A
collection of articles on Parental Alienation Syndrome and Parental
Alienation in family court proceedings in the United Kingdom by
Dr
L F Lowenstein M.A., Dip.Psych., Ph.D.
'Parent
Alienation Syndrome: What the Legal Profession
Should Know', (1990) Medico-Legal Journal Vol.66 Part
(4), 151-161
1.
What is the Parent Alienation Syndrome (PAS)?
2.
Why does PAS occur?
3.
Who is most likely to practise it?
4.
What are the likely consequences for:
(a) The alienated
person.
(b) The children.
5.
How is it carried out?
6.
What can be done to reverse the unjust and
destructive effects
and long term consequences of
PAS?
7.
What is the judicial recourse?
8.
Research into PAS in the UK.
9.
Some preliminary conclusions and
recommendations.
Introduction
I
have been involved in and out of the legal system with the process of
PAS, and propose to answer the questions outlined, in the most simple
terms. I will try to explain to those faced with PAS in cases of
marital disharmony, marriage guidance, divorce proceedings, the legal
system and evaluation of children and adults involved and suggest how
to reverse some of the tragic consequences before they reach a court
of law or during the proceedings in a court of law.
Although
I will be responding to the questions posed briefly and succinctly, I
will try not to over simplify this complex subject. However, there
are wider and more comprehensive texts available which consider the
complex phenomena of PAS (see Bibliography).
1.
What is the Parent Alienation Syndrome (PAS)?
PAS
is not a new phenomenon. It has been practised for as long as marital
or relationship conflicts have occurred. It is the conscious action,
although sometimes deemed unconscious by some psychologists and
psychiatrists, of one parent turning against another to oust the
other parent from the affection, love, respect or regard by children
which both parents bore. It is most effectively used against younger,
passive children and is rather less effective with older and more
assertive children.
It
is unlikely to occur in a stable harmonious relationship between
parents. The couple who are at ease, even happy, with one another
will tend to engender love for their children. They will encourage
children to regard the other parent favourably They will work
together to bring up their children appropriately with socialised
standards of behaviour. Such children have the advantage of knowing
they come from a secure base, of being loved by both parents and in
turn, feeling the same way towards them. In some cases even where
marital disharmony occurs PAS does not occur and parents continue to
foster good relations with their children and with the other partner
and their children.
This
is not to say that problems between parents do not arise among normal
couples. Somehow, however, the bond created between them and the
responsibility they feel for one another and their children makes the
union
endure and the guidance given to children also has a positive
quality. Even when it does not endure, PAS is not an inevitable
consequence. Many marriages fail. It is the tragedy of our time. When
this occurs, responsible parents consider their role as good parents
to be of the greatest importance. They will actually encourage their
former partner to participate in guiding and caring for their
children. They will display the view that they both love their
off-spring, even if they cannot love one another. They will make
certain that the other parent is a good parent in the eyes of their
children. Were this to happen as a general basis, there would be no
PAS. Such parents accept and embrace the important principle that
division between parents does not mean that their love for their
children is any less.
Such
unions endure because both members regard their own role and
responsibilities as paramount and also consider their former
partner's role important. In this way, despite the marital split,
parenting patterns persist. Sometimes the parted couples can even
establish a friendly relationship towards one another which is
desirable as a consequence for their children. To achieve this end,
some parents need guidance from an outside professional.
2.
Why Does PAS Occur?
Before
answering this question, it is important to note that in very rare
instances of poor parenting by one partner, or even criminal
activities such as paedophilia, such parents should be eliminated
from the parenting, role or their role must be curtailed and only
reinstated after such parents have been successfully treated for
their problems.
With
these important exceptions eliminated from the picture we may now
concentrate on why PAS occurs. PAS results from a relationship in
conflict when the alienator feels the need to control totally the
process of rearing
children, after an acrimonious separation. The
exhibitor of this trait is usually female but not exclusively so.
Sometimes this results from the need to retaliate against the
targeted former partner who may have been, but not necessarily was,
the rejector of the relationship. Other factors may include the
alienators own early childhood experiences and having suffered from
alienation by their own parents.
Depriving
a former partner of positive contact with his/her children is a
powerful weapon. Some alienators go as far as accusing the former
partner, often unfairly, of physically, emotionally and even sexually
abusing the child or children merely to get their own way. This
results in the involvement of social workers, the police and leads to
the humiliation of the alienated parent, often unjustly. When this
happens many alienated partners give up the fight to seek or maintain
contact with their children. The alienating parent will then use this
against him by informing the children: "You see how little he
cares for you".
"Wasn't
I right about him?" The child will more often than not fail to
understand the lack of logic of what has taken place and will usually
support the mother's position since she is present-most of the time
and has usually been the main caretaker. (The process of alienating a
child against the father or vice versa works will be discussed below
in section 5.) The objective of the alienator is to eliminate partly
and sometimes totally, the alienated parent from the family and from
having any control and care of the child. Sometimes a new partnership
has emerged. It is then the object of the alienator to promote the
affection and closeness of these hapless children with the new
partner and to exclude the alienated parent, usually the father.
3.
Who is most likely to practise it?
What
follows will portray the mother as the chief alienator. Of those who
practise PAS, 75% are mothers as against 25% of men who alienate. I
will concentrate therefore on the woman's role as alienator but what
is said about them can equally be said about men. Despite the changes
in social and cultural norms, this is due to the view that the mother
is the centre of family life. Hence alienating mothers feel they have
the greatest input and responsibility in caring for the child
compared with the male.
Mothers
who are on their own feel it is only right t and fair for them to
make decisions concerning their children. They will fear losing the
child to the father once he allegedly influences them that she may be
thought of as being paranoid. Women will often claim it was after all
they who carried and gave birth to the infant. They will use any
weapon fair or foul to make certain that they have the ultimate power
and control over their children. Among the weapons used are
accusations that the father is unfit to care or even to spend any
time with the child. This may be due to allegations of sexual
misconduct, alcohol or drug misuse or immorality or a poor mental
state, or life-style or possibly criminal involvement. Due to the
closeness of mothers and children, the children will often believe
what the alienator states, namely that the other parent is evil or
worse than useless.
Such
mothers divorce themselves from the real needs of the child in order
to maintain their total control and to eliminate the contact and
relationship with the other parent. When litigation is threatened,
the alienating parent becomes even harder in her determination to
have complete control. She will say to the child: "See what your
father is doing now? He is trying to have me imprisoned'.' This turns
the child even more against the father as he sees the mother as the
victim. Hence she has involved and continues to involve the child in
her battle with the father and the process of programming and
brain-washing the child until the child sees matters as she does and
so she turns the child against the father. The child's behaviour
therefore becomes increasingly more difficult when the father is
present and the child may even refuse to go with him. Sometimes
in-laws allied to one or the other may influence matters further.
Hence
the hostility of the mother against the' father will be accepted by
the child who responds accordingly. The response of the mother to
this is deep gratification; she has achieved her objective. She may
even deny that she is doing anything to influence the child and may
aver that she is actively encouraging the child to cooperate. The
result is that the child will behave in an inimical, unfriendly and
hostile way towards the alienated person. In this situation the
mother may well believe her own lies and perceptions. Some mothers
over-indulge their children in order to persuade their children that
their mother offers them most. This over-indulgence is combined with
persistent denigration of the other parent.
Parents
who seek to programme their children against a parent have often come
from families where this was done to them, by one of their parents.
They are therefore very familiar with the techniques that can be used
effectively and are perpetuating a vicious and destructive pattern to
the next generation.
4.
What are the likely consequences to the alienated person and the
children?
Children
hate to see their parents in acrimony It reduces their sense of
security and they feel in jeopardy. The successful indoctrination,
programming and brain-washing of a child leads to bitterness, sadness
and anger in the unjustly accused parent and prevents the parent from
exercising his rights, obligations and love for the child. He or she
will either give up the fight, considering it best all round or there
will be an acrimonious conflict. When this happens the child suffers
confusion and ultimately alienation from one of the parents. This may
go on for months or for many years.
Fear
is sometimes induced in the child towards the alienated parent. Fear
is ultimately often translated into attacking and humiliating the
alienated parent. Fear induction is especially likely to be
successful with younger children. Eventually such children consider
the alienated parent as "bad", "inadequate" and
of little value to them. Such parents eventually are forced to play a
peripheral role or no role at all, save as financial providers and
sometimes not even that. When mother's economic position is stronger
than father's for instance, there is a desire to eliminate father
even from the role of being a provider. Some fathers become desperate
and contemplate suicide or seek to escape through alcohol or drugs.
This merely verifies the picture which mothers frequently inculcate
in their children - that their father is an alcoholic or drug addict.
Others, as already stated, give up the struggle for any kind of
contact with their once cherished children. Some children seeing the
once stable parents embroiled in this kind of warfare turn against
both parents and become depressed, underachieve at school or turn to
delinquency.
Only
much later in life, do children sometimes be-come aware of the wrong
which has been done and the way they have been used as pawns and
programmed against all the opposing "reality'.' Then the
antagonism of the future adult turns against the alienating parent.
When they mature and learn to think for themselves they realise that
the alienated parent has suffered a great injustice at the hands of
the alienator and through themselves by having allowed one parent to
turn them against the other. They may feel a sense of desperate
guilt. A helpless kind of regret occurs which cannot be assuaged and
often follows when the alienated parent has died or vanished. It is
this sense of guilt that such youngsters who grow into adults must
live with.
Such
children as teenagers and adults may well re-member the techniques
used, including false statements made about the alienated parent and
realise they ere totally unjustified.
5.
How is PAS carried out?
Parents
who use PAS often view themselves as "victims"; they like
their children to see them as "victims". They tend to seek
revenge and encourage their children to believe that the other parent
is at fault, by claiming that he/she (the victim) and programmer has
been cruelly and unjustly treated by their father/mother who suffers
from a number of moral and personal problems. Alienating parents will
overstate or even create vices such as: "He's an alcoholic, drug
taker, womaniser, has no sense of responsibility, drives dangerously
etc." See Table 1, below, dealing with research into PAS in the
UK.
Accusations
range from failure to provide financially to accusations of sexual
and/or physical abuse, even when there are no justifiable reasons for
such allegations (Table 2). A parent is at risk of being judged
guilty by allegations alone. Needless -to say when physical or sexual
abuse has actually occurred and been substantiated by a court, then
the convicted parent will have and should have only limited or no
access
to the child in question.
Interviews
and intervention in the form of therapy are usually necessary in
order to counteract such allegations. Such help will be met with a
mixture of hope by the alienated parent as well as resentment and
sometimes a lack of cooperation by the alienated parent and often by
the "brain-washed" child. This is because those who carry
out the programming against the alienated parent use or promote
anything which
Table
1: Severity of alienation
by sex
Male
alienators
|
Female
alienators
|
|
Mild
|
11
|
8
|
Moderate
|
5
|
19
|
Severe
|
1
|
16
|
TOTAL
|
17
|
43
|
will
achieve their objective of hurting, denigrating and if possible
eliminating the alienated parent from having any control or contact
with the child. We have already mentioned the most damaging procedure
of
Table
2: Specific reasons given
to children by alienating parent, by sex
Against
male
|
Against
female
|
|
1.
Failure to provide financially
|
9
|
3
|
2.
Lacking in love or aggressive and lack of care
|
12
|
13
|
3.
Disloyal and unfaithful
|
11
|
12
|
4.
Drug or alcohol abuser
|
8
|
7
|
5.
Immoral or mentally unstable
|
19
|
22
|
6.
Accusations of physical abuse incest or sexual abuse
|
14
|
1
|
all,
allegations of sexual abuse. Here, the victim, namely the alienated
parent, has to prove his/her innocence rather than the alienator
having to prove his/ her allegation.
Other
methods of alienation by programming and brain-washing children can
be seen by the following:
a).
By observing the behaviour and listening to the statements of
children towards the alienated party.
(An
illustration of this will be found in Section 6.)
b).
By noting the control the alienating parent seeks and obtains in
order to eliminate the alienated parent.
c).
By noting, the marital disharmony as well as the acrimony when the
parents separated and beyond that time.
d).
By noting the contradictory statements and behaviour demonstrated by
the programmed child when interviewed.
e).
By taking note of the character assaults which the alienating parent
makes which is often not verifiable i.e. that the former partner is
immoral, lacks parenting skills, drinks heavily, uses drugs, is
emotionally unstable or unreliable or is dishonest etc.
f).
By noting the unchildlike statements made which have been programmed
by the alienating parent.
Other
ways of demonstrating PAS is to show the child to be totally under
the influence of the alienating parent. Children will accept and
repeat what their mothers or fathers have said in attacking and
humiliating and alienating the other parent and of course refusing to
have contact or very limited contact with that alienated person. The
child believes what is said about the alienated parent and behaves
accordingly.
There
are many other direct as well as more subtle methods of programming
and brain-washing to gain the loyalty and control of the child while
at the same diminishing, destroying, humiliating and sidelining
the
alienated parent partly or totally. Here are a few more devices to
add to the list:
a).
Encouraging the child to disobey and show a lack of respect for the
alienated parent.
b).
Promoting an alliance between the child and alienator against the
other parent.
c).
Opposing the other parent's child rearing methods and communicating
this to the child.
d).
Bribing and over-indulging children to create comparative poverty of
enjoyment with the other parents when they are with that parent.
e).
Suggesting and actually changing the surname of the child to reduce
the influence and memory of the other parent.
f).
Programmer playing the part of a "martyr" claiming how
badly he/she was treated by the alienated parent.
g).
Making children afraid of the alienated parent.
h).
Encouraging children to hate being with the other parent.
i).
Showing the other parent to be bad.
j).
Instilling in the child the view that the other parent plans or wants
to take the child away from the programmer and even to kidnap the
child.
k).
Making the child feel anxious, rejected and insecure if the child
does not comply with the programmer.
l).
Programmer encouraging the child to keep secrets while spying and
reporting on the alienated parent.
m).
Moving away or living some distance from the alienated parent.
n).
Sowing the seeds of disobeying the alienated parent.
o).
Negative non-verbal communication such as turning body away when
speaking of the alienated parent or making derogatory faces about the
alienated parent.
p).
Programmer creating ambivalence regarding the alienated parent i.e.
"be nice to parent although he is a bad man who wants to take
you away from me".
q).
Treating child as "best friend" instead of child/parent
relationship.
r).
Threatening child with physical punishment and actually carrying it
out if child appears to be favourable towards alienated parent.
6.
What can be done to reverse the unjust and destructive effects and
long term consequences of PAS?
It
is vital that a professional such as a clinical psychologist or
psychiatrist be involved as soon as possible to deal with PAS to
limit the damage and prevent it from becoming impervious to
improvement. The professional must be aware of PAS and of its
origins. Sometimes unannounced home visits are indicated.
Both
parents and the child or children must be evaluated individually,
rather than together, with the professional being aware of the
presence and effect of PAS on all concerned. Once it is established
that neither of the parents is a danger to a child, efforts must be
made to develop a voluntary modus vivendi on who should have the
children and when and of the need to avoid PAS by either parent: the
"two step plan" (see article by Lowenstein in Paedophilia
book - Chapter 20). If the initial process of voluntary help being
provided with both parents and the child is ineffective, a firmer
approach must be adopted which will involve the legal system.
However, it is always preferable in the first instance to see if one
can get the parents together for the benefit of the child, on a
voluntary basis.
Interviews
with all members of the warring factions should be insisted upon by
the court. Frequently there is much opposition to this by one party
or the other. Various excuses or arguments are offered such as "the
witness does not wish to be assessed... children have been through so
much already and it would be detrimental to his/her psychological
state to be re-interviewed etc.". Only the court can insist on
all being done as the Expert Witness requests. Failure to cooperate
with the Expert Witness should indicate to the court what needs to be
done next. It is preferable for the court to appoint one Expert
Witness rather than for two Expert Witnesses to be facing one
another, siding with their particular position rather than
considering the overall complexity of the problems and the welfare of
the child. This of course is not always possible in an "adversarial"
atmosphere.
Interviews
and tests used must be carried out sensitively and impartially
Videotaping should be used when allowed by the participants. When
this is not allowed, the court should note who does not allow it and
why Videotapes can be studied by all involved in seeking to make the
best possible decisions for the child.
A
shortened version of a hypothetical session with the child is set out
below (P = Psychologist; C = Child):
P
Now tell me how you feel about your father?
C.
I never want to see him again.
P
Why is that?
C.
I don't want anything to do with him. . . he stinks and he's nasty to
my mother.
R
Why, what did he do?
C.
He makes our mother's life unhappy and now we don't have to do what
he says.
E
How?
C.
Making us come here to see you and having to go to the court.
R
Your father wants to spend time with you and loves you.
C.
Well I don't love him. We are better off without him. He's trying to
make trouble for Mum. . . trying to get her put in prison maybe.
P
Why do you say that?
C.
Mum told us and we believe her. She is the only one who really cares
about us.
E
How do you know your father doesn't care about you?
C.
Why, after all he's done?
R
What has he done?
C.
The way he's treated us, especially Mum.
R
Didn't you ever feel close to him or love him at all?
C.
No... well yes, but that was a long time ago before he and Mum
quarrelled and split up.
Where
PAS continues by one or both parties, legal sanctions must be imposed
and enforced with the alienating parent undergoing psychological
treatment. If this fails the parent should be forced to stop such
behaviour. In an extreme case, parents who continue PAS should lose
custody of the child, and the child placed with the cooperating
in-laws or relatives who permit full contact by the child with the
previously alienated parent. An alienating parent could alternatively
be fined or imprisoned and the alienated parent given regular contact
with and even custody of the child.
This
would need to be done with the greatest of care, since the children
have often been programmed so fully against the alienated parent that
it will not be perceived as in their best interests. I believe that
what is required is a period of re-programming, with the help of a
clinical psychologist. In this way the child may be allowed to
understand the following:
1.
Why the programming occurred.
2.
What can be done to gradually improve and cement the child's
relationship with the alienated parent.
Therapists
involved in helping such children should seek to develop a greater
insight into children exposed to PAS. Older children especially would
understand the need for explanations into what needs to be done to
counteract it.
Interviews
between the alienated parent and children are especially important
and often indicate the extent of the programming which has taken
place by the alienator against the alienated party. Again the
dialogue which follows has been abbreviated to present merely the
highlights of PAS and its effects (C = Child; F = Father):
F.
You know I have always loved you. Remember the good times we had when
I used to read to you and play games with you.
C.
I don't remember any of that, I only remember you used to shout at
mum and how you always criticised her (note the selective memory).
F.
I'm sorry about that but I've always loved you de-spite that.
C.
It's too late just to be sorry We're better off with-out you (note
sign of brain-washing having taken place).
F.
Don't you miss me at all?
C.
No! You're a horrible man. My sister hates you too.
F.
Do you really mean that? What can I do now?
C.
Just leave us alone. If you give us money, mum told me we can manage
without you altogether (note the request for money comes from the
programmer).
F.
But I'm your father and love you and want to spend time with you.
C.
Mum says you have a funny way of showing it and we don't have to obey
you any more (note again the influence of the programmer).
F.
And you believe I don't love you when I always have loved you.
C.
I believe mum.
F.
And you don't believe me?
C.
How can I believe both of you. Mum says she will never lie to me
(again we have selective believing based on the mother's
brain-washing).
It
is important to know what is happening on the basis of such
interviews and avoid taking one side or the other in the parental
alienation struggle. Hence the children will lean best how to resist
being programmed by becoming more independent in their thinking. They
also need to learn not to feel guilty about what has happened, and
understand they have not produced it themselves. Some children even
blame themselves for the parental battle.
They
should be encouraged to develop their own confidence in a future life
wherein they are in control, such as in their studies, peer
relationships etc.
Such
increased independent thinking might well reduce the efforts of one
or both parents to programme against the other parent. Therapists may
be able to provide all encompassing, or at least helpful, responses
which the child can use when efforts of brain-washing are in progress
such as:
"I
will not hear about anything bad about either you or.. ." "I
intend to make up my own mind as to how I see things. If you want to
fight with... don't use me as a weapon against... I love and need you
both and I don't want to become involved in your arguments etc.'.'
This
undoubtedly is a hard thing to achieve. These would naturally be
ideal responses for the child to make towards a programming adult.
Here, the child is aware of the brain-washing efforts being made and
stands up to it in a critical manner against the programmer. If the
child is very young and/or not sufficiently insightful or assertive,
such responses will be unlikely. The child may be too influenced by
the programmer due to age and pacificity and will fail to evaluate
the motives and techniques employed. A psychologist, once involved,
should encourage under-standing as to why and how the programming
occurs, and communicating it to the child.
Often
PAS occurs in the absence of contact or very much reduced contact
with the alienated parent. The child is therefore overwhelmed by "one
side of the story". Re-education by the therapist sometimes
helps and of course the increasing of contact with the other party is
vital. Sadly, sometimes the brain-washing has been so overwhelmingly
effective, that nothing further can be achieved to reduce the impact
of the brain-washer. The child has been so thoroughly turned against
the other parent that only legal action by the embittered alienated
parent has any chance at all. Unfortunately at this time, the
children are often older and having failed to receive support from
the other parent, becomes totally and habitually inflexible as a
product of the indoctrination process from the programmer.
If
it has not gone this far, the evaluator or psychologist when speaking
to the child must do so in a very sensitive manner, to establish and
maintain a good rapport with the questions such as the following
being asked:
"Tell
me something about both of your parents and their good qualities".
"Tell me how you heard about. . ." "Tell me how you
know about this. . ." "What makes you think.. .?"
"Could there be any other explanation for. . .?" "Is
there anything you and I could do to make you feel different about
the parent you now dislike?" "What would you like to see
happen now and why?"
When
interviewing the brain-washer, efforts must be made to show them up,
despite the fact that they may already know the following:
"Are
you feeling vengeful against...?"
"Do
you think that what you do is the best way of handling the
situation?"
"How
will your child benefit from what you are doing now and in the
future?"
"Do
you want your child to come through this process without suffering. .
.?"
"What
could be cone to improve the situation?"
"Do
you think your accusations against... are totally correct?"
"Please
tell me why you feel as you do. . . what are your goals?"
"Do
you want me to help you and your child in this manner?"
"Would
you do what you can for the benefit of your child now and in the
future?"
If
the answer is yes, the programmer may be open to suggestions of a
more rational nature and this could be beneficial to reverse the
process of negative programming. Great care must be taken by the
de-programmer to appear to be as "neutral" as possible,
while at the same time reducing the effects of the unhealthy and
destructive effects of brain washing which has been carried out.
7.
What is the judicial recourse?
The
alienated parent will turn to the legal profession and the courts if
all other methods have failed. They feel justice must surely prevail
when an independent judge is made aware of PAS. This is now a common
scenario in the United States, but less so in the UK. Judges are
naturally influenced by a number of traditions and are unaware in
many cases, of the effects of PAS.
1.
Mothers, on the whole, are regarded as preferable to fathers having
custody of children, all things being equal.
2.
The older child should have a final say with whom to be with. This
does not, however, take account of the programming which the
alienating parent has carried out beforehand.
3.
In the case of a younger child, many judges will favour the mother as
main or sole custodian, all things being equal. When they don't
favour the mother, or alienating parent, they will be viewed as
unfair and siding with the other parent.
4.
Sometimes judges will recommend family therapy and the involvement of
psychiatrists, paediatricians or clinical psychologists to assess and
treat the conflict between opposing parents. These professionals also
often fail to be aware of the PAS which has eliminated or reduced the
role of the alienated parent.
It
is vital that decisions are made which are fair and just for all
concerned. PAS cannot be allowed to deprive a stable and capable
parent of their parenting role. Any parent who practises PAS should
be dealt with severely by the courts. This should be done initially
with the "voluntary cooperation" of all concerned as
previously mentioned. If this does fail with the help of a
professional involved, then more stringent pressure must be expected
by the courts. PAS is a type of brain-washing which leads to
suffering for all concerned, either in the short or long term. Both
parents must be viewed as having the right and the obligation to play
a vital role in the care, guidance and love provided for their
children.
The
judiciary must be educated to realise that many potential parents who
have been the victims of ad-verse brain-washing of their children
give up the fight. They do this for a variety of practical reasons
including:
1.
The feeling that they are doing more harm to their children than good
by fighting over them.
2.
Lack of financial resources.
3.
The view that they simply do not think they can win against a
determined alienating former partner.
4.
It takes much determination and is extremely time consuming, when one
is already fully stretched in earning a living in order to provide
for the children.
It
is unfortunate that many children view the fact that a parent does
not fight for them in the courts, as rejection by that parent of
themselves.
8.
What does research say about PAS in the UK?
There
is a considerable amount of research in the United States as
published by Gardner and by Clawar & Rivlin Child Held Hostage, a
book recently mentioned. There has however been very limited research
in the UK. As already mentioned about 75 per cent of cases of PAS
indicate the mother to be the alienator with about a quarter being
the father.
Table
1 shows both the sex and the severity of the alienation derived from
a study of 60 consecutive referrals involving alienation of some kind
by one of the partners.
In
the case of mild, one refers to negative comments made by one partner
or another. Moderate refers to disparaging remarks made at least 2-3
times per week. In the case of severe, we refer to daily or more
negative comments about the alienated parent to children.
Table
2 refers to the kind of negative or disparaging statements made. In
most cases there is a reference to more than one descriptive phrase
(1-6) as to why the alienated partner is disparaged to the children.
Hence,
for example, 9 women stated that the male failed to provide
financially. The males only state 3.
Table
3 indicates the variety of reactions of children to the alienating
process being waged by a parent. It will be noted from Table 3 that
virtually all the children suffered one way or another including
gender identity problems from the alienating process. Some became
psychologically disturbed by withdrawing into themselves. Others
showed behavioural symptoms such as aggression, lowered school
attendance and performance. There are also the long term effects of
failure to realise educational-vocational potential. Finally,
al-though the data is incomplete, there is evidence that some
youngsters eventually turned against the instigator of the alienation
process. This could well be a warning to those who alienate by
programming or brain-washing children against another parent!
Conclusions and
Recommendations
1.
The legal profession and most importantly the courts must be aware of
the insidious influence of PAS, how it functions and what should be
done to counteract it.
2.
Having understood that PAS is unfair, unjust and detrimental to the
present and future of brain-
Table
3: Types and frequency of
reaction of child to alienation
Type
|
Frequency
|
1.
Confusion: this includes frustration and not
knowing
what to believe
|
57
|
2.
Becoming alienated towards one parent
|
53
|
3.
Becoming withdrawn and depressed, having sleep disorders,
regressing, developing suicidal ideation, obsessive compulsive
behaviour, enuresis, anxiety, day-dreaming, psychosomatic
disorders etc.
|
41
|
4.
Partly ignoring alienation process i.e. becoming more independent
|
4
|
5.
Becoming a behaviour problem with lack of
impulse
control with siblings and in school
|
37
|
6.
Lack of school attendance and deterioration in school performance
|
36
|
7.
Turning elsewhere for stability to grandparents peers etc
|
38
|
8.
Later failing to develop educationally, vocationally their
potential
|
45
|
9.
Later turning against alienator and the process of alienation
|
11
|
10.
Problems with sexual identity
|
37
|
washed
children, appropriate action should be taken by the courts.
3.
The court, in conjunction with an experienced Expert Witness in PAS
who ideally should be appointed by the court rather than by one of
the solicitors, on one side or the other, should be empowered to take
steps to reduce the impact of PAS.
4.
All evidence indicates that children who have contact with both
stable parents, even if they are separated, are better adjusted now
and in the future than those who are alienated from one of their
parents due to the effects of PAS.
5.
It is the role of the Expert Witness to help the child to understand
the way PAS works and to encourage the child not to be influenced by
it or to be-come embroiled in it. Loyalty and love to both parents is
the order of the day. This will benefit the child in the short term
and even more in the longer term.
6.
There are both short and long term affects of PAS. This includes
poorer adjustment in future years to a partner in another
relationship due to identification and identity problems including
one's own sexuality.
Children
who have been subjected to programming are more likely themselves to
practise this kind of behaviour when they become adults and embroiled
in marital difficulties. The process of alienation becomes
perpetuated.
Recent
Research into Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS)
Until
the 1980's there was minimal research on the subject of PAS. One of
the earliest to consider it was Palmer (1988) who addressed the legal
remedies to the parental alienation syndrome in the context of
divorce proceedings.
Plumb
& Lindley (1990) suggest that PAS occurs when parents cannot
settle or will not settle the matter of their children's well-being
on their own. It becomes of paramount importance that they are given
the opportunity, with the aid of appropriately ethical and impartial
professionals, to settle the matter of their childrens' welfare. In
this way such professionals can dramatically reduce the psychological
and psychophysiological damage typically resultant of adversarial
litigation. Once, under current law, the parents have experienced the
painstaking Family's Team evaluation process recommended in this
book, they need not remain passive in deciding custody for
themselves. The Family's Team approach has the advantage of providing
substantial data and recommendations to the court in its decision
making. The book by Plumb & Lindley, Humanizing Child Custody
Disputes: The Family's Team, is written for parents who wish to
become more informed as to the criteria and method for objective
child custody and visitation recommendations. However, this book is
useful for legislators who, after considering the ideas, methods, and
rationale contained therein, should recognise that custody matters
are not best dealt with in adversarial courts where the participants
are often mis- and uninformed victims of not only their own pain and
vindictiveness, but also victims of the court's unpremeditated
insistence that there be winners and
loser.
The book offers a more humane and efficient process for future
dispositions of custody/visitation litigation.
Guidelines
for using mediation with abusive couples were constructed by Geffner
(1992) who focused on techniques and issues concerning mediation of
abusive couples during and after separation or divorce. A
questionnaire was presented to identify abusive relationships. It was
important that the wife and children ware safe during mediation,
since research showed that more batterers murdered their wives during
the period when divorce was imminent. Since the balance of power was
unequal in the relationship mediation had to be modified so that the
situation became neutral. Issues facing mediators in these cases also
involved living arrangements, conversion changes in children,
financial support, joint custody and parent alienation problems.
Efforts
were made to expand the parameters of PAS by Cartwright (1993). He
suggested, through new evidence, that PAS was provoked by other than
custodial matters, that cases of alleged sexual abuse were often
hinted at and the slow judgement by courts exacerbated the problem of
prolonged alienation of the child. This could trigger a number of
mental illnesses. The author also suggested that too little is as yet
known of the long term consequences to alienated children and their
families.
A
number of reviews were carried out in assessing current assessment
methods used in child custody litigation and mediation. Hysjulien et
al (1994) used psychological tests, semi-structured interviews,
behavioural observations of parents and children. The related issues
of child abuse, sexual abuses domestic violence, and PAS were
discussed. There was little empirical evidence to support the
efficacy of methods typically used by professionals in making
recommendations to the court.
Of
foremost interest is the work of Richard Gardner (1992; 1998) in his
book Parental Alienation Syndrome. In addition to the book, there
have been Addendums (in November 1996 and September 1997) providing
recommendations for dealing with PAS. Gardner divides PAS into three
categories depending on the severity: mild, moderate and severe. He
has provided legal approaches as well as psychotherapeutic approaches
to deal with each in turn. He considers the primary symptomatic
manifestations to be:
1.
A campaign of denigration.
2.
Weak, frivolous or observed rationalisation for the
deprivation.
3.
Lack of ambivalence.
4.
The independent thinker phenomenon.
5.
Reflective support of the loved parent on the
parent control.
6.
Absence of guilt.
7.
Borrowed scenarios.
8.
Spread of animosity to the extended family of the
hated parent.
Detail
on interviewing techniques as well as treatment approaches was
suggested by Gardner. Some of these may seem severe and yet no one
has provided a more comprehensive and realistic approach.
The
work of Clawar & Rivlin (1991) in their book, Children Held
Hostage, provides considerable information an the symptoms of PAS and
what needs to be done to correct these problems. The book is
outstanding in providing meaningful and useful techniques and is part
of the section of 'Family Law' by the American Bar Association.
Turkat
(1994) described the problem of child visitation interference; acute
interference PAS, and divorce related malicious mother syndrome. He
considered the associated difficulties in handling this problem in
the legal system.
An
experience with conducting child custody evaluation was explored by
Stahl (1994). He explored the professional issues and techniques
involved in child custody evaluations. Domestic violence, drug and
alcohol abuse, supervised contacts mental illness, pa-rental
alienation syndrome, relocation of one or both parents, and the need
for ongoing updated evaluations were considered. The book was
intended for evaluators and other mental health professionals,
solicitors and judges.
Sixteen
selected cases formed the basis of an article by Dunne & Hedrick
(1994). Their analysis of 16 divorcing families in which one or more
of the children aged 0-24 years had rejected one of the parents was
termed parent alienation syndrome. The cases were taken from the
caseloads of clinicians working with the families. The cases met the
majority of Gardner's criteria, including an obsessive hatred of the
alienated parent on the basis of trivial and unsubstantiated
accusations and complete support for the alienating parent. Although
the cases showed a wide diversity of characteristics, Gardner's
criteria were useful in differentiating these cases from other
post-divorce difficulties. PAS appeared to be primarily a function of
the pathology of the alienating parent and that parent's relationship
with the children. PAS did not signify dysfunction in the alienated
parent or in the relationship between that parent and child.
Mapes
(1995) studied child eye-witness testimony in sexual abuse
investigations. This book was written for psychologists, social
workers, guidance counsellors, child welfare workers, physicians law
enforcement personnel and solicitors to whom a child may have
disclosed allegations of sexual abuse or who may be responsible for
the investigation of children's allegations. Current research and
thinking on such topics as symptomatology, psychotherapy, repressed
memories, Dissociative Identity Disorders, hypnosis, cults, the
Parent Alienation Syndrome, and the non-leading-leading continuum of
investigative techniques was presented. The reader was introduced to
the sexual abuse investigative process and discussions of practical
issues such as the use of anatomically detailed dolls, where
interviews should be conducted, the use of medical evaluations and
psychological testing. A step by step process for assessing
credibility and validity was explained following a four-step decision
making process.
A
therapist's view of PAS was carried out by Lund (1995). She explored
the different reasons why a child might reject one parent in a
divorced family and the ways of helping such families. Cases in which
a child resisted contact with a parent were not always, but quite
often, linked to PAS. The reasons for parental rejection ware mainly
due to the following:
1.
Developmentally normal separation problems.
2.
Deficits in the non-custodial parent's skills.
3.
Appositional behaviour.
4.
High-conflict divorced families.
5.
Serious problems, not necessarily abuse.
6.
Child abuse.
Lund
considered Gardner's recommendations of le-gal and therapeutic
interventions based on whether the case was assessed to be one of
mild, moderate or extreme parental alienation. Success in the
treatment of PAS cases had to be defined as the maintenance or
removal of some contact between parent and child.
Rand
(1997) considered the spectrum of PAS in two articles published in
1997. He reviewed Gardner's work and concluded that PAS was 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 relation-ship with the rejected/target
parent was destroyed. Testimony on PAS in legal proceedings sparked
de-bate. Closely associated were high conflict divorce and the
involvement of the legal system.
Finally,
Johnston & Roseby (1997) concentrated on a developmental approach
to understanding and helping children of violent, disputed divorce.
They examined the immediate and long term effects of high conflict
divorce on children and especially traced the development of problems
affecting very young children, through adolescence, with special
attention to the im-pact of family violence and the dynamics of PAS.
They described the clinical interventions that had proven to be most
effect in their work with individual families and groups along with
principles for custody decisions making and service programmes in the
courts and communities that helped manage the conflict.
Bibliography
Parental
Alienation Syndrome, Second Edition published in 1992, 1998 by
Creative Therapeutics
Addendum
No. 3. November, 1996 Recommendations for dealing with parents who
induce a Parental Alienation Syndrome in their children. Published as
an adjunct to the Parental Alienation Syndrome - A Guide for Mental
Health and Legal Professionals.
Addendum
No. 5. September, 1997 Recommendations for dealing with parents who
induce a Parental Alienation Syndrome in their children. An adjunct
to the Parental Alienation Syndrome - A Guide for Mental Health and
legal Professionals. Cresskill, New Jersey
Paedophilia
- The Sexual Abuse of Children, its occurrence, diagnosis and
treatment. Chapter 20. Parental Alienation Syndrome - A two step
approach towards a solution. Published 1998 Able Publications,
Knebworth, Hertfordshire1998
Children
Held Hostage dealing with programmed and brain-washed children by
Stanley S Clawar & Brynne Rivlin - Section of Family Law
(American Bar Ass).