Understand the aggressive parenting behaviours used to disrupt the parent-child relationship
When I first got married, I didn't know that there was a 50% chance that my marriage would end in divorce. During our marriage we had a child and again, I did not know that there was a one in six chance that my divorce would turn out to be a "major conflict" and that my child would be used by an angry, vengeful eg to avenge the failure of our marriage. In the years since my divorce, the mother's behaviour has intensified. I finally learned what terms like parental exclusion (PA), mean, parental alienation syndrome (PAS), and aggressive parenting (HAP), and experienced how easy it is to manipulate the family law system through false allegations.
In 1985 Dr introduced Richard Garner, a forensic psychiatrist, coined the term PAS in an article titled "Recent Trends in Divorce and Custody Claims", where he defined PAS as "a disorder that occurs mainly in custody disputes. Its primary manifestation is a campaign of discrediting children against one parent, a campaign that has no merit. It is the result of a combination of programming (brainwashing) by the other parent and the child's own contributions to discredit the targeted parent." Several years later, Ira Daniel Turcot presented "Malignant Mother Syndrome Related to Divorce".
The behaviours associated with both syndromes are relatively similar and include aggressive, aggressive parenting behaviour in an attempt to isolate the child from the other parent. The latter, however, focuses on the mother's behaviour, while PAS can be associated with both the mother and the father. Today, PA or PAS are common terms used to define the practice of attempting to isolate a child or children from a parent, regardless of gender.
The official statement of the American Psychological Association (APA) on PAS notes "a lack of data to support the so-called parental alienation syndrome and raises concerns about the use of the term." However, the American Psychological Association (APA) has stated that it "has no official position on the alleged syndrome". Advocates against PAS believe it is a form of child psychological abuse, and the APA's refusal to address PAS leaves "target parents" lacking resources to combat the problem. At the same time, there are those who rule out the validity of the PAA and believe that it is used as an excuse by abusive parents during custody challenges to explain their child or children's hostility towards them. In some cases this can be very true.
In his article, "A New Definition of Parental Alienation: What's the Difference Between Parental Alienation (PA) and Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS)?" Dr. Douglas Darnall focuses on behaviour and defines "Parental Alienation (PA), rather than PAS, as any constellation of behaviours, whether conscious or unconscious, that may cause a disruption in the relationship between a child and the other parent." In short, PA teaches the child to hate the other parent, leading to alienation from the parent. With a focus on behaviour, Dr. Darnall a more pragmatic approach to PA acceptance by lawyers, therapists and family courts.
The tactics or tools that parents use to alienate the child range from simply hurting the other parent in front of the child; - encourage others to do the same, so that the child is bombarded daily with negative remarks; To report allegations of abuse or neglect to child protective services or family law. This behaviour is known as aggressive aggressive parenting. One technique described by author John T. Steinbeck's Children's Brainwashing Book is that some "hostile fathers who remarry will have one or more children call the stepfather, 'Daddy,' as a technique used to devalue the biological parent." Parental separation syndrome is a condition. Aggressive parenting is aggressive behaviour.
Aggressive aggressive parents are unable to move on. They are stuck in the past and focus on revenge for the failure of their marriage and the control they had during the marriage. They manipulate family law and child protective services in an attempt to maintain control over the ex-spouse. They take no responsibility for their actions, blame everyone else and put themselves above the child's own good. Therapist-turned-family law attorney Bill Eddy notes in his article "Personality Disorders and False Claims in Family Court" that there is a "prevalence of personality disorders in high-conflict divorce and custody cases where false claims are used."
The most prevalent is borderline personality disorder, followed by narcissistic personality disorder and antisocial personality disorder. This explains the lack of empathy for the child's emotional state and the ability to manipulate family law and child protection services so easily. Parents with antisocial personality disorder will play the role of the "victim." They are experts at manipulation and lies because they actually believe their lies justify what they do.
Not all children can learn to hate. Some have a strong relationship with parents. Steinbeck also notes that in some cases "the separated parent feels that the other parent has a very strong working relationship with the child or children, and is irrationally concerned that this positive relationship will somehow affect their relationship with the child. " A child who is old enough to decide who they want to live with can result in a reversal of financial obligations, where the non-custodial parent is obligated to pay child support and provide medical coverage for the child. HAP can only be a financial incentive. Regardless of the motives, attempting to distance a child from a parent by using aggressive parenting tactics or parental alienation tactics is psychological child abuse.
It is much easier to remove a child when a child is separated from their parents. False allegations in family court of abuse or neglect will greatly limit the parent-child relationship and will have limited time spent under supervision. The standard divorce decree has already reduced the non-custodial parent to a visitor in the life of the child or children with a visitation schedule on the first, third and fifth weekends of the month. Now the parent is limited to a "supervised" visitation schedule of three or four hours a month. Supervised visitation programs are manipulated as easily as family law manipulations, for example, parents simply need to call in at the last minute to request a rescheduling.
The family court will always support the claims and the court is very slow. Depending on the skill of the lawyer, this separation period can last for several months. This gives the 'target parent' extra time to teach the child to dislike the 'target parent', as well as drains the 'target parent's' financial resources.
A lawyer once told me that "the only place people lie more than family court is in the pub." Family law suffers from false claims simply because it is a very effective tool for quickly severing the relationship between parent and child. Family court does not prosecute false claims, which is why false claims are common. The claims do not have to be specific. Some attorneys advise clients to keep the allegations vague so that investigative agencies like Child Protection Services don't get involved, since their reports carry a lot of weight in court. A claim in family law can be as vague as "the father is a danger to the child." This is enough for the family court to order that visitation be withheld or supervised, but not specifically enough to involve child protective services.
Family law is a system of guilt by accusation. Once charged, it is the defendant's responsibility to prove that the allegations are false. The accused parent will likely be sentenced to a supervised visit with the child or children, as well as to complete a psychological assessment and interview with mediators and parenting coordinators, all at personal expense. He may also pay for a forensic examination, also called a social examination assessment, to prove that claims are false. The accused parent will spend thousands, or perhaps tens of thousands, of dollars trying to prove the accusations false - eventually finding himself/herself financially drained and psychologically exhausted.
The accused parent may lose their relationship with the child or children just because they run out of money to keep fighting. Unfortunately, this also results in the child losing his loving father. David Levy, co-founder of Child Rights Adviser and author of The Best Parent is Both Parents, stated, “President Obama talks a lot about absentee parents who take responsibility. (But) he may not realize that there are millions of parents, who want to be involved (in the lives of their children).” ". The struggle for the "right of the child to both parents" is a costly battle - both financially and psychologically. Lots of parents lose out just because they run out of money.
The solution is to define “in the best interests of the child” as “the right of the child to both parents” and then protect that right. Don't ignore false claims. It is understood that claims must be investigated; However, if it is proven false, the parent who made the false allegations must be prosecuted. Ask this parent to complete a psychological assessment. Intervene to protect the child when you hear your friend or relative make negative comments about the child's father or other aggressive parental behaviour.
Let the child know that both parents love him. Encourage hostile parents to seek treatment to find a solution and to stop using the child to "balance." One thing is for sure: When a parent tries to separate a child from a parent just to avenge a failed marriage, the child experiences emotional pain. Because this pain was intentionally inflicted, it is child psychological abuse. If you engage in or allow aggressive, aggressive parenting behaviour in an attempt to distance a child from a parent, you are complicit in the child's psychological abuse. Stand up and protect the rights of the child and his parents.
.webp)
