Responding to parental alienation for practitioners

PARENTAL ALIENATION:
RESPONDING TO DELIBERATE
RUPTURES OF CHILDREN'S
LOVING PARENTAL
RELATIONSHIPS.
APS College of Counselling Psychologists
Conference 201528/02/15
©Dialogue In Growth Pty. Ltd. 2015. 1

Profile
28/02/15©Dialogue In Growth Pty. Ltd. 2015.
2
 Stan Korosi M.Couns. HS Associate APS
 PA Counsellor, consultant and psychotherapist working mainly
with parental alienation, targeted or rejected parents, favoured
parents etc.
 At all stages of the alienation process
 PA Counselling and coaching
 I am a rejected/alienated parent
 Alienation independently assessed (2007)
 No intervention prescribed or ordered (2008)
 Editor-in-Chief ‘Parental Alienation International’ newsletter of the
Parental Alienation Study Group
 Reconciliation is possible even decades after a rupture

A Spectrum of Affiliation to
Alienation
3
Alienated
Estranged
Aligned
Affiliated
Non-ambivalent relationship
Child estranged from one parent
Reaction against IPA or abuse targeting the child
Reaction against family situation hostile or indifferent to the
child
Protective parenting may be involved
Pathological alienation-Child abuse
Child influenced by alienating parent
Unreasonable, distorted
SUPERVENING and DOMINANT PROCESS-subsumes all
other processes
Positive relationship
Affiliated with both parents
Neither parent unduly influencing the child
Ambivalent relationship
Aligned with one parent but accepting of the other
Aligned parent not involved against non-aligned parent

What Are We Talking About?
4
“Is 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”
(Gardener, 1985).
“A disturbance in which children, usually in the
context of sharing a parents negative attitudes,
suffer unreasonable aversion to a person, or
persons, with whom they formally enjoyed normal
relations or with whom they would normally
develop affectionate relations” (Warshak, 2006).

5
Critical aspects are:
 A child changes from having a previously good, warm,
healthy relationship and attachment, to rejection and aversion
of the formerly beloved attachment figure
 The child rejects or develops an aversion to others related to
the rejected parent (such as family members), and not only to
the parent.
 A secure attachment becomes highly insecure
 Unreasonable, irrational . E.g. otherwise inconsequential
issues result in disproportionate responses

6
 A good-enough parent is rejected
 Emotional child abuse?
 Family violence?
 A favoured parent is the active agent who
causes the child to reject a ‘good enough’
loved parent
 Do children alienate themselves?
 Do they form extreme alignment as a maladaptive
means of dealing with parental conflict?

Parental Alienation (PA) versus
Parental Alienation Syndrome
(PAS)
7
 PAS is not specifically defined in DSM V BUT DSM V now
contains a description of alienation
 Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) is diagnosed in the child:
 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.
 Is it an abnormal family system presentation, a type of
serious attachment disorder (Childress.C 2014), a syndrome,
a shared delusional disorder?
 A. one of the above
 B. all of the above
 C. does it matter?

Parental Alienation and DSM V
8
 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.”
 DSM 5 Relevant Diagnostic Categories-Child psychological
abuse
 “non-accidental 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.”

Useful Definitions-Parental
Alienation
 “Who expresses freely persistently,
unreasonable negative feelings and
beliefs (such as anger, hatred, rejection
and/or fear) towards a parent that are
disproportionate to the child's actual
experience with that parent. Entrenched
alienated children are marked by an un-
ambivalent, strident rejection of the
parent with no apparent guilt or conflict”
 Johnston (2005)
 Who expresses to their child/ren freely
persistently, unreasonable negative
feelings and beliefs (such as anger,
hatred, rejection and/fear) towards the
other parent that are disproportionate to
the other parent’s and child’s experience
of a loving relationship between them,
with the premeditated intentions of
rupturing the relationship between their
child and the other parent. Extreme
alienating parents are marked by a
dependent relationship between
themselves and the child/ren, lack of
insight or self-awareness of the effects of
their behaviour upon the child/ren, loss of
ambivalence and strident rejection of the
target parent whom they formerly loved,
lack of apparent guilt or remorse.
 Korosi(2013)
28/02/15
9
©Dialogue In Growth Pty. Ltd. 2015.
Alienated Child Alienating Parent

‘High Conflict or Parental
Alienation?
 A distinctive, complex family
response to divorce, which occurs
over time, and constitutes a pattern
of severe psychological abuse.
 A Favored Parent (FP) recruits the
children to form an alliance with the
FP in a campaign of denigration
against the rejected and hated
parent, the Target Parent (TP).This
may include the TP’s extended
family.
 The children become active
participants in the campaign of
denigration, declaring their devotion
and loyalty to the FP while rejecting
the TP.
 In high conflict divorce, the
children have a relationship
with both parents.
 Severely alienated children
only have a relationship with
the FP.
 In severe alienation the
animosity and denigration
spreads to the TP's extended
family. The child severs those
relationships as well. In high
conflict situations children are
more likely to maintain
relationship with extended
family
28/02/15
10
What is Parental Alienation?
What are the differences between
parental alienation and high conflict
divorce cases?

‘High Conflict or Parental
Alienation?
 The process between the FP and
children involves devaluing,
demoting and vilifying the TP.
 The reasons for rejecting/hating
the TP are irrational and out of
proportion to justify the intense
staunch relentless rejection of
the TP.
 The FP’s purpose - to sever the
physical, emotional, and
psychological relationship, and a
once mutual love bond the
children held with the TP.
 Alienated children may lie and/or
spy for the FP, and high conflict
divorce children avoid choosing
one parent over the other.
 Alienated children make false
allegations against the TP.
 In high conflict divorce cases,
children who have normal child
and parent conflicts, express the
conflict with feelings of
ambivalence.
28/02/15
11
What is Parental Alienation?
What are the differences between
parental alienation and high conflict
divorce cases?

Parental Alienation in
Australia:2012
12
 22% of family law cases claimed parental alienation
 Doubled 2009 figures
 More mothers claim PA but (slightly) more fathers make
unsubstantiated claims
 20 Substantiated/28 unsubstantiated Mothers
 15 Substantiated/10 unsubstantiated Fathers
 The resident parent is more likely to alienate
 83% of alienating parents had residence of alienated child/ren
 2010 substantiated alienation
 11% had share care
 Bala.N 2012 AIFS

Bala.N 2012 AIFS
13

Parental Alienation
Internationally
14
 Illegal in Brazil
 Illegal in some states of Mexico including
Mexico city
 Legislative changes under consideration in
Puerto Rico
 What is illegal?
 Parental involvement in causing a child to reject
or refuse contact with a beloved parent
 Sanctions include change of residence

A (Brief) Review of Parental
Alienation
15
 Evidenced based family relationship presentation more than 30
years old
 Developed by Dr. Richard Gardner 1980’s
 Reformulated at least 3 times
 1990’s a gender neutral approach-Dr. Richard Garner
 2001 Alienated child perspective –Kelly and Johnson
 2005 Differentiation between naïve, mild/moderate and extreme
alienation (Warshak.R, Baker. A.J et.al.)
 Intervention programme Family Bridges for Alienated Children (FBAC)
 2012 Family Reflections Reunification Programme (FRRP). Reay, K.
 2012 Family Therapy and Collaborative Systems approach to PA
(Gottlieb.L)
 2013-14 Attachment based formulation in process (C. Childress)
 Criteria for behavioural indicators of PA remain remarkably
consistent with Gardeners original formulation in the 1980’s

A (Brief) Review of Parental
Alienation
16
 Generally considered to be a particularly egregious form of child
emotional/psychological abuse and family violence (targeting the
alienated parent).
 Family law often leaves alienated children in the care of the abusive
alienating parent because
 It simply does not know what to do when an alienated child (unreasonably
and harshly) refuses contact
 Misinterprets a child’s rejection and aversion as the child’s genuine response
independent of parental influence
 Misinterprets a childs bond with a favoured or alienating parent as secure
 Does not appreciate that the harm unreasonable contact refusal/rejection
causes is similar to child sexual abuse and family violence (Baker, A.J. 2007,
2009)
 Research (Baker, A.J 2007, 2009) indicates that outcomes for
alienated children are as compromised as for other forms of abuse
including sexual abuse.

Family Law Conflicted on PA?
17
 The Kelly and Johnston model (2001) often referred to in Family
Assessments proposes that children refuse time with the other parent
because.
 The child experiences separation anxiety, preferring to remain with the "custodial"
parent. (Exploited by an alienating parent)
 The child copes/manages with severe parental conflict by minimising time with
one of the parents. (Alignment NOT Alienation. Conflict created by alienating
parent)
 ‘It only takes one to tango’
 The child is concerned about the parent's parenting style and has experienced
rigidity, rejection and insensitivity. (Alignment NOT Alienation)
 The child rejects the other parent because the child is concerned about the
"custodial" parent's emotional stability if they had time with the other parent. This
condition implies a degree of parentification (AND alienation when exploited by
the favoured parent)
 The child rejects the other parent's new partner because they are concerned
about their treatment by the parent's partner-how it is made out to them.
 Step family alienation-The ‘EX FACTOR”

Family Law Conflicted on PA?
18
 Family Law assesses alienation using models that do
not consider alienation as material to a child’s
rejection!
 Kelly & Johnston model de-emphasises role of alienating
parent as a causative agent. Treats the child but the cause
remains
 Martindale and Gould (2007) -important to distinguish
between children who refuse to have time with a parent
because of a range of reasons from those who are
alienated.
 Most PA research and practice supports the view that
alienation occurs through the campaign of denigration
and demotion by an alienating parent to which a child
responds with unreasonable and irrational rejection
 Alienating parent is the causative agent in alienating a
child

Extreme Alienation
 Harsh, unreasonable
rejection
 May include extended family
 No ambivalence
 Unbalanced
 Reflexive support to favoured
parent
 May make unsubstantiated
allegations
 ‘Parroting’
 Independent thinker
phenomena
 Favoured parent uses a variety of extreme
techniques
 Mail interception
 Monitoring media of all types
 Legal, financial, administrative abuse
 Denigration
 Manipulating and/or destroying family history
and memories
 Encouraging the child to ‘demote’ the
rejected parent e.g.use of first name
 Breaching orders
 Passivity
 Co-opt the child into spying and intelligence
gathering
 Contact interference
 Creating a climate of fear and threat
 Recruit siblings
28/02/15
19
Alienated Child Alienating Parent

The Alienation Proposal
20
 “I am the only parent who loves you and you
need me to feel good about yourself; the other
parent is dangerous and unavailable; and
pursuing a relationship with the other parent
jeopardizes your relationship with me.”
 Baker. A.J

PA Injury to Targeted Parent
21
 “…that only the alienated parent suffers abuse
resulting from the PAS; and because they are
“big boys and big girls,” they are expected to,
“Just get over it and move on.””
 Gottlieb.L The Parental Alienation Syndrome: A Family Therapy and Collaborative Systems Approach to
Amelioration p 209. Charles Thomas Publishers USA 2012
 Trauma
 Incomplete ambiguous loss
 Existential ‘assault’ and violation of cherished values
and beliefs
 Emotional and Empathic dysregulation
 Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)
 Many alienated parents report at least one or more
symptoms

PA Injury-Child
22
 The effects of losing not only the intact family, but also a
parent, hang heavily over children, touching them in ways
that can wreak havoc in many realms of life both in the
present and future. As adults, many victims of bitter
custody battles who had been permanently removed from
a target parent . . . still long to be reunited with the lost
parent. The loss cannot be undone. Childhood cannot
be recaptured. Gone forever is that sense of history,
intimacy, lost input of values and morals, self-awareness
through knowing one’s beginnings, love, contact with
extended family, and much more. Virtually no child
possesses the ability to protect him or herself against
such an undignified and total loss.
 Clawar and Rivlin (1991) p. 105 in Gottlieb.L The Parental
Alienation Syndrome: A Family Therapy and Collaborative
Systems Approach to Amelioration p 209. Charles Thomas
Publishers USA 2012

Outcomes for Adult Alienated
Children
23
 Feelings of remorse
 Regret for lost opportunities- particularly when rejected parent has
since died
 Suffer rates of depression, anger, anxiety, relationships difficulties,
substance abuse
 Report that they wish someone had intervened and NOT listened to
them as children
 Can be alienated from own children and family
 Have adult conflict with favoured/alienating parent
Baker, A. (2007). The Ties that Bind. New York: Norton.

Conceptions of Alienating
Parents
24
 Highly plausible, high functioning. May present as the
target parent
 Present as rigid, defensive, moralistic, flawless and
virtuous, externalise responsibility and lack insight.
 Extreme personality traits such as histrionic, paranoid,
anxiety borderline and narcissistic disorders
 May be sub-clinical
 Reactive to separation, loss.

Conceptions of Alienating
Parents
25
 Poor boundary between self and other
 Attachment injuries. E.g. Fearful-avoidant
 Never stop
 Become predictable and intensify their alienation
as their child gets older and asserts self-agency
 May lead to a fatal, non-recoverable rupture.
 May turn on YOU!

(Mis) Conceptions of Alienated or
Target Parents
 They are ‘bad’ parents
 Degree of parental
empathy-attunement
towards children
 Reactivity to alienating
behaviour can reinforce
alienation
 FALSE. Bad parenting
may result in alignment-
NOT alienation
 TRUE-will affect
remediation
 TRUE-Reactive to
alienation interactional
cycle
28/02/15
26

Target Parents
 May react with passivity or
withdrawal reinforcing allegations of
abandonment, disinterest and poor
parenting.
 May be easily offended and react
with aggression and disrespectful
behaviour Little or no insight into their
own contributing behaviours .
 Confusing child’s needs with their
own
 TRUE- Alienated Parents simply
do not know what to do
 Bad advice: “The kids will eventually
come around”.
 FALSE. Rejected parents are
violated and traumatised-may drive
anger
 TRUE. Inadvertently collapse own
needs upon children & create
insecurity.
 Feeds alienation interactional cycle
28/02/15
27

Target Parents
 May struggle with interpersonal
communication
 Parenting flaws contribute to
alienation
 May have unrecognised FOO
experience of alienation or alignment
 Have diagnosed their ex-partners
and may be waging their own
‘counter campaign’
 The loss of a child under alienating
circumstances is TRAUMATIC
 FALSE. No more than any other ‘
good enough’ parent
 TRUE where rejected parent
reinforces alienation
 TRUE. Psychodynamic aspect
‘blindsides’ rejected parents
 TRUE. Some alienated/rejected
parents lose sight of the children
 May result in EMPATHIC and
EMOTIONAL DYSREGULATION
 PTSD
28/02/15
28

The Target Parent’s Dilemma
29
 “Alienated parents generally find
themselves in a double-bind situation: if they
pursue a relationship with their resistant
children, they are labeled aggressive or
insensitive to their children’s feelings. But if
they do not pursue their visits, they are
accused of abandoning their children.”
 Gottlieb.L The Parental Alienation Syndrome: A Family Therapy and Collaborative Systems Approach to Amelioration
p 209. Charles Thomas Publishers USA 2012

Why ‘Traditional’ Therapeutic
Approached are Contraindicated for PA
30
 Traditional therapeutic approaches can make PA worse; the
alienated child and favored parent may entrench their positions to
prove their point, thereby further entrenching their distorted views.
 Factors related to the failure of traditional therapeutic approaches
are:
 Initially, the therapist is likely to have an adversarial relationship
with some family members, including the alienating parent and
the alienated child (or children)
 The alienating parent and child (or children) attend reluctantly, if
at all and only if legally mandated. They may be poorly motivated
and deeply determined to undermine both the therapy and the
therapist
 Reay, K. (2015). Family Reflections: A Promising Therapeutic Program Designed to Treat Severely
Alienated Children and Their Family System. American Journal of Family Therapy, Volume 43, Issue 2,
pp. 1-12, 2015

Why ‘Traditional’ Therapeutic
Approached are Contraindicated for PA
31
 Factors related to the failure of traditional therapeutic
approaches are:
 Co-morbid psychopathology, particularly in the alienating
parent. Prevalence of personality disorders, such as
antisocial and borderline personality disorders, among
severely alienating parents. Such presentations are
resistant to intervention for PA, as such people they may
not react well to “looking in their mirror.”
 Psychotherapy may not address the primary underlying
problem in severe PA- the alienating parent’s problematic
thinking, emotional instability, and harmful behavior. In
severe cases, the alienating parent is too determined, too
disturbed, and too delusional to respond to intervention–
traditional or otherwise
 Reay, K. (2015). Family Reflections: A Promising Therapeutic Program
Designed to Treat Severely Alienated Children and Their Family System.
American Journal of Family Therapy, Volume 43, Issue 2, pp. 1-12, 2015

Toward PA Informed Practice
32
 RED ALERT!
 It is NOT NORMAL for a child to reject a formerly beloved
parent/grandparent/extended family
 ASK HOW, WHY?
 Delusional constructs
 Children’s construction of reality and attachment may not be reliable
when under the influence of an alienating parental figure
 Child Exclusive practice. How much credence to put on children’s
views?
 Evidence shows that children WANT a loving relationship with the
parent they are rejecting (Baker.A.J)
 They secretly want YOU to intervene and protect them from
sanctions from the favoured parent

33
 Evidence shows that children are emotionally/psychologically
abused by the process of alienation, especially if it results in them
rejecting a beloved parent
 Trauma markers
 Targeted parents are not perfect parents, they are ‘good enough’
but they have been abused and traumatised
 Rejecting a parent is traumatising
 This will dys-regulate and disrupt remediation and intervention
 Rejected/alienated parents have suffered emotional and
attachment injury

34
 Attachment disorders
 Alienating parents are very plausible
 Personality disorders
 Disorganised attachment
-precursor to extreme personality traits or personality disorders
 Consider both children’s behaviour AND parents behaviour (passive
and active)
 DANGER! Child over-empowerment
 12 y.o children do not vote, do not drive, do not get to choose
which parent to love

35
 High conflict as a possible marker of Parental Alienation
 Often advantageous to one parent
 One parent LOOKS like the perpetrator-but are they?
 Alienated parent has no choice but to fight for their children’s
welfare
 Alienating parent’s best tactic is passivity
 Watch out for the use of unsubstantiated allegations
 Keep it NON GENDERED

Assessment and Intervention
Principles
36
 Humanistic-existential approaches contraindicated for PA
 Risk validating delusional reality
 Triangulation of therapist into delusional system
 Caution with family therapies that treat ‘the system’ without
considering PA dynamics-blaming the victim
 Alienated and alienating parents both need intervention
 Trauma, disenfranchised (target or alienated parent)
 Pathology, attachment injury, extreme personality traits
(favoured or alienating parent)
 An exclusion period, no contact between alienated child and
alienating or favoured parent MUST be considered.

Principles
37
 Why consider an exclusion period, no contact between
alienated child and alienating or favoured parent?
 Loss of or fused boundary between self and other, between
alienating parent and alienated child is a key mechanism by
which an alienated child loses his/her sense of self-construction,
reality and individuality
 Children may not see themselves as independent (despite asserting
the contrary).
 Therefore there is no independent ‘self’ (child)who might relate with
an ‘other’ (target parent)
 The ‘self’ can only be reinstated in the absence of the enveloping
‘other’
 Alienated children may be ‘parentified’ into caring for an
alienating parent who is ‘vulnerable’ and ‘dependent’
 This is a harmful process where children’s developmental needs are
suspended

Principles
38
 Why consider an exclusion period, no contact
between alienated child and alienating or favoured
parent?
 Children take ownership of alienated parents severe
anxiety and may be unable to separate, individuate
and differentiate appropriately in an anxiety mediated
relationship where they may have difficulty
experiencing their emotions separately from those of
the alienating parent.
 Alienated children’s distorted views and insecure
attachment cannot be reosolved within a relationship
that reinforces it

Principles
39
 The rejected parent is the best therapist
 Alienated child and rejected parent MUST be placed
together
 Therapist as facilitator
 Challenge
 Direct-reality formation, basis for harsh and unreasonable
rejection, ‘unsafe’
 Indirect-’what we think we see may not be what we saw’
The fallibility of human perception and memory
 Discuss other situations that are similar or analagous to the
child’s and alienated parent, use metaphors or examples-less
threatening and more easily engaged with.

PA Systemic Strategic Empathy-
Empathic Strategy
40
 Reunification seems to occur when rejected
parents focus upon their children,
 are seen to take a hit for them,
 focus on relational security,
 are not defensive,
 appropriately challenge false assertions,
 act protectively, (do not expose the child to
alienating parents sanction)

Empathic Strategy
41
 Strategically ‘manage’ the favoured/alienating parent
 Allow them to expose themselves. Alienating parents are
entrapped by their personality
 Allay extreme anxiety/paranoia
 Constructive dialectic-child must experience internal
conflict to change
 The ‘irritant factor’
 Evoke loving memories,
 Make no emotional demands and at the same time
stand their ground

Empathic Strategy
42
 Decouple from alienation interactional cycle
 Drive a positive ‘counter-alienation interactional
cycle’
 Hold adolescent and teenage alienated children
accountable and responsible for their choices
 Without blame
 Appeals to their next developmental level.
 Let go but do not give up

PA Structured Family Systems
Therapy
43
 Disengage the PA coalition or ‘triangle’
 ‘Disrupt’ the negative interactional cycle
 Alienated child is the focus but not the problem
 Activate parent-child love (rejected parent-child)
 Alienated parent as ‘deprogrammer’
 Avoid validation of child’s distorted and delusional views of rejected
parent
 Does not require that the alienating parent attend
 Primary focus is on the negative delusional systems between alienated
child and rejected parent
 Gottlieb. L.J (2012). THE PARENTAL ALIENATION SYNDROME: A Family Therapy and Collaborative
Systems Approach to Amelioration. Springfield. Illinois: Charles.C. Thomas Publishers

Intervention Programmes
44
 FBAC Family Bridges for Alienated Children (USA, Australia), Warshak.R, Rand.R
 Legal mandate
 Mandatory exclusion period between alienated child and favoured parent
 Since 2005-most researched
 Trained facilitators in Australia
 Overcoming Boundaries (USA)
 Voluntary
 No exclusion period
 Family Reflections Reconciliation Programme (FRRP) (Canada), Reay. K
 Analogous to FBAC
 Since 2012
 Efficacy study
 Intervention (Australia)
 Family Bridges (FBAC) trained facilitators/leaders
 Court ordered reportable therapy

Family Bridges (FBAC)
45
 The Family Bridges workshop replaces the structure
of traditional weekly 45-minute office sessions with an
intensive private four-day workshop intervention….
 The children’s reintegration with the rejected parent is
accomplished both through the process and the
content of the workshop… bringing parent and child
together, with the support of the court, to work
cooperatively on common goals helps lessen hostility
and prejudice.
 The syllabus covers the underlying processes that
contribute to parental alienation …exercises teach
how distortions in memory, perception, and thinking
occur.

Family Bridges (FBAC)
46
 The FBAC programme also teach how:
 negative stereotypes form under the influence of suggestion and
authority figures,
 how parental conflict harms children,
 how to think critically,
 how children can stay out of the middle of their parents’ conflicts,
and
 how the children and parent can better communicate and
manage conflict.
 Children learn how to maintain balanced, realistic, and
compassionate views of both parents
 Warshak, R.A (2014). Parental Alienation: What it is; How to Manage
it. University of Texas School of Law. American Academy of
Matrimonial Lawyers (Texas Chapter). Innovations ;Breaking
Boundaries in Custody Litigation. 12-13 June 2014. Dallas, Texas.
USA.

Principles of FBAC
47
 Goals
 facilitate, repair, and strengthen the children's ability to maintain
healthy relationships with both parents;
 help children to avoid being in the middle of their parents'
conflicts;
 strengthen children's critical thinking skills;
 protect children from unreasonably rejecting a parent in the
future;
 help children maintain balanced views and a more realistic
perspective of each parent as well as themselves;
 help family members develop compassionate views of each
other's actions rather than excessively harsh or critical views;
 strengthen the family's ability to communicate effectively with
each other and to manage conflicts in a productive manner: and
 strengthen the parents' skills in nurturing their children by setting
and enforcing appropriate limits and avoiding psychologically
intrusive interactions

How Effective is FBAC?
 2010 US Study
 23 Rejected parent-alienated
children families
 All with prior failed experience of
counselling, family therapy, other
court ordered ‘family counselling’ or
other intervention
 22 of 23 (96%) Successful
reunifications, Positive
relationship restored.
 18 of 22 (82%) retained a positive
relationship after long term follow
up.
 Relapses due to premature contact
with favoured/alienating parent
 Warshak, R.A. (2010). Family
Bridges: Using Insights From
Social Science to Reconnect
Parents and Alienated Children.
Family Court Review. Volume
38. No 1. January 2010.
Association of Family and
Conciliation Courts.
 2014 US Study (in progress)
 57 alienated children
 40 of 57 >12 y.o
 22 >14 y.o
 33% rejected their mother
 Evenly divided by gender
 95% recovered a positive
relationship with rejected parent
 82% (47 0f 57) retained a positive
relationship after long term follow
up
 Relapses due to premature contact
with favoured/alienating parent
 Warshak, R.A (2014). Parental
Alienation: What it is; How to
Manage it. University of Texas
School of Law. American
Academy of Matrimonial
Lawyers (Texas Chapter).
Innovations ;Breaking
Boundaries in Custody
Litigation. 12-13 June 2014.
Dallas, Texas. USA
28/02/15
48

Family Reflections Reunification
Programme (Reay, K.)
49
 ”The Family Reflections Reunification Program...is often utilized in
circumstances where traditional therapy has not proven successful
to foster a healthy relationship between children and a rejected
normative parent. “
 “The purpose of the FRRP is to reconcile children with their rejected
normative parent and to foster a healthy relationship between the
child and his or her rejected parent. “
 Court mandated: British Columbia, a court may order, under Section
40 and 41 of the Family Law Act, that the target parent (or some
suitable third party) shall have guardianship and parental
responsibility of the child to enroll and place the child in FRRP for a
period of up to one year.
 This includes aftercare services for the purpose of restoring the
child’s relationship with the target parent and his/her family.
 Reay, K. (2015). Family Reflections: A Promising Therapeutic Program Designed to Treat Severely Alienated
Children and Their Family System. American Journal of Family Therapy, Volume 43, Issue 2, pp. 1-12, 2015

FRRP Structure
50
 1. TRANSITION PHASE: The child and his or her
siblings initially attend the retreat without having any
contact with both parents.
 2. REUNIFICATION PHASE: The child subsequently
begins a psycho-educational program that leads to the
reunification process with the rejected parent
 The rejected parent arrives at the retreat shortly after the
child begins working with a psychologist in preparation for
a successful reunification
 Reay, K. (2015). Family Reflections: A Promising Therapeutic
Program Designed to Treat Severely Alienated Children and Their
Family System. American Journal of Family Therapy, Volume 43,
Issue 2, pp. 1-12, 2015

FRRP Structure
51
 3. DEPARTURE PHASE: The child and rejected
parent engage in various psycho-educational and
outdoor experiential programs separately and
then together after they have successfully
reconnected with each other.
 The favored parent begins counseling with a FRRP
therapist.
 FOLLOW UP PHASE: A continuing care plan
supports the reunification process over the long-
term.
 Reay, K. (2015). Family Reflections: A Promising Therapeutic
Program Designed to Treat Severely Alienated Children and
Their Family System. American Journal of Family Therapy,

How Effective is FRRP? (Reay, K.)
52
 Preliminary studies show a “95% success rate in
re-establishing a healthy relationship within a very
short period of time between severely alienated
children/youths and their rejected parent”.
 The FRRP began in early 2012.
 Families were followed at 3-month, 6-month, 9-
month and 12-month intervals. .
 Two additional research studies underway.
 Reay, K. (2015). Family Reflections: A Promising Therapeutic Program Designed to Treat Severely
Alienated Children and Their Family System. American Journal of Family Therapy, Volume 43, Issue 2,
pp. 1-12, 2015

What Next?
53
 Family consultants need to consider criteria for assessing PA
 Treat PA as child abusive
 Treat PA as a form of family violence
 Differentiate ‘high conflict’ and parental alienation
 Consider recommending a structured intervention programme in severe
cases
 Develop PA informed practice.
 Further workshops/training
 Psychological/social work/counselling
 Legal

References
54
 Altobelli, T. (2011). “When a Child Rejects a Parent: Why Children Resist
Contact”. Australian Journal of Family Law. No 185
 Baker. A.J. (2007). Breaking The Ties That Bind: Adult Children of Parental
Alienation Syndrome. New York USA. W.W Norton & Company.
 Baker.A.J, Sauber, R.S. (2013). Working with Alienated Children and
Families: A Clinical Guidebook. New York. USA. Routledge
 Baker, A.J, Bone, M.J, Ludmer, B. (2014). The High Conflict Custody Battle:
Protect Yourself and Your Kids From a Toxic Divorce, False Accusations
and Parental Alienation. USA.Harbinger Publications.
 Darnall. D.(2010). Beyond Divorce Casualties: Reunifying The Alienated
Family. New York. USA Taylor Trade Publishing
 Gottlieb. L.J (2012). THE PARENTAL ALIENATION SYNDROME: A Family
Therapy and Collaborative Systems Approach to Amelioration. Springfield.
Illinois: Charles.C. Thomas Publishers
 Gould, J.W, Martindale , D.A. The Art and Science of Child Custody
Evaluations, (2009). New York. USA. The Guilford Press
 Kelly, J. B., & Johnston, J. R. (2001). The Alienated Child: a Reformulation
of Parental Alienation Syndrome. Family Court Review, 39(3), 249-266.
 Lorandos.D, Bernet.W, Sauber R.S, (2013)Parental Alienation: The
Handbook for Mental Health and Legal Professionals. Springfield. Illinois:
Charles.C. Thomas Publishers

References
55
 Lowenstein, L. F. (1998). PARENT ALIENATION SYNDROME: A TWO STEP APPROACH
TOWARD A SOLUTION. Contemporary Family Therapy: An International Journal December,
20(4), 505-520.
 Lowenstein, L. F. (2007). Parental Alienation: How to understand and address parental alienation
resulting from acrimonious divorce or separation. London: Russell House Publishing.
 Lund, M. (1995). A Therapist's View of Parental Alienation Syndrome. Family and Conciliation
Courts Review, 33(3), 308-316.
 McIntosh, J. (2003). Enduring Conflict in Parental Separation: Pathways of Impact on Child
Development. Journal of Family Studies, Vol. 9(1), 63-80.
 McBride, J.(2012). Child-less Parent: Snapshots of Parental Alienation. USA. CCS
Communication.
 Moore,T. Please…Let Me See My Son: A Fathers Fight with Parental Alienation and the Family
Law Process.(2013). Guildford. UK. Grosvenor House Publishing
 Reay, K. (2015). Family Reflections: A Promising Therapeutic Program Designed to Treat
Severely Alienated Children and Their Family System. American Journal of Family Therapy,
Volume 43, Issue 2, pp. 1-12, 2015
 Reahy, M (2011). Toxic Divorce-A Workbook for Alienated Parents
 Warshak, R.A (2014). Parental Alienation: What it is; How to Manage it. University of Texas
School of Law. American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers (Texas Chapter). Innovations
;Breaking Boundaries in Custody Litigation. 12-13 June 2014. Dallas, Texas. USA.
 Warshak, R. A. (2010). Divorce Poison: How to Protect Your Family from Bad-mouthing and
Brainwashing. New York: Harper Collins.
 Warshak, R.A. (2010). Family Bridges: Using Insights From Social Science to Reconnect Parents
and Alienated Children. Family Court Review. Volume 38. No 1. January 2010. Association of
Family and Conciliation Courts.

Resources and Links
56
 International Parental Alienation Study Group
 www.pasg.info
 Overcoming Parental Alienation
 www.dialogueingrowth.com.au
 Family Bridges
 www.warshak.com
 Family Reflections Reunification Programme
(FRRP)
 www.familyreflectionsprogram.com
 kreaycounselling.com

Responding to parental alienation for practitioners

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (20)

Destaque

Destaque (17)

Semelhante a Responding to parental alienation for practitioners

Semelhante a Responding to parental alienation for practitioners (20)

Último

Último (20)

Responding to parental alienation for practitioners

Notas do Editor