When I first married, I didn't realize there was a 50 percent
chance that my marriage would end in divorce. During our marriage, we
had a child and again, I didn't realize that there was a one in six
chance my divorce would turn out to be "high conflict," and that my
child would be used by an angry and vindictive ex to avenge the failure
of our marriage. Over the years since my divorce, the mother's behavior
has only intensified. Eventually, I came to learn the meaning of terms
such as Parental Alienation (PA), Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS),
and Hostile Aggressive Parenting (HAP), and experienced how easily the
family court system can be manipulated by false allegations.
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 child-custody disputes. Its primary
manifestation is the child's campaign of denigration against a parent, a
campaign that has no justification. It results from the combination of
programming (brainwashing) by the other parent and the child's own
contributions to the vilification of the targeted parent." Several years
later, Ira Daniel Turkat introduced "Divorce-Related Malicious Mother
Syndrome." 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 whereas PAS can relate to both the
mother and the father. Presently, PA or PAS are the common terms used to
define the practice of attempting to alienate a child or children from a
parent, regardless of gender.
The American Psychological
Association's (APA) official statement on PAS notes "the lack of data to
support so-called parental alienation syndrome and raises concern about
the term's use." However, the APA states it has "no official position
on the purported syndrome." Advocates against PAS believe it is a form
of psychological child abuse, and the APA's refusal to address PAS
leaves "targeted parents" lacking needed resources to fight the problem.
At the same time, there are those who discount the validity of PAS and
believe it is used as an excuse by abusive parents during custody
challenges to explain "the animosity of their child or children toward
them." In certain cases, that may very well be true.
In his
article, "New Definition of Parental Alienation: What is the Difference
Between Parental Alienation (PA) and Parental Alienation Syndrome
(PAS)?" Dr. Douglas Darnall focuses on the behavior and defines
"parental alienation (PA), rather than PAS, as any constellation of
behaviors, whether conscious or unconscious, that could evoke a
disturbance in the relationship between a child and the other parent."
Simply put, PA is teaching the child to hate the other parent, leading
to estrangement from the parent. By concentrating on the behavior, Dr.
Darnall presents a more pragmatic approach to acceptance of PA by
attorneys, therapist and family courts.
The tactics or tools that
parents use to alienate a child range from simple badmouthing the other
parent in front of the child; encouraging others to do likewise, until
the child is bombarded with negative remarks on a daily basis; to
reporting accusations 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 have the child
or children call the stepfather, 'daddy,' as a technique used to devalue
the biological parent." Parental Alienation Syndrome is a condition.
Hostile Aggressive Parenting is the behavior.
Hostile aggressive
parents are unable to move on. They are stuck in the past and focused on
avenging the failure of their marriage and the control they had during
the marriage. They manipulate the family court and child protective
services in an attempt to continue control over their ex-spouse. They
accept no responsibility for their actions, blame everyone, and place
themselves above the child's own interest. Therapist turned family law
attorney Bill Eddy notes in his article "Personality Disorders and False
Allegations in Family Court" that there is a "prevalence of personality
disorders in high conflict divorce and custody cases in which false
allegations are used." The most prevalent of these is Borderline
Personality Disorder, followed by Narcissistic Personality, and
Anti-Social Personality Disorder. This accounts for the lack of empathy
toward the child's emotional state, and the ability to manipulate family
court and child protective services so easily. Parents with anti-social
personality disorders will play the "victim." They are experts at
manipulating and lying because they actually believe their lies to
justify what they are doing.
Not all children can be taught to
hate. Some have a very strong bond with the parent. Steinbeck also notes
that in certain cases the "alienating parent feels that the other
parent has a strong, highly functional relationship with the child or
children and is irrationally worried that this positive relationship
will somehow affect their relationship with the child." A child old
enough to decide with whom he or she wishes to live with may result in a
reversal of financial obligations, as the non-custodial parent is
obligated to pay child support and provide medical coverage for the
child. HAP may simply be financially motivated. Regardless of the
motives, attempting to alienate a child from a parent using hostile
aggressive parenting or parental alienation tactics is psychological
child abuse.
It is much easier to alienate a child when the child
is separated from the parent. False allegations to family court of abuse
or neglect will severely limit the relationship between the parent and
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 or children's lives by a visitation schedule of the
first, third, and fifth weekends of the month. Now the parent is
limited to a "supervised" visitation schedule of three or four hours per
month. Supervised visitation programs are just as easily manipulated as
family court, e.g., parents simply need to call in at the last minute
to seek rescheduling.
Family court will always side with the
allegations and the court moves very slowly. Depending on the skill of
an attorney, this period of separation could last for months. This gives
the "targeting parent" additional time to teach the child to hate the
"targeted parent," as well as draining the "targeted parent's" financial
resources.
An attorney once told me that "the only place people
lie more than in family court is at a bar." Family court is plagued by
false allegations simply because they are such an effective tool to
quickly sever the parent-child relationship. Family court does not
prosecute against false allegations, which is why false allegations have
proliferated. Allegations do not need to be specific. Some attorneys
advise clients to keep the allegations vague so as not to chance
involving investigative agencies such as child protective services, as
their reports carry so much weight with the court. An allegation to
family court may be as vague as "The father is a danger to the child."
This is enough for the family court to order visitations withheld or
supervised, but not specific enough to involve child protective
services.
Family court is a guilt-by-accusation system. Once
accused, it is the responsibility of the accused to prove the
allegations false. The accused parent will most likely be court-ordered
to supervised visitations with the child or children, as well as
complete a psychological evaluation and meet with mediators and parent
coordinators, all at personal cost. He or she also may pay for a
forensic investigation, also referred to as a Social Study Evaluation,
to prove the allegations false. The accused parent will spend thousands,
or perhaps tens of thousands, of dollars proving the accusations false -
and in the end, find him/herself financially drained and
psychologically exhausted. An accused parent may lose a relationship
with the child or children simply because they ran out of money to
continue to fight. Unfortunately, this also results in a child losing a
loving parent. David Levy, cofounder of the Children's Rights Counsel
and author of The Best Parent is Both Parents, stated: "President Obama
talks a lot about absentee fathers who need to take responsibility.
(But) he may not realize that there are millions of parents who want to
be involved (in their children's lives)." Fighting for the "child's
right 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 child's right to both parents," and then protect that
right. Stop ignoring false allegations. Understandably, allegations need
to be investigated; however, if proven false, the parent who made the
false allegations should be prosecuted. Order that parent to complete a
psychological evaluation. Step in to protect the child when you hear
your friend or relative making negative remarks about the child's parent
or any other hostile aggressive parenting behavior. Let the child know
that both parents love him/her. Encourage those hostile parents to seek
therapy to find closure and stop using the child to "get even." One
thing is certain: when a parent is attempting to separate a child from a
parent simply to avenge a failed marriage, the child suffers emotional
pain. Because this pain was brought on purposely, it is psychological
child abuse. If you participate or allow hostile aggressive parenting
behavior in an attempt to alienate a child from a parent, you are an
accomplice to psychological child abuse. Stand up and protect the
child's right to both parents.
Article Source:
http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=James_Ray_Edwards