Responding to parental alienation for practitioners. This presentation contains the latest information on evidence based interventions for parental alienation
Welcome to this seminar on parental alienation and in particular today’s focus on our responses and interventions to the deliberate rupture of children’s relationships with a beloved parent. I am assuming that you are all here because you have some personal or professional interest in this area.
You may have been confronted with situations in which you might have felt helpless about how to intervene.
My work in this presentation has come about because matters are changing in Australia regarding how we conceive and formulate the situations I have described. In the past, we have not had any effective interventions in this area and whilst the situation is improving, we still remain conflicted and some extent confused about how we respond. Keep in mind that we have a visceral, disgust and revulsion about the notion of sexual abuse of our children, family violence towards parents and children.
However we seem to have a muted, confused and conflicted response when a child’s relationship with a beloved parent is ruptured due to the actions of another parent. The parents do this effectively gaming you and our family law system and destroying family systems as we know them. Children are growing up to be adults with the notion embedded in them that the easiest way they can deal with people they do not like or with whom they have conflict is to simply cut them off..
So clearly, the intergenerational transmission of parental alienation is now becoming a feature judging by the alienation histories of the rejected parent of whom I work
This might be a good time to take a straw poll and see who you are what your connection is with this subject.
So, let us see some hands up for those of you who:
Work with parents who have lost contact with their children or whose relationship with their children is under some kind of threat or tension that significantly affects the relationship?
Work with children, teenagers and young adults or older adults who no longer have contact or relationship with one or more parent
Are family consultants who operate within the family law system and/or provide assessments and recommendations, and reportable therapy
We usually find there is quite a spread, that nearly everyone has certainly a professional connection and in many cases a personal connection. I will not ask you to put your hands up but it is very likely that some of you will have had the experience in your own family or amongst friends where relationships between a child and a beloved parent has been ruptured. You might want to reflect on the consequences of that to you, your friends family or children, about what worked for you, whether you are able to effect a reconciliation and where did you find your support.
I emphasise the latter because I am often approached by professionals in our field who have struggled with their own situations. They feel that they can only remain silent in seminars such as these because they do not feel they have the support of their colleagues. This is something for all of us to reflect upon.
So here is a bit about me.
I have both a professional and personal interest in this field, having struggled to find any effective intervention with my own situation. The end result was outrageously tragic and tragically outrageous.
I found myself and my children in a legal-psychological conundrum when no one could offer any particular insight nor any effective intervention when my daughters loving relationship with me was ruptured.
Looking back now it seems remarkable that in my situation the assessment was made that loving relationship between me and my daughter was deliberately ruptured by the other parent, in this case the mother yet there was no support no intervention recommended. Many parents still find themselves in the situation today or ordered into interventions that either do not work or are counter-productive. Worse still, parenting orders are made that are either doomed to failure or have no hope of ever being enforced.
This is the equivalent of saying that “well, we know your child is being sexually abused we have not really got a solution for why they do not want to be with you, so we are just going to leave them where they are so they can continue to be abused.”
For example, if we give a 13-year-old adolescent the power to choose which parent they will spend time with, when they have already rejected one parent, which parent would they choose?
Most of my work is with alienated rejected parents, parents and shared care situations with a relationship with the children is under constant threat and step families with a constantly have to deal with what we call the ‘EX factor’.
Some of my clients pretending to reconnect with their children after decades of rupture.
There are many reasons why the relationship between children and parents rupture, there are many reasons why children refuse to spend time with parents. I am only here to talk about one of those reasons. And that is parental alienation or what Kelly and Johnson called pathological alienation.
Now I have taken Kelly and Johnson’s model for spectrum and have modified it to show the pathological alienation of the child to be influenced by a hostile favoured or alienating parent not emphasise this process is dominating process that supersedes all supervenes all other issues the child faces usually in the context of a high conflict separation and divorce
We also know the children will quite rightly rejected parent who is being abusive towards them where they been involved in family abuse; estranged. Parents who restrict or withdraw their child in contact with an abusive parent call protective parents would draw a very clear distinction between protective parenting and alienation is not the same thing nor are they to be confused.
We also know the children naturally form alignments with parents and sometimes these alignments could be superficially hostile driven by quite understandable
All phenomena such as parenting styles personalities are anger and grief and confused emotional responses in the wake of separation and divorce yet such children maintain ambivalence towards the parent against whom they are aligned. And in particular the parent with whom they are aligned does not exploit that situation.
Sometimes parental alienation and extreme alignment have been confused or conflated. To me this is an exercise in political correctness. Yes, children can be extremely aligned with the clear distinction as will discuss later is the role of a favourite or alienating parent in creating that alienation which is very distant date from alignment by amongst other things the loss of ambivalence and reflexive support of the favoured or alienating parent
So let us start out with some simple definitions of what we talking about.
First you will see Richard Gardner’s original definition in 1985 and then you see a more recent definition by Richard Warshak. Watching a hold on to the idea the central idea that the child develops negative attitudes, and versions or rejections of a parent or parenting figure with whom they would normally have enjoyed a loving and normal relationship that is really are starting point with a question start.
Some definitions of Parental Alienation:
“One parent deliberately damages, and in some cases destroys, the previously healthy, loving relationship between his or her child and the child’s other parent”.
“A form of emotional child abuse where a custodial/residential parent belittles or vilifies the other parent to the child”
“A set of strategies that a parent uses to foster a child’s rejection of the other parent”.
Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) is determined by the extent to which efforts of the alienating parent have been successfully manifest in the child, and not by the parents efforts alone.
I want to emphasise here that one of the most obvious markers of alienation is that the child not just has an aversion to, negative attitude or rejection of a parent but to the entire extended family of the parent whom they have rejected.
Keep in mind that grandparents and other extended family members are the forgotten rejected parenting figures
The other aspect we need to keep in mind is that children can have quite unreasonable irrational and harsh reasons why they are rejecting a parent and often have quite dramatic and disproportionate responses to relatively simple matters. So very small matters that might be otherwise an annoyance are then used as a reason to reject the parent. It could be anything from talking too loudly, chewing the wrong way or could be what otherwise might be a normal parent-child conflict particularly in adolescent and teenage years that suddenly results in rejection. Ordinarily these conflicts are a necessary part of growing up.
It can be as simple as developing a management plan for using mobile phones and other devices at the dinner table or in bedrooms. Matters that would be otherwise considered normal domains for parental discipline and boundaries.
In one case in which I was involved the father of a teenage boy 15 years old or so with whom he had shared care, instituted a rule about the use of mobile phones after dinner and in the bedrooms. These rules followed school policies. The teenage son, texted his mother during the night and arranged for her to pick him up. The teenager then secretly left the house met up with the mother and the two of them then proceeded to the police station where they made an allegation of assault.
So we are left with these big questions are we dealing with child abuse family violence directed against both the child and the rejected parent, what are we to make of the situation where a parent who is good enough but not perfect (because none of us are perfect) is rejected.
Let us consider the plight of our children locked into conflict they cannot possibly resolve, that makes them feel helpless and powerless and with a struggle to respond effectively without causing themselves emotional injuries and which seriously undermines their relational security.
I want to emphasise a key point, more than just a matter of semantics. Children will align themselves with one parent against the other whilst maintaining an ambivalence towards the parent against whom they are aligned. We could say that this is a means of dealing with parental conflict maladaptive otherwise.
However children do not alienate themselves. To be alienated the child needs to be influenced by a favoured parent. The process of alienation and alignment differ fundamentally both in this regard and in a loss of ambivalence in the former over the latter.
I do not want to spend too much time on clinical diagnosis. It is certainly been a source of some controversy as to whether we have parental alienation or parental alienation syndrome. This is another presentation entirely. Discussion seems to turn on whether we diagnose the symptoms and the child only we consider the entire family system and maladaptive, pathological and abusive presentation of a coalition or triangulation.
However, is becoming more and more important to have clear assessment criteria to differentiate parental alienation from other presentations where children reject a parent.
One final point to which I will come back to is that it is way too simplistic to construe or formulate a child’s rejection of a loved parent as a reaction to or maladaptive response to parental conflict. This simply leads to blaming the victim principally the rejected parent.
DSM 5 Relevant Diagnostic Categories
Child affected by parental relationship distress
“when the focus of clinical attention is the negative effects of parental relationship discord (e.g., high levels of conflict, distress, or disparagement) on a child in the family, including effects on the child’s mental or other physical disorders.”
Child psychological abuse
“nonaccidental verbal or symbolic acts by a child’s parent or caregiver that result, or have reasonable potential to result, in significant psychological harm to the child.”
Supporting DSM 5 discussion on Parent-child relational problem .
“may include negative attributions of the other’s intentions, hostility toward or scapegoating of the other, and unwarranted feelings of estrangement.”
A very good description of a child’s view of the alienated parent?
So What?
How would a diagnosis change your situation ?
So What?
How would a diagnosis change your situation ?
A very good description of a child’s view of the alienated parent?
I have come up with my own definition that leverages the work done by Kelly and Johnston. Their formulation typically does not include the role of an alienating parent is an abusive agent.
Their definition features prominently in family law where is the child’s presentation that is considered above the parental involvement in formulating their presentation
As I said before, parental alienation and high conflict are often confused and conflated. Children’s rejection of a loved parent is formulated as a response to parental conflict
Note the key differences between parental alienation cases and high conflict separation and divorce. Alienated children only have a relationship with a favoured alienating parent, and there is evidence of a favoured parent who recruits the child in alliance with them against the rejected or target parent.
Alienated children hate the rejected parent (whom they have formally loved) with an intensity and to a degree that they become an active participant in a campaign against the rejected parent driven by the favoured or alienating parent. Children will repeat adult concepts in which they have been inducted without understanding what these concepts mean or formulate views and even allegations that they truly believe they have come up with all by themselves (independent thinker phenomena).
Imagine, that your eight-year-old child returns home from a shared care visit and accuses you of not paying child support? Where did they get that idea from and what does an eight-year-old child understand about child support? How does your child then begin to formulate their relationship with you?
Now Nick Bala, a well-known researcher in the field of parent child relationships and in particular parental alienation. He undertook a study of the Australian situation and reported in a presentation to the Australian Institute of Family Studies in 2012
The bottom line is that it is becoming an increasing presentation and certainly an increasing allegation. This means you really do have to focus on assessment and intervention. These figures dispel any notion that this is a gendered issue as well. I regret to say that men and women, fathers and mothers are equally bad at it.
Dr Richard Gardner was much criticised for what would now be considered a gendered formulation of parental alienation as alienation by the mother against the father. This may have been the social context in 1985 when custody as it was then known was routinely awarded to mothers whilst fathers generally left the home and regrettably left their children’s lives. We now know this to be extremely damaging.
Gendered notions of parental alienation are no longer relevant in the increasing shared care, equal parenting and stepfamily environment of the 21st-century.
The situation across the world is changing with regard to parental alienation, thanks to more than 30 years of research and practice in this field.
My presentation here would really be about a criminal matter in other countries. In particular I note in Brazil and Mexico legislation is formulated to consider a parent who ruptures a child relationship with another loved parent to be child abusive
Evidenced based family relationship presentation more than 30 years old
Developed by Dr. Richard Gardner 1980’s
Controversies include
Gender bias
Theoretical foundations
false attribution is about personal integrity
The field is broadening and deepening yet the markers of parental alienation remain remarkably consistent to gardeners original formulation. The language changes but the meaning does not
Just to emphasise, what we are talking about here today are the interventions, how do we restore loving a relationship and reunify parents and children
The single biggest issue that alienated parents face when they appeal to you, when they appeal to family law to address the situation for their children is a lack of consistency and misinterpretation of a child’s rejection.
In a well-documented and reported case in 2012 a federal magistrate ordered that an alienated child remain living with the parent who had alienated them from their loved father based upon a false allegation of sexual abuse based upon a clairvoyance predictions. In his reasons for judgment the federal magistrate considered in this case the mother to be the better parent, notwithstanding her false allegation and her stated and obvious intent to ensure that the children would have nothing to do with their father.
GAYLARD and CAIN
Alienated children do that most remarkable things.
Imagine if your child insisted on calling you by your first name? In one case a teenage child reconnected with the rejected parent but only on the basis that they called the rejected parent by their first name. This became most disrespectful, and denigrating relationship in which the rejected parent felt that there will be recruited into an abusive relationship and that abuse, denigration emotion and insult were the only basis for their relationship.
In another case, a teenager was caught by a parent with whom she was on a shared care visit secretly recording on her iPad video and photographs of the contents of the house whilst maintaining a running commentary, room by room to the parent with whom she was not resident at the time.
Are very common type of alienation is contact interference. This ranges from arranging a meeting or drop-off that one location attending a different one, mixing up times, or more insidious and undermining constantly ringing a child while they are staying with one of their parents. Whose anxiety is this about? This approach totally disrupts the child’s capacity to have an uninterrupted relationship without being preoccupied by what is happening to the other parent. P
Some of the worst alienators are older siblings. A diabolical combination I came across was a teenage daughter who actively recruited her younger brother against their mother.
Social media can also be exploited. In one case I worked on, a teenager was recruited by non-resident parent entirely on Facebook. A disappeared one day without notice or warning and suddenly appeared at the other parents place. Technically this was a breach of court orders but then again did not the child choose this? This is why we need to assess parental alienation properly. A careful look at the chain of communication on Facebook would reveal the subtle recruitment process. Essentially, the alienating parent played on their dependence and the child’s feelings of guilt and responsibility for the parents plight parent
This encapsulates the conditionality of the relationship that alienated children have with the favoured parent.
This is what I bring out to the rejected parents with whom I work.. Their mission is to establish unconditionality with their children and in every way possible to affirm their children’s relationship with the other parent-whether they like it or not
Alienated children are in an invidious position. They want a relationship with both parents, the research backs this up. However they are often forced into a position with the rejected the parent whom they love because their relationship with them is unconditional and because they construe that their parents will always be there for them.
They do not have that assurance of that security with the favoured parent. This is exactly the type of maladaptive response and indeed disassociation of the love for the rejected parent that is harmful to children.
So far focus very much an alienated children the some extent the favourite or alienating parent. However, more and more research is being done that shows alienating or rejected parents our abused in this process, traumatised not just by the incomplete and ambiguous loss of at loved child, but by the sudden harsh and unreasonable rejection by that loved child and an unrelenting campaign against them by an ex-partner whom they loved. This violates their cherished values beliefs.
They are traumatised in particular by the reinterpretation and destruction of memories of a loving relationship with their child an even the physical destruction and the facing of family artefacts and photographs .
They are also further abused and traumatised by institutionalised responses that tend to blame them and/or impose ideological lenses such as gendered notions
I cannot add any more to this. Children do not understand what they lose by rejecting a parent, nor can they expect to understand or appreciate just how harmful this is to them and their future relationships.
The single most important point you need to take away from this is no matter how hostile the child how rejecting they are, secretly they wish someone would intervene and stop this process, they wish that someone did not listen to them and brought them together with the parent whom they have rejected. Is almost like they are sucked into a vortex but unable to call out to help, as though the more they cry out for help the stronger the vortex is.
With this in mind, you may be the only person standing up for them when they cannot speak for themselves or in particular when they speak with the voice of the alienating or favoured parent
Research shows the parental alienation is at least as harmful the children as child sexual abuse and has similar long-term outcomes into adult life. Children have to dissociate themselves from the loving memories and experiences of the parent whom they are rejecting.
It is an essential internal conflict they simply cannot resolve and which requires external intervention, in many cases against their will, to bring them into contact again with the parent whom they have rejected and with whom they now maintain an irrational and at times fearful relationship
The most important thing to note here is that favoured or alienating parents will present very plausibly as high functioning individuals. They are revealed by their acts and omissions and their focus upon the other parent.
Keep in mind that it is not normal parenting to deliberately sabotage or cause the rupture of a child’s loving relationship with the other parent any more than is normal to sexually abuse a child
There is an interesting concept called narcissistic inflation. This is where a favoured parent essentially collapses their boundary of self over their child to make them and their child inseparable, as though they are their child and their child is them. Naturally this is harmful to the child because they do not develop their own sense of self, do not differentiate or individuate.
Often the presenting behaviour is extreme anxiety, manifesting an overprotective actions, over-medicalisation for example towards their child in which they construe the other parent is a threat that the child eventually believes.
What do you make of a parent who insists on photographing their child’s clothes before they let the child go to their shared care time with the other parent?
How do you formulate the child’s reaction?
What do you make of the parent who will simply keep bringing the child’s mobile phone constantly while they are with the other parent.
Targeted or reject the parents are often blamed and held responsible for the children rejecting them.
They will often develop PTSD or other traumatised responses to a situation that is beyond theirs or anyone’s appreciation. They naturally try to oppose alienation tactics and strategies and then find that this actually makes it worse and plays into the hands of legal and administrative processes instituted by the favoured parent.
It is an enormous challenge for rejected parents the see through their children’s lenses and have some appreciation of their experiences. Yet this is the key to successful strategies for reunification
Sometimes rejected parents are simply paralysed by their own pain and by the weight of legal and administrative actions against them. They simply do not know what to do ; this is very different from being passive.
Rejecting parents are in such pain that they do risk confusing their needs with their children’s. There is a very big difference to a child perceiving the parents needs to see them for their own purposes, to alleviate their own feelings of loss from a child perceiving the parent wants to spend time with them because they do not want their children to miss out on them.
In one case the child is an objective means to alleviate the parents bad feelings about the situation and in the other the child is important in their own right to the parent. Each of these two positions developed different tactics and strategies it is only the latter position that bypasses the child’s dissociation
A common misconception lies in the formulation of so-called hybrid cases with a parent is seen to be contributing to the alienation of the child. It was in some cases this may be true due to inappropriate parenting but in many cases it is actually a misunderstanding about the nature of the child alienating responses to their parent.
Unfortunately, some rejected parents deal with their dissociated and projected feelings of violation and loss by diagnosing their ex-partners (they are all experts of course) an waging a counter campaign. In one case a rejected parent presented with at least three family reports each increasingly critical of their parental response and their role in fomenting conflict. They insisted that parental alienation was family violence directed against them by the other parent. Whilst this may be true it did not lead to the sort of approaches and strategies that facilitated the child spending time with them. Instead this parent was maintaining a steady focus on the other parent instead upon their child.
It sometimes comes as as a shock to rejected parents that when they stare into their human mirror they realise that they have had their own experience of alienation within their family of origin. This has the effect of blindsiding them to the alienation processes in their own families.
Family violence can have the effect of forcing an alignment between a child and another parent. This may be a precursor step to their experience of alienation later on in their lives.
Without an understanding of how parental alienation the store to child’s reality formulation, causes a pathological coalition or triangulation to form it is possible the conventional approaches bitterly those the humanistic-existential an affirming of one’s own lived experience I actually reinforce delusional reality.
Are commonly repeated narrative is how reportable family therapy is sabotaged by an alienating parent, or alienating parent simply refuses to attend court-ordered interventions counselling or fabricates reasons why the child will not attend. Think about it is simply amazing how a parent will ensure that their 12-year-old child will attend school, eat their dinner, go to bed on time do the chores and somehow it becomes their choice to (and they cannot “make them”) attend an intervention.
Alienating and favoured parents typically sabotage court-ordered interventions that require office attendance when they are outside the office and for as long as the alienated child is resident with them
Many practitioners are unable to determine and discern the harsh rejection of a loved parent is actually harsh and unreasonable but simply take it on face value as the child’s view and experience. This then leads to the child’s views being given credence in family law that would not otherwise be the case if it were understood their views had been unduly influenced by the favoured parent.
Antisocial personality disorder is notoriously resistant to treatment. Borderline personality disorder, though treatable, requires highly specialized treatment
. Therapists who insist on a trial of conventional therapy (e.g., to “see for myself”) are exceedingly unlikely to succeed (Miller cited in Baker, 2013, pp. 15-16).
The reality is that there are more reported treatment failures than successes when it comes to therapeutic intervention with some moderate and all severe cases of alienation (cited in Fidler et al., 2013). Moreover, empirical evidence is accumulating that documents psychological damage associated with alienation and estrangement (for example, Baker, 2005, 2006, 2007; Bernet, 2010; Fidler et al., 2013; Reay, 2007, 2011; Warshak, 2010).
Without an understanding of how parental alienation the store to child’s reality formulation, causes a pathological coalition or triangulation to form it is possible the conventional approaches bitterly those the humanistic-existential an affirming of one’s own lived experience I actually reinforce delusional reality.
Are commonly repeated narrative is how reportable family therapy is sabotaged by an alienating parent, or alienating parent simply refuses to attend court-ordered interventions counselling or fabricates reasons why the child will not attend. Think about it is simply amazing how a parent will ensure that their 12-year-old child will attend school, eat their dinner, go to bed on time do the chores and somehow it becomes their choice to (and they cannot “make them”) attend an intervention.
Alienating and favoured parents typically sabotage court-ordered interventions that require office attendance when they are outside the office and for as long as the alienated child is resident with them
Many practitioners are unable to determine and discern the harsh rejection of a loved parent is actually harsh and unreasonable but simply take it on face value as the child’s view and experience. This then leads to the child’s views being given credence in family law that would not otherwise be the case if it were understood their views had been unduly influenced by the favoured parent.
Antisocial personality disorder is notoriously resistant to treatment. Borderline personality disorder, though treatable, requires highly specialized treatment
. Therapists who insist on a trial of conventional therapy (e.g., to “see for myself”) are exceedingly unlikely to succeed (Miller cited in Baker, 2013, pp. 15-16).
The reality is that there are more reported treatment failures than successes when it comes to therapeutic intervention with some moderate and all severe cases of alienation (cited in Fidler et al., 2013). Moreover, empirical evidence is accumulating that documents psychological damage associated with alienation and estrangement (for example, Baker, 2005, 2006, 2007; Bernet, 2010; Fidler et al., 2013; Reay, 2007, 2011; Warshak, 2010).
The starting point here is that it is simply not normal for a child to reject a beloved parent regardless of the conflict.
To put it simply in terms of revolutionary psychology, the unattached child dies, we see this in the animal world with abandoned babies cubs or pups. There are few instances of young animals rejecting their parents and their social group as such rejection is almost guaranteed death
Keep in mind the child who rejects a loving and loved parent has developed a maladaptive, traumatic and dissociative response to a situation that fundamentally threatens their relational security. So do not listen to them! Listen to what they are not saying! Imagine what it takes for them to harshly and unreasonably reject a loved parent?
Look out for secondary reactive responses to primary grief, violation and anger
Also keep in mind that both alienated children and target or rejected parents may manifest traumatic responses that dysregulate their capacity for empathy and attunement.
This traumatic dysregulation will impede any attempt at developing an empathic connection with their rejecting children. Rejected parents have to have the emotional resilience, flexibility and adaptability to keep coming back to their child in the face of constant rejection often in the form of total silence.
Be vigilant for signs of what I call over empowerment. Is a marker of adolescents their children this developmental phase feel powerless and helpless react against that. Alienating and favoured parents at exploit this by giving them unprecedented power to choose what no child would ever have a choice about-which parent to love
Teenagers in particular are prone to exercise power without responsibility. With rejecting teenagers and young adults I coaching and counsel rejected parents to bring home to their children the existential choice and responsibility associated with their decision, however rational or irrational it is.
Lookout for signs of disorganised and chaotic attachment’s is the breeding ground for personality disorders or extreme personality traits
It is common to misconstrue high conflict as situation or presentation gives which alienate the children formulator reaction. It is also common to misconstrue the rejected parent as the instigator of the conflict. The reality is that Alienating Parents can remain passive once they have alienated their children. This presents a status quo in a Family Law context that is very difficult to change except by change of residence and change parental responsibility-a highly challenging notion. This makes projected parents the ones who have to take action. The trap to them is that that more the action is ineffective the more action they take and this plays into the hands of the alienating parent.
Unsubstantiated allegations of family violence or abuse are a major issue. Our legal system and the social context requires us to take every allegation seriously. alienating parents know this and therefore common tactic is to make an allegation which there is very little frantic evidence. It does not matter that the allegation is never dealt with or if it does go to trial is set aside. What matters is they have unimpeded access to their child to complete the alienation process wildly target parent is forced to defend themselves against the charge which there is very little evidence.
In one case in which I was involved a target parent did actually verbally abuse their partner. Their partner then made an allegation to the police that they had been physically assaulted and co-opted an adult child to perjure themselves in an affidavit. The target parent was fortunate because they had been independent witness to this event. The case collapsed because the defendant, the target parent made it clear that they will cross-examine their own child in which the perjury would be revealed.
This was a legalistic response to a false allegation in which the relationship was permanently ruptured.
In another well-publicised case of the so-called Italian children in 2012. The Italian father was made out to be abusive and this was used as the basis for the parent to remove the children from Italy and bring them to Australia with the active collusion of her extended family. To the great detriment of the children this drama was played out in the public eye in which the father was set up as a fearful figure. The children had little option but to go along with the carefully orchestrated emotional responses from their mother.
A careful look at the reasons for judgment show that there is no basis for this and therefore no protective basis for what amounts to be an unlawful abduction under the Hague Convention
PA Family therapy focuses on a new family system. Disrupts the alienation interactional cycle
PA Family therapy focuses on a new family system. Disrupts the alienation interactional cycle
PA Family therapy focuses on a new family system. Disrupts the alienation interactional cycle
Parental alienation plays upon children suggestibility and the emergence of early primitive concept formation and judgment. Children easily formed black-and-white judgments than not rationally based are informed by suggestion rather than their own construct of reality.
The only way to reconcile rejected parent with a rejecting child is to bring them together whether the child wants to or not. This is the only way for the child to experience their formerly loved parent as very different from what they have come to believe about them
Evidence over the long term in the US about parent-child reconciliations shows that many children reconcile their parents without any reflection on their past rejection. Sometimes is best not to reprise the past not insist that children appreciate or have insight into their rejection. Many alienated children feel shame and remorse for their rejection of their loved parent and this may inhibit their reconciliation.
Children naturally want to avoid the emotional pain of confronting in themselves their rejection upon the other parent and any reflection of their internal conflict in doing so, especially since they have little understanding and appreciation what makes them do it. Rather than directly approaching this it is sometimes better to normalise a situation in the context of other situations and families that are removed from the child and by indirect example, stories movies etc. bring the child to an appreciation of the situation that has some parallels with theirs. This is far less threatening to them and is actually the key to intervention programs as we will discuss later.
Work with extreme suggestibility
Subjugation of self and personal agency-restore
This is the approach that I use. A synthesis of emotion focused therapy and systems theory. I counsel and coach alienated or rejected parents to not directly respond to children’s statements or assertions but always turn them back to what it means for the child, and what the child has to do to respond in this way.
A typical response might be “I am really sad for you that the only way you can deal with the situation is to not spend time with the parent whom you really love, this must hurt you a lot”
“You know when I was your age I did not want to get stuck in anyone’s conflict either. It must be awful for you and I am really sorry if you feel that I played a part in this”
It is vital that rejected parents develop an understanding and appreciation of their ex-partners personality. Often they are able to assuage extreme anxiety by constantly reassuring the other parent about just how important their relationship is to their child. Is also vital that they keep affirming the child’s relationship with the other parent because in many cases a child returning from shared care time with the other parent will be interrogated by the favoured parent as to their loyalty. Often such children feel the need to report that they had a “horrible time” because this is what they believe the other parent wants to hear. Naturally disappears in affidavits and presents constant dilemmas to family consultants in determining what credence they should put on the children’s views
Whether we like and are not the only way out is through it. Or as Winston Churchill famously said “if you going through tough times then keep going”. In other words, the only way the children to keep their memories of a love parent alive is to evoke those memories. This places the children in what I call a constructive dialectic or constructive internal conflict. They are constantly confronted with the emotional experience that they have rejected a parent and they do love that parent, Obviously they tend respond maladaptively. However in the long run they will always remember that the rejected parent simply kept trying. I left with the contradictory and irreconcilable message that somehow they must mean something to the parent and they have rejected. Conversely if we do not activate dissociated loving memories than simply makes it easy for the child to dissociate and deal with their trauma by not dealing with.
This is why I encourage rejected parents to be the irritant factor.
Alienated children can have the most disrespectful, and denigrating relationship with the rejected parent entrapping the rejected parent in the only relationship they can have for fear of losing their child. In actual fact such children are in acting and alienation interactional cycle is actually quite borderline in its process. The rejected parent finds themselves engaged in a hostile abusive relationship with their child that then reinforces their child’s rejection of them that the child wants to impose upon their parent. This requires monumental strength from the rejected parent to take an appropriate stand whilst not making any emotional demands of their children.
Rather than remonstrate or discipline their children it is better to say something like “ something awful must be happening in you for you to treat me this way”
It is vital that rejected parents develop an understanding and appreciation of their ex-partners personality. Often they are able to assuage extreme anxiety by constantly reassuring the other parent about just how important their relationship is to their child. Is also vital that they keep affirming the child’s relationship with the other parent because in many cases a child returning from shared care time with the other parent will be interrogated by the favoured parent as to their loyalty. Often such children feel the need to report that they had a “horrible time” because this is what they believe the other parent wants to hear. Naturally disappears in affidavits and presents constant dilemmas to family consultants in determining what credence they should put on the children’s views
Whether we like and are not the only way out is through it. Or as Winston Churchill famously said “if you going through tough times then keep going”. In other words, the only way the children to keep their memories of a love parent alive is to evoke those memories. This places the children in what I call a constructive dialectic or constructive internal conflict. They are constantly confronted with the emotional experience that they have rejected a parent and they do love that parent, Obviously they tend respond maladaptively. However in the long run they will always remember that the rejected parent simply kept trying. I left with the contradictory and irreconcilable message that somehow they must mean something to the parent and they have rejected. Conversely if we do not activate dissociated loving memories than simply makes it easy for the child to dissociate and deal with their trauma by not dealing with.
This is why I encourage rejected parents to be the irritant factor.
Alienated children can have the most disrespectful, and denigrating relationship with the rejected parent entrapping the rejected parent in the only relationship they can have for fear of losing their child. In actual fact such children are in acting and alienation interactional cycle is actually quite borderline in its process. The rejected parent finds themselves engaged in a hostile abusive relationship with their child that then reinforces their child’s rejection of them that the child wants to impose upon their parent. This requires monumental strength from the rejected parent to take an appropriate stand whilst not making any emotional demands of their children.
Rather than remonstrate or discipline their children it is better to say something like “ something awful must be happening in you for you to treat me this way”
The real purpose of this type of structured parental alienation oriented family therapy is to rekindle the natural love between child and parent and change the interactional cycle to a more positive parent-child loving based relationship between the child and the rejected parent.
A child’s natural love for the rejected parent is held hostage by the self reinforcing coalition between the child and the favoured parent. Keep in mind the child is the focus but not the problem. The problem is the negative interactional cycle driven by extreme personality traits and often disorganised and chaotic attachments by a favoured parent.
Now will quickly cover constructive intervention programs that operate and the family Court mandates in the US, Canada and soon in Australia. I am one of three trained facilitators of this program in Australia in Australia
At least one of these programs has been running for quite some time and has been well research for efficacy. They all share the following common factors:
They are residential programmes
They are mandated programs and the child’s attendance is enforced
The court mandate usually involves a change in parental responsibility and residence
Released to these programs there is an enforced exclusion between the favoured parent and the alienated child.
Where there is enforced exclusion, there is an after-care program that facilitates a different relationship between formally alienating parent and child
The alienated child and the rejected parent are always brought together
Family Bridges has been running for the longest period of time it is essentially a psycho educational-experiential program where rejected parent and an alienated child interact with teaching materials with a facilitator.
These materials show children and indeed parents just how easy it is to distort reality or to believe what one thinks one sees when in fact there has been careful instruction as to what has to be seen and what not.
This is a four-day residential program, with a 90 day exclusion period running concurrently.
Family Bridges has been running for the longest period of time it is essentially a psycho educational-experiential program where rejected parent and an alienated child interact with teaching materials with a facilitator.
These materials show children and indeed parents just how easy it is to distort reality or to believe what one thinks one sees when in fact there has been careful instruction as to what has to be seen and what not.
This is a four-day residential program, with a 90 day exclusion period running concurrently.
These goals tend to help children formulate a stronger sense of self and a better sense of their own boundaries, key development processes that are disrupted by the process of alienation. Alienating Parents essentially subjugate a child sense of self and impose their own boundaries, eliminating their child’s.
Parents and children are taught about how to resolve family conflict, sometimes through the use of family meetings, negotiation and conflict resolution skills.
This programme is highly effective in the long run. However what is interesting is that the research shows that the failures are entirely due to premature and at times unlawful contact usually instigated by the alienating parent.
The Family Reflections Reunification Programme is analogous to family bridges. It is also a psycho educational-experiential and residential program
In a vast majority of cases, the aftercare plan is established long before the child and rejected parent arrive at the retreat. As the on-site program draws to a close, clients work with their therapists to develop future plans of action. This ensures that the elements of a good recovery plan are in place before the family leaves. The plan may include individual and family therapy by a trained and certified FRRP therapist located near the family’s home or continued involvement via phone or Internet with the on-site therapists at the retreat
The bottom line is as simple as bringing rejected parent and alienating child together.
In a vast majority of cases, the aftercare plan is established long before the child and rejected parent arrive at the retreat. As the on-site program draws to a close, clients work with their therapists to develop future plans of action. This ensures that the elements of a good recovery plan are in place before the family leaves. The plan may include individual and family therapy by a trained and certified FRRP therapist located near the family’s home or continued involvement via phone or Internet with the on-site therapists at the retreat
The bottom line is as simple as bringing rejected parent and alienating child together.
Prior to exiting the program, the child and parent share the same large living quarters and enjoy a special celebration chosen by the child
We need to have the courage to realise that parental alienation is child abuse and family violence and should evoke a similar visceral response in us as child abuse, child sexual abuse and family violence does. This should also lead us to the similar forthright institutional responses that are directed towards bringing rejected parents and alienated children together.
We need to be a lot smarter and more forthright in our views about some of the tactics used to alienate a child and to be able to better discern whether a child’s views of a rejected parent are reasonably formulated by them or have been formulated for them.
Just as your practice is now more trauma informed and we have a better appreciation of how trauma dysregulates attachment and empathy we need to be more parental alienation informed and have a better appreciation of how alienation also dysregulates a child’s attachment to a loved parent. It is this rejection that is the marker of a child trauma and maladaption to it.