What is Parental Alienation?

Parental alienation is the process, and the result, of the psychological manipulation of a child into showing unwarranted fear, disrespect or hostility towards a parent and/or other family members.[1][2] It is a distinctive and widespread form of psychological abuse and family violence —towards both the child and the rejected family members—that occurs almost exclusively in association with family separation or divorce (particularly where legal action is involved)[3] and that undermines core principles of both the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Most commonly, the primary cause is a parent wishing to exclude another parent from the life of their child, but other family members or friends, as well as professionals involved with the family (including psychologists, lawyers and judges), may contribute significantly to the process.[1][4] It often leads to the long-term, or even permanent, estrangement of a child from one parent and other family members[5] and, as a particularly adverse childhood experience, results in significantly increased risks of both mental and physical illness for children. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parental_alienation

Parental Alienation is child abuse

according to Amy J.L. Baker PhD. in her article in Psychology Today 
​"Parental Alienation is Emotional Abuse of Children"

​Parental alienation is a set of strategies that parents use to undermine and interfere with a child's relationship with his or her other parent. This often but not always happens when parents are engaged in a contested custody battle. There is no one definitive set of behaviors that constitute parental alienation but research with both parents and children has revealed a core set of alienation strategies, including bad-mouthing the other parent, limiting contact with that parent, erasing the other parent from the life and mind of the child (forbidding discussion and pictures of the other parent), forcing the child to reject the other parent, creating the impression that the other parent is dangerous, forcing the child to choose, and belittling and limiting contact with the extended family of the targeted parent.
Parents who try to alienate their child from his or her other parent convey a three-part message to the child: (1) I am the only parent who loves you and you need me to feel good about yourself, (2) the other parent is dangerous and unavailable, and (3) pursuing a relationship with that parent jeopardizes your relationship with me. In essence the child receives the message that s/he is worthless and unloved and only of value for meeting the needs of others. This is the core experience of psychological maltreatment (emotional abuse) as defined by the American Professional Society on the Abuse of Children (APSAC).
Research with "adult children" of parental alienation syndrome (that is, adults who believe that when they were children one parent turned them against the other parent) confirms that being exposed to parental alienation represents a form of emotional abuse. Furthermore, these adults reported that when they succumbed to the pressure and rejected one parent to please the other, the experience was associated with several negative long-term effects including depression, drug abuse, divorce, low self-esteem, problems with trusting, and alienation from their own children when they became parents themselves. In this way the cycle of parental alienation was carried forward through the generations. Thus, parental alienation is a form of emotional abuse that damages the child's self esteem in the short run and is associated with life-long damage.
As is often true with other forms of abuse, the child victims of parental alienation are not aware that they are being mistreated and often cling vehemently to the favored parent, even when that parent's behavior is harmful to them. This is why, mental health and legal professionals involved in cases of parental alienation need to look closely at the family dynamics and determine what the cause of the child's preferences for one parent and rejection of the other parent are. If the favored parent is found to be instigating the alignment and the rejected parent is found to be a potential positive and non abusive influence, then the child's preferences should not be strictly heeded. The truth is, despite strongly held positions of alignment, inside many alienated children want nothing more than to be given permission and freedom to love and be loved by both parents. https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/caught-between-parents/201106/parental-alienation-is-emotional-abuse-children

​

High Conflict Individuals

According to Bill Eddy, LCSW, JD
Who Are High Conflict People?
​By Bill Eddy, LCSW, Esq.

 The term “high conflict” had been around for at least twenty years, especially in regard to “high-conflict families” in divorce. I wanted to shift the focus to describe and deal with individuals, since it seemed that many high-conflict families included only one high-conflict person – and that dealing directly with that person would be the most effective way to help the family.
Since I had been a therapist before becoming a lawyer, I knew about personality disorders, how confusing they were, how persuasive they could be, and some of the methods for treating them. Yet no one outside of psychiatric treatment seemed to have a clue about their behavior – and often reacted in ways that made things worse. Since I was also seeing the same personality-disordered behavior in workplace disputes and neighbor disputes, as well as non-divorce legal disputes, I wanted to explain to others what was going on. People with personality disorders were showing up in all of these settings as “high-conflict” people, where their behavior was interpreted as simply about the current “issue,” rather than about the need for serious mental health treatment. Now, after a dozen years of focusing on this subject, I want to explain my current understanding of these terms in this article, and how to use them in a positive and practical way.
An Observable High Conflict Pattern
High-conflict people (HCPs) have a pattern of high-conflict behavior that increases conflict rather than reducing or resolving it. This pattern usually happens over and over again in many different situations with many different people. The issue that seems in conflict at the time is not what is increasing the conflict. The “issue” is not the issue. With HCPs the high-conflict pattern of behavior is the issue, including a lot of:

1. All-or-nothing thinking
2. Unmanaged emotions
3. Extreme behaviors
4. Blaming others

All-or-nothing thinking: HCPs tend to see conflicts in terms of one simple solution rather than taking time to analyze the situation, hear different points of view and consider several possible solutions. Compromise and flexibility seem impossible to them, as though they could not survive if things did not turn out absolutely their way. They often predict extreme outcomes if others do not handle things the way that they want. And if friends disagree on a minor issue, they may end their friendships on the spot – an all-or-nothing solution.
Unmanaged emotions: HCPs tend to become very emotional about their points of view and often catch everyone else by surprise with their intense fear, anger, yelling or disrespect for those nearby or receiving their comments over the Internet – or anywhere. Their emotions are often way out of proportion to the issue being discussed. This often shocks everyone else. They often seem unable to control their own emotions and may regret them afterwards – or defend them as totally appropriate, and insist that you should too.
On the other hand, there are some HCPs who don’t lose control of their emotions, but use emotional manipulation to hurt others. They may trigger upset feelings in ways that are not obvious (sometimes while they seem very calm). But these emotional manipulations push people away and don’t get them what they want in the long run. They often seem clueless about their devastating and exhausting emotional impact on others.
Extreme behaviors: HCPs frequently engage in extreme behavior, whether it’s in writing or in person. This may include shoving or hitting, spreading rumors or outright lies, trying to have obsessive contact and keep track of your every move – or refusing to have any contact at all, even though you may be depending on them to respond. Many of their extreme behaviors are related to losing control over their emotions, such as suddenly throwing things or making very mean statements to those they care about the most. Other behaviors are related to an intense drive to control or dominate those closest to them, such as hiding your personal items, keeping you from leaving a conversation, threatening extreme action if you don’t agree, or physically abusing you.
Blaming others: HCPs stand out, because of the intensity of their blame for others – especially for those closest to them or in authority positions over them. For them, it is highly personal and feels like they might not survive if things don’t go their way. So they focus on attacking and blaming someone else and find fault with everything that person does, even though it may be quite minor or non-existent compared to the high-conflict behavior of the HCP. In contrast to their blame of others, they can see no fault in themselves and see themselves as free of all responsibility for the problem. If you have been someone’s target of blame, you already know what I’m talking about.
They also blame strangers, because it is so easy. On the Internet, they can be anonymous and make the most extreme statements. Even if they know you, there is a sense of distance and safety, so that extremely blaming statements can flow.
A Predictable Pattern
Perhaps 15% of our society (and growing) seems preoccupied with blaming others a lot of the time. Though it’s a growing problem, it’s a predictable problem—and can be handled in most cases, if you understand it. Once you know some aspects of their pattern of behavior, you may be able to anticipate other problems that will arise and avoid them or prepare to respond to them.
HCPs seek Targets of Blame, because blaming others unconsciously helps them feel better about themselves. Blaming others also helps them unconsciously feel safer and stronger when they connect with other people. They’re constantly in distress and totally unaware of the negative, self-defeating effects of their own behavior. In a sense they are blind. Since HCPs can’t see the connection between their own behavior and their problems, their difficult behavior continues and their conflicts grow.
The Underlying Personality Pattern
High Conflict People have high-conflict personalities. Conflict is part of who they are. It’s a life-long personality pattern of thinking, feeling, and acting. Time after time, they avoid taking responsibility for their problems. Time after time, they argue against feedback, regardless of how helpful and truthful it may be. And time after time, they try to persuade others to agree with their rigid points of view and to help them attack their Targets of Blame. The issues come and go, but their personality traits keep them in conflict. Their problems remain unresolved and the stress on those around them often increases.
From my own experience and the feedback of many people who take our seminars with High Conflict Institute, the HCP personality pattern seems to be the same, regardless of the kind of conflict or who else is involved:
Underlying High-Conflict Personality Pattern
1.    Rigid and Uncompromising, Repeating Failed Strategies
2.    Difficulty Accepting and Healing Loss
3.    Negative Emotions Dominate their Thinking
4.    Inability to Reflect on their Own Behavior
5.    Difficulty Empathizing With Others
6.    Preoccupied with Blaming Others
7.    Avoids Any Responsibility For the Problem or the Solution
Perhaps you know someone with this pattern. Someone who insists that you, or someone you know, is entirely to blame for a large or small (or non-existent) problem. If so, he or she may be an HCP. However, before you rush to tell that person that he or she is an HCP, remember: Do not openly label people and don’t use this information as a weapon. It will make your life much more difficult if you do.
Personality Disorders
Is a high-conflict personality the same thing as a personality disorder? Not exactly, but there is a lot of overlap. From my training and experience as a therapist, I believe that the people who become HCPs have personality disorders—or some “traits” of a personality disorder.
When I worked as a therapist at psychiatric hospitals and clinics, I learned a lot about patients with personality disorders. Years later, when I became an attorney and mediator, I recognized that the people who were stuck in high-conflict behavior had many of the same characteristics as people with personality disorders.
A personality disorder is a long-term dysfunctional pattern of thinking, feeling and behaving that affects many areas of a person’s life. People with personality disorders are not crazy or stupid, and some are very intelligent. Instead, they have “blind spots”—especially regarding their behavior with the people close to them in everyday life. They have daily personal problems which they keep repeating and repeating. Yet they don’t recognize these problems and can’t seem to stop themselves, even when their problems are obvious to everyone around them—and are harmful to themselves. They’re stuck in self-defeating and self-destructive behavior.
People with personality disorders are psychologically unable to grasp the consequences of many of their actions. They have a psychological barrier against examining their own behavior, and therefore they don’t change their own behavior, even when it would help them. Instead, they defend their actions and personalities—and remain stuck repeating their self-defeating behavior.
HCPs and people with personality disorders share three key characteristics:
1.    They lack self-awareness, especially of the effects of their own interpersonal behavior on others.
2.    They don’t change their behavior, even when receiving repeated negative feedback.
3.    They “externalize” responsibility for problems in life, blaming forces beyond themselves.
In addition, HCPs have the following two behavior patterns which many people with personality disorders do not have:
HCPs are preoccupied with a “Target of Blame” – usually someone very close to them (boyfriend, girlfriend, spouse, parent, child, best friend, etc.) or someone in an apparent position of authority (supervisor, company, government agency, police, doctor, lawyer, politician, etc.). They take aggressive action against that person, including lawsuits, employment complaints, spreading rumors, and even violence, in an effort to get that person to go away or change their behavior, so that the HCP will stop feeling so threatened inside. Many people with personality disorders do not focus on one person this way and are not able to sustain an attack against another person the way that HCPs do.
HCPs persuade others to be “Negative Advocates” [Flying Monkeys]– usually family, friends or professionals who help in blaming the Target – which escalates their conflicts instead of helping them calm down to solve their problems. Negative Advocates are emotionally hooked by the intense fear and anger of the HCP, yet they are usually uninformed. When they hear about (or experience) the HCP’s extreme behavior, they often abandon the HCP, so that HCPs are constantly seeking new Negative Advocates. This ability to engage Negative Advocates enables High Conflict People to avoid confronting their own behavior, so that nothing changes and their “high-conflict” situations continue. Many people with personality disorders do not focus on a Target of Blame, so they don’t recruit Negative Advocates.
Maladaptive Traits
Many high-conflict people have some maladaptive personality traits, but not enough to have a personality disorder. They may have some self-awareness, make some efforts to change and blame others less. However, they still have a pattern of escalating conflicts, with Targets of Blame and Negative Advocates, so that they have the pattern of a high-conflict person. Therefore, HCPs do not always have personality disorders and people with personality disorders are not always HCPs. For practical purposes, the same methods apply with anyone – including those with or without personality disorders – so you never have to figure this out.
HCP is Not a Diagnosis
When I developed the terms High Conflict Person, High Conflict Personality and HCP, I did not intend them to be a mental health diagnosis, such as a personality disorder. My intention was to assist ordinary people in managing their professional and/or personal relationships with possible HCPs, not treating the individual as a patient. My intention was to make this information accessible to anyone who needed it if they suspected someone might be an HCP.
I recommend having a “Private Working Theory” that someone may be an HCP. You don’t tell the person and you don’t assume you are right. You simply focus on key methods to help in managing your relationship, such as paying more attention to: 1) connecting or bonding with the person with empathy, attention and respect; 2) structuring the relationship around tasks rather than reacting to emotions; 3) reality testing so that you don’t necessarily believe everything you are told, but also don’t assume the person is lying because they may honestly believe inaccurate information; and 4) educating about consequences, as HCPs are often caught up in the moment and can’t see the risks ahead.
Of course, the HCP concept is closely related to the issues and methods of dealing with people with personality disorders. But only mental health professionals can diagnosis and treat personality disorders. While the committee currently revising the DSM is planning to change the way diagnoses are made for personality disorders, it won’t have any effect on dealing with possible HCPs – because this is not a diagnosis. It’s a description of high-conflict patterns of behavior.
It’s better to learn about the predictable behavior patterns of HCPs and ways to respond constructively in professional and personal relationships. If you think someone is an HCP, use this information as a Private Working Theory and focus on changing your own behavior, not theirs.
High Conflict Institute provides training, consultations, books, CDs and DVDs regarding High Conflict People (HCPs) to individuals and professionals dealing with legal, workplace, educational, and healthcare disputes. Bill Eddy is the President of the High Conflict Institute and the author of several books, including “It’s All Your Fault!” He is an attorney, mediator, and therapist. HCI speakers have presented seminars to attorneys, judges, mediators, ombudspersons, human resource professionals, employee assistance professionals, managers, and administrators in over 25 states, several provinces in Canada, France, Australia and Sweden. For more information go to: www.HighConflictInstitute.com or call 619-221-9108.
http://www.highconflictinstitute.com/who-are-high-conflict-people

Administrator's caveat; mental health professionals are reluctant and many are not qualified to make a personality disorder diagnosis. This is part of our struggle. All authors have been given credit for their works. We are merely using their works as a sample and as a reference of our visitors. For additional information contact the individual authors.

Eight Cardinal Symptoms of PA
​
According to Richard Gardner, PhD.

​​The Eight Cardinal Symptoms of Parental Alienation Syndrome (Gardner, 1998)
1) A campaign of denigration
The child is obsessed with the "hatred" of the target parent. The child speaks of the hated parent with every vilification and profanity in their vocabulary. The vilification has the rehearsed quality of a litany. The denigration includes not just the negativity of the other parent (AP), but also the child's own contributions. The denigration may or may not include false sex-abuse allegations.

2) Weak, Frivolous, and absurd rationalisations for the deprecation
The child justifies and rationalises the rejection of the TP with weak and ludicrous explanations. The child may also try to justify the hatred and alienation of the TP with old memories of minor altercations with the alienated parent. When PAS children are pressed to provide more detailed explanations for the rejection, they are unable to do so.

3) Lack of ambivalence
The PAS child exhibits a complete lack of ambivalence. Whereas all relationships are ambivalent - that is characterised by mixed feelings and the ability to see good and bad points in other people, the PAS abused child views the hated parent (TP) as all bad and the loved parent (AIP) as all good. The AIP is often idealised and can do no wrong.

4) The "independent-thinker" phenomenon
The PAS child will profoundly insist that their decision to reject the TP is their own and that they have not been influenced by the AIP. This is often coupled with the AIP stating that the child's decision to reject the TP is the child's own.

5) Reflexive support of the alienating parent
The PAS child automatically takes the position of the AIP. Even when the parents are seen together in joint sessions/family conference and the child is presented with firm evidence that supports the vilified parents (TP) position, the PAS child will refuse to accept the proof and may not even give the TP the opportunity to present his side of the argument.

6) Absence of guilt over cruelty towards the alienated parent
The PAS child will usually not exhibit any guilt or remorse for the rejection of or cruelty towards the TP. The child will often show no gratitude towards the TP for gifts, financial support or reciprocate expressions of affection from the TP.

7) Borrowed scenarios
There is a rehearsed quality to the child's litany - the child will use phrases and terms not commonly used by children of that age. The child will repeat expressions identical to those used by the AIP. The child may also cite events or behave as if they were hurt or injured during a conflict at which they were not present.

8) Spread of animosity to the extended family and friends of the alienated parent
The PAS child's hatred or rejection of the TP will often spread to include that parent's extended family and friends. Grandparents, uncles, aunties, cousins and even siblings with who the child had a loving relationship will now be viewed obnoxiously and the child will refuse to associate with them.
http://www.sharedparenting.org.uk/www.sharedparenting.org.uk/symptoms

Parental Alienation similar to "Stockholm Syndrome"

According to Ludwig F. Lowenstein, PhD.

A child who has had a good relationship with the now shunned parent will state: “I don’t need my father/mother; I only need my mother/father. Such a statement is based on the brainwashing received and the power of the alienator who is indoctrinating the child to sideline the previously loving parent. 
In the case of the Stockholm Syndrome, we have in some ways a similar scenario. Here the two natural loving parents have been sidelined by the work of subtle or direct alienation by the perpetrator of the abduction of the young girl. At age 10, the child is helpless to resist the power of her abductor. 
To the question: “How does the abductor eventually become her benefactor?”, we may note the process is not so dissimilar to the brainwashing carried by the custodial parent. This is done for the double reason of: 1) Gaining the total control over the child and consequently its dependence upon them. 2) To sideline the other parent and to do all possible to prevent and/or curtail contact between the child and the absent parent/parents. 
The primary reason for such behavior is the intractable hostility of the custodial parents towards one another. This reason does not exist in the case of the abductor of a child such as occurred in the case of Natascha Kambusch. Nevertheless the captor wished to totally alienate or eliminate the child’s loyalty or any feeling towards her natural parents. Due to the long period away from her parents and a total dependence for survival on her captor, Natascha’s closeness to her family gradually faded. She may even have felt that her own parents were making little or no effort to find her and rescue her. This view may also have been inculcated by her captor.
Her captor’s total mastery and control over her, eventually gave her a feeling of security. She could depend on the man to look after her with food, shelter, warmth, protection and hence led to her survival. Such behaviour on the part of the captor led over time not only to “learned helplessness” and dependence, but in a sense to gratefulness. As he was the only human being in her life this was likely to happen. She therefore became a ready victim of what is commonly termed the “Stockholm Syndrome” or the victim of “Parental Alienation.”
​http://www.parental-alienation.info/publications/46-thecomofparalitothestosyn.htm


According to Linda Kase-Gottlieb, LMFT, LCSW-r
Missing The Alienation
April 22, 2014
Why do mental health professionals and attorneys who evaluate or work with alienated children frequently mistake alienation for estrangement?
The main reason is that cases of parental alienation are counterintuitive.  That is, the brain is hardwired to misinterpret and misunderstand the family dynamics in these situations.  That leads to a number of common cognitive errors (thinking errors) that, in turn, lead to serious errors in professional reasoning and decision-making. In other words, The brain is tricked by alienation cases just as it is tricked by an optical illusion. Consequently, many professionals, including mental health professionals and attorneys, get these cases backwards. Often, the targeted parent is unfairly criticized for having allegedly contributed to his or her rejection, and the alienating parent is either absolved or believed to have made only a minor contribution. Thus, unless the professional has an in-depth understanding of alienation and estrangement, cases of severe alienation are frequently mistaken for estrangement.
This phenomenon has been described in some detail by Steven Miller, M.D., a physician who studies clinical reasoning and clinical decision-making. For an excellent summary, readers might wish to refer to a chapter that Dr. Miller wrote entitled, “Clinical Reasoning and Decision-Making in Cases of Child Alignment: Diagnostic and Therapeutic Issues,” in the book, Working with Alienated Children and Families, edited by Amy J. L. Baker, Ph.D. and Richard Sauber, Ph.D.  Dr. Miller examines the complexity of alienation cases, explains why such cases are so counterintuitive, even to professionals, and describes how even the most experienced mental health practitioner can succumb to a variety of cognitive and clinical errors.
I will subsequently specify some of the more common counterintuitive mistakes and biases that occur in alienation cases. But I wish first to discuss how an experienced mental health professional can be fooled in these cases and may be no better at diagnosing alienation than a layperson.
Why is that so?  For one thing, professionals who are assigned to conduct custody evaluations, provide reunification therapy, or represent a child in court are usually not experts in alienation and estrangement.  Parental alienation is a highly specialized area, a subspecialty within the field of family dynamics and family systems therapy.  It requires special knowledge and special skills. But most mental health professionals have received little or no specialized training in these areas.
For instance, most custody evaluations are performed by clinical psychologists. And yet, the usual doctoral degree in clinical psychology does not include even a single course in family dynamics. Although I collaborate with many knowledgeable PAS-aware psychologists — many of whom are excellent, superb clinicians — they have usually gained their expertise in parental alienation through extensive practice experience, not as part of their formal training.  A similar situation exists within the discipline of child psychiatry, which generally provides little or no specialized training in family dynamics. Although some degree programs in clinical social work offer the option of specializing in family dynamics and family therapy, that is only an option, and many clinical social workers have little or no background in this area. Among mental health professionals, one of the few degrees that actually require formal training in family dynamics is a degree in marriage and family systems therapy, and even those who hold that degree are not necessarily experts in alienation and estrangement.
The bottom line is that not all mental health practitioners have the required expertise to handle cases of parental alienation, and not all therapists are bona fide specialists, let alone subspecialists, in alienation and estrangement.
Thus, parental alienation is a complex subspecialty that requires special expertise.  To make this point, I sometimes use the following analogy: both a tax attorney and a divorce lawyer have gone to law school, and are presumably familiar with basic legal principles.  Nevertheless, each would probably be over his or her head — like a fish out of water — if he or she attempted to practice the other specialty.
The situation is even more problematic for attorneys who deal with parental alienation. As previously noted, such cases are highly-counterintuitive, and attorneys who do not have special expertise in this area can make a multitude of cognitive, legal and strategic errors — including serious errors when trying these cases in court. Although Dr. Miller has described more than 30 such errors, some are particularly important and are highlighted here.

• Most professionals believe that if a child has rejected a parent, the parent must have done something to warrant it. Few people would even think of another explanation: namely that the child had been programmed or brainwashed, just like what occurs in a cult or in the well-known Stockholm syndrome. But if one were to compare alienated children to foster children — specifically, children who had been removed from their parents due to actual abuse and neglect — the difference would be obvious.  Children who have truly been abused crave a relationship with their parents.  Paradoxically — and this is what makes it so counterintuitive — with few exceptions, abused children protect their abusive parents.  They do not disparage, attack or reject them. I myself saw this consistently during my 24 years of working in New York State’s Child Welfare System.
• Most professionals believe that it is unlikely that a child would align with an abusive, alienating parent. What is missed here is that the child is vulnerable to the manipulations of the alienating parent, such as bribery, abuse of authority and power, and permissiveness.  We know how it is generally the targeted/alienated parent who enforces the appropriate discipline to fill the parental vacuum vacated by the alienating parent.  By doing so, targeted/alienated parents are incredibly misunderstood and doubly victimized by the inexperienced professional, who then labels them as too harsh and not respectful of their children’s feelings and wishes.
• Most professionals confuse pathological enmeshment with healthy bonding. To the naïve observer, the closeness and clinging seen with enmeshed parent-child relationships seems normal, even healthy. But it is not. As a result of this dysfunctional relationship, alienated children lose their individuality; must suppress their natural feelings of love and need for a parent; and are manipulated to do the bidding of the alienating parent. That is extremely dangerous and damaging to the child.

Having fallen prey to these and other cognitive errors, mental health professionals who lack expertise in alienation then succumb to other biases that lead them to conclude that the alienating parent is competent and the targeted parent is not — in other words, those professionals get it backwards.
For example, the targeted parent frequently presents with symptoms of anxiety, depression and fear. What PAS-unaware professionals fail to understand is that these symptoms are situational and maintained by the alienation and are not dispositional. As noted by Dr. Miller, this is called the fundamental attribution error. It is one of the most common and pernicious cognitive errors. Likewise, it is common for PAS-unaware professionals to conclude that a targeted parent’s anger is the result of a character flaw instead of the result of trauma caused by the alienation.  This may include:
Having been maltreated by the other parent and the child; 
Being maltreated by the professionals in the mental health and/or judicial systems and who have been coopted by the alienating parent;

• Being falsely accused of abusing his or her child;
• Fearing incarceration due to false allegations; or
• Being drained of financial resources or pushed into bankruptcy.

Even the most emotionally stable individual would become anxious and angry in the face of such attacks. 
Another common error is to fail to adequately consider the baseline situation. If the primary problem is alienation, then, by definition, the targeted parent’s behavior was generally acceptable and there was no evidence of abuse or neglect. His or her functioning was adequate, and the relationship with the child was good or normal. Yet some professionals ignore these critical elements of the family's history, placing too much emphasis on their personal observations and too little emphasis on the baseline relationships.
Other common cognitive errors in such cases include:

• Anchoring.As used in cognitive science, anchoring refers to a phenomenon in which a judgment is unduly influenced by initial information, and there is inadequate adjustment when additional, contradictory information becomes available.
• Confirmation bias. Once anchored to an opinion, the PAS-unaware professional can succumb to confirmation bias,which is a tendency to focus on evidence that might confirm a hypothesis while neglecting evidence that might refute it. 
• Premature closure. This cognitive error ensues when the evaluator arrives at a final conclusion or diagnosis before obtaining and considering sufficient information.  Factors that lead to premature closure in alienation cases include but are not limited to completing and submitting a custody evaluation without obtaining information from the targeted parent’s long-standing therapist; failing to interview all relevant collateral contacts, especially collateral contacts who have positive things to say about the targeted parent or from those who can confirm the alienation; and failure to properly assess intra-family relationships by doing semi-structured interviews not only with the family as a whole and with various sub-groups but with each individual member.

Given the immense responsibility of professionals who intervene in children’s lives, it behooves us to employ the highest standard of professional conduct and ethics. That means selecting only professionals who have adequate expertise and skill to handle such cases. Because they are so counterintuitive, many cases require a subspecialist in alienation and estrangementin order to reliably rule in, or rule out, alienation, and distinguish it from true estrangement.
Author’s notes: (1) The preceding comments about custody evaluators also apply to reunification therapists and other professionals.  I have written extensively about appropriate therapy in my 2012 book, The Parental Alienation Syndrome: A Family Therapy and Collaborative Systems Approach to Amelioration. I also contributed a chapter on treatment to Working With Alienated Children and Families: A Clinical Guidebook (2012), i.e., the book previously discussed in this article. I look forward to contributing an article summarizing treatment issues in cases of parental alienation to National Parents Organization. (2) I would like to thank Dr. Steven Miller for reviewing this manuscript and offering suggestions prior to publication.
https://www.nationalparentsorganization.org/blog/16-latest-news/21679-missing-the-alienation



For more information regarding Parental Alienation visit;
https://www.facebook.com/groups/PAWWSG

http://www.calsouthern.edu/content/events/parent

al-alienation-an-attachment-based-model

http://www.parental-alienation.info

​http://www.warshak.com

Parental Alienation IS Child Abuse

• Mental Health professionals (psychiatrist, psychologist, social workers, counselors, therapists)  have already determined the acts and behaviors that constitute parental alienation (PA) are psychologically and emotionally abusive to the child and are detrimental to the child's normal healthy emotional development.   Usually, only the former spouse and other intimate partners are aware of the abusive behavior and were oftentimes subjected to it themselves.  
• This abuse is as dangerous as physical and sexual abuse for a child and must be prevented as much as possible.

                 Please sign into our guestbook via our contact page. We will need everyone's support when we contact legislators.
​