When I first got married, I didn’t realize that there was a 50 percent chance that my marriage would end in divorce. During our marriage, we had a son and, once again, I did not realize that there was a one in six chance that my divorce would turn out to be a “great conflict” and that my son would be used by an angry and vengeful ex to avenge the failure of our marriage. Over the years since my divorce, the mother’s behavior has only intensified. Finally, I learned the meaning of terms like Parental Alienation (PA), Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS), and Hostile Aggressive Parenting (HAP), and experienced the ease with which the family court system can be manipulated by false accusations.

In 1985, Dr. Richard Garner, a forensic psychiatrist, introduced the concept of PAS in an article, “Recent Trends in Divorce and Custody Litigation,” in which he defined PAS as “a disorder that arises primarily in the context of of the custody of the children “. disputes. Its main manifestation is the campaign to denigrate the child against a parent, a campaign that has no justification. It is the result of the combination of programming (brainwashing) by the other parent and the child’s own contributions to the defamation of the target parent. “Several years later, Ira Daniel Turkat presented the” Malicious mother syndrome related to divorce. “The behaviors associated with both syndromes are relatively similar, encompassing hostile aggressive parenting behavior in an attempt to alienate the child from the other parent. However, the latter focuses on the mother’s behavior, while PAS may be related to with both mother and father Currently, PA or PAS are the common terms used to define the practice of trying to separate a child or children from a parent, regardless of gender.

The official American Psychological Association (APA) statement on PAS notes “the lack of data to support the so-called parental alienation syndrome and raises concern about the use of the term.” However, the APA states that it “does not have an official position on the alleged syndrome.” Advocates for PAS believe that it is a form of psychological child abuse, and the APA’s refusal to address PAS leaves “target parents” without the necessary resources to combat the problem. At the same time, there are those who dismiss the validity of the PAS and believe that abusive parents use it as an excuse during custody challenges to explain “the animosity of their child or children towards them.” In certain cases, that may very well be true.

In your article, “New definition of parental alienation: What is the difference between parental alienation (PA) and parental alienation syndrome (PAS)?” Dr. Douglas Darnall focuses on behavior and defines “parental alienation (PA), rather than PAS, as any constellation of behaviors, whether conscious or unconscious, that could evoke an alteration in the relationship between a child and the child. another parent “. Simply put, PA is teaching the child to hate the other parent, leading to estrangement from the parent. By focusing on behavior, Dr. Darnall presents a more pragmatic approach to the acceptance of PA by attorneys, therapists, and family courts.

The tactics or tools that parents use to alienate a child range from simply badmouthing the other parent in front of the child; encouraging others to do the same, until the child is bombarded with negative comments on a daily basis; to report allegations of abuse or neglect to child protective services or family court. This behavior is known as hostile aggressive parenting. One tactic that author John T. Steinbeck describes in Brainwashing Children is that some “hostile parents who remarry will cause the child or children to call the stepfather ‘daddy’ as a technique used to devalue the biological father.” Parental alienation syndrome is a condition. Hostile aggressive parenting is behavior.

Hostile and aggressive parents cannot move on. They are trapped in the past and focused on avenging the failure of their marriage and the control they had during the marriage. They manipulate family court and child protective services in an attempt to maintain control over their ex-spouse. They do not accept responsibility for their actions, blame everyone, and place themselves above the best interests of the child. Therapist-turned-family law attorney Bill Eddy notes in his article “Personality Disorders and False Accusations in Family Court” that there is a “prevalence of personality disorders in high-conflict divorce and custody cases. that false accusations are used. ” The most prevalent of these is borderline personality disorder, followed by narcissistic personality disorder and antisocial personality disorder. This explains the lack of empathy towards the emotional state of the child and the ability to manipulate family court and child protective services so easily. Parents with antisocial personality disorders will play the role of “victims.” They are adept at manipulating and lying because they really believe their lies to justify what they are doing.

Not all children can be taught to hate. Some have a very strong bond with their parents. Steinbeck also notes that in certain cases the “alienating parent feels that the other parent has a strong and highly functional relationship with the child or children and is irrationally concerned that this positive relationship will somehow affect their relationship with the child.” A child old enough to decide who they want to live with can result in a reversal of financial obligations, as the non-custodial parent is required to pay child support and provide medical coverage for the child. HAP may simply be financially motivated. Regardless of the motives, attempting to distance a child from a parent using hostile aggressive parenting tactics or parental alienation tactics is psychological child abuse.

It is much easier to alienate a child when the child is separated from his parents. False allegations of abuse or neglect in family court will severely limit the relationship between the parent and the child and the limited time spent will be under supervision. The Standard Divorce Decree has already reduced the non-custodial parent to a visitor in the child’s or children’s lives through a visitation schedule on the first, third, and fifth weekend of the month. Now the parent is limited to a three- to four-hour “supervised” visitation schedule per month. Supervised visitation programs are as easily manipulated as family courts, for example, parents simply need to call at the last minute to request rescheduling.

The family court will always side with the accusations and the court moves very slowly. Depending on the skill of an attorney, this period of separation could last for months. This gives the “target parent” additional time to teach the child to hate the “target parent,” as well as depleting the “target parent’s” financial resources.

A lawyer once told me that “the only place where people lie more than in family court is in a bar.” Family court is plagued with false accusations simply because they are such an effective tool for quickly breaking up the parent-child relationship. The family court does not prosecute false accusations, which is why false accusations have proliferated. The accusations do not need to be specific. Some attorneys advise clients to keep allegations vague so as not to risk the involvement of investigative agencies such as child protective services, as their reports carry a lot of weight in court. An accusation in family court can be as vague as “The father is a danger to the child.” This is sufficient for the family court to order the retention or supervision of visits, but not specific enough to involve child protective services.

Family court is a guilty-by-indictment system. Once accused, it is the responsibility of the accused to prove the falsehood of the accusations. The court will most likely order the accused parent to supervised visitation with the child or children, as well as to complete a psychological evaluation and meet with mediators and parent coordinators, all at personal expense. You can also pay for a forensic investigation, also known as a Social Study Evaluation, to prove the allegations are false. The accused parent will spend thousands, or perhaps tens of thousands of dollars to prove the allegations false and, in the end, will find himself financially drained and psychologically drained. An accused parent may lose relationship with the child or children simply because they ran out of money to continue fighting. Unfortunately, this also results in a child losing a loving parent. David Levy, co-founder of Children’s Rights Counsel and author of The Best Parent is Both Parents, stated: “President Obama talks a lot about absent parents who must take responsibility. (But) he may not realize that there are millions of parents who want to participate (in their children’s lives) “. Fighting for the “right of the child to both parents” is a costly battle, both financially and psychologically. Many parents simply lose because they ran out of money.

The solution is to define “in the best interest of the child” as “the right of the child to both parents” and then protect that right. Stop ignoring false accusations. It is understandable that complaints are investigated; however, if it is proven false, the parent who made the false accusations must be prosecuted. Order that parent to complete a psychological evaluation. Step in to protect the child when you hear your friend or relative make negative comments about the child’s parents or any other aggressive and hostile parenting behavior. Let the child know that both parents love him. Encourage these hostile parents to seek therapy to find closure and to stop using the child to “get even.” One thing is for sure: When a parent tries to separate a child from a parent simply to avenge a failed marriage, the child suffers emotional pain. Because this pain was caused on purpose, it is psychological child abuse. If you engage in or allow aggressive and hostile parental behavior in an attempt to remove a child from his or her parents, you are complicit in psychological child abuse. Stand up and protect the rights of the child to both parents.