This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/nov/29/crackdown-on-parental-alienation-could-do-more-harm-than-good
The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| Crackdown on parental alienation could do more harm than good | Crackdown on parental alienation could do more harm than good |
| (about 2 months later) | |
| Letters | |
| Wed 29 Nov 2017 19.17 GMT | |
| Last modified on Wed 29 Nov 2017 22.00 GMT | |
| Share on Facebook | |
| Share on Twitter | |
| Share via Email | |
| View more sharing options | |
| Share on LinkedIn | |
| Share on Pinterest | |
| Share on Google+ | |
| Share on WhatsApp | |
| Share on Messenger | |
| Close | |
| The Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service’s new guidance on “parental alienation” (Parents at war could risk losing children, 18 November) is worrying. Cafcass justifies its “groundbreaking” approach by a significant rise in alienation cases, with 11%-15% of children of divorcing parents being turned against their non-resident parents – a process that can profoundly damage the child. | The Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service’s new guidance on “parental alienation” (Parents at war could risk losing children, 18 November) is worrying. Cafcass justifies its “groundbreaking” approach by a significant rise in alienation cases, with 11%-15% of children of divorcing parents being turned against their non-resident parents – a process that can profoundly damage the child. |
| Parental alienation is undeniably damaging, especially in its more extreme form. Nevertheless, as early as 2001, American researchers were warning that too often in divorce situations, all children resisting contact were being labelled “alienated” and their parents as abusive and “alienating parents”. More recent research (Fortin, Hunt and Scanlon, 2012: Taking a longer view of contact: The perspectives of young adults who experienced parental separation in their youth) suggests that it is a mistake to assume that a child’s reluctance to have contact with the non-resident parent is simply due to brainwashing by the resident parent. Our evidence suggests that even relatively young children may have very clear reasons of their own for resistance to contact. | Parental alienation is undeniably damaging, especially in its more extreme form. Nevertheless, as early as 2001, American researchers were warning that too often in divorce situations, all children resisting contact were being labelled “alienated” and their parents as abusive and “alienating parents”. More recent research (Fortin, Hunt and Scanlon, 2012: Taking a longer view of contact: The perspectives of young adults who experienced parental separation in their youth) suggests that it is a mistake to assume that a child’s reluctance to have contact with the non-resident parent is simply due to brainwashing by the resident parent. Our evidence suggests that even relatively young children may have very clear reasons of their own for resistance to contact. |
| Cafcass’s plan to “help” “abusive” parents “to change their behaviour with the help of intense therapy” sounds Kafkaesque, especially with the ultimate sanction of care proceedings to remove the child. Hopefully it is considering carefully the extreme dangers of mistakenly diagnosing parental alienation. After all, failure to establish the real reason for a child’s resistance to contact may lead to abuse and/or domestic violence being overlooked, and, worse, to the child being removed from a victimised mother seeking only to protect her child. Jane FortinEmeritus professor of law, Sussex University | Cafcass’s plan to “help” “abusive” parents “to change their behaviour with the help of intense therapy” sounds Kafkaesque, especially with the ultimate sanction of care proceedings to remove the child. Hopefully it is considering carefully the extreme dangers of mistakenly diagnosing parental alienation. After all, failure to establish the real reason for a child’s resistance to contact may lead to abuse and/or domestic violence being overlooked, and, worse, to the child being removed from a victimised mother seeking only to protect her child. Jane FortinEmeritus professor of law, Sussex University |
| • Speaking as someone who was “alienated” from a parent while growing up, and therefore didn’t see them for most of my teenage years, I read with horror the “groundbreaking” plans by Cafcass to potentially force children to live with the parent they are alienated from and even to cut off contact with the alienating parent. | • Speaking as someone who was “alienated” from a parent while growing up, and therefore didn’t see them for most of my teenage years, I read with horror the “groundbreaking” plans by Cafcass to potentially force children to live with the parent they are alienated from and even to cut off contact with the alienating parent. |
| Parental alienation is damaging to children, and to the adults they become. But there is absolutely nothing about this proposal that would have helped in my situation and a great deal that would have made it worse. Parental alienation is rarely black and white – most parents who discourage contact with the non-resident parent are motivated by good intentions, however misguided. The child comes to believe the picture they paint of that parent. This means that forcing the child to live with the alienated parent will be extremely frightening for the child. The use of the child as a pawn of the state to punish the alienating parent, and the threat of cessation of contact with them, simply replicates and deepens the coercive abuse of power the child is already experiencing at the hands of their parents. Either way, the child still risks loss of a parental relationship. | Parental alienation is damaging to children, and to the adults they become. But there is absolutely nothing about this proposal that would have helped in my situation and a great deal that would have made it worse. Parental alienation is rarely black and white – most parents who discourage contact with the non-resident parent are motivated by good intentions, however misguided. The child comes to believe the picture they paint of that parent. This means that forcing the child to live with the alienated parent will be extremely frightening for the child. The use of the child as a pawn of the state to punish the alienating parent, and the threat of cessation of contact with them, simply replicates and deepens the coercive abuse of power the child is already experiencing at the hands of their parents. Either way, the child still risks loss of a parental relationship. |
| It would be a very different matter if this intervention is trying to find out the “authentic” views of the child, but there is little in this article to suggest this is the plan. We need to stop looking to coercive interventions as a tool to fix complex problems in family relationships. Why, for example, is the “solution” to the alienating parent to force them into therapy, and what ethical therapist would undertake therapy under duress? An alternative strategy (which was never offered to me) would be to offer long-term advocacy support to the child, and therapy if needed, to help them pick their way through the mess their parents have created and determine for themselves what they want. | It would be a very different matter if this intervention is trying to find out the “authentic” views of the child, but there is little in this article to suggest this is the plan. We need to stop looking to coercive interventions as a tool to fix complex problems in family relationships. Why, for example, is the “solution” to the alienating parent to force them into therapy, and what ethical therapist would undertake therapy under duress? An alternative strategy (which was never offered to me) would be to offer long-term advocacy support to the child, and therapy if needed, to help them pick their way through the mess their parents have created and determine for themselves what they want. |
| It is also worth noting that in the absence of legal aid for private law family litigation, both parents and the child risk loss of at least one of the most important of life’s relationships without legal representation. We would not tolerate this for public law care proceedings, even though the outcome may be the same. I’m disappointed that the Guardian seems to have presented these controversial proposals as positive and groundbreaking without pause for thought.Name and address supplied | It is also worth noting that in the absence of legal aid for private law family litigation, both parents and the child risk loss of at least one of the most important of life’s relationships without legal representation. We would not tolerate this for public law care proceedings, even though the outcome may be the same. I’m disappointed that the Guardian seems to have presented these controversial proposals as positive and groundbreaking without pause for thought.Name and address supplied |
| • Join the debate – email guardian.letters@theguardian.com | • Join the debate – email guardian.letters@theguardian.com |
| • Read more Guardian letters – click here to visit gu.com/letters | • Read more Guardian letters – click here to visit gu.com/letters |
| Children | |
| Divorce | |
| Family law | |
| Parents and parenting | |
| Family | |
| Young people | |
| letters | |
| Share on Facebook | |
| Share on Twitter | |
| Share via Email | |
| Share on LinkedIn | |
| Share on Pinterest | |
| Share on Google+ | |
| Share on WhatsApp | |
| Share on Messenger | |
| Reuse this content |