What is Parental Alienation?
Parental alienation involves a concerted effort on the part of one parent to brainwash a child into hating the other parent. It is a term used by mental health and legal professionals to describe both a complex form of child psychological abuse (i.e., isolating, exploiting/corrupting, terrorizing) and a diagnostic label for identifying a pathologically disturbed parent-child relationship between an alienating parent and a child victim.
- CHILD PSYCHOLOGICAL ABUSE: Parental alienation meets the standard definitions for child psychological and emotional abuse including those of: The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders Fifth Edition (DSM-5) and The American Professional Society on the Abuse of Children (APSAC) Handbook of Child Maltreatment Fourth Edition:
- The DSM-5 defines “child psychological abuse” as any "nonaccidental verbal or symbolic acts by a child’s parent or caregiver that result, or have reasonable potential to result, in significant psychological harm to the child."
- The American Professional Society on the Abuse of Children defines “psychological maltreatment” as “a repeated pattern or extreme incident(s) of caretaker behavior that thwart the child’s basic psychological needs” for “safety,” “socialization,” and “emotional … support.”
- DIAGNOSTIC LABEL: The DSM-5 (2013) has two diagnostic codes which can be used for the diagnosis of parental alienation:
- On page 715 of the DSM-5, the code V61.20 (Z62.820) can be used in settings where a child presents with “unwarranted feelings of estrangement” toward the target parent which is primarily due to the alienating parent's use of “excessive parental pressure” or “parental overprotection” or “hostility toward" [the target parent] or "scapegoating" [of the target parent] in front of the child. The label for this code is “Parent-Child Relational Problem.” Z62.820 “is a billable/specific ICD-10-CM code that can be used to indicate a diagnosis for reimbursement purposes.” It is important to note that “unwarranted feelings of estrangement” due to “excessive parental pressure” are specific diagnostic indicators of parental alienation.
- On page 716 of the DSM-5 manual, the code V61.29 (Z62.898) can be used to help mental health professionals identify, treat, and prevent parental alienation symptoms and its sequelae in cases where “the negative effects of parental relationship discord (e.g., high levels of conflict, distress, or disparagement)” involved a concerted effort by one parent to harm or destroy the children’s relationship with the other parent. The label for this code is: “Child Affected by Relationship Distress.” Z62.898 is a billable/specific ICD-10-CM code that can be used to indicate a diagnosis for reimbursement purposes. It is important to note that when children are negatively affected by parental relationship distress “the reactions of the child may include the onset or exacerbation of psychological symptoms, somatic complaints, an internal loyalty conflict, and, in the extreme, parental alienation, leading to loss of a parent-child relationship.” Typically, “a child affected by parental relationship distress displays impaired functioning in behavioral, cognitive, affective, and / or physical domains. Examples of behavioral problems include oppositionality and the child’s reluctance or refusal to have a relationship with a parent without a good reason (parental alienation).”
What is Third Party Alienation?
How Do We Diagnose Parental Alienation?
Diagnosing parental alienation requires documented evidence that a child has been exposed to one or more parental alienation strategies and/or brainwashing techniques and the exposure is the primary cause for the child to:
- Engage in a “campaign of denigration against the target parent” [The child often present complaints in a litany, some trivial, many false or irrational]
- Utilize “frivolous rationalizations” to justify the denigration [The child’s reactions of hatred or disdain are unjustified and disproportionate to the circumstances they describe. They may claim to be fearful, but they do so easily and without typical fear reactions] and
- Manifest two or more of the following six attitudes and behaviors:
- “lack of ambivalence” [The child manifests all-or-none thinking, idealizing the alienating parent and devaluing the target parent]
- “reflexive support for the alienating parent” [The child immediately and automatically takes the alienating parent’s side in a disagreement]
- “borrowed scenarios” [The child makes rehearsed statements that are identical to those made by the alienating parent. Younger siblings may mimic what they have heard their older sibling say. They usually are unable to elaborate on the details of the events they allege]
- “independent-thinker phenomenon,” [The child proudly states the decision to reject the target parent is his own, not influenced by the alienating parent]
- “absence of guilt or remorse … for mistreatment of the target parent,” [The child may be oppositional, rude, disrespectful, and even violent toward the target parent, and shows little or no remorse for those behaviors]
- “spread of the child’s animosity to the target parent’s extended family” [Expressed feelings and hatred often include the extended family or friends of the target parent, even when the child has had little or no contact with them]
What is the Difference Between Alienation and Estrangement?
Often these two terms are used interchangeably. The word “alienate” means “to cause to become unfriendly or hostile; estrange” and the word “estrange” means “to make hostile, unsympathetic, or indifferent; alienate.” However, the behavioral science literature makes these terms distinguishable through modifiers (i.e., unwarranted, irrational, parental, realistic). For example, the DSM-5 (2013) clarifies how the term estrangement should be used in cases of parental alienation on page 715: “Cognitive problems [within a parent-child relational problem] may include negative attributions of the other’s intentions, hostility toward or scapegoating of the other, and unwarranted feelings of estrangement.” This helps identify cases when an alienated child’s feelings of hostility towards a target parent are unwarranted; meaning they are unreasonably negative and significantly disproportionate to the child’s actual experience with the tar parent. Likewise, when a child’s feelings of estrangement are warranted, then the term “realistic estrangement” (emphasis added) should be applied. Thus, the term parental alienation is used to describe how an alienating parent manipulates a child’s affection towards a loved target parent to become hostile for “unjustified” reasons that are “disproportionate” to the child’s actual experiences with the target parent.
Parental Alienation Strategies
Most of the research into the effects of parental alienation and the strategies used by alienating parents comes from Amy J. L. Baker, Ph.D. the Director of Research at the Vincent J. Fontana Center for Child Protection in New York City. For more than a decade, Dr. Baker has studied and published in the peer-reviewed journals of science, her findings about the behavior of alienating parents. Her studies of adults who were victims of parental alienation as children, document seventeen strategies of parents who alienate their children;
- Badmouthing (corrupting emotional abuse): Alienating Parent (AP) uses verbal and non-verbal communications that convey to the child that the targeted parent (TP) is unloving, unsafe, and unavailable. Existing flaws are exaggerated, and non-existent flaws are manufactured. Statements are made frequently, intensely, with great sincerity, and unbalanced by anything positive.
- Limiting contact (isolating emotional abuse): The AP violates parenting plans and/or takes advantage of ambiguities in the plan to maximize time with the child. The TP has fewer opportunities to counter the badmouthing message, leading to the attenuation of the parent-child relationship. The child acclimates to spending less time with the TP and the court might even reward the AP by instituting the new “status quo” as the permanent schedule.
- Interfering with communication: The AP demands constant access to the child when the child is with the TP but does not reciprocate when the child is with him/her. Phones are not answered, e-mail messages are blocked, and messages are not forwarded. The TP has fewer opportunities to be a part of the child’s daily world and share with the child the small moments that make up a child’s life.
- Interfering with symbolic communication: Thinking about, talking about, and looking at pictures of a parent while away can help a child feel close and connected to an absent parent. The AP creates an environment in which the child does not feel free to engage in these activities with respect to the TP. Alienating parents, however, are able to make their presence felt to the child even when the child is with the TP. The child is preoccupied with thoughts of the AP, making frequent calls to check in, following rules imposed by the AP, worrying that the AP will be upset or angry. The child’s mind and heart are preoccupied with the AP and there is no room left for the child’s thoughts and feelings about the TP.
- Withdrawal of love (rejecting emotional abuse): APs make their approval of paramount importance to the child; so much so that the child would do anything to avoid the loss of love that is experienced when the child has disappointed or angered that parent. Typically what angers and hurts the AP most is the child’s love and affection for the TP. Thus, in order to secure the love of one parent, the child must relinquish the love of the other. Although this is not something likely to be explicit to the child, it will be apparent to the TP that the child lives in fear of losing the AP’s love and approval.
- Telling the child the target parent is dangerous (terrorizing emotional abuse): A particular form of badmouthing, this involves creating the impression in the child that the TP is or has been dangerous. Stories might be told about ways in which the TP has tried to harm the child, about which the child has no memory but will believe to be true nonetheless, especially if the story is told often enough.
- Forcing the child to choose (creating a loyalty conflict): The AP will exploit ambiguities in the parenting plan and create opportunities to seduce/compel the child away from the TP by scheduling competing activities and promising valued items and privileges. If both parents are present at the same event/location the child will favor the AP and ignore or be rude to the TP.
- Telling the child the target parent does not love him or her: Another specific form of badmouthing occurs when the AP allows or encourages the child to conclude that the TP does not love him or her. The AP might make statements that conflate the end of the marriage with the end of the parent’s love of the child. (i.e. Mommy left us, or Daddy doesn’t love us anymore). The AP will foster the belief in the child that she is being rejected by the TP and distort every situation to make it appear as if that is the case.
- Confiding in the child: The AP will involve the child in discussions about legal matters and share with the child personal and private information about the TP that the child has no need to know. The AP will portray him/herself as the victim of the TP, inducing the child to feel pity for and protective of the AP, and anger and hurt toward the TP. The confidences are shared in such a way as to flatter the child and appeal to his/her desire to be trusted and involved in adult matters.
- Forcing the child to reject the target parent (corrupting emotional abuse): APs create situations in which the child actively rejects the TP, such as call the TP to cancel upcoming parenting time or request that the TP not attend an important school or athletic event. Not only is the TP being denied something that s/he truly desires but s/he is being delivered the news by the child, leading to feelings of hurt and frustration. The TP may respond by lashing out at the child, further damaging their already fragile relationship. Further, once children have hurt a parent, the alienation will become entrenched as the child justifies his/her behavior by devaluing the TP.
- Asking the child to spy on the target parent (corrupting emotional abuse): TPs usually have information in their files, desk, or computer that is of interest to the AP, such as paystubs, receipts, legal documents, medical reports, and so forth. An AP might suggest directly to a child or hint that the TP has information that s/he is not sharing with the AP. The AP will likely create the impetus in the child by linking the information to the child’s desires (i.e., if we knew whether Daddy got a raise we could ask for more money and buy a new dog for you). Once children betray a parent by spying on them, they will likely feel guilty and uncomfortable being around that parent, thus furthering the alienation.
- Asking the child to keep secrets from the target parent: The AP will ask or hint that certain information should be withheld from the TP in order to protect the child’s interests. Such as, “If Mommy knew that we were planning on taking a trip she would take me to court and try to stop it. Let’s not tell her until Saturday, when it will be too late for her to interfere.” Like spying, keeping secrets creates psychological distance between the TP and the child, who may feel guilty and uncomfortable with the TP. Obviously, when the TP discovers that the child withheld the information, the parent will be hurt and/or angry at the child
- Referring to the target parent by their first name: Rather than saying “Mommy/Daddy” or “Your Mommy/Your Daddy” the AP will use the first name of the TP when talking about that parent to the child. This may result in the child referring to the TP by first name as well. The message to the child is that the TP is no longer someone whom the AP respects as an authority figure for the child and no longer someone who has a special bond with the child. By referring to the TP by first name, the AP is demoting that parent to the level of a peer or neighbor.
- Referring to a step-parent as mom or dad and encouraging the child to do the same: Once the AP is remarried, s/he will speak of the new partner as if that parent were the only mother/father of the child. This parent will be introduced to others (teachers, coaches, parents of friends) as the “mother/father” rather than as the step-parent. The AP will refer to that parent as the mother/father to the child and create the expectation that the child will do so as well. If the TP should find out that the child is doing this, s/he will be hurt and angry with the child.
- Withholding medical, academic, and other important information from the target parent / Keeping the target parent's name off medical, academic, and other relevant documents: All important forms from school, sports, religious education, and so forth ask for the information about the child’s mother and father. The AP will not provide information about the TP in the appropriate place on the form and may not include the information at all. In this way, the TP will be at a decided disadvantage in terms of accessing information, forging relationships, being contacted in emergencies, being invited to participate, being provided with changes in schedules/locations, and so forth. Further, the AP will not provide the TP with schedules, reading lists, notices, and the like from the school, coach, doctor, and so forth. Taken together, these twin strategies marginalize the TP in the eyes of the child and important adults in his/her life. They also make it considerably more difficult for the TP to be an active and involved parent.
- Changing the child's name to remove association with the target parent: If the AP is the mother, she may revert to using her maiden name after the divorce and will institute a practice of using that name for her children as well. If the AP is the mother and she remarries, she will assume the surname of her new husband and will institute a practice of using that new surname for her children as well. If the AP is the father, he may start referring to the child with a new nickname (convincing the child that s/he has always been called by this name) and in this way forge a new identity for the child in which the AP is the most important parent. The TP may feel distant and awkward with the child who now refers to him or herself with a new name. The TP may feel that the name change represents a reaction of him/her and will experience hurt, sadness, and frustration because of that.
- Cultivating dependency / undermining the authority of the target parent (corrupting emotional abuse): Alienated children often speak of the AP as if that parent were perfect, exceptional, and in every way above reproach. They also behave as if they are dependent on that parent in a way that is not necessary or appropriate given the age and life experience. APs are able to develop dependency in their children rather than (as is typical of non-alienating parents) help their children develop self-sufficiency, critical thinking, autonomy, and independence. At the same time, they will undermine the authority of the TP in order to ensure that the child is loyal to only one parent. Examples include instituting rules that the child must follow even when with the TP, and mocking or overwriting the rules of the TP. The AP becomes elevated in the eyes of the child while the TP becomes less important and less meaningful.
Brainwashing Techniques used by Alienating Parents
“Programming” and “Brainwashing" are two terms used by Dr. Stanley Clawar and Brynne Rivlin (2013) to describe the methods and techniques used by alienating parents to manipulate their children into rejecting and/or hating the target parent. According to Clawar and Rivlin (2013), “programming and brainwashing is a process (intentional and unintentional) whereby a parent … attempts to limit, damage, and interfere with the love, contact, and image of the target parent” (p. 9). In their 12-year study of 1000 divorced/separated families commissioned by the American Bar Association, they identified 12 brainwashing techniques used by alienating parents;
- Denial-of-Existence Technique ~ One of the basic techniques parents use to assault the character of the other parent is to deny or not acknowledge the social existence of the other parent. The manner of denial can vary greatly. One common technique is simply never to talk about the other parent. By excluding any discussion of the other parent or ignoring the topic when raised by the child, the brainwashing parent can send a subtle message to the child that the other parent is not significant. He or she does not exist in our conversation, and therefore, he or she does not, in social terms, exist.
- The “Who, Me?” Technique ~ A subtle but powerful technique is to make indirect attacks on the other parent. When questioned about such attacks, the brainwashing parent will say, “Who, me?” The programmer indicates that he or she meant no such thing and that the listener or child was certainly misinterpreting. The list of indirect attacks is infinite, but the basic pattern is that the programmer/brainwasher attacks something about the character, lifestyle, past, present, or future of the target parent.
- Middle-Man Technique ~ By speaking to the child about issues that should be first discussed with the other parent, the programmer/brainwasher can compromise and/or damage the child’s relationship with or image of the target parent. For instance, discussing time-schedule arrangements by asking questions such as, “Do you think you would like to have more time with Mom?” often places the child in the middle. The pressure on the child is to make a choice in front of an inquiring parent.
- Circumstantial Technique ~ By manipulating, changing, rearranging, and commenting on time, the programming parent tries to gain dominance in the eyes of the children. “Your mother’s always late for delivery and pickup. I wonder if she would be late for her own funeral.” The other parent told her children, “He’s always early for pickup, but late for delivery.” These parents are attacking character by discussing punctuality. Not informing the other parent of school dates, plays, conferences, ceremonies, awards, sporting events, and the like is a way of signifying to the children that the other parent lacks importance.
- “I Don’t Know What’s Wrong with Him” Technique ~ Many parents have developed a technique whereby they create and/or exaggerate differences between themselves and the other parent in front of the children. A behavioral pattern is that arguments develop at the time of pickup and delivery of the children. Often the initial phase of the conversation is polite and appropriate. If the conversation goes on beyond a certain point, however, the brainwashing parent might instigate an argument by using a phrase or presenting an idea that he or she consciously or unconsciously knows will incite the other parent.
- Ally Technique ~ Attempting to get the children to side with one parent against the other occurs both in and outside of marriage. At the time of separation, divorce, or custody conflict, however, the attempt to ally the children is stronger. An example would be asking the children direct questions such as, “Don’t you think your mother is wrong to try to get all the money she can from us?” Other such questions are “You’re a sensitive child—do you think it’s fair for a father to have all that money? He just bought himself a new car and a house—look at how we have to live.”
- Morality Technique ~ Programming behaviors often include moral judgments against the target parent concerning his/her values, lifestyle, choice of friends, successes or failures in life (career, financial, relational), or residential choice. These criticisms are intended to elevate one’s own position in comparison with the target parent, who becomes diminished by this good/bad dichotomy. Criticizing behaviors are often insidious, occurring over a period of time with different degrees of intensity but always powerful. Like the wearing away of a stone constantly assaulted by waves, the child’s perception of the target parent changes from its original, more positive view, finally conforming to the programming parent’s negative opinions and sentiments. In such cases, the effect can become almost irreversible. These children are no longer able to accept both parents as equally good. In successful brainwashing, even if the child is deprogrammed with valid counter-information or has positive experiences with the other parent, the child may rewrite reality or will rationalize, ascribing ulterior motives to the target parent in the service of maintaining the beliefs of the indoctrinating parent.
- Threat of Withdrawal-of-Love Technique ~ This is a coercive, powerful, and almost universally successful technique utilized by parents who programme. Here, the children come to fear rejection or loss of love from a parent if they express love or a desire to be with the other parent. It becomes implicitly or explicitly understood that to be loved and accepted, the child must become a cohort and also turn against the other parent.
- “I’m the Only One Who Really Loves You” Technique ~ The intent is to create the belief that the target parent or those who are associated with that parent are not sincere in their love and caring for the child. Genuine love, interest, and involvement, by contrast, exist only in the heart of the programmer. The child is led to peer beneath the surface where ulterior motives lurk. The child comes to believe himself/herself a fool for being duped into attributing such positive qualities of love and caring to an obviously clever person who is bent on driving a wedge between the parent (programmer) and child.
- “You’re an Endangered Species” Technique ~ One method of instilling distrust, fear, lack of love, or the belief that a parent is unable to care properly for the child is accomplished through a procedure of judgmental, opinionated, and negative commentary and/or physical inspection and interrogation once the child arrives “home” again. Through these techniques, the child comes to interpret anything associated with the target parent as wrong or unsafe and to perceive his or her ongoing existence as being at risk with each contact. If the child is tired from a full weekend in which there were enjoyable activities, the interpretation might be, “Your father always wears you out. What’s wrong with him? Doesn’t he know you have school tomorrow?”
- Rewriting-Reality Technique ~ This technique is also referred to as rewriting history or rescripting. Through rewriting reality, the brainwasher attempts to convince a child to doubt his or her ability to perceive reality. A child may observe a scenario unfold from beginning to end, but as the brainwashing parent repetitively goes over the scenario and resists the child’s interpretation, the original and “true” reality is ultimately filtered out and the rewritten script is eventually adopted. The basic reward is parental acceptance and love.
- Physical-Survival Technique ~ Although each of these syndromes, administered individually or in combination, works its inexorable effects on children, the use or threat of physical punishment is one of the most potentially injurious acts for children. When a brainwashing parent or other agent resorts to threatening and/or physically punishing a child, it is usually the result of frustration over the child’s noncompliance in adopting the programme
