaluator's practice. The child's adjustment and relationship with both parents at evaluation and follow-up were compared. Children who had enforced visitation with the target parent, or were in target parent custody, maintained relationships with both parents unless the alienator was too disturbed. In the completed alienation outcome group, the alienating parent had custody before and after the evaluation, and was able to violate court orders with impunity. Therapy as the primary intervention was ineffective and sometimes made things worse.
If you are concerned that you are being targeted for parental alienation by the other parent of your child, you may feel compelled to take what you believe to be is the "high road" when responding to parental alienation attitudes and behaviors. According to conversations with hundreds of targeted parents, this high road appears to be conceptualized as not confronting the alienating parent in front of the child and not saying anything that could be construed as critical about the alienating parent to the child. The rationale for this approach appears to be three-fold. First, targeted parents seem to believe that to respond with anything short of the high road would entail behaving like an alienating parent, which would be morally and ethically wrong. They believe that they would lose their moral authority with themselves and their child. This belief is summed up in the old adage "Two wrongs don't make a right." Targeted parents have asked, "How can I complain about the other parent badmouthing me and then respond by badmouthing that parent?" For some targeted parents, they identify themselves as the "good" parent, the one who does not engage in alienating behaviors. To succumb to the desire to respond in kind to the alienation is to become the very thing that they hate the most. The second reason for taking what is perceived to be the high road is the fear that should they try to point out to the child how the other parent is engaging in badmouthing and why this is wrong, they would be increasing the pressure on their child and placing him or her in an untenable position of having to explain, justify, or perhaps even defend the acts of their other parent. Targeted parents are highly attuned to what they believe to be the negative effects of the other parent's alienating strategies and are reluctant to do more of the same to the child.
The present study investigated the extent to which young adults' reports of—and desires for—maternal and paternal involvement differed between intact and divorced families. An ethnically diverse sample of 1,376 young adults completed measures of reported and desired mothering and fathering across 20 parenting domains. Results indicated that both reports of and desires for father involvement differed sharply by family form (intact versus divorced), whereas few family form differences emerged for reported or desired mother involvement. These findings are discussed in terms of implications for custody and access decisions within the family court system.
Allegations of family violence, child abuse, and alienation often occur in the same contested child custody case. Custody eval-uators often are poorly trained in forensic assessment of allegations of domestic violence and allegations of alienation. The authors of this article suggest language that is designed to differentiate between cases in which the term alienation is appropriate, as in non-abuse cases, and when it is best to use other language such as estrangementsabotaging, and counter productive protective parenting in cases where there is abuse. This article describes a decision tree that is designed to assist evaluators in identifying the causes of multiple allegations of maltreatment and abuse.
I review new findings on (a) college students' perspectives on their living arrangements after their parents' divorces, (b) their relations with their parents as a function of their living arrangements, (c) their adjustment as a function of their parents' relocation, and (d) the amount of college support they received. Students endorsed living arrangements that gave them equal time with their fathers, they had better outcomes when they had such arrangements and when their parents supported their time with the other parent, they experienced disagreement between mothers and fathers over living arrangements, and they gave evidence of their fathers' continuing commitment to them into their young adult years. These findings consistently contradict the recent, influential public policy recommendations of Judith Wallerstein.
Parental alienation syndrome (PAS) is a disorder that arises in children in the context of child-custody disputes. It is the result of the combination of the programming (brainwashing) of children by the alienating parent and the children's own contributions to a campaign of denigration against the alienated parent. A central factor operative in the children's contributions is their empowerment, most often by the indoctrinators, but occasionally by the passivity of the targeted parent. In addition to these intrafamilial factors, extrafamilial factors are also operative, especially the legal system and mental health professionals. This article focuses on the ways in which all of these empowerment factors operate in the etiology, development and perpetuation of parental alienation syndrome.
A qualitative retrospective study was conducted of 40 adults who experienced parental alienation as a child. Individuals participated in one-hour semi-structured interviews. Audiotapes were transcribed verbatim and submitted to a content analysis for primary themes and patterns. For this article, findings pertaining to the strategies parents were reported to use to effectively turn the participants against the other parent were analyzed. Results revealed 33 types of strategies, 12 mentioned by at least 20% of the sample 1) general bad mouthing of the other parent, 2) limiting actual contact, 3) withdrawing love/getting angry if participant showed positive regard for targeted parent, 4) bad mouthing targeted parent by saying s/he doesn't love participant, 5) forcing participant to choose, 6) bad mouthing targeted parent by saying s/he is dangerous, 7) confiding in participant about adult relationship 8) limiting mention and photographs of the targeted parent, 9) forcing participant to reject targeted parent 10) limiting contact with/belittling extended family, 11) belittling targeted parent in front of participant, and 12) inducing conflict between participant and targeted parent. These twelve strategies are discussed in the context of attachment theory. Examples of each are provided in order to offer a glimpse into the lives of adult children of parental alienation.
Despite being contrary to good patient care and existing clinical and forensic practice guidelines, some therapists nevertheless engage in dual clinical and forensic roles. Perhaps because an injured litigant seeking treatment is required to engage in 2 distinct roles (litigant and patient), care providers may be tempted to meet both sets of that person's needs. Through the presentation of 10 principles that underlie why combining these roles is conflicting and problematical, the authors stress the importance of avoiding such conflicts, avoiding the threat to the efficacy of therapy, avoiding the threat to the accuracy of judicial determinations, and avoiding deception when providing testimony.
In a previous issue ofthis journal, Joan B. Kelly and Janet R. Johnston describe their reformulation of the parental alienation syndrome (PAS). Here, 1 prewnt area\ in which I agree with the authors and areas in which 1 disagree. Particular focus is placed on these PAS-related issues: the syndrome question, PAS versus parental alienation, the medical model, custodial transfer, gender bias, DSM-/C: empirical studies, and the misapplication of PAS. In their reformulation of the parental alienation syndrome (PAS), Kelly and Johnston (200 I) described a model that overlaps a great deal with my own work on PAS but also differs in a few aspects. Although separated by a continent, I believe we are essentially seeing the same kinds of psychological problems, as divorce is ubiquitous, and similar problems are caused everywhere for the families involved. I believe we could also agree that all solutions to psychological problems have drawbacks and that we are not dealing with right answers and wrong answers, but have to select what we consider to be the least detrimental of the options available to us. Our differences are probably not as wide as the July 200 1 issue might imply (for a similar view, see Warshak, 2001), and it is my hope that this response will serve to narrow these differences. Furthermore, because the PAS arises so frequently in the context of litigated child-custody disputes, and because such families turn to the courts for assistance in the resolution of these conflicts, professional differences are likely to become exaggerated and more polarized in the courtroom, which is an inevitable outcome of adversarial proceedings.
This paper discusses the extent of violence in high-conflict litigating families, differentiating between abusive relationships and high-conflict divorce, and describing the numerous ways that parenting is deficient and compromised. Guidelines for making access plans that minimise adverse effects on children, restrains further abuse, and protects parents who have been victimised is followed by a discussion of the specialised services needed, and the challenges in coordinating the efforts of family court and community agencies on behalf of these families.
Foreword Arlene Vetere 1. Structural Family Therapy 2. A Family in Formation 3. A Family Model 4. A Kibbutz Family 5. Therapeutic Implications of a Structural Approach 6. The Family in Therapy 7. Forming the Therapeutic System 8. Restructuring the Family 9. A "Yes, But" Technique 10. A "Yes, And" Technique 11. The Initial Interview 12. A Longitudinal View Epilog
In this reply to Richard Gardner, we outline our points of disagreement with his formulation of parental alienation syndrome (PAS), showing that his focus on the alienating parent as the primary cause of children's negative attitudes and rejecting behavior toward the other parent is overly simplistic and not supported by findings from recent empirical research. It follows that we strongly object to Gardner's recommendations for legal and mental health interventions with alienated children as well as the use of the term PAS when referring to this problem.
Should a child custody evaluation be a clinical tool informed by forensic methods and procedures or a forensic tool informed by clinical experience? The authors conclude that an evaluation requires a delicate blend of scientific thinking, clinical understanding, through observations, appropriate use of psychological tests, and self-report measures and information from sufficient collateral sources. Evaluators must pay attention to internal biases and integrate them with the relevant literature. Finally, evaluators must remember that their evaluation and reports will be used by both the courts and the family in reaching a decision on behalf of the children.
This article explores patterns of contact between non-resident fathers and their children, and mothers’ and fathers’ satisfaction with contact arrangements in a nationally representative sample of separated parents in Australia. The data suggest that in Australia more than one third of children whose parents do not live together do not see their fathers, while 17% have daytime-only contact. The levels of contact are a source of dissatisfaction for both mothers and fathers. Although the majority of resident mothers expressed satisfaction with the contact arrangements, 40% reported that they would like to see more father–child contact taking place, while only 5% thought that there was too much contact. By contrast, three quarters of non-resident fathers wanted more contact with their children. That included those who had little or no face-to-face contact with their children, indicating that disengagement did not mean disinterest. The greatest levels of satisfaction for both mothers and fathers were with shared parenting arrangements. The implications for family law and practice are considered.
Over the past three decades, parental alienation syndrome (PAS) has been proposed to explain behaviors by a child who refuses to spend time with a parent and actually denigrates that parent within the context of a child custody dispute. Although some mental health professionals and child custody evaluators, attorneys, and judges have been quick to accept and admit PAS as evidence in these disputes, there has been no consistent empirical or clinical evidence that PAS exists or that the alienator's behavior is the actual cause of the alienated child's behavior towards the target parent. This article attempts to help those working with custody issues understand how the PAS construct fails to meet scientific standards and should not be admissible in courts.
Divorce-Related Malicious Mother Syndrome was described originally by Turkat (1995). When this initial report was published, the disorder had been observed only in females. Recent case material has emerged which suggests that the abnormality may be gender neutral. To facilitate proper scientific investigation, the taxonomic label and diagnostic criteria have been changed accordingly. Divorce-Related Malicious Parent Syndrome is a significant clinical and legal problem, which remains in dire need of pertinent research and analysis.
Children's perspectives can enlighten decisions regarding custody and parenting plans, but different opinions exist about how best to involve children in the decision-making process. This article discusses why most procedures for soliciting children's preferences do not reliably elicit information on their best interests and do not give children a meaningful voice in decision making. Instead, these procedures provide children with forums in which to takes sides in their parents' disputes. In addition to hearing an individual child's voice, decision makers can use the collective voice of children, as revealed in research on such topics as joint custody, overnight stays, and relocation to help understand what children might say about these issues with the hindsight of maturity and in the absence of parental pressure, loyalty conflicts, inhibitions, and limitations in perspective and articulation.
Children who have been programmed by one parent to be alienated from the other parent are commonly seen in the context of child-custody disputes. Such programming is designed to strengthen the position of the programming parent in a court of law. Many evaluators use the term parental alienation syndrome (PAS) to refer to the disorder engendered in such children. In contrast, there are evaluators who recognize the disorder, but prefer to use the term parental alienation (PA). The purpose of this article is to elucidate the sources of this controversy and to delineate the advantages and disadvantages of using either term in the context of child-custody disputes, especially in evaluators' reports and testimony in courts of law. The author concludes that families are best served when the more specific term parental alienation syndrome is used rather than the more general term parental alienation .
Every lawyer either has heard of or has been involved in a divorce case that initially seemed manageable and resolvable only to find that it develops into a nightmarish drama. The parties involved in such cases are often those who have a personality disorder. A personality disorder is a clinical term used to describe people who are “locked in” for many years, with certain exaggerated personality traits that interfere with many aspects of their daily functioning. It is exceptionally difficult to achieve client control when working with a client with a personality disorder. This article will describe nine personality disorders, how to identify them, and how to work with them.
Maladaptive efforts to adjust to remarriage can provoke or exacerbate parental alienation syndrome. The remarried parent, the other parent, the stepparent, and the child each may contribute to the disturbance. Underlying dynamics include jealousy, narcissistic injury, desire for revenge, the wish to erase the exspouse from the childs life in order to make room for the stepparent, competitive feelings between the exspouse and stepparent, the new couples attempt to unite around a common enemy and avoid recognition of conflicts in the marriage, the childs attempt to resolve inner conflict, and parent-child boundary violations. These dynamics are discussed and suggestions for treatment are offered.
The parental alienation syndrome is commonly seen in highly contested child-custody disputes. The author has dcscribed three types: mild, moderate, and severe-each of which requires special approaches by both legal and mental health professionals. The purpose of this article is to correct some misinterpretations of the author's recommendations as well as to add some recently developed refinements. Particular focus is given to the transitional-site program that can be extremely useful for dealing with the scvcre type of, parental alienation syndrome. Dealing properly with parental-alienation— syndrome families requires close cooperation between legal and mcntal health professionals. Without such cooperation therapeutic approaches are not likely to succeed. With such cooperation the treatment, in many cases, is likely to be highly effective.
This commentary focuses on new directions in the study of fathers and families. Several topics that are ripe for more theoretical and empirical scrutiny are outlined. These include the biological determinants of fathering, cultural constraints on fathers, the impact of becoming a father on men’s development as adults, and an intergenerational perspective on fathering. The implications of the recent advances in our understanding of gay and lesbian parents for the critical nature of the father’s role in the family are examined. Finally, a wider range of methodological approaches—including qualitative as well as quantitative, experimental as well as correlational—is advocated in order to advance our appreciation of fathers in children’s lives.
Denying reality is obviously a maladaptive way of dealing with a situation. In fact, denial is generally considered to be one of the defense mechanisms, mechanisms that are inappropriate maladaptive, and pathological. In the field of medicine to deny the existence of a disease seriously compromises the physician's ability to help patients. If a physician does not believe that a particular disease exists, then it will not be given consideration when making a differential diagnosis, and the patient may then go untreated. This is in line with the ancient medical principle that proper diagnosis must precede proper treatment. Or, if for some external reason the physician recognizes the disorder, but feels obligated to use another name, other problems arise, for example, impaired communication with others regarding exactly what is going on with the patient, and hence improper treatment. This is what is occurring at this point with the parental alienation syndrome, a disorder whose existence has compelling verification. In this article I discuss the reasons for denial of the PAS and the ways in which such denial harms families. Particular emphasis will be given to the ways in which this denial harms women, although I will certainly comment on the ways in which the denial harms their husbands and children. In the past, denial of the PAS has caused men much grief. Such denial is now causing women similar grief.
The increasingly widespread use of parenting coordination to provide ongoing, intensive case management of higher conflict child custody cases recognizes the many advantages of this alternative dispute resolution (ADR) process in the family courts. The essential functions of the parenting coordination process are to create appropriate parenting plans; to build functional, enduring coparenting relationships; and to resolve ongoing coparenting disputes. In this article, an experienced multidisciplinary group from different jurisdictions across the United States examines a few of the most challenging issues that currently confront the field of parenting coordination. These include legal issues, such as the quasi-judicial authority of the parenting coordinator (PC) derived from statutory and legislative means, continuing jurisdiction of cases, and constitutional challenges. A description of cases that can benefit from the appointment of a PC is provided, as well as a judicial view of the pros and cons of the role. Essential aspects of the practice are discussed, including the importance of structure and boundaries, challenges to the use of the role, liability issues, and the PC's role in creating and managing collaborative teams to work on these cases. The article concludes with a vision of the future that highlights the need for research and training to responsibly advance this promising, emerging role.