If you’re struggling to manage your relationship with your child during a high-conflict separation or divorce, you’ve likely heard the term “parental alienation.” Maybe you’ve even come across “clinical” definitions that resonate with you and your current situation. However, “parental alienation” itself has a complicated history, and negative connotations in clinical, legal, and emotional terms.
We believe that “parental alienation” fails to capture the nuances of a challenging family dynamic, and can often create barriers to recovery and restoring the bond between you and your child. Adopting a more accurate outlook on family bond obstruction can help you counteract its symptoms.
Parental Alienation: A Loaded Term
The term “parental alienation” was first used in the 1980s by Dr. Richard Gardner to describe a “mental condition in which a child (usually one whose parents are engaged in a high-conflict divorce) allies himself or herself strongly with one parent and rejects a relationship with the other parent without legitimate justification.” Later, Dr. Craig Childress elaborated on this definition, describing a complex family trauma involving “attachment-based pathology” caused by “child psychological abuse” by the parent that the child aligns with.
While the term “parental alienation” seems to describe how a parent-child relationship deteriorates over time, it can be problematic from clinical, legal, and emotional standpoints.
First and foremost, “parental alienation” has never been recognized as a mental health condition by the American Psychiatric Association, the World Health Organization, or any other medical governing body. To date, there is no recognized standard for diagnosing this complex family dynamic.
Family courts have followed the medical profession’s lead, generally frowning upon the use of “parental alienation” in legal arguments. Far too often, it is used alongside other poorly-defined terms such as “malicious mother syndrome” and “toxic masculinity” to construct polarizing, adversarial arguments that seldom help a parents’ case. As such, using the term in court may prevent you from being taken seriously and obtaining a fair ruling.
Because of its origins and uses, the term “parental alienation” enforces a “black-and-white” mentality that often does parents more emotional harm than good. In reality, the entire family suffers from trauma; thinking in terms of “victims” and “perpetrators” often fails to capture the situation adequately. Both parents are working through the trauma of high-conflict separation, in-turn causing damage to the parent-child bond.
To be clear, we do not deny that the symptoms of “parental alienation” exist, nor do we deny the very real effects they have on a parent-child relationship. Although the works of Dr. Gardner and Dr. Childress are useful in identifying “parental alienation”, their definitions often perpetuate an “us-versus-them” mentality that can prevent emotional healing and restoring your bond with your child.
Renaming and Reframing “Parental Alienation”
Whenever we try to label something as nuanced as a changing family dynamic, we tend to focus more on the label itself than solving the problem and beginning the healing journey. The desire for justification, validation, or simply “winning” will keep you stuck in conflict (with your child stuck in the middle). When dealing with symptoms of “parental alienation,” the focus needs to shift to being the best you can for your child, helping the whole family heal and move forward. Separation and divorce do not end a family; they only restructure it.
Nonetheless, it can be helpful to use less controversial terms to describe the alienation process between a child and their parent. We find the term family bond obstruction more completely describes these situations than “parental alienation,” while the terms favored and disfavored parents avoid adding unnecessary adversity and conflict to the healing process.
Like this article? Check out, “9 More Things I Learned in My Divorce”
Share
Leave a Reply