Parental Alienation Misinformation

Parental Alienation: Misinformation and the Critics

11/4/2016

One of the most mysterious and vexing issues related to the subject of Parental Alienation, as especially Parental Alienation Syndrome, is the continued criticisms of it.

In most cases, the criticisms are based in misinformation. One of the most prevalent of these notions is that Parental Alienation is used as a shield to deflect from the abuse of a child by a parent. This is simply not the case.

It is repeated throughout the literature (even by sources that disagree on other matters related to the subject) that Parental Alienation is not a proper explanation for a child’s not wanting to see a parent, when that parent has truly been abusing that child. When this is the case, Parental Alienation is not the proper explanation.

That said, it is also the case that Parental Alienation may be misused by unethical attorneys and abusive parents, claiming that their abused child does not want to see them, not because they have been abused, but because of the influences of the other parent.

This is a clear misuse of the Parental Alienation label. This misuse however should not be used as a rationale to dismiss it legitimate use.

Other such criticisms follow this same pattern of misunderstanding and misuse of the literature related to Parental Alienation. I would like to draw attention to an article, "Parental Alienation Syndrome: Examining the Validity Amid Controversy", authored by myself that addresses this in more detail.

I have found that when the criticisms are confronted, that the critic has not read that to which they are referring, or that they had simply been told this misinformation by someone else, who also had not read the source material. This is a troubling, but common finding. It should not perhaps be surprising to find that the dynamic of vilification and distortion is well practiced within this context.

Parental Alienation Initial Consultation

Get help regarding your specific Parental Alienation problem through an Initial Private Consultation with Dr. Bone, this is an important first step for parents experiencing alienation.

6 Comments

Dean Tong link

7/10/2017 12:47:41 pm

Dr. Bone is a consummate professional and long-time expert in high-conflict court cases involving parental alienation. His experience of 20 or more years in the field including his writings, seminars, et al are necessary takes for attorneys and parents who traverse this arena of psychology and the law.

Juliana

10/13/2017 01:26:18 am

You are so full of sh*t. A narcissist won lounges to blabber. PAS was created by Gardener, Pedophile, to protect Pedophiles. It will never NEVER pass the Frye or Daubert reliable scientific method of testing. Therefore, its inadmissibility in court, stands. You are a fcuking moron.
Gardner was also past president of NAMBLA until he committed suicide during a pending class action lawsuit by Richard Ducote.

Elizabeth Eberle

12/28/2017 11:07:36 am

I think that as adults we can make our statements of agreeing or disagreeing without using bad language . That way you say what you want to say and people will listen better to you than just saying gosh maybe they shouldn't be on here.Some sites will take you off for that.There is literature if you will read it that says that PA does exist and a lot of states are now passing laws for this very thing.Even in Washington ,DC they are looking at a new law now to see if they will pass it that includes PA. IT IS NO LONGER CALLED PAS.ONLY PA.Someone has not kept up with all of the information and knowledge and studies going on.There are many Experts in this field that the courts do allow to testify NOW ! Because I work for one.So you are allowed to your own perceptions but things are changing in the world around you for the good of the children so they can have both parents hopefully.Thank you for letting me have my say .

Hooter

5/4/2018 02:15:55 pm

Misperception: Dr. Gardner supports and is fully sympathetic to the practice of pedophilia

Fact: There is absolutely nothing that I have ever said in any of my lectures, or anything that I have written in any of my publications to support this allegation. This is my position on pedophilia: I consider pedophilia to be a form of psychiatric disturbance. Furthermore, I consider those who perpetrate such acts to be exploiting innocent victims with little, if any, sensitivity to the potential effects of their behavior on their child victims. Many are psychopathic, as evidenced by their inability to project themselves into the position of the children they have seduced, and ignore the potential future consequences on the child of their abominable behavior.
Accordingly, we all need protection from pedophiles. Jail is certainly a reasonable place to provide us with such protection. This is especially the case because the vast majority of pedophiles are not going to be cured, or even helped significantly with their problems, by psychotherapy�the assertions of some psychotherapists notwithstanding. By adulthood the pedophilic orientation has been deeply embedded in the brain circuitry and is not likely to be changed by such a superficial approach as �talk therapy.� Nor is it likely to be changed to a significant degree by conditioning techniques, i.e., �behavior modification.� It is as reasonable to believe that one could accomplish this goal as it is to believe that one could change an adult homosexual into a heterosexual and vice versa.
I am also in favor of Megan�s Law, which requires that communities learn about the presence in their midst of pedophiles who have just been released from prison. I do believe, however, that the same laws should be applied to those who have been convicted of certain other crimes such as rape (which in a sense is similar to pedophilia), murder, arson, and other felonies that present formidable risks to the community. In short, I have absolutely no sympathy for pedophiles, and the fact that I have testified in courts of law in defense of innocent parties�who have been wrongly accused of pedophilia�does not mean that I am in any way sympathetic to those who actually perpetrate such a heinous crime.

Misperception: Dr. Gardner believes that everybody has pedophilic tendencies

Fact: I believe that all people are born with the potential to engage in every kind of atypical sexual behavior known to humanity. It behooves parents and other caretakers to suppress socially unacceptable behavior and to channel the child�s sexual urges into socially accepted forms. This should happen in early childhood. In our society the pedophilic potential has been suppressed successfully for the vast majority of individuals. Those who have not experienced such suppression become pedophiles. There have been other societies in the history of the world that have not suppressed pedophilic tendencies. The fact that such suppression has not taken place is a fact of history. This does not mean that I suggest that we emulate such societies or that I approve of pedophilia. Human sacrifice has been widespread in many societies in the history of the world. This also is a fact of history. To state this fact does not mean that I approve of the practice. The suppression of primitive impulses is necessary for the existence of a civilized society. Abba Eban, a former Israeli Ambassodor to the United States, put it well: �Man becomes civilized when his animal impulses are tamed, subdued, and transcended by his social nature.�

Misperception: Dr. Gardner believes that pedophilia is a good thing for society

Fact: I believe that pedophilia is a bad thing for society. I do believe, however, that pedophilia, like all other forms of atypical sexuality, is part of the human repertoire and that all humans are born with the potential to develop any of the forms of atypical sexuality (which are referred to as paraphilias by DSM-IV). My acknowledgment that a form of behavior is part of the human potential is not an endorsement of that behavior. Rape, murder, sexual sadism, and sexual harassment are all part of the human potential. This does not mean I sanction these abominations.
I have noted the historical fact that pedophilia has been and still continues to be a widespread phenomenon. Unfortunately, this has been interpreted by some to indicate that I condone the practice. This is the equivalent that saying that those who note the ubiquity of rape and murder are thereby condoning these atrocities.

Misperception: Dr. Gardner is in strong support of the North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA)

Fact: I have never been a member of this organization, and I am opposed to its primary principles. Adult men who have sex with boys are exploiting them, corrupting them, and contributing to the development of sexual psychopa

Angela link

5/6/2018 11:30:51 pm

I've made similar comments elsewhere before. People who claim Parental Alienation is not real or is widely used by abusers to continue their abuse of the child really do make you feel like losing hope. They make you feel like you’re crazy when you’ve witnessed years of controlling behaviour by people who probably have a personality disorder or at the very least are not very nice people who seek to control every facet of their partners and children’s lives.

Bizarrely, these people tend to accept that there are parents that use coercive and controlling behaviour to keep a child from the other parent which is basically what the supporters of Parental Alienation (PA) are describing. It doesn’t really matter what you call it, it’s the behaviours that drive the outcome that I’m concerned with. Nobody from the PA world is saying that all children are liars and that no investigation should take place – quite the opposite.

The argument that PA pushes legitimate child abuse under the rug makes me feel a little ill. I accept there are abusers that would try to use PA to be able to continue their abuse and I think they are vile BUT isn’t the whole point of the court and family assessment process to properly investigate any allegations that are made, whether that bedomestic violence, sexual abuse, PA etc.? If the highly paid “professionals” in the court system did a better job of that investigation, to the level people in the public assumes happens when a decision as important as cutting of a parent from a child is to be made, the truth would come out. Let’s be honest, these cases drag on for years, surely there is time to do a proper investigation? The issue is the tools the investigators use and the people that conduct them are ill equipped. If the courts had better understanding of coercive/controlling behaviour and had over decades listened to fathers who are genuine victims instead of being blocked at every turn by the “feminist” movement which pitches that all fathers are bad and abusive and every child is in danger of being left with a father that abuses them - then the need to raise awareness of Parental Alienation would not be required.

I know of 4 normal range fathers who have been denied access to their children. One was beaten up by mother’s boyfriend who tried to stop him from collecting their child as she sought to break the contact order. This was recorded on tape, the court refused to listen to his evidence. Eventually he did manage to gain contact and spends quality time with his child and they have a good relationship. Another gave up after years of court when his children had nothing but cruel swear words to describe him and his life was threatened by the mother. After years of no contact he received communication from a third party to inform him that his children had been subjected to severe abuse over the years by their mother. Another didn’t even bother going to court because he was not able to cope with the conflict coming from the mother who was telling the children he was no good, he hoped the children would find him but decades later that hasn’t happened – he went on to happily raise 3 well-adjusted and intelligent children with a new partner. The last is still going through the process after trying very hard to work with the mother over a number of years. Nobody since the first court assessor a number of years ago has reviewed the evidence he has provided or has performed any fact finding to mitigate the false and exaggerated claims subsequently made against him by the mother or the child. So I’m sorry if Ms Russell believes that PA is used as an excuse to push child abuse under the carpet, her arguments against PA are doing the exact same thing in my view.

In the UK, like other countries including the US and Australia, we have a big problem where mothers and children make false or exaggerated claims of abuse against fathers. It’s widely accepted by even those that work in the court system. So until these “professionals” start providing me with hard data I will only go with what I’ve seen – PA is real. Enough women have seen it in action now and recognise it for what it is, the coercive and controlling behaviours by one parent against another – it is child abuse. Domestic abuse is real, sexual abuse is real, parental alienation is real. One does not take priority over the other. The existence of one does not wipe out the existence of the other. Claims of each should be investigated in full.

I agree that most people with empathy for their child’s needs when faced with the relationship breakdown with a normal range parent, don’t end up in family court. So if it is in court something has gone very wrong. Either the parent disputing access to the child has a psychological or control problem or the parent being denied contact is n

Angela link

5/6/2018 11:42:54 pm

Continued... not a normal range parent. The courts need to investigate better to work out which is which BUT each party should have the right to state their evidence. From what I’ve seen that doesn’t happen in the UK. Allegations can be made but they are not investigated. One parents concerns may be heard by an assessor but the other parent’s not. I’ve seen investigatory reports where a child has made false and or exaggerated allegations, there was no fact finding. If I’ve seen it happen live – I’m pretty sure that similar complaints from others are real.

They talk about the parental alienation industry but neglect to mention the infinitely higher financed feminist industry. They talk about not being able to force a child to love a parent but they don’t talk about how children who did originally love a parent can be coerced into rejecting that parent and emotionally killing them off.

The fact that highly paid “professionals”have allowed this state of affairs to go on for decades with all their infighting and politically/financially motivated clap trap is an absolute disgrace. I have no idea how this has not caused more trouble than it has. Unjustifiably alienated parents are committing suicide, controlling parents are killing their children if there is any chance contact is established with the other parent and I’m sure some abusers are able to manipulate the system. That’s not because of PA that’s because of a failure of the investigation process.

Parental Alienation: Misinformation and the Critics

Parental Alienation Initial Consultation

Leave a Reply.

J. Michael Bone, PhD.

Archives

Categories