26. The myth of 'parental alienation syndrome' and it's harmful legacy in Australian Family Law

Speaker 1: 0:00

Hi everyone, thanks for joining me on another episode of the post-separation abuse podcast. I'm your host, danielle Black, and I'm a strategic separation and divorce coach, primarily supporting women in Australia who are navigating separation, divorce and co-parenting with someone who is controlling, who may have been abusive in other ways and who may have a number of high conflict personality traits that could be consistent with one or more personality disorders. On one of last week's episodes, I spoke about why it's important to question the information that you're consuming, particularly if you're finding this on social media or simply online, and why it's problematic to consume information from other countries, particularly from the US. As I explained in that episode, the family law system in America is very different to that in Australia, and the outcomes that you can expect to receive if your case goes to court here in Australia, particularly to do with parenting, is likely to be very different to what someone in America might expect their outcome to be. A number of my clients have caused themselves unnecessary worry before they started working with me by consuming information that was coming from the US and that was really only designed to inform an American audience. In that episode last week, I also mentioned the term alienation and that this is something that protective mothers can sometimes be accused of. I'm going to unpack that a little bit more in today's episode. I am hesitant to go too far down the rabbit hole of this topic because, honestly, it's something that I really don't want to give too much airtime to, and you'll learn why that is as this episode unfolds. What I find in the work that I do is that many people use the term alienation without really having a good understanding of what that word means or where that term originated.

Speaker 1: 2:13

The term alienation, when we're talking about family law situations, originated from parental alienation syndrome, which is a term introduced by child psychiatrist Richard Gardner in 1985 to describe signs and symptoms he believed to be exhibited by children who have been alienated from one parent through manipulation by the other parent. The proposed symptoms included extreme fear of the other parent that Richard Gardner determined to be unwarranted, and disrespect or hostility toward a parent. Gardner believed that the set of behaviours that he observed in some families could be used to diagnose psychological manipulation or undue influence of a child by one parent, typically by the other parent, who may be attempting to prevent an ongoing relationship between a child and the other parent or other family members after separation or divorce. It's important to note here that parental alienation syndrome has not been accepted by the medical community in any country that I'm aware of, and that parental alienation syndrome lacks scientific validity and reliability. To my knowledge, it has been debunked and is not something that is supported by any psychological association in the world. Gardner also went on to state that parents, usually mothers who were alienating their child or children from the other parent, made false accusations of child abuse and sexual abuse, usually against fathers, as a means to prevent contact between them. Now, I'm sure this will come as no surprise to you Gardner's belief in parental alienation syndrome and the fact that he was primarily accusing mothers of engaging in what he called alienating behaviour. This was widely accepted and applauded by fathers rights groups.

Speaker 1: 4:23

Parental alienation and parental alienation syndrome are generally understood to be the actions of one parent attempting to prevent or disrupt a child having an ongoing relationship with the other parent, and linked in with that are accusations that the alienating parent in this situation is manufacturing or making up false allegations of abuse. Despite the fact that the theory of parental alienation syndrome has been exposed as junk science, parental alienation accusations are still made by fathers rights groups and by fathers who are accused of physical, emotional, psychological and sexual abuse of children. The majority of parents who are accused of alienating behaviours are protective mothers who are concerned about the safety of their children in the care of the other parent. The fact that parental alienation syndrome or even the term alienation still has any credibility with the court, with family law, with lawyers, with mediators, with anyone working in this space, is disturbing and, frankly, disgusting. The fact that protective mothers are still accused to this day in Australia of quote unquote alienating children from the other parent is appalling, and it continues to potentially place children at serious risk if a court requires them to visit, to spend time with or to live with an abusive parent.

Speaker 1: 6:01

When parental alienation is raised in family law cases in Australia, a protective parent can experience all kinds of intimidation, obviously from their controlling and abusive former partner, from the lawyer who is representing their former partner perhaps their own lawyer, from the judge, from registrars, from court, child experts and family report writers, all of whom may paint them as controlling, as manipulative, as alienating. And psychologists aren't immune from this either. There are many psychologists who, when a child has disclosed abuse, when a child is fearful of the other parent, will recommend such things as family therapy in an attempt to restore that bond, because there is a pervasive belief that a child needs to have a relationship with both parents, seemingly despite the fact that one parent could be a coercively controlling, manipulative abuser. This is a far-reaching problem. It extends far beyond just our legal system as a whole and, I think, really goes into the fabric of our society and our community. And if you're listening to this right now, this is what I challenge you to think about, to contemplate, to consider Does a child need to have a relationship with both parents in order to grow a healthy, safe, well-adjusted? Should that relationship be persisted with, even if a child is fearful of the other parent, even if the child has witnessed family violence, even if the child has been on the receiving end of family violence, even if the other parent is coercively controlling and demonstrates zero insight into their own behaviour? That's a question I think that we all need to ask ourselves and that we all need to reflect upon, and, in my view, it is not in the best interests of children to maintain a relationship with both parents where one parent is an abuser. Unfortunately, that is not the belief that is held by the community as a whole and it's not the belief that is held by our legal system. And some of these problems are still occurring in Australia and worldwide because of the legislation regulating family law in Australia, promoting a philosophy of belief that children need to be shared after parents separate in terms of decision making and also the time that they spend with parents.

Speaker 1: 8:34

In a very adversarial system, children are in many ways treated as assets of the relationship that need to be shared between both parents. All of this puts protective mothers in a difficult situation. On one hand, they are, of course, focused on the safety and well-being and best interests of their children and wanting to protect their children from harm, and by harm I'm not just talking about physical harm, I'm also referring to mental, emotional and psychological harm. However, if they don't seem willing to facilitate a relationship between the child and the other parent, then they can be viewed as being obstructive, and this can then add more fuel to the fire if they've been accused of alienating the child from the other parent. This puts protective mothers in a really difficult situation. They know only too well what their former partner is capable of because of what they themselves have experienced, and unfortunately, there does seem to be a huge disconnect between the courts, the professionals connected with the courts, psychologists when it comes to recognizing that the way that a man treats the mother of his children is a predictive factor in how he is going to treat his children.

Speaker 1: 9:57

Unfortunately, there are also many perceptions, beliefs, stereotypes when it comes to what an abuser looks like. The reality is that most abusers look like your neighbor, your dad, your brother, your child's teacher, your GP, your psychologist, your barrister and I've just reeled off a few professions there of the ex-partners of some of my clients. We're talking about people who are highly educated, who are professional. Abuses are not men who simply don't know any better. The vast majority of abusers know exactly what they're doing. They can be very clever at keeping things behind closed doors. They can be very coercively controlling and manipulative without anyone on the outside knowing what it is that they're doing to their victims. They can present well in court. The reality is that we still live in a world in which women are often disbelieved when it comes to reports of family violence, when it comes to reports of physical abuse, sexual abuse, psychological abuse, and, unfortunately, children are just as likely to be disbelieved.

Speaker 1: 11:11

I have a number of clients whose lawyers have cautioned them against taking out intervention orders against abusive ex-partners, even though there have been situations where police have been urging them to do so. The fear is that if they seek an intervention order, if they seek to protect themselves and their children, that they will be viewed as alienating. If this does not appall you, it should. Every day in this country, children are being ordered to spend time with a parent. That is abusive, that is manipulative, that is coercively controlling, that is harmful and, in many cases, is a parent whom the child is fearful of and, after separation, mum is no longer there to protect them.

Speaker 1: 11:55

Australian research into family law cases has identified that parental alienation accusations continue to be used by fathers as a defence to child abuse allegations, particularly child sexual abuse allegations. Research also suggests that deliberately false allegations of family violence and abuse are rare. Despite the fact that the vast majority of allegations of family violence and child abuse are true, many legal professionals are still using terms such as alienation, parental alienation and parental alienation syndrome. This must stop. In a country where violence against women and children is an epidemic, we must be doing everything that we can as a community to put an end to the silencing of women and children when they speak out against abuse, even when this is in the context of separation and divorce. I have a number of clients who, when they first started working with me, disclosed the abuse that they had experienced, and for some of them, I was the first person that they had ever opened up to about what they had experienced, from everything ranging from long-standing coercive control and financial abuse to severe physical violence that resulted in broken bones. So many women are living in fear, and so many women are afraid that if they speak openly and honestly about their experiences when there are disputes around care arrangements for children, so many of those women are concerned that they are going to be labelled as alienators and that they won't be believed, and this is just simply not good enough. As a country, as a community, we must do better.

Speaker 1: 13:51

Abusing the mother of his children is one of the worst things a father can do for the well-being and overall development of those children, including brain development. Research demonstrates that men who are abusive to their partners are many times more likely to be physically and or sexually abusive to their children than non-abusive men. In one study, around 50% of abusive men were found to be physically abusive to their children, compared to approximately 7% of men who did not have a history of abuse toward their partner. Researchers found that abusive men are six times more likely to be sexually abusive to their children than men who do not have a history of abuse towards their partner. Abusive men tend to view their partners, former partners and children as possessions to exert control over, and can demonstrate patterns of behaviour that use children to meet their own needs. There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that the danger to children reduces after a couple separates or divorces. Rather, the abuser then may have time with the children without the protection of their mother.

Speaker 1: 15:03

This is the reality of what many of my clients are dealing with. This is the reality of what many women in this country and worldwide are dealing with. This is a gendered issue, as so many issues around violence and abuse are. I'll say that again, this is a gendered issue. Everything in the context of family law has a gendered consequence, whether you see it or not, and when it comes to accepting terms like parental alienation syndrome or even just parental alienation. The gendered consequence of this is that women are more likely to be disbelieved when they are disclosing abuse, and children are more likely to be disbelieved. Is this really the country that we want to live in?

Speaker 1: 15:50

I feel strongly about this issue for a number of reasons, one being that I myself was accused of alienation. None of those accusations stuck. However, I do still sometimes reflect on what may have happened in my case if any of those false accusations against me had been believed. This is a big part of why I do the work that I do in supporting my clients. Part of the support that I provide is helping to ensure that no accusations of alienation will be successful. If this is something that you're currently dealing with or that you're concerned about, please get in touch. Please visit my website, danielblackcoachingcomau. Please book a free discovery call to have a chat with me about how I may be able to help you going forward.

Speaker 1: 16:40

For all of the reasons that I've discussed on this episode, I rarely use the term alienation unless I'm describing something that someone has been accused of or for the purposes of education, such as in this episode. You might be wondering. So what term, then, should be used when we're talking about a protective parent who is concerned about the behaviours of the abusive parent who may be attempting to turn the child against the protective parent? In situations like that. I still do not use the term alienation. In my view, it is a term that needs to be completely removed when it comes to the context of family law. That's how divisive this is and that's how strongly I feel about it.

Speaker 1: 17:28

Rather, what I suggest you do is to refer to things like influencing so a parent attempting to influence a child or coaching so a parent attempting to coach a child. In my view, those terms are far more accurate to describe the behaviour and, incidentally, the majority of influencing and coaching behaviours are perpetrated by the abuser, by the abusive parent, because, incidentally, abusers don't just stop at targeting their ex-partner. They know that, where their ex-partner is concerned, the best way to harm her is to attempt to damage the relationship and the connection that she shares with the children. So, instead of alienation, I suggest you use the words influence or coaching and be aware that if your ex-partner is controlling or abusive in other ways, there is a very, very good chance that they are doing something to attempt to influence or coach one or more of your children. The good news with that is that research in this area suggests that the vast majority of attempts to turn a child against a parent will boomerang back against the other parent. Kids don't like hearing people say bad things about their mum, particularly when they know from their own experience that what is being said about their mother is not true.

Speaker 1: 18:59

If you're concerned about what your ex-partner may be saying to your children about you in an attempt to influence or coach your children in a particular way, I highly recommend that you reach out and Book Afraid Discovery call to have a chat with me and to learn whether or not working with me going forward is something that would be a good fit for you and for your situation. This is something that a number of my clients are navigating. This is something that I personally navigated in my own situation, and there are absolutely things that you can do about this that are positive and proactive. If this episode has struck a chord with you, if you're as passionate as what I am about removing the terms parental alienation syndrome and alienation from the language when we're talking about family law and parenting matters, then please join with me in no longer using the term alienation yourself when referring to these behaviors. If you're a legal professional, if you're a psychologist, if you're a lawyer, if you're connected with the court, if you happen to be listening to this podcast and if you still use the terms parental alienation or even just alienation, please stop.

Speaker 1: 20:12

There is an entire country full of women and children who need this debunked bullshit to stop. It's harmful and it is leading to children being put in intolerable, distressing and harmful situations with abusive parents. We all have a part to play. If this episode has raised any concerns for you about what you're personally dealing with, whether you have separated from your partner or not, please remember that 1800 respect is available to you if you are within Australia. The number for 1800 respect is in the show notes of this episode. Thank you so much for your time. I'll talk to you soon.