Fathers and Mens Rights

Sunday, May 4, 2008

References Relevant to Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS)

Before referring to this document, please read the explanation here. Originally this page was reproduced here as a courtesy. Nevertheless, as errors are located the page is updated. Suggested changes are welcome. (Last update: 04/05/2008)
213 items (total)

SECTION 1

Articles by Richard A. Gardner, M.D. on parental alienation syndrome that have been published or accepted for publication in professional outlets. (23 items)

Gardner, R. A. (1985), Recent trends in divorce and custody litigation. The Academy Forum, 29(2)3-7. New York: The American Academy of Psychoanalysis.
Gardner, R. A. (1987), Child Custody. In Basic Handbook of Child Psychiatry, ed. J.Noshpitz, Vol. V, pp. 637- 646. New York: Basic Books, Inc.
Gardner, R. A. (1987), Judges interviewing children in custody/visitation litigation. New Jersey Family Lawyer, 7(2):26ff.
Gardner, R. A. (1991), Legal and psychotherapeutic approaches to the three types of parental alienation syndrome families: when psychiatry and the law join forces. Court Review, 28(l):14-21.
Gardner, R. A. (1994), The Detrimental Effects on Women of the Misguided Gender Egalitarianism of Child-Custody Dispute Resolution Guidelines. The Academy Forum. 38 (1/2): 10-13. New York: The American Academy of Psychoanalysis.
Gardner, R. A. (1997), Recommendations for Dealing with Parents Who Induce a Parental Alienation Syndrome in Their Children. Issues in Child Abuse Accusations, 8(3):174-178.
Gardner, R. A. (1998), Recommendations for Dealing with Parents Who Induce a Parental Alienation Syndrome in Their Children. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage , 28 (3/4):1-23.
Gardner, R. A. (1999), Differentiating between the parental alienation syndrome and bona fide abuse/neglect . American Journal of Family Therapy, 27(2):97-107.
Gardner, R.A.(1999), Family Therapy of the Moderate Type of parental Alienation Syndrome. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 27(3):195-212.
Gardner, R.A.(1999), Guidelines for Assessing Parental Preference in Child-Custody Disputes. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 30(1/2):1-9.
Gardner, R.A.(2001), The Parental Alienation Syndrome: Sixteen Years Later. The Academy Forum. New York: The American Academy of Psychoanalysis, 45(1):10-12.
Gardner, R.A.(2001), Should Courts Order PAS Children to Visit/Reside with the Alienated Parent? A Follow-up Study. American Journal of Forensic Psychology. 19(3):61-106. <Abstract and Article Excerpts >
Gardner, R.A. (2002), Sollten Gerichte anordnen, daß an PAS leindende Kinder den antfremdeten Elternteil besuchen bzw. bei ihm wohnen? In: Das elterliche Entfremdungssyndrom. Anregungen für gerichtliche Sorge- und Umgangsregelungen. Berlin: Verlag für Wissenschaft und Bildung, pp.23-95.

Gardner, R.A. (2002), The Empowerment of Children in the Development of the Parental Alienation Syndrome. The American Journal of Forensic Psychology , 20(2):5-29
Gardner, R.A. (2002), Parental Alienation Syndrome vs. Parental Alienation: Which Diagnosis Should Evaluators Use in Child-Custody Litigation? The American Journal of Family Therapy, 30(2):101-123.
Gardner, R.A. (2002), Denial of the Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) Also Harms Women. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 30(3):191-202.
Gardner, R.A. (2002), Does DSM-IV Have Equivalents for the Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) Diagnosis? American Journal of Family Therapy, 31(1):1-21.
Gardner, R.A. (2003), The Judiciary's Role in the Etiology, Symptom Development, and Treatment of The Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS). American Journal of of Forensic Psychology, 21(1):39-64.
Gardner, R.A. (2003), The Parental Alienation Syndrome: Past, Present, and Future. In The Parental Alienation Syndrome: An Interdisciplinary Challenge for Professionals Involved in Divorce., eds. W. von Boch-Gallhau, U. Kodjoe, W Andritsky, and P. Koeppel, pp. 89-125. Berlin, Germany: VWB-Verlag für Wissenshaft and Bildung.
Gardner, R.A. (2003), How Denying and Discrediting the Parental Alienation Syndrome Harms Women., eds. W. von Boch-Gallhau, U. Kodjoe, W Andritsky, and P. Koeppel, pp. 121-142. Berlin, Germany: VWB-Verlag für Wissenshaft and Bildung.
Gardner R.A. (2004), The Relationship Between the Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) and the False Memory Syndrome (FMS), American Journal of Family Therapy, 32, 79-99.
Gardner, R.A. (2004), The Three Levels of Parental Alienation Syndrome Alienators, American Journal of Forensic Psychiatry, 25, 41.
Gardner, R.A. (2004), Commentary on Kelly and Johnston's "The Alienated Child: A Reformulation of Parental Alienation Syndrome." Family Court Review, 42, 622-628.
Gardner, R.A. (2006), The Parental Alienation Syndrome and the Corruptive Power of Anger. In The International Handbook of Parental Alienation Syndrome, eds. R. A. Gardner, S. R. Sauber, D. Lorandos, pp. 33-48, Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.

SECTION 2

Articles and chapters in edited books, by authors other than Dr. Gardner, that discuss parental alienation syndrome. (131 items)

Palmer, N.R. (1988), Legal Recognition of the Parental Alienation Syndrome. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 16(4):361-363.
Byrne, K. (1989), Brainwashing in Custody Cases: The Parental Alienation Syndrome. Australian Family Lawyer, 4(3):1-4.
Goldwater, A. (1991). Le Syndrome D'aliénation Parentale (in English). In Développements récents en droight familial (pp. 121-145). Cowansville, Quebec: Les Editions Yvon Blais.
Clawar, S. S. and Riviin, B. V. (1991), Children Held Hostage: Dealing with Programmed and Brainwashed Children. Chicago, Illinois: American Bar Association.
Cartwright, G.F. (1993). Expanding the Parameters of Parental Alienation Syndrome. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 21(3):205-215.
Dunne, J. and Hedrick, (1994), The Parental Alienation Syndrome: An Analysis of Sixteen Selected Cases. Journal of Divorce and Remarriage, 21(3/4):21-38.
Price, J. and Pioske, K, (1994), Parental Alienation Syndrome: A Developmental Analysis of a Vulnerable Population . Journal of Psychosocial Nursing, 32(11):9-12.
Lund, M. (1995), A Therapist's View of Parental Alienation Syndrome. Family and Conciliation Courts Review, 33(3):308-316.
Cooke, L. (1995), Parental Alienation Syndrome: A "Hidden" Facet of Custody Disputes, First Place: Canadian Bar Association 1995 Lieff Award.
Bergman, Z.B. and Weitzman, E. (1995) Parental Kidnapping and Parental Alienation Syndrome. Sichot (Hebrew) 9(2): 115-130.
Waldron, K.H. and Joanis, D.E. (1996), Understanding and Collaboratively Treating Parental Alienation Syndrome, Journal of Family Law, 10:121-133.
Garber, B.D. (1996), Alternatives to Parental Alienation Syndrome: Acknowledging the Broader Scope of Children's Emotional Difficulties During Parental Separation and Divorce. New Hampshire Bar Journal, March 1996:51-54.
Klenner, W. (1996). Rituale der Umangsvereitalung bei getrennt lebenden oder geschiedenen Eltern, FamRZ Heft 24, page 1529-1535.
Walsh, M. R. and Bone, J. M. (1997), Parental Alienation Syndrome: An Age-old Custody Problem. The Florida Bar Journal, LXXI(6):93-96.
Rand, D.C. (1997a), The Spectrum of Parental Alienation Syndrome (part I). American Journal of Forensic Psychology. 15(3):23-51.
Rand, D.C. (1997b), The Spectrum of Parental Alienation Syndrome (part II). American Journal of Forensic Psychology. 15(4):39-92.
Turkat, I.D. (1997), Management of Visitation Interference.The Judges Journal 36:2:17-47.
Borris, E.B. (1997), Interference with Parental Rights of Noncustodial parent as Grounds for Modification of Child Custody, Divorce Litigation, January 1997, p. 1-13.
Willbourne, C. and Cull, L. (1997), The Emerging Problem of Parental Alienation. Family Law (British Publication) December, 1997, p. 807-808.
Levita Z. et al (1997) Contact Refusal: Parent-Child Conflict in Separation and Divorce Sichot, (Hebrew) 11(2).
Gould, J. W. (1998), ?Conducting Scientifically Crafted Child Custody Evaluations.Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.
Gordon, R. M. (1998), The medea complex and the parental alienation syndrome: when mothers damage their daughters' ability to love a man. In The Mother-Daughter Relationship: Echoes Through Time, ed. G. G. Fenchel, pp. 207-225. Northvale, New Jersey: Jason Aronson, Inc.
Kodjoe, von U.O. and Koeppel, P. (1998), The Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS). Der Amtsvormund, Heidelberg, Germany. January 1998, pp. 9-26. and 135-140.
von Leitner, W. and Schoeler, R. (1998), Maßnahmen und Empfehlungen für das Umgangsverfahren im Blickfeld einer Differentialdiagnose bei Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) unterschiedlicher Ausprägung in Anlehnung an Gardner (1992/1997), (translation: Measurement and Reccommendations for Access Proceedings in accordance with the Differential Diagnosis in different degrees of PAS according to Gardner {1992/1997}). Der Amtsvormund, Heidelberg, Germany. November/December, 1998, pp. 849-868.
Kodjoe, U. (1998). Ein Fall von PAS, KindPrax , 6/1998, pp. 172-174.
Kodjoe, U. & Koeppel, P. (1998). Fruherkennung von PAS - Möglichkeiten psychologischer und rechtlicher Interventionen, KindPrax., 5/98, pages 138-144.
Fischer, W. (1998). Das Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) und die Interessenvertretung des Kindes - Ein Interventionsmodell für Jugendhilfe und Gericht - Teil 1, Nachrichten Dienst-des Deutschen Veriens für öffentliche und private Fürsorge, Heft 10/98, pages 306-309.
Fischer, W. (1998). Das Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) und die Interessenvertretung des Kindes - Ein Interventionsmodell für Jugendhilfe und Gericht - Teil 2, Nachrichten Dienst-des Deutschen Veriens für öffentliche und private Fürsorge, Heft 11/98, pages 343-348.
Maidment, S. (1998), Parental Alienation Syndrome-A Judicial Response? Family Law, May 1998, pp. 264-266. (U.K.)
Kopetski, L. (1998), Identifying Cases of Parental Alienation Syndrome-Part I. The Colorado Lawyer , 27(2):65-68.
Kopetski, L. (1998), Identifying Cases of Parental Alienation Syndrome-Part II. The Colorado Lawyer , 27(3):61-64.
Lowenstein, L. F. (1998), Parent Alienation Syndrome: a two-step approach toward a solution. Contemporary Family Therapy, 20(4): 505-520.
Lowenstein, L. F. (1998), Parent Alienation Syndrome: a two-step approach toward a solution. In Paedophilia: The Sexual Abuse of Children. ed L.F. Lowenstein, Great Britain: Able Publishing.
Salzgeber, J. and Stadler, M. (1998), Beziehung kontra Erziehung. Kritische Anmerkungen zur aktuellen Rezeption von PAS. KindPrax 6/98, pp. 167-171.
Siegel, J. C. and Langford, J. S. (1998), MMPI-2 Validity Scales and Suspected Parental Alienation Syndrome. American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 16(4): 5-14.
Lowenstein, L. F. (1998), Parental Alienation Syndrome: What the Legal Profession Should Know. Medico-Legal Journal 66(4):151-161.
Zander, J., Theunissen, W. and van Aliena (1999), Het Ouderverstotingssyndroom in de Nederlandse (The Parental Alienation Syndrome in the Netherlands). Servo Assen.
Lowenstein, L. F. (1999), Parental Alienation Syndrome. Justice of the Peace (U.K.), 163(3):446-450.
Stadler, M. and Salzgeber, J. (1999), Parental Alienation Syndrom (PAS)-alter Wein in Neuen Schläuchen? FPR 4/99, pp 231-235.
Bakalar, E. (1998), Das Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) in der Tschechischen Republic; Zentralblatt für Jugendrecht (Zfj Jhg. 85, Nr. 6/98, S. 268).
Leitner, W. G. (1999), Intervention-guided single case-help and parental alienation syndrome (PAS): differential diagnosis and treatment approaches. In Identity and Self-Esteem: Interactions of Students, Teachers, Family and Society, eds. S. Sebre, M. Rascevska, and S. Miezite, pp. 253-260. Riga: SIA, "Macibu Apgadj NT"
Boch-Galhau, W.V., (1999) Das Parental Alienation Syndrom, Das Wohl und die Interessenvertretung des Kindes. Vortrag beim Interessenverband Unterhalt und Familienrecht (ISV/VDU) am 26. März 1999 in Würzburg; ISUV Report Nr. 80 (1999)4-5 und Nr. 81:6-8.
Lowenstein, L.F. (1999), Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS). Justice of the Peace, 163 (Jan 16):47-50.
Bone, J.M. and Walsh, M.R. (1999). Parental Alienation Syndrome: How to Detect It and What to Do About It. The Florida Bar Journal, 73(3):44-48.
Lamontagne, P. (1999), Syndrome dâ Alienation Parentale: Contexte et Piges de lâ Intervention. In: Gyseghem, H. van (1999) Us et Abus de la mise en mots en matire dâabus sexuel, MontrŽal, MŽridien, pp. 177 ö 200.
Major, J.A. (1999), Parents Who Have Successfully Fought Parental Alienation Syndrome. Aspen Family Law Journal. (in press).
Vestal, A. (1999), Mediation and Parental Alienation Syndrome. Family and Conciliation Courts Review, 37(4): 487-503.
Warshak, R.A. (1999), Psychological Syndromes:Parental Alienation Syndrome. Expert Witness Manual, Chapter 3-32. Dallas, TX: State Bar of Texas, Family Law Section.
Salzgeber, J., Stadler, M., Schmidt, S.M., Partale, C.,(1999), Umgangsprobleme-Ursachen des Kontaktabbruchs durch das Kind jenseits des Parental Alienation Syndrome; Kind-Prax 4/99, S. 107-111.
Warshak, R.A. (2000), Remarriage as a Trigger of Parental Alienation Syndrome," American Journal of Family Therapy, 28: 229-241.
Ellils, E. M. (2000), Divorce Wars Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.
Brandes, J.R. (2000), Parental Alienation. New York Law Journal, March 26, 2000, pp. 3 ff.
Kodjoe, U (2000), Auswirkungen des Vater-Kind-Kontaktverlustes: der immaterielle Schaden aus psychologischer Sicht Anmerkungen zur Elsholz-Entscheidung des Europ. Gerichtschofs für Menschenrechte. Der Amtsvormund 8/2000, pp. 641-643.
Weidenbach, J.(2000), Dein Papa is ganz böse. Psychologie Heute 2/2000, pp 40-45.
Jopt, U. J./Behrend, K. (2000) Das Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) ö Ein Zwei-Phasen-Modell, Zentralblatt für Jugendrecht (ZfJ) 87 (6) 2000, S. 223 ö 231, ZfJ 87 (7) 2000, S. 258 - 271.
Ellis, E.M. (2000), Parental Alienation Syndrome: A new challenge for family courts. In E. M. Ellis (Ed.), Divorce wars : Interventions with families in conflict (pp.205-234). Washington DC: APA Books.
Schršder, U. (2000): Umgangsrecht und falsch verstandenes Wohlverhaltensgebot Auswirkungen auf Trennungskinder und Entstehen des so genannten PA-Syndroms (English Translation: Visitation rights and missunderstanding of the rule to cooperate Effects on children of divorce and the development of the
PA-syndrome) Zeitschrift fŸr das gesamte Familienrecht (FamRZ) 47 (10): 592 596.
Von Boch-Galhau, W., (2001), Trennung und Scheidung im Hinblick auf die Kinder und die Auswirkungen auf das Erwachsenleben, unter besonderer Berüucksichtigung des Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS). In: Eltern sägen ihr Kind entzwei: Trennungserfahrungen und Entfremdung von einem Elternteil. Ed. S. Bäuerle and H. Moll-Strobel, Donauwörth, Germany: Auer Verlag. pp. 37-64.
Kodjoe, U. (2001), Die feindselige Ablehnung eines Elternteils durch sein Kind (psychologischer Aspekt). In: Eltern sägen ihr Kind entzwei: Trennungserfahrungen und Entfremdung von einem Elternteil. Ed. S. Bäuerle and H. Moll-Strobel, Donauwörth, Germany: Auer Verlag. pp. 26-36.
Koeppel, P. (2001), PAS und das deutsche Kindschaftsrecht (juristischer Aspekt). In: Eltern sägen ihr Kind entzwei: Trennungserfahrungen und Entfremdung von einem Elternteil. Ed. S. Bäuerle and H. Moll-Strobel, Donauwörth, Germany: Auer Verlag. pp. 65-78.
Moll-Strobel, H. (2001), Die Bedeutung von Mutter, Vater und Geschwistern für das heranwaschsende Kind und das Triangulierungskonzept. In: Eltern sägen ihr Kind entzwei: Trennungserfahrungen und Entfremdung von einem Elternteil. Ed. S. Bäuerle and H. Moll-Strobel, Donauwörth, Germany: Auer Verlag. pp. 108-115.
Moll-Strobel, H. (2001), Pädagogische Handlungsperspektiven und schulische sowie unterrichtliche Interventionsmöglichkeiten. In: Eltern sägen ihr Kind entzwei: Trennungserfahrungen und Entfremdung von einem Elternteil. Ed. S. Bäuerle and H. Moll-Strobel, Donauwörth, Germany: Auer Verlag. pp. 116-124.
Warshak, R.A. (2001), Current Controversies Regarding Parental Alienation Syndrome. American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 19(3):29-59.
Fischer, W.(2001), Funktion des Verhfahrenspflegers bei Umgangsstreitigkeiten (sozial pädagogischer und mediatorischer Aspekt). In: Eltern sägen ihr Kind entzwei: Trennungserfahrungen und Entfremdung von einem Elternteil. Ed. S. Bäuerle and H. Moll-Strobel, Donauwörth, Germany: Auer Verlag. pp. 79-95.
Vassiliou, D. and Cartwright, G.F. (2001), The Lost Parent's Perspective on Parental Alienation Syndrome. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 29(3): 181-191.
Berns, S. (2001), Parents Behaving Badly: Parental Alienation Syndrome in the Family Court Magic Bullet or Poisoned Chalice? Australian Journal of Family Law. 15(3): 191-214.
Fegert, J.M., (2001), Parental Alienation oder Parental Accusation Syndrome? Die Frage der Suggestibilität, Beeinflussung und Induktion in Umgangsrechsgutachten. KindPrax 1/2001, pp. 3-7.
Burrill-O'Donnell, J. (2001), Parental Alienation Syndrome in Court Referred Custody Cases. Dissertation.(www.dissertation.com/library/1121490a.htm)
Binckli, J. (2001), Trennung von Kindern und Geschwistern (soziologischer und politischer Aspekt)-Eine Fallgeschichte. In: Eltern sägen ihr Kind entzwei: Trennungserfahrungen und Entfremdung von einem Elternteil. Ed. S. Bäuerle and H. Moll-Strobel, Donauwörth, Germany: Auer Verlag. pp. 96-107.
Suren, A.: Das Parental Alienation Syndrom (PAS) Belastungsreaktionen und BewŠltigungsstrategien betroffener MŸtter [english translation: The Parental Alienation Syndrome(PAS): Stress Reactions and Coping Strategies of Afflicted Mothers] (Diplomarbeit an der FakultŠt fŸr Psychologie und Sportwissenschaften, Abteilung fŸr Psychologie der UniversitŠt Bielefeld, Germany, Nov. 2001)
Warshak, R.A. (2002), Misdiagnosis of Parental Alienation Syndrome. American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 20(1):31-52.
Spangenberg, B and Spangenberg, E. (2002), Induszerte Umgangsverweigerung (PAS) Und Richterliche KreativitŠt. Familie, Partnerschaft Und Recht (FPR) 6 (2002): 256-257.
Andritzky, W. (2002) Zur Problematik kinderärztlicher Atteste bei Umgangs- und Sorgerechtsstreitigkeiten - Mit Ergebnissen einer Befragung. Befragung Der Kinder- und Jugendarzt 33 (11): 885-889 and 33 (12): 984-990.
Sobal, B. (2002) Article 13(b) of the Hague Convention Treaty: Does It Create a Loophole for Parental Alienation Syndrome--An Insidious Abduction? The International Lawyer, Fall 2001, Vol. 35, No. 3, pp. 997-1025.
Hobbs, T. (2002) 'Parental Alienation Syndrome & UK Family Courts, The Dilemna, Pt. 1, Family Law 32:182-189.
Hobbs, T. (2002) 'Parental Alienation Syndrome & UK Family Courts, The Dilemna Pt. 2, Family Law 32:381-387.
Klenner, W. (2002) Szenarien der Entfremdung im elterlichen Trennungsprozess-Entwurf eines Handlungskonzepts von Prävention und Intervention, Jugendamt 89(2):48-57.
Krause, M. (2002) PAS und seine Geschwister - Strukturell-systemische Überlegungen zur Gefährdung des Kindwohls durch sechs verschiedene Muster pathologischer Trennungsbewältigung, Zentralblatt für Jugendrecht (ZfJ) 75(1):2-6.
Birchler-Hoop, U.: Elternentfremdung; in: Und Kinder, 21 (69) 2002: 37-52.
Boch-Galhau, W.V. (2002), Le PAS: Impacts de la Séparation et du Divorce sur les Enfants et sur Leur Vie D'adulte, Synapse: Journal de Psychiatrie et Système Nerveux Central, No. 188, Septembre 2002.
Andritzky, W. (2002), Verhaltensmuster und Persönlichkeitsstruktur entfremdender Eltern: Psychosoziale Diagnostik und Orientierungskriterien für Interventionen. (english title: Behavioral Patterns and Personality Structure of Alienating Parents: Psychosocial and Diagnostic Criteria for Intervention) Psychotherapie in Psychiatrie , Psychotherapeutischer medizin und Klnischer Psychologie 7 (4): 166-182.
Jopt, U. J./ZŸtphen, J.(2002) Elterliche PASsivitŠt nach Trennung ö Zur Bedeutung des betreuenden Elternteils fŸr die PAS-Genese, in: Fabian, T., Jacobs, Nowara S., Rode, I. (Hrsg.); QualitŠtssicherung in der Rechtspsychologie, MŸnster, 2002.
Boch-Galhau, W.V. (2002), Sindrome de Alienación Parental (PAS): Influencia de la seapración y el divorcio sobre la vida adulta de los hijos. Revista Argentina de Clinica Psicologica, XI, 113-138.
Rybicki, D. (2003), Parental Alienation Syndrome. In: Childhood Disorders Diagnostic Desk Reference. Ed. E. Fletcher-Janzen and C.R. Reynolds, Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Camps, A. (2003), Psychiatrische und psychosomatische Konsequenzen für PAS-Kinder (english title: Psychiatric and Psychosomatic Consequences for PAS-Children) In The Parental Alienation Syndrome: An Interdisciplinary Challange for Professionals Involved in Divorce., eds. W. von Boch-Gallhau, U. Kodjoe, W Andritsky, and P. Koeppel, pp. 143-156. Berlin, Germany: VWB-Verlag für Wissenshaft and Bildung.
von Boch, W. (2003), Folgen der PAS-Indoktrinierung für betroffene erwachsene Scheidungskinder (english title: Consequences of PAS-Indoctrination for Children of Divorce as Adults) In The Parental Alienation Syndrome: An Interdisciplinary Challange for Professionals Involved in Divorce., eds. W. von Boch-Gallhau, U. Kodjoe, W Andritsky, and P. Koeppel, pp. 157-162. Berlin, Germany: VWB-Verlag für Wissenshaft and Bildung.
Kodjoe, U. (2003), Die Auswirkungen von Entfremdung und Kontaktabbruch auf betroffene Eltern (english title: Consequences of Alienation and Interruption of Contact for Alienated Parents) In The Parental Alienation Syndrome: An Interdisciplinary Challange for Professionals Involved in Divorce. eds. W. von Boch-Gallhau, U. Kodjoe, W Andritsky, and P. Koeppel, pp. 163-166. Berlin, Germany: VWB-Verlag für Wissenshaft and Bildung.
von Boch, W. and Kodjoe, U. (2003), Zwei Fallvorstellungen: Interviews mit einem entfremdeten erwachsenen Scheidungskind und einer entfremdeten Mutter (english title: Two Case Demonstrations: Interviews with an Alienated Child of Divorce as Adult and an Alienated Mother) In The Parental Alienation Syndrome: An Interdisciplinary Challange for Professionals Involved in Divorce., eds. W. von Boch-Gallhau, U. Kodjoe, W Andritsky, and P. Koeppel, pp. 167-174. Berlin, Germany: VWB-Verlag für Wissenshaft and Bildung.
Finkelstein, C. (2003), The Heart of an Abducted and Alienated Child In The Parental Alienation Syndrome: An Interdisciplinary Challange for Professionals Involved in Divorce., eds. W. von Boch-Gallhau, U. Kodjoe, W Andritsky, and P. Koeppel, pp. 175-179. Berlin, Germany: VWB-Verlag für Wissenshaft and Bildung.
Warshak, R. (2003), Current Controversies Regarding the Parental Alienation Syndrome In The Parental Alienation Syndrome: An Interdisciplinary Challange for Professionals Involved in Divorce., eds. W. von Boch-Gallhau, U. Kodjoe, W Andritsky, and P. Koeppel, pp. 207-234. Berlin, Germany: VWB-Verlag für Wissenshaft and Bildung.
Sjorgen, L.H. (2003), Einen Elternteil gefährlich machen: PAS in Schweden und Norwegen (english title: Making a Parent Dangerous :PAS in Sweden and Norway) In The Parental Alienation Syndrome: An Interdisciplinary Challange for Professionals Involved in Divorce., eds. W. von Boch-Gallhau, U. Kodjoe, W Andritsky, and P. Koeppel, pp. 235-248. Berlin, Germany: VWB-Verlag für Wissenshaft and Bildung.
Andritsky, W. (2003), Entfremdungsstrategien im Sorgerechts- und Umgangsstreit: Zur Rolle von (kinder)ärztlichen und -psychiatrischen Attesten (english title: Alienation strategies in custody and visitation litigations: The role of pediatricians, physicians and psychiatrists.) In The Parental Alienation Syndrome: An Interdisciplinary Challange for Professionals Involved in Divorce., eds. W. von Boch-Gallhau, U. Kodjoe, W Andritsky, and P. Koeppel, pp. 249-282. Berlin, Germany: VWB-Verlag für Wissenshaft and Bildung.
Andritsky, W. (2003), Verhaltensmuster und Persönlichkeitsstruktur entfremdender Eltern: Psychosoziale Diagnostik und Orientierungskriterien für Interventionen (english title: Alienating Parents: Psychosocial Diagnostics and Orientation Criteria for Intervention) In The Parental Alienation Syndrome: An Interdisciplinary Challange for Professionals Involved in Divorce., eds. W. von Boch-Gallhau, U. Kodjoe, W Andritsky, and P. Koeppel, pp. 283-314. Berlin, Germany: VWB-Verlag für Wissenshaft and Bildung.
Fischer, W. (2003), Möglichkeiten von Verfahrenspflegern in der Arbeit mit PAS-Fällen Grundsätzliche Aspekte (english title: Working Strategies with PAS Cases for Guardians Ad Litem Fundamental Aspects) In The Parental Alienation Syndrome: An Interdisciplinary Challange for Professionals Involved in Divorce., eds. W. von Boch-Gallhau, U. Kodjoe, W Andritsky, and P. Koeppel, pp. 315-322. Berlin, Germany: VWB-Verlag für Wissenshaft and Bildung.
Strohe, J. (2003), Möglichkeiten von Verfahrenspflegern in der Arbeit mit PAS-Fällen Eine Fallgeschichte (english title: Working Strategies with PAS Cases for Guardians Ad Litem:A Case History) In The Parental Alienation Syndrome: An Interdisciplinary Challange for Professionals Involved in Divorce., eds. W. von Boch-Gallhau, U. Kodjoe, W Andritsky, and P. Koeppel, pp. 323-332. Berlin, Germany: VWB-Verlag für Wissenshaft and Bildung.
Knappert, C. (2003), Frühe Interventionsstrategien als Möglichkeiten der Jugendamtsmitarbeiter in der Arbeit mit PAS-Fällen (english title: Possible Early Intervention Strategies Implemented by Social Institutions Dealing with PAS Cases) In The Parental Alienation Syndrome: An Interdisciplinary Challange for Professionals Involved in Divorce., eds. W. von Boch-Gallhau, U. Kodjoe, W Andritsky, and P. Koeppel, pp. 333-342. Berlin, Germany: VWB-Verlag für Wissenshaft and Bildung.
Blank, M. (2003), Anmerkungen zur Persönlichkeitsstruktur des betreuenden Elternteils als mögliche zentrale Ursache für die Entstehung eines elterlichen Entfremdungssyndroms (english title: Remarks on the Personality Structure of the Caring Parent as a Possible Central Cause for the Development of a Parental Alienation Syndrome) In The Parental Alienation Syndrome: An Interdisciplinary Challange for Professionals Involved in Divorce., eds. W. von Boch-Gallhau, U. Kodjoe, W Andritsky, and P. Koeppel, pp. 243-252. Berlin, Germany: VWB-Verlag für Wissenshaft and Bildung.
Stuart-Mills-Hoch, P. and Hoch, R. (2003), Successful Reintegration of Severely Alienated Children and Their Parents In The Parental Alienation Syndrome: An Interdisciplinary Challange for Professionals Involved in Divorce., eds. W. von Boch-Gallhau, U. Kodjoe, W Andritsky, and P. Koeppel, pp. 253-266. Berlin, Germany: VWB-Verlag für Wissenshaft and Bildung.
Finkelstein, C. (2003), PAS Perspectives: An Adult, Parentally Abducted and Alienated as a Child, Reflects on Current PAS Treatment Modules In The Parental Alienation Syndrome: An Interdisciplinary Challange for Professionals Involved in Divorce., eds. W. von Boch-Gallhau, U. Kodjoe, W Andritsky, and P. Koeppel, pp. 267-372. Berlin, Germany: VWB-Verlag für Wissenshaft and Bildung.
Barden, R. C. (2003), Building Multi-Disciplinary Legal-Scientific Teams in PAS and Child Custody Cases In The Parental Alienation Syndrome: An Interdisciplinary Challange for Professionals Involved in Divorce., eds. W. von Boch-Gallhau, U. Kodjoe, W Andritsky, and P. Koeppel, pp. 373-382. Berlin, Germany: VWB-Verlag für Wissenshaft and Bildung.
Dum, C.T. (2003), Begutachtete Aufsätze in Fachzeitschriften und das Parental Alienation Syndrom (english title: Peer-Reviewed Articles in Professional Journals Dealing with the Parental Alienation Syndrome) In The Parental Alienation Syndrome: An Interdisciplinary Challange for Professionals Involved in Divorce., eds. W. von Boch-Gallhau, U. Kodjoe, W Andritsky, and P. Koeppel, pp. 383-390. Berlin, Germany: VWB-Verlag für Wissenshaft and Bildung.

ten Hövel, G. (2003), Liebe Mama, böser Papa: Eltern-Kind_entfremdung nach Trennung und Scheidung: Das PAS-Syndrom, Munich, Germany: Kösel Verlag.
Warshak, R. A. (2003), Bringing Sense to Parental Alienation: A Look At the Disputes and the Evidence. Family Law Quarterly, 37(2): 273-301.
Rueda, C. (2004), An Inter-rater Reliability Study of Parental Alienation Syndrome. American Journal of Family Therapy, 32(5) 391-403.
Andre, K. (2004), Parental Alienation Syndrome. Annals of the American Psychotherapy Association, Winter 7-11.
Aguilar, J. M. (2004), Síndrome de Alienación Parental. Hijos manipulados por un cónyuge para odiar al otro, Cordoba, Spain: Almuzara Editorial.
Baurain, M. (2005), Pour Poser Les Terms Du Débat, Divorce et Séparation, 3, 5-12.
Van Gijseghem, H. (2005), L'aliénation parentale: points controversés, Divorce et Séparation, 3, 19-28.
Gagné, M. and Darpeau, S. (2005), L'aliénation parentale est-elle une forme de maltraitance psychologique?, Divorce et Séparation, 3, 29-42.
Rault, F. (2005), Séparation et allégations d'abus sexuels, Divorce et Séparation, 3, 43-56.
Rathmes, J. (2005), L'heur de l'enfant - Leurre du juge, Divorce et Séparation, 3, 57-76.
Bensussan, P. (2005), Intervieuw du Docteur Bensussan, Divorce et Séparation, 3, 77-90.
Boch-Galhau, W. von and Kodjoe, U. (2005), Syndrome d'aliénation parentale: une forme de maltraitance psychologique des enfants en ca de séparation ou de divorce conflictuel des parents, Divorce et Séparation, 3, 91-116.
Erwoine, D. (2005), Les traitements du syndrome d'aliénation parentale, Divorce et Séparation, 3, 117-126.
Odyniec, H. (2005), De l'enfant-otage à l'enfant-soldat: chroniques de guerres familiales, Divorce et Séparation, 3, 127-137.
Baker, A.J.L. (2005), The long-Term Effects of Parental Aienation on Adult Children: A Qualitative Research Study, American Journal of Family Therapy, 33, 289-302.
Spruijt, E., Eikelenbook, B., Harmeling, J., Stokkers, R. and Kormos, H. (2005), Parental Alienation Syndrome in the Netherlands, American Journal of Family Therapy, 33, 303-318.
Campbell, T. (2005), Why Doesn't Parental Alienation Occur More Frequently? The Significance of Role Discrimination, American Journal of Family Therapy, 33, 365-378.
Ellis, E.M. (2005), Help for the Alienated Parent, American Journal of Family Therapy, 33, 415-426.
Warshak R.A. (2005), Eltern-Kind-Entfremdung und Sozialwissenschaften - Sachlichkeit statt Polemik, Zentralblatt für Jugendrecht (ZfJ) No.5, May (2005): 186-200.
Baker, A.J.L. (2005), The Cult of Parenthood: A Qualitative Study of Parental Alienation, Cultic Studies Review,4, [page #s not yet available]
Baker A.J.L. (2005), Parental Alienation Strategies: A Qualitative Study of Adults Who Experienced Parental Alienation As a Child, American Journal of Forensic Psychology,23, [page #s not yet available]
Delfieu, J.-M. (2005), Expert près la cour d’appel de Nimes: Syndrome d’aliénation parentale Diagnostic et prise en charge médico-juridique, Experts, No. 67, 24-30.
Napp-Peters, A. (2005), Mehrelternfamilien als „Normal“-Familien – Ausgrenzung und Eltern-Kind-Entfremdung nach Trennung und Scheidung. In: Praxis der Kinderpsychologie und Kinderpsychiatrie, 54 (10), 792–801.
Rand, D., Rand, R., and Kopetski, L. (2005), The Spectrum of Parental Alienation Syndrome (part III): The Kopetski Follow Up Study, American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 23(1): 15-43.
Baker, A.J.L. (2006, in press), Patterns of Parental Alienation: A Qualitative Research Study, American Journal of Family Therapy,34, 1-16.
Baker, A.J.L. (2006), in press), Behaviors and Strategies of Parental Alienation: A Survey of Parental Experiences, Journal of Divorce and Remarriage, 45(1/2), [page #s not yet available].
Baker, A.J.L. (in press), The Power of Stories: Stories About Power. Why Therapists and Clients Should Read Stories About the Parental Alienation Syndrome, American Journal of Family Therapy.
Steinberger, C. (2006), Father? What Father? Parental Alienation and Its Effect on Children, Family Law Review, 38 (1).
Gardner, R.A., Sauber, S. R., and Lorandos, D. (2006), The International Handbook of Parental Alienation Syndrome, Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas. This book consists of 34 chapters. The chapters will be listed separately when time permits.
Weigel, D.J. and Donovan, K.A. (2006), Parental Alienation Syndrome: Diagnostic and Triadic Perspectives, The Family Journal,14(3), 274-282.

SECTION 3

Additional publications with material relevant to pathological alienation. (48 items)

Huntingon, D. S. (1986), The Forgotten Figures in Divorce, and Fatherhood: the Struggle for Parental Identity. Ed. Jacobs, J.W.Washington, D.C.: The American Psychiatric Association Press
Lampel, A. (1986), Post-divorce therapy with high conflict families. The Independent Practioner, Bulletin of the Division of Psychologists in Independent Practice, Division 42 of the American Psychological Association, 6(3):22-6.
Jacobs, J. W. (1988), Euripidies' Medea: a psychodynamic model of severe divorce pathology. American Journal of Psychotherapy, XLII(2):308-319.
Johnston, J. R. and Campbell, L. E. (1988), Impasses of Divorce: The Dynamics and Resolution of Family Conflict. New York: The Free Press.
Blush, G. J. and Ross, K. L. (1990), Investigation and case management issues and strategies. Issues in Child Abuse Accusations. 2(3): 152-160.
Wakefield, H. and Underwager, R. (1990), Personality characteristics of parents making false accusations of sexual abuse in custody disputes. Issues in Child Abuse Accusations, 2(3):121-136.
Ross, K.L. and Blush, G.J. (1990), Sexual Abuse validity discriminators in the divorced or divorcing family. Issues in Child Abuse Accusations, 2(1):1-6.
Theonnes, N. and Tjaden, P.G. (1990), The extent, nature, and validity of sexual abuse allegations in custody visitation disputes. Child Abuse & Neglect, 12:151-163.
The California Child Abuse and Neglect Reporting Law: Issues and Answers for Health Practitioners. State of California, 1991.
Wakefield, H and Underwager, R. (1991), Sexual abuse allegations in divorce and custody disputes. Behavioral Sciences and the Law,9:451-468.
Patterson, D. (1991-92), The other victim: the falsely accused parent in a sexual abuse and custody case. Journal of Family Law, 30:919-941.
Maccoby, E. E. and Mnookin, R. H. (1992), Dividing the Child: Social and Legal Dilemmas of Custody. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Rogers, M. (1992), Delusional disorder and the evolution of mistaken sexual allegations in child custody cases. American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 10(l):47-69.
Ceci, S. J and Bruck, M. (1993), Suggestibility of the child witness: a historical review and synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 113(3):403-439.
Johnston, J. R. (1993), Children of Divorce Who Refuse Visitation. In Nonresidential Parenting: New Vistas in Family Living, ed. Depner, C. E. and Bray, J.H. London: Sage Publications.
Rand, D. C. (1993), Munchausen syndrome by proxy: a complex type of emotional abuse responsible for some false allegations of child abuse in divorce. Issues in Child Abuse Accusations, 5(3)135-55.
Johnston, J.R. and Campbell, L. E. (1993), Parent-Child Relationships in Domestic Violence Families Disputing Custody. Family & Conciliation Courts Review,31(3):2S2-298.
Ackerman, M.J. and Kane, A.W. (1993), Psychological Experts in Divorce, Personal Injury, and Other Civil Actions, Second Edition Vol. 1, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. §4.31 Parental Alienation Syndrome, pp142-147.
Holstein-Sanders, C. (1993), When You Suspect the Worst. Family Advocate, Winter 1993:54-56.
Byrne, K and Maloney, L. (1993), Intractable Access: Is There a Cure? Australian Family Lawyer 8(4):22-27.
Sanders, C. H. (1993), When You Suspect the Worst: Bad-Faith Relocation, Fabricated Child Sexual Abuse and Parental Alienation. Family Advocate, winter:54-56.
Ward, P. and Harvey, J. C. (1993), Family Wars: The Alienation of Children. New Hampshire Bar Journal,. March:30.
Ward P. and Harvey, J.C., Familienkriege, die Entfremdung von Kindern. ZfJ Jhg. 85, Nr. 6/98, pp 237-245 (aus dem Amerikanischen übersetzt von C.T. Dum mit Vorbemerkungen von W. Klenner).

Garrity, C.B. and Baris, M.A. (1994), Caught in the Middle: Protecting the Children of High-Conflict Divorce. New York: Lexington Books (an Imprint of Macmillan, Inc.).
Guidelines for Child Custody Evaluations in Divorce Proceeding (1994). American Psychologist, 49(7)677-680.
Hysjulien, C Wood, B., and Benjamin, G.A.H. (1994), Child Custody Evaluations: A Review of Methods Used in Litigation and Alternative Dispute Resolution. Family and Conciliation Courts Review, 32(4):466-489.
Feinberg, J. M. and Loeb, L. S. (1994), Custody and visitation interference: alternative remedies . American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers Journal, 12(2):271-284.
Feinberg, J. M. and Loeb, L.S. (1994), Custody and Visitation Interference: Alternative Remedies. American Academy of matrimonial Lawyers, 12(2):271-284.
Turkat, I.D. (1994). Child Visitation Interference in Divorce. Clinical Psychology Review, 14(8):737-742.
Ackerman, M.J. (1995), Clinician's Guide to Child Custody Evaluations. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. New York.
Bricklin, B. (1995), The Custody Evaluation Handbook: Research-Based Solutions and Applications. Brunner-Mazel, Inc. Bristol, PA.
Ehrenberg, M. F. and Eiterman, M.F. (1995), Evaluating Allegations of Sexual Abuse in the Context of Divorce, Child Custody and Access Disputes. In True and False Allegations of Child Sexual Abuse: Assessment and Case Management. ed. Ncy, T. New York: Brunner/Mazel Publishers.
Klenner, W., (1995), Rituale der Umgangsvereitelung bei Getrenntlebenden oder Geschiedenen Eltern. FamRZ, Jhg. 42, Heft 24, 15. Dez 1995, S. 1529-1535.
Mapes, B. E. (1995), Child Eyewitness Testimony in Sexual Abuse Investigations. Brandon, Vermont: Clinical Psychology Publishing Co., Inc.
Turkat, 1. D. (1995), Divorce Related Malicious Mother Syndrome. Journal of Family Violence, 10(3):253-264.
Adams, J. K. (1996), Investigation and Interviews in Cases of Alleged Child Sexual Abuse: A Look at the Scientific Evidence. Issues in Child Abuse Accusations, 8(3/4):120-138.
Jones, M.M. and Sullivan, M. (1996), Dealing with Parental Alienation in High Conflict Custody Cases. Presentation at Conference of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, San Antonio, TX.
Lampel, A. (1996), Children's Alignment with Parents in Highly Conflicted Custody Cases. Family and Conciliation Courts Review, 34(2):229-239.
Turkat, I.D. (1996), Relocation as a Strategy to Interfere with the Child-Parent Relationship, American Journal of Family Law, (11): 39-41.
Campbell, T.W. (1997), Psychotherapy with Children of Divorce: the Pitfalls of Triangulated Relationships. Psychotherapy 29(4):646-652.
Rooney, S. A. and Walker, T. F. (1999), Identification and treatment of alienated children in high-conflict divorce. In Innovations in Clinical Practice: A Source Book, Vol. 17, eds VandeCreek, L. and Jackson, T. L. et al., pp. 331-341. Sarasota, Florida: Professional Resource Press/Professional Resource Exchange, Inc.
Stahl, P. M. (1999), Alienation and alignment of children. The California Psychologist , XXXII(3):23-29.
Stahl, P. M. (1999), Complex Issues in Child Custody Evaluations. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.
Lowenstein, L.F. (1999), Parental Alienation and the Judiciary, Medico-Legal Joiurnal, 67(3):121-123.
Koeppel, P. (2000), Zur Bedeutung der Elscholz-Entscheidung für die Fortentwicklung des deutchen Kindschaftrechts, Der Amtsvormund , 8/2000, pp 639-641.
Büte, D. (2001), Das Umgangsrecht bei Kindern Geschiedner Oder Getrennt Lebender Eltern: Ausgestaltung - Verfahren - Vollstreckung. Bielefeld, Germany: Erich Schmidt Verlag.
Bow, J.N., Quinell, F.A., Zaroff, M. and Assemony, A. (2002), Assessment of Sexual Abuse Allegations in Child Custody Cases. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 33(6):566-575.
Warshak, R. A. (2003), Payoffs and Pitfalls of Listening to Children. Family Relations, 52(4), 373-384.
Darnall, D. and Steinberg, B. (2008), Motivational Models for Spointaneous Reunification With the Alienated Child: Part I, American Journal of Family Therapy, 36(2), 107-115.

SECTION 4 Book Reviews

Reviews of Dr. Gardner's books on parental alienation syndrome. (11 items)

Krivacska, J. J. (1989), The Parental Alienation Syndrome and the Differentiation Between Fabricated and Genuine Child Sex Abuse. Book Review. Issues in Child Abuse Accusations, 1(1):55-56.
Levy, D. (1992), The Parental Alienation Syndrome: A Guide for Mental Health and Legal Professionals. Book Review. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 20(3):276-277.
Underwager, R. (1992), The Parental Alienation Syndrome: A Guide for Mental Health and Legal Professionals. Book Review. Issues in Child Abuse Accusations, 4(2):108-109.
Levy, D. (1992), Review of Parental Alienation Syndrome: A Guide for Mental Health and Legal Professionals. American Journal of Family Therapy, 20(3):276-277.
Etemad, J. (1999), The Parental Alienation Syndrome, Second Edition. Book Review. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,38 (2): 223-225.
Underwager, R. (1998), The Parental Alienation Syndrome: Second Edition.. Book Review. Issues in Child Abuse Accusations, 10:178.
Reischer, H. (1999), The Parental Alienation Syndrome: A Guide for Mental Health and Legal Professionals. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law , 27(3): 504-506.
Utesch, W. (1999), The Parental Alienation Syndrome, Second Edition. Book Review. The American Journal of Family Therapy,(in press).
Turkel, A. (2001) Therapeutic Interventions for Children with Parental Alienation Syndrome Book Review. News for Women in Psychiatry, 19(4):17.
Deming, J. (2001) Therapeutic Inteventions for Children with Parental Alienation Syndrome. Book Review. American Journal of Psychiatry and the Law, 29(4):505.
Meister, R. (2001) Therapeutic Inteventions for Children with Parental Alienation Syndrome. Book Review. American Journal of Family Therapy, 31(4):351-354.

SECTION 5 Frye and Mohan Rulings

The Frye Test is the standard by which a court can determine whether a scientific contribution has gained enough general acceptance in the scientific community to be admissable in a court of law. The Frye Test criteria for admissability were applied to The Parental Alienation Syndrome in the following cases:

Kilgore v. Boyd, 13th Circuit Court, Hillsborough County, FL., Case No. 94-7573, 733 So. 2d 546 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) Jan 30, 2001.
- Boyd v. Kilgore, 773 So. 2d 546 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000) (Prohibition Denied)
- Court ruling that the Parental Alienation Syndrome has gained general acceptance in the scientific community and thereby satisfies Frye Test criteria for admissibility.
Bates v. Bates 18th Judicial Circuit, Dupage County, IL Case No. 99D958, Jan 17, 2002.
- Court ruling that the Parental Alienation Syndrome has gained general acceptance in the scientific community and thereby satisfies Frye Test criteria for admissibility.[excerpt]

In Canada, the Mohan Test is applied to assess admissablity. It is more stringent than the Frye Test in that it employs more criteria than Frye. The Mohan Test was applied to the Parental Alienation Syndrome in the following case(s):

Her Majesty the Queen vs. K.C. Superior Court of Justice, Ontario, County of Durham, Central-East Region, Court File No. 9520/01. August, 9, 2002

SECTION 6 Additional Publications Not Referenced Above

The American Psychological Association has published guidelines* for child-custody evaluations in divorce proceedings. These are the guidelines The American Psychological Association proposes that examiners use when conducting such examinations. The Guidelines provide another index of the value of the PAS concept to child custody evaluators. The Guidelines conclude with a highly selective reference section titled "Pertinent Literature." Three of the 39 references are books by Dr. Gardner; one is titled "The Parental Alienation Syndrome" and the other two include discussions about PAS.

Gardner, R.A. (1989), Family Evaluation in Child Custody Mediation, Arbitration, and Litigation. Cresskill, NJ: Creative Therapeutics,Inc.
Gardner, R. A. (1992), The Parental Alienation Syndrome: A Guide for Mental Health and Legal Professionals. Cresskill, NJ: Creative Therapeutics,Inc.
Gardner, R. A. (1992), True and False Accusations of Child Sex Abuse. Cresskill, NJ: Creative Therapeutics, Inc.

* Guidelines for Child Custody Evaluation in Divorce Proceedings. Washington, D.C.: American
Psychological Association (1994).

The Family Law Section of the American Bar Association published Clawar and Rivlin's book Children Held Hostage: Dealing with Programmed and Brainwashed Children.** The following book by Dr. Gardner is referenced:

Gardner, R.A. (1987),The Parental Alienation Syndrome and the Differentiation Between Fabricated and Genuine Child Sex Abuse Cresskill, NJ: Creative Therapeutics, Inc.

**Clawar, S. and Rivlin, B.V. (1991), Children Held Hostage: Dealing with Programmed and Brainwashed Children . Chicago, IL:Division of Family Law, American Bar Association.

The State Bar of Texas, Family Law Section, published in 1999 its Expert Witness Manual. The section: Psychological Syndromes includes a chapter entitled Psychological Syndromes: Parental Alienation Syndrome (Chapter 3-32). The purpose of this chapter is to provide guidelines for mental health and legal professionals who work in courts of law.

Warshak, R.A. (1999), Psychological Syndromes:Parental Alienation Syndrome. Expert Witness Manual, Chapter 3-32. Dallas, TX: State Bar of Texas, Family Law Section.

The State Bar of Texas published in 2002 its Family Law Course. Chapter 22 is entitled Parental Alienation: Syndrome or Symptom.

Hirsch, R.A. (2002), Parental Alienation Syndrome: Syndrome or Symptom. Advanced Family Law Course 2002, Chapter 72. Dallas, TX: State Bar of Texas.

Warshak, R.A. (2002), Divorce Poison: Protecting the Parent-Child Bond From a Vindictive Ex. New York: ReganBooks.

Family Law Quarterly 35(3):527-552, 2001

Comments on Carol S. Bruch’s Article
"Parental Alienation Syndrome and Parental Alienation:
Getting it Wrong in Child Custody Cases"

Richard A. Gardner. M.D.

All truth passes through three stages. First it is ridiculed. Second it is violently opposed. Third it is accepted as self-evident.
Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

Before addressing myself to the numerous misperceptions, distortions, and even fabrications that are to be found in this article, it is important to make a few comments about the author herself, especially with regard to her qualifications for writing this article. She is a research professor of law. From the biographical information provided about her on the University of California at Davis website, it is clear that she is a woman of accomplishment who has involved herself in many areas of the law. However, as important as her contributions may have been, there is nothing in her biographical information to indicate that she has spent significant time in family courts working directly with clients involved in child-custody disputes. Accordingly, she is very remote from the lawyers who are directly working with families involved in high conflict child-custody disputes. In short, she has not had significant experiences "in the trenches."

In a footnote on the first page of the article (page 527) Bruch gives credit to three reference librarians at her law school. Again, we have three assistants who are operating in the cloistered environment of the law library, far from the reality of the outside world, especially the divorce courts, where the real PAS action is taking place. Furthermore, it is clear that she has not properly differentiated among the sources of her information, specifically, whether it be a learned journal or some newspaper article written by someone on assignment that day to become an "expert" on the subject. She has not properly concerned herself with the validity or credibility of her sources. Most important, the article is not balanced. Either she ignores a significant body of data that supports my work in the PAS realm, or dismisses it perfunctorily.

In footnote #2 she states:

"Errors or omissions are her own."

Although the article appears in the reputable Family Law Quarterly and is written in a scholarly style, it is not a balanced article. Bruch makes consistent choices by quoting professionals and articles with only one point of view, and does not vary from this. She does not consider documents advancing a point of view that opposes her own, despite the widespread availability of these numerous articles and cases. Courts of law must deal with two sides of an issue. This article does not.

The number of misrepresentations in this article is so great that it would take an article of equal length, if not longer, to attempt to correct them all. What I will do here is comment on the most egregious of the various distortions, misrepresentations, and even fabrications.

First, Bruch focuses on false sex-abuse accusations in PAS and assumes that one equals the other. Nowhere in my writings is there any confirmation of this. What I do say in my writings is that a false sex-abuse accusation can be a spin-off of the PAS and my own experience has been that this occurs in about ten percent of cases. I have also stated that in my clinical experience the vast majority of these are generally false, but that still, on occasion, one sees a true sex-abuse accusation along with a PAS.

Page 528, footnote 3. Bruch quotes studies that describe one-to-two percent true sex-abuse accusations. What is misleading here is that these studies are dated 1990 and 1992, based on data from the 1980s, a time when the false sex-abuse accusation was not as generally appreciated. It is likely that studies from the same sources conducted today, 15 years later, would provide a higher percentage. That said, Bruch is still confirming the existence of the false sex-abuse accusation phenomenon. Our only difference is the percentage of cases in which this occurs. From the vantage point of the innocent victim, it does not matter whether he (she) is in the one-percent group, the twenty-percent group, or any other percent group; that individual is still being falsely accused and may very well be sentenced to jail (as some such unfortunate people actually are).

Page 528, footnote 3. Bruch quotes a single article by K. Faller that Bruch repeatedly references throughout her article. However, Bruch selectively ignores my response article, which was published in the next issue (Child Maltreatment, 3(4):309-312) (Gardner, 1998a). Furthermore, Bruch fails to mention that the Faller article was published after I had testified in support of the plaintiff in a malpractice suit against her in Michigan (see Champney v. Faller et al., Washtenaw County #95-4760-CK).

Bruch states (p. 528-529):

"Although Dr. Gardner sometimes states that his analysis does not apply to cases of actual abuse, the focus of his attention is directed at discerning whether the beloved parent and child are lying, not whether the target parent is untruthful or has behaved in a way that might explain the child’s aversion."

This quote is another example of the limitations of Bruch’s research. She states that I "sometimes state" that my analysis (of PAS, presumably) does not apply to cases of actual abuse. In fact, I routinely state that the diagnosis of PAS does not apply to cases of actual abuse (Gardner, 1992a, 1998b, 1999). She continues with the criticism that I am not evaluating for any weaknesses in the target parent’s behavior. In every case I assess the target parent as to whether or not he (she) has abused or neglected the children, or exhibited any other behavior that might contribute to their alienation. Chapter Nine of my 1998 book on the PAS is devoted to my techniques for making this differentiation (Gardner, 1998b). In addition, I have been involved in many cases in which, after an evaluation, I informed the client engaging my services that I could not support his (her) position because the children’s rejection was grounded in real abuse/neglect that became apparent in the course of the evaluation.

In addition, it is important to note that prior to being retained by a client to conduct an evaluation, I require the prospective client to sign my contract which confirms recognition "that Dr. Gardner may not ultimately support my position in the litigation." In practice, this is not an uncommon outcome. When it occurs, the client usually elects, in one way or another, not to have me testify or submit my findings to the litigation at hand and my involvement with the matter ends then and there. Accordingly, my negative findings (e.g. no PAS but rather abuse) remain effectively off the record.

What then is on the record are the cases in which my findings support and coincide with the client’s position. My detractors shrewdly exploit this by accusing me of being a "hired gun," fully available to absolve anyone who is willing to pay me. This contention couldn’t be further from the truth, but the rules of doctor/patient confidentiality prevent me from countering this accusation by citing those cases in which my evaluations failed to support the clients allegations of PAS or failed to exculpate them from accusations of abuse.

Bruch states (p. 529, footnote 6):

"Two examples are his efforts to distinguish true from false allegations and his blanket advice to judges that they should refrain from taking abuse allegations seriously, even when supported by a therapist who has seen the child."

Once again, Bruch overstates her thesis. Her use of the word blanket implies that she has comprehensively looked at every case in which I have testified, and that in every possible case of sex abuse that arises in the context of divorce, I recommend that judges ignore the sex-abuse accusation. This is simply not true. I have taken care to make the proviso that only after a thorough evaluation has been conducted can one determine whether or not sex abuse has occurred. The elaborate protocols I use, generally requiring three or four hours of interviewing with the child alone, are described in two of my books (Gardner, 1992b, 1995). They also describe the detailed evaluation I conduct of the accused party, especially with regard to the presence or absence of pedophilic tendencies. This inquiry, of course, takes even more time. If, after this extensive evaluation, I find that bona-fide sex-abuse is extremely unlikely and that the child’s complaints are not related to the target parent’s behavior, but to the alienating parent’s and the child’s behavior (PAS manifestations), then I do advise that the children’s complaints not be taken seriously, because they are the products of fabrications and/or delusions-a result of their programming.

Unfortunately there are therapists who take PAS children’s allegations seriously, much to the detriment of all family members. This does not mean that I do not first make the differentiation between true and false accusations. I do so in every case. Furthermore, I am very much aware of the fact that there are bona fide abusers who claim that they are innocent of abuse and that the children’s accusations are the products of the other parent’s PAS manipulations. As mentioned, Chapter Nine of my 1998 PAS book is devoted completely to differentiating the true from false accusations in such cases. One of the purposes of this chapter is to "smoke out" these bona fide abusers who try to claim that they are merely innocent victims of PAS indoctrinations.

Bruch states (page 530):

"First, Gardner confounds a child’s developmentally related reaction to divorce and high parental conflict (including violence) with psychosis."

Again, we see another gross misrepresentation. What I do state is that my experience has been that severe PAS represents about ten percent of the cases I have personally seen. Furthermore, I state that in some of those cases we do see paranoia in the accusing parent, which is a form of psychosis. In such cases, what one most often sees is a circumscribed delusional system centering on the victim parent. The DSM-IV diagnosis Delusional Disorder is often applicable here. In those cases, I do consider the indoctrinating parent to be suffering with this circumscribed paranoid delusional system centering on the target parent-a delusion that warrants the term psychosis. The children get swept up in this delusion and the dyad justifiably warrants the DSM-IV diagnosis, Shared Psychotic Disorder (Folie-à-Deux). When an unskilled therapist does not recognize the PAS, he (she) may join in with the parent-child dyad. In such cases the folie-à-trois designation is warranted. I believe that most family court lawyers, as well as mental health professionals who work with these families, have seen this phenomenon.

Bruch states (page 531) that my work has the "practical effect of impugning all abuse allegations, allegations which Gardner asserts are usually false in the divorce context." PAS children routinely allege physical, verbal, and emotional abuse. In the context of the PAS, such accusations are usually false. Furthermore, if my clinical findings are representative, about ten percent of PAS children may allege sexual abuse. Bruch is correct in stating that I consider most of these PAS derived sexual-abuse accusations to be false. (In contrast, I consider most intrafamilial accusations to be true). There is a vast amount of scientific literature describing the phenomenon of false accusations occurring in the context of child-custody disputes. These omissions reveal the bias that pervades Bruch’s argument.

Bruch states (p. 532):

"Worse yet, if therapists agree that danger exists, Gardner asserts that they are almost always man-hating women who have entered into a folie-à-trois with the complaining child and concerned parent."

Once again, Bruch overstates her case. Her phrase "if therapists agree that danger exists, Gardner asserts…" is in itself misleading. She implies that whenever a therapist-any therapist, or group of therapists-concludes that abuse has taken place it must have happened. This is an overly credulous position. Those in the field know well that many errors are made in the typical evaluation, that there are many levels of evaluator competency, and that nothing conclusive can be said about their findings unless their findings have been thoroughly critiqued for proper evaluation methodology.

Moreover, the word always is a very dangerous word to use, especially in a learned document. I rarely use that word, whether in speaking or writing. Bruch will have a long search if she is looking to find that word in any of my publications, especially with regard to the folie-à-trois phenomenon. Yes, there are man-hating women who do join in with PAS programmers to victimize and scapegoat a target father. However, there are also male therapists who do this, and there are women therapists who do this who are not man-haters.

Bruch states (p. 534):

"In sum, children’s reluctance or refusal to visit noncustodial parents can probably be better explained without resorting to Gardner’s theory. Studies that followed families over several years, for example, report that visits may cease or be resisted when a variety of reasons cause custodial parents and children to be angry or uncomfortable with the other parent."

Bruch would have the reader believe that I have no appreciation of alternative reasons for children’s alienation from a parent other than PAS. Such a statement is ludicrous. It indicates complete ignorance of my publications, books and articles that were written long before I wrote my first article on the PAS in 1985. I describe in these publications many other reasons why children are antagonistic toward one of the parents, reasons that have nothing to do with PAS. Even in my books on the PAS I advise examiners to be vigilant and explore alternative explanations for the children’s alienation. I have repeatedly stated that when bona fide abuse exists, the PAS diagnosis is not applicable. Furthermore, for each of the diagnostic criteria delineated in my books on sex abuse I detail the manifestations when the accusation is true and the manifestations when the accusation is false (Gardner, 1992b, 1995). Bruch completely ignores this pervasive principle in my diagnostic protocols.

Bruch continues (p. 534-535):

"First, Gardner is broadly (but mistakenly) believed to be a full professor at a prestigious university."

Bruch is basically stating here that I misrepresent myself when I claim that I am Clinical Professor of Child Psychiatry at Columbia University, College of Physicians and Surgeons. If Bruch is correct here, then I have somehow duped the university and the medical school into listing my name for over 39 years on their rosters of faculty members, as well as convincing them to biannually reconfirm my appointment. And this occurs only after their review of extensive documentation, which I am required to submit to determine that I am still worthy of holding the appointment. The fact is that I was the first clinician in private practice to achieve full professorial rank in the Child Psychiatry Department at Columbia. In alleged confirmation of this fabrication, Bruch quotes from Newsweek (she has no hesitation using as references newspapers and magazines, giving them equal status with learned publications) that "the title Gardner enjoys indicates neither full faculty membership nor research accomplishment." In reality, I had to satisfy the same rigorous qualifications as the full-time academicians to achieve full professorship rank at Columbia University Medical School, including: review of my peer-reviewed published articles, my books, comments by student evaluators, contributions to the field of child psychiatry, invited lectures throughout the U.S. and abroad, research accomplishments, and anonymous letters of recommendation from faculty members from other medical schools. Bruch would give the impression that the Columbia University Medical School frivolously dispenses its professorships. This is absurd, and is an important example of the kind of serious factual inaccuracies that underlie her scholarly style.

Bruch continues (page 535):

"Because this aura of expertise accompanies his work, few suspect that it is mostly self-published."

This is a fabrication. As a research professor, Bruch knows full well that articles published in learned peer-review journals are not self-published. In contrast, books can be self-published. I have over 150 articles published in scholarly peer-review journals. In addition, prior to 1978 I published 16 books with major publishers (Doubleday, G.P. Putnam’s, Prentice-Hall, Avon Books, Bantam Books, and Jason Aronson) before I began publishing through Creative Therapeutics. I still get invitations from more well-known publishers to write books, and I last accepted an invitation from Bantam Books to do so in 1991.

Bruch states (p. 535-536):

". . . receives referrals from the websites of fathers’ organizations, and provides packaged continuing education courses for professionals."

It is true that I receive referrals from fathers’ organizations. The implication here is that there is something wrong with this. Many of these men have been victimized terribly by PAS accusations. However, I also receive many referrals from mothers, even mothers who belong to women’s organizations, who also have been victimized by PAS. And this has been even more the case in the last few years. Most of the PAS examiners with whom I have been in contact have observed, as have I, that men are now as likely to become PAS indoctrinators as women. Elsewhere I have described this gender shift (Gardner, 2001a, 2002a).

The statement that I "provide packaged continuing education courses for professionals" is a blatant fabrication. I do not provide packaged continuing education courses for professionals. Bruch does not provide the names of these so-called packages and/or courses. She cannot do this because they do not exist, either on my website or anywhere else. We see here yet another example of her irresponsibility. However, even if I did provide such packages, is there something wrong with that? Professional organizations are always encouraging their members to enhance their knowledge of their fields and continue their education.

Bruch continues (p. 536):

"Finally, he often inaccurately represents or suggests that PAS is consistent with or endorsed by the accepted work of others."

My website (www.rgardner.com/refs) currently lists 137 peer-reviewed articles by over 150 authors. This indicates acceptance. On the same website I list 66 courts of law that have recognized the PAS. These important lists provide compelling proof that PAS is accepted by the professionals who wrote those articles and the peer reviewers who accepted them for publication. It also indicates that PAS was accepted by at least 66 judges in courts of law who saw fit to mention the full term PAS in their rulings and ruled accordingly. Therefore, there is nothing "inaccurate" about my representation. What is accurate is her misrepresentation of me.

Bruch states (page 537):

"...whenever child sexual abuse allegations or disrupted visitation patterns arise in the United States, one must now be prepared to confront a claim asserting that PAS is at work, not abuse or other difficulties."

An unseverable part of any PAS evaluation is to assess for the presence of (parental) "abuse or other difficulties." Her argument goes on to say that a database search of reported (emphasis mine) cases between 1985 and 2001 reveal numerous mental health professionals in addition to Gardner having testified as to the presence of PAS within a custody dispute, "although far fewer were willing to recommend that custody be transferred and contact with the primary (alienating) custodian terminated." The author’s implication is that even evaluators advocating PAS are unwilling to follow Gardner fully by recommending a change of custody. This is a distortion, in that most PAS experts agree with me that change of custody is appropriate only in severe cases of PAS, and severe cases are but a small subset of PAS cases as a whole. I will agree, however, that I am more likely to recommend custodial transfer in the severe cases than many other evaluators, because they have more commitment to the therapeutic treatment of such cases than I. I believe, however, that my follow-up study of 99 children (Gardner 2001b) provides strong support for my position regarding these cases and that ultimately other such studies will confirm that reduction of access to the alienator is the only hope for children in the severe category of PAS.

Bruch than professes to be "profoundly disturbed" by the degree to which expert witnesses, judges and attorneys have been invoking PAS, and the almost total absense of inquiries into its scientific validity. She then launches into a footnote which asserts that a compiled list of PAS positive caselaw on the Gardner website is misleading because it consists "most(ly) of cases unchallenged as to scientific validity of PAS." (fn39). Bruch’s footnote is itself misleading in its own right in that she then cites four cases as examples of how the list is misleading. She fails to point out that two of her four case examples are not even found on Gardner’s list (Crews v. McKenna and Loll v. Loll). Basically, what she has done here is claim that my list includes cases in which the court did not recognize PAS and then cites as examples of such cases two cases that were never on my list. Equally reprehensible is her claim that in the other two cases the court did not recognize the PAS. In actuality, the court did recognize the PAS in these cases: one is even an appellate ruling (Truax v. Truax). Again we see gross misrepresentation.

Bruch would have the reader believe that in 66 different courts of law-spread across almost as many jurisdictions in the U.S., Canada, Australia and Germany-judges, attorneys, and mental health professionals, after careful review of the facts in the case, subscribe to PAS but that this trend is no measure of validity unless it has been subjected to a Frye or Daubert hearing.

With regard to PAS Frye tests, Bruch belies her underlying bias, devoting a substantial footnote (19 lines) to discussing an older case in which PAS did not survive the Frye challenge, and begrudgingly adding a passing reference (2 lines) to Kilgore v. Boyd, a more recent case in which PAS was found to satisfy the Frye Test requirements. The court’s decision followed a two-day hearing in which both Richard A. Warshak, Ph.D. and I testified. This case was appealed and the appellate court declined to even reconsider the trial court’s Frye test decision.

It may be of interest to the reader to know, that in January 2002 a court in Wheaton, Illinois-in a case in which I testified along with Christopher Barden, Ph.D., L.L.D.-ruled that the PAS does satisfy Frye Test criteria for admissibility (see Bates v. Bates, 18th Judicial Circuit, Dupage County Il. Case No 99D958, January 17, 2002). One cannot fault Bruch for not including the second Frye Tests decision because it was probably handed down too late for inclusion in her article.

Page 538. Bruch speaks here about reported cases in which the PAS has not been accepted and footnotes only one case to support her statement. She does not speak about reported cases in which the PAS has been accepted. In most of the cases in which I have testified on the PAS, the court has admitted my testimony and has not denied the existence of the disorder. However, more important, she would lead the reader to believe that reported cases represent the majority of, if not all, family court cases. This is not true. Only a small percentage of family court cases ever get reported. Most readers would not generally appreciate this misrepresentation. The word usually is important here. She gives no percentages.

With regard to my Sex Abuse Legitimacy Scale (SAL Scale) Bruch states (p. 539):

"Following considerable scientific criticism, Gardner withdrew the test he had constructed to determine whether sexual abuse had taken place."

Again, Bruch is wrong here. The SAL Scale was published in 1987. I withdrew it in 1989, two years later, predominantly because too many evaluators were ignoring the requirement that it only be used when all three parties (mother, father, and alleged child victim) were interviewed. Bruch is again quoting here newspaper articles as her source of information, making no differentiation between learned publications and articles written by journalists-thus compromising her research.

Page 541. Here Bruch refers to the PAS as a "street myth." I consider this a very revealing statement. It provides confirmation that Bruch has absolutely no experience "in the street," "in the trenches," where family lawyers and mental health professionals daily see the PAS. From her "ivory tower," she somehow views it as a street myth. She would do well to go into the streets herself and see whether or not PAS exists.

On the same page, Bruch expresses some puzzlement and even amazement that the American Bar Association’s section on Alternate Dispute Resolution gave its annual prize to an article on the PAS. Apparently, the American Bar Association knows something she doesn’t. More importantly, as far back as 1991, the American Bar Association commissioned Clawar and Rivlin to write their now classic, Children Held Hostage: Dealing with Programmed and Brainwashed Children. The authors describe therein hundreds of cases of PAS, and references my book on the subject (Gardner, 1987). Lawyers all over the country and even abroad, continually refer to their seminal work.

Page 541ff Bruch makes reference to the work of Johnston, Kelly, and Sullivan. She somehow has the idea that these people have improved upon my work. A careful reading of their material and mine will confirm that we are both seeing the same cases, the same range of alienated children from mild, to moderate, to severe. The only difference is that they are giving the disorder a different name. This produces some confusion for Bruch who needs to maintain the delusion that PAS does not exist. Kelly and Sullivan even recommend custodial transfer in the severe cases, which is what I have been criticized for. Workers in the field know well that this is the only hope for children who have been severely alienated. Changing the name from PAS to PA does not cause the disorder to evaporate. PAS has been written on by professionals around the world. My website lists articles in English, French, Dutch, and German. At this point I am co-editing a volume completely devoted to the parental alienation syndrome. Submissions are coming in from authors in at least eight different countries: the U.S., Australia, Canada, The U.K., Sweden, Germany, The Czech Republic, and Israel. If we are to believe Bruch, all these people have been swept up in my delusion that PAS exists. Along these lines Bruch states (549):

"Until she provides further clarification, Johnston’s apparent support for forced contact between the members of high-conflict families should be construed narrowly, given her many publications questioning the wisdom of or need for such approaches."

Johnston, for all her criticisms of me, has come to recognize that forced contact may be the only hope for children with severe PAS, whether or not she wants to call the disorder PAS. Since Bruch has cited her so frequently, she cannot dismiss Johnston’s work, but tries to minimize the direction her work has inexorably taken as Johnston continues to work "in the trenches."

Page 547 Bruch quotes Wallerstein:

"Most dramatically, Wallerstein reveals that these children’s alignments were transient, with every child later abandoning his or her harsh position, mostly within one or two years and all before the age of eighteen."

This is reported as having been stated in a telephone conversation with Judith Wallerstein. My own follow-up study of 99 PAS children, statistically analyzed and not anecdotally reported, provides very different conclusions. The study provides compelling evidence that the vast majority of severe PAS cases (91%) will not return to a good relationship with the target parent if the court does not force it. The summary of that article is found here: (http://www.rgardner.com/refs/ar8-excerpt.html. Bruch gratuitously dismisses this peer-reviewed article, giving it absolutely no credibility. This difference between Wallerstein’s experiences and my own is easily explained. Wallerstein saw her original group in the 1960s and 1970s. At that time, under the tender-years-presumption, mothers almost automatically gained custody of their children. High-conflict divorce, at that time, was less related to custody than to property and even as to whether or not divorce would be granted. In the 1970s, when the tender-years-presumption was replaced with the best interests of the child presumption, and preference for mothers was generally considered "sexist," courts were required to be gender-blind with regard to assigning primary custodial status. It was in this setting that parents began to program their children to gain leverage in courts of law-thus the birth of the PAS. Therefore, comparison between Wallerstein’s population and my group is not possible, and the conclusions that Bruch presents here are therefore moot.

Page 547, footnote 73. Bruch again makes reference here to a telephone conversation with Dr. Judith Wallerstein on April 10, 2001. There was no telephone conversation with me, the person who is named on practically every page of her article, the person who is the primary target of her diatribe. We see here another example of Bruch’s extreme bias, her selectively ignoring data that might shake and even tumble the house of cards she has built in this article.

Page 549. Bruch states:

"It is puzzling that Johnston expressly endorses many coercive aspects of Sullivan and Kelly’s legal framework"

Although Johnston, Sullivan, and Kelly are very critical of my work, they are seeing the same children-so ubiquitous is the PAS, "out in the streets"-and recognize that in severe cases coercive techniques are the only hope for the children and the target parent. She is puzzled here because these authorities, whom she is citing to discredit me, are making recommendations that are strikingly similar to my own, and thus could be seen as supporting my position.

Page 550-551 Bruch refers to the specious argument that PAS is not to be taken seriously because it is not in DSM-IV. In response to the absurdity in this statement I quote here a segment from my article Parental Alienation Syndrome vs. Parental Alienation: Which Diagnosis Should Evaluators Use in Child-Custody Disputes (Gardner, 2002b) that addresses itself to this point:

To say that PAS does not exist because it is not listed in DSM-IV is like saying in 1980 that AIDS (Autoimmune Deficiency Syndrome) does not exist because it was not then listed in standard diagnostic medical textbooks. DSM-IV was published in 1994. From 1991 to 1993, when DSM committees were meeting to consider the inclusion of additional disorders, there were too few articles in the literature to warrant submission of the PAS for consideration. That is no longer the case. It is my understanding that committees will begin to meet for the next edition of the DSM (probably to be called DSM-V) in 2002 or 2003. Considering the fact that there are now at least 135 articles in peer-review journals on the PAS, it is highly likely that by that time there will be even more articles. (The list of peer-reviewed PAS articles is to be found on my website, www.rgardner.com/refs, a list that is continually being updated.)

It is important to note that DSM-IV does not frivolously accept every new proposal. Their requirements are very stringent with regard to the inclusion of newly described clinical entities. The committees require many years of research and numerous publications in peer-review scientific journals before considering the inclusion of a disorder, and justifiably so. Gille de La Tourette first described his syndrome in 1885. It was not until 1980, 95 years later, that the disorder found its way into the DSM. It is important to note that at that point, Tourette’s Syndrome became Tourette’s Disorder. Asperger first described his syndrome in 1957. It was not until 1994, 37 years later, that it was accepted into DSM-IV and Asperger’s Syndrome became Asperger’s Disorder.

Bruch criticizes PAS because it conforms to the "medical model" and ignores the family systems model. The implication here is that the medical model cannot be applied to family issues. Somewhat paradoxically, however, she believes that inclusion of PAS in DSM-IV would indicate that PAS has greater credibility as a disorder. Yet each diagnosis in DSM-IV follows the medical model. In order to make a diagnosis, the physician must compare the patient’s symptoms with those listed in the book. The DSM committees have repeatedly rejected family systems diagnoses because they are nebulous and speculative. They are almost impossible to subject to controlled studies, especially studies in which statistical verification is warranted. Again, the implication is that I do not concern myself with family interrelationships. An unbiased reader can examine any page of any of my books on the PAS and see mention of family relationships and family systems. Last, I am certain that Bruch would want her doctor to follow the medical model when diagnosing any illness that she may have.

There are many other criticisms I have of the Bruch article, which is not the disinterested, comprehensive survey of the material available on PAS that it represents itself to be. My final conclusion is that it is not I who am biased and misrepresenting the material; it is clearly Bruck herself.

Last, I believe that all of Bruck’s attempts to discredit and deny PAS will prove futile, her obvious great labors toward that goal notwithstanding. PAS exists, and corroboration of that is the 66 judges who have cited it, and the over 150 authors who have written about it. Whether one wants to call it alignments, PA or PAS, we are all describing the same phenomenon, and this alone argues for the fact that we are describing a problem that is real. It is a syndrome in every sense of the word. In fact, it is "purer" than many of the syndromes described in DSM-IV. The phenomenon whereby, in the context of a high-conflict child-custody dispute one parent programs the child against the other, and the child joins in with his or her own contributions, has repeatedly been seen in courts of law in the last twenty years. Mental health professionals, lawyers, and judges will ultimately agree that the only hope for most of the children in the severe category is significant reduction of the children’s access to the programming parent (now approximately 50 percent fathers) and that if this is not done, the vast majority of these children will suffer lifelong alienation from a good, loving parent.

Richard A. Gardner, M.D.
Clinical Professor of Child Psychiatry
Columbia University
College of Physicians and Surgeons

references

Champney v. Faller et al., Washtenaw County #95-4760-CK.

Gardner, R. A. (1987), The Parental Alienation Syndrome and the Differentiation Between Fabricated and Genuine Child Sex Abuse. Cresskill, New Jersey: Creative Therapeutics, Inc.

_______ (1992a), The Parental Alienation Syndrome: A Guide for Mental Health Professionals. Cresskill, New Jersey: Creative Therapeutics, Inc.

_______ (1992b), True and False Accusations of Child Sex Abuse. Cresskill, New Jersey: Creative Therapeutics, Inc.

_______ (1995), Protocols for the Sex-Abuse Evaluation. Cresskill, New Jersey: Creative Therapeutics, Inc.

_______ (1998a), Response to Faller article. Child Maltreatment, 3(4):309-312.

_______ (1998b), The Parental Alienation Syndrome (Second Edition), Cresskill, New Jersey: Creative Therapeutics, Inc.

_______ (1999), Differentiating between the parental alienation syndrome and bona fide abuse/neglect. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 11127(2):97-107

_______ (2001a), The recent gender shift in PAS indoctrinators. News for Women in Psychiatry (A publication for the Association for Women Psychiatrists), 19(4):11-13.

_______ (2001b), Should courts order PAS children to visit/reside with the alienated parent? A follow-up study. American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 19(3):61-106.

_______ (2002a), Denial of the parental alienation syndrome (PAS) harms women also. (in press)

_______ (2002b), Parental Alienation Syndrome vs. Parental Alienation: Which diagnosis should evaluators use in child-custody disputes? The American Journal of Family Therapy, 30(2):101-123.

Tuesday, April 8, 2008

Who’s oppressing who?

Barbara Kay | Saturday, 5 April 2008

One of Canada’s leading newspaper columnists takes on the ideology of feminism.

In its earliest and most benign form – the political campaign to achieve equality under the law and equality in economic opportunities – feminism was a necessary and welcome reform movement. No rational person could be less than delighted to see barriers to a full range of educational and career options for women fall by the wayside.

The feminism I take exception to today is not the mild and blameless right of a woman to self-actualize that all women absorb by osmosis from the cultural air we breathe, but the radical ideology that has come to dominate the movement’s academic and institutional elites over the last 40 years.
This is an ideology that sees the relations between the sexes as a never-ending antagonistic power struggle, with women as eternal victims and men as eternal oppressors. It is an ideology that explains away the moral failings of women as the fault of a patriarchal "system", but holds men responsible for their actions. And most important, it is an ideology that shortchanges children by privileging the rights and importance to children of mothers over fathers.

That kind of feminism is so deeply entrenched in our society’s cultural elites and the institutions they dominate -- really it is the defining ideology of our era -- that whether she wants to or not, no thinking woman can escape the necessity of negotiating some kind of relationship with its claims.

However intellectually objective we all try to be, each of us brings our own particular life experiences to the decision of what kind of relationship that will be, and I am no different.
So for full disclosure: I brought two relevant pieces of personal history to the table. The first is that I am the daughter -- one of three -- of a charismatic, entrepreneurial, risk-taking father. Having known the privations of extreme poverty in his youth, he was so obsessed with providing economic security for his family that he literally worked himself to a premature death.

Because he was a hero to me, I am well disposed toward the men I meet, unless I am shown good reason not to be, and as a result there are many wonderful men in my life, not least my husband of 44 years and my son and son-in-law, both supportive, loving husbands of high-achieving women and engaged, beloved fathers of two daughters each.

Everything in my experience with men points to the conclusion that different cultural values around relations between the sexes produce different outcomes. Normal, psychologically healthy men, raised in a society respectful of women, as Canada’s heritage culture is, are governed in their relations with women by the instinct to protect them, not to hurt them.

The second element I bring to the subject is the fact that I am a Jew, and grew up at a moment of expanding acceptance of Jews as social equals, a direct result of the world’s sympathy for Jews following the Holocaust.

Because of my people’s unique history, I am instinctively wary of any group – whether a race, an ethnic group, a religion or a sex - that plays a dualistic hand, scapegoating an entire group to explain the unachieved goals of its own members. For a scapegoating ideology always ends in grievance-collecting and a conspiracy theory of history. My people has been unusually vulnerable to conspiracy theory evils over the centuries. It is presently in the midst of battling a particularly destructive and existentially threatening one.

Virtually all Arab and many other Muslim nations rely on Jew hatred to externalize an explanation for their own failures. It works very well. The world has not seen such a widespread and virulent strain of anti-Semitism dominating an entire region since the Nazi era. So I can say with the conviction bred of close scrutiny that I have no use for blame-laying ideologies of any kind.

The time and place in which I grew up was friendly to intellectual diversity, friendly to Israel and becoming very friendly to women. The time and place I inhabit today is unfriendly to intellectual diversity, very unfriendly to Israel, not so friendly to heterosexual men, but extraordinarily friendly to women. These are some of the themes I have lived, and now they are the themes I write about.

The Bridget Jones phenomenon
I started writing intermittently for the National Post in 2000, and on a weekly basis in 2003. For the first several years I wrote frequently about "bad girl culture": a column on children’s hookerwear – little girls dressing like Vegas show girls with the complicity and even active encouragement of their mothers; then one on young women at Ivy League universities starting porn magazines; and a few about the demeaning custom of "hooking up": guilt-free promiscuity with no consequences, or rather none admitted.

I argued that what began for women as sexual liberation had degenerated into irresponsible, intimacy-anaesthetizing, sexual libertinism, an unhealthy trend for women and for society.
In its most delusional form, I cited what I considered a perfect media representation of the phenomenon: the 2001 movie Bridget Jones’s Diary. This was supposedly an update of Pride and Prejudice, Jane Austen’s classic novel of a meeting of true minds. In the novel the dignified and witty Elizabeth Bennet captures the heart of the upright and gallant Mr Darcy through her strong character, integrity and intelligence.

In the movie version Elizabeth has morphed into the ditzy Bridget Jones, an impulsive, chain-smoking slob of no discernible wit or understanding of human nature, entirely focused on sex, and available to any good-looking man who crosses her path without regard to his character. She is cute and sexy, nothing else.

Strangely, the modern Mr Darcy character with whom Bridget ends up -- completely unrealistically, of course because in real life such a man would never take her seriously -- is in every way a faithful recreation of the original, an intelligent, refined man of taste, discernment and sexual restraint. My conclusion: "Bridget Jones’ and Mark Darcy’s screen characters illuminate a curious postmodern gender disparity in moral standards… For the gentleman is a gentleman still, but the lady has become a tramp."

Feminism and demography
I moved on from there to the dramatic demographic consequences feminism has had on society. As a result of feminists’ promotion of career equity with men and unrestrained sexual experimentation over early and faithful commitment, women are having fewer children later, and many are having none. Consequently, birthrates are down in all western countries, in many below the replacement levels. Canada’s current fertility rate is 1.54 per woman, behind one-child China’s 1.7.

Sadly, many women realize they want to have children, but too late. They were not warned by their Women’s Studies teachers or by feminist commentators that fertility peaks by age 25, or that late pregnancies carry elevated risks, or that induced abortions pose a risk of pre-term delivery in future pregnancies.
Abortion is now such a commonplace here that it is used as a backup form of birth control. Abortions in Quebec have doubled in the last 10 years: in 1998 16 percent of pregnancies resulted in abortion. Today 30 percent do. You don’t have to be a religious Christian to find that statistic disturbing.

All of these realities are directly traceable to feminist doctrine. Feminists’ original goal may not have been the intention to preside over the actual demographic decline of western civilization. Their goal was to empower women. But as the old saying goes, when you are up to your neck in alligators, it’s difficult to remember that your original intention was to drain the swamp.

Campaigning against men
I then turned my attention to the negative and far-ranging effects, of feminism on men. Misandry, which is the female equivalent of misogyny (misanthropy is a hatred of humankind), is now entrenched in our public discourse, our education system and social services. Misandry flies beneath most people’s radar, because we have become compliant in the acceptance of theories that have nothing to do with reality, and compliant in the speech codes that accompany that tendency.

Denigration of men in ways both casual and formal are a commonplace in society. Last Christmas I saw an advertisement for a butcher block knife holder in the shape of a man. The slot for the largest knife was placed in his groin. Hilarious? Imagine a knifeholder in the shape of a woman and a knife slot at the vagina. Hilarious? Not so much. Once you become aware of the phenomenon, you will see it everywhere, trust me.

For overt misandry, one has only to survey the industry around domestic violence. You could be forgiven for thinking that domestic violence is a one-way street, for that is certainly the impression one has from the fact that there are innumerable tax-funded shelters for abused women, none for abused men, unlimited funds for campaigns to raise consciousness around abused women, none for abused men. There is not a single social services agency or charity in Canada advertising "family services" that offers counseling, shelter or legal services for men who have been physically abused by women.

When angry feminists adduce their mantra that only men are inherently violent and that women use violence only in self-defense, I bring up a theme that is forbidden to discussion in women’s shelters: how is it then that partner violence amongst lesbians is significantly higher than amongst heterosexual partnerships?

How is it that children are far, far more likely to be physically abused by their mothers than their fathers? And when they are, how can we justify a woman’s right to take her children to a shelter to escape a violent husband when there is no shelter in the country that will accept a father with children fleeing an abusive mother?

The implosion of the family
Finally I want to talk about the implosion of the traditional family, which can be directly traced to feminism’s repudiation of normative marriage and the role of fathers as vital to a child’s psychological well-being. In June 2006 I wrote about the imbalance, in women’s favour, in the family law system: 90 per cent of contested custody suits end in sole custody awarded to the mother. Such a skewed percentage is unthinkable in any other branch of law.
The family law system is now systemically colonized by radical feminists. Their goal is the incremental legal eclipse of men's influence over women's spheres of "identity" interests, which includes children. To that end the custody issue has become a front line in the gender wars, supported by all feminist academics and institutional elites, by supine cabinet ministers and by feminist judges.

To illustrate with just a few examples:

Supreme Court of Canada chief justice Beverley McLachlin: "We have to be pro-active in rearranging the Canadian family"
Former justice minister Martin Cauchon: "Men have no rights, only responsibilities"
Feminist psychologist Peter Jaffe, a social-context educator of family court judges: "[J]oint custody is an attempt of males to continue dominance over females"
And most egregiously this from the National Association of Women and the Law: "Courts may treat parents unequally and deny them basic civil liberties and rights, as long as their motives are good".

Here we are truly in George Orwell country. In simple words this statement means "The end justifies the means" and there is not a totalitarian regime in the world that does not espouse that exact excuse for their denial of rights to their citizens. In our courts the "good" that motivates them is supposedly the child’s "best interests" but in fact it is virtually always the mother’s happiness. This is not justice.

Misandry in family law
Misandry in family law arises from an ideology that views children as the property of women, even though many peer-reviewed studies show children want and need both parents, and no studies show sole parenting by a mother serves children's best interests. This ideology is instilled in judges during training sessions featuring feminism-driven materials, and subsequently often plays out as unaccountable kangaroo courts.
The result is that an adversarial mother who initiates a divorce against the will of the father --however indifferent her parenting skills, however superb his - and even if the children spend their days with nannies or day care workers --pretty well has a lock on sole custody of the children.

If she makes a false allegation of abuse in order to have him barred from the house -– this happens regularly; any unsubstantiated claim of abuse or even voicing her fear of abuse by a woman will be acted upon instantly by the police and the courts with no recourse for the man – or denies rightful access to the father, she will never be punished at all.
Conversely, if he withholds support money, even if he has lost his job and has no other means of paying, he will be criminalised: His picture as a "deadbeat dad" may appear on government-sanctioned internet sites, and if he goes to jail, as is likely, he will serve a longer sentence than cocaine dealers.

In the days when children belonged to both their parents, it used to be said that children were "hostages to fortune." Today they are hostages to feminism and the state.
And yet every credible sociological study on record demonstrates without ambiguity that if there is a single sure indicator for success in adulthood, it is the presence of a father in a child’s life from the time he or she is old enough to negotiate a path through the world beyond her doorstep. If there is a sure indicator of failure – dropping out, drugs, promiscuity, crime – it is not poverty, it is fatherlessness in later childhood and adolescence.
There is a Yiddish expression my mother used to invoke with a philosophical sigh, "der reidele dreht sich" – the wheel turns. A hundred years ago, it was homosexual love that dared not speak its name. Today homosexual love roars, and it is manliness that whispers in the shadows.

Goethe said: "All theory is grey, but green springs the golden tree of life." The time for zero-sum theories – if your sex wins, mine loses – is past. Men’s voices needn’t be silenced for women’s to be heard. We need more conversation, less monologue. Only one voice should be privileged by everyone: the still, small voice of conscience. Conscience leads away from sexism and toward humanism. Humanism leads to mutual respect and trust between the sexes. And collaboration between the sexes leads to the "golden tree of life" we should all be striving toward – a healthy society.

http://www.mercatornet.com/articles/whos_oppressing_who/

Barbara Kay writes for the National Post. This article is an excerpt from a speech given earlier this week to the McGill University Women’s Alumnae Association on the Impact of Feminism on Society.

Wednesday, January 23, 2008

One Out Of Four Children Involved In A Divorce Undergoes Parental Alienation Syndrome

ScienceDaily (Jan. 23, 2008) — One out of four children involved in a divorce and custody litigation undergoes the so-called Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS), consisting of the manipulation of children by the custodial parent, who incessantly tries to turn them against the other parent by arousing in them feelings of hatred and contempt for the target parent, as explained in the book Marital Conflicts, Divorce, and Children’s Development by professors José Cantón Duarte, Mª Rosario Cortés Arboleda, and Mª Dolores Justicia Díaz, from the Department of Evolutionary and Educational Psychology of the University of Granada.

In the 1980’s, PAS was defined by scientist Richard Gardner of Columbia University. Men are usually the target parent, since in most cases the mother has custody of the child.

According to Mª Rosario Cortés, “the so-called alienating parent is the one who has custody and uses it to brainwash the child, turning him or her against the alienated parent”. In most cases, the process is very subtle the custodial parent stating such things as “if I just told you some more things about your father/mother…”, or by making the child feel sorry for “abandoning” every time he or she visits the alienated parent.

As pointed out by the group of researchers of the University of Granada, there are many other factors which influence PAS apart from the unacceptable attitude of the custodial parent, such as children’s psychological vulnerability, the character and behaviour of parents, dynamics among brothers, or the existing conflicts between the two divorced parents. Very often children not only reject their father, but also his

family and close friends. Grandparents, uncles and aunts, cousins, and the new partner of the non-custodial parent are also affected by this syndrome, and children undergoing PAS can even “expel them from their life.”

Symptoms

Among other symptoms, Professor Cortés points out that children tend to find continual justifications for the alienating parent’s attitude. They denigrate the target parent, relate negative feelings unambivalently towards that parent, deny being influenced by anyone (pleading responsibility for their attitude), feel no guilt for denigrating the alienated parent, or recount events which were not experienced but rather came from listening to others.

The authors of Marital Conflicts, Divorce, and Children’s Development, which was first published in Spanish in 2000 and is coming soon in a new updated edition, state that PAS is more frequent among children aged 9 to 12 than among teenagers, and that there are no relevant gender differences in PAS.

According to Mª Rosario Cortés, the Parental Alienation Syndrome occurs most frequently in cases where parents are involved in divorce litigation, while it is not usual when the decision to seek divorce is mutual. The professor of the UGR underlines that in every case of PAS, “the family must be provided with a family-mediation programme for equal treatment of all members affected by this problem, which is increasingly more frequent.”

Adapted from materials provided by Universidad de Granada
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080122110040.htm

Monday, June 11, 2007

Gatekeeping ~ ‘Momblocked’ mothers edged out by dads

MSNBC.com

Caregivers can clash when stay-at-home fathers step up their game

By Victoria Clayton

updated 8:31 a.m. ET, Mon., June 11, 2007

Two months after giving birth to her daughter, Jen McClure-Metz received a phenomenal job offer. If she wanted to become a producer on a hit television show, she’d have to start in a month.

McClure-Metz and her husband talked it over and made the same decision many families are making: Dad would stay home full time and take care of their daughter.

“While I never thought that I would end up staying home with Sarah, I knew that I was fully capable of doing so,” says Brian Metz, McClure-Metz’s husband.

But almost four years into it, McClure-Metz began to feel her husband was maybe too capable. He had become more competent and assertive in the child-care arena and it showed in small ways. Metz took over when his wife struggled with the car seat, or put the kibosh on plans when he thought their daughter needed down time.

“Basically, he was the parent in charge and I often felt trumped,” says McClure-Metz.

More and more dads like Metz have become so confident in taking care of the kids that moms can feel edged out, or "momblocked."

Dr. Craig Garfield, a pediatrician and researcher at Chicago's Northwestern University who specializes in the role of men in child-rearing, says it's still the norm for moms to act as the gatekeepers to fathers' involvement with their kids. “I’d still say it would be a unique father who is so confident in his approach to parenting as to block his partner,” Garfield says.

But the growing number of primary-care dads could be reversing this notion.

Besides momblocking, McClure-Metz says her family also has had to come to terms with different parenting styles when Dad is in charge in their Los Angeles home.

“What I’ve noticed with my husband and other stay-at-home dads is that they like to fly by the seat of their pants,” she says. “Consulting a book to them seems like asking for directions. Consequently, they use some interesting, un-PC parenting tactics. I’ve caught my husband saying things like, ‘If you don’t put that back you’ll never have another cookie in your life,’ or, ‘Do you want a birthday party? Because if you don’t stop doing that, I’m going to cancel your birthday party.’”

She also found herself wondering about the more aggressive activities her husband seems to promote. Take the wrestling moves.

“My husband likes to pretend to pile drive our daughter. He acts like he’s going to go right on her but he goes to the side and they think it’s the funniest thing in the world,” McClure-Metz says. “Our daughter now loves to wrestle. I never counted on that.”

Counseling helped
Several months ago the couple made their way to a marriage counselor to try to work out some of these issues.

“It was a great thing to do,” McClure-Metz says. “We were experiencing friction but didn’t see the bigger picture. It was enlightening to have someone point out that when you switch traditional gender roles, it’s often stressful.”

Brian Metz says the counseling sessions gave him valuable insights as well.

“You just have to communicate that much more with your spouse when you’re going against what society typically dictates,” he says.

What McClure-Metz learned was that her husband was not trying to “block” her for the sake of edging her out; sometimes it was that he simply knew their child better.

“Now I can admit it: My husband is slightly more in tune with our daughter than I am because he spends far more time with her,” she says.

That’s often a hard thing for working moms to face, says Tom Vytacil, a stay-at-home dad for the past five years and a founder of Minnesota Dads At Home, a support group for stay-at-home fathers.

“We’ve dealt with similar issues,” Vytacil says of his family life. There was a time when Vytacil’s daughter wouldn’t allow her mom to pour water over her head in the bathtub, but she’d let him do it. “I just had to tell my wife, ‘Look, we’ve been through it. That’s all it is.’”

Vytacil says that with enough reassurance and communication between parents, the issues can usually be resolved.

Moms who feel edged out should take heart, says Philip Lerman, author of “Dadditude: How a Real Man Became a Real Dad.”

“When it comes to parenting, mothers are God. They created you,” Lerman says. “You don’t go to God and say, ‘What have you done for me lately?’ Mothers have this incredible, undeniable bond with the child. Fathers are always just trying to catch up.”

Lerman, who quit his job on the television show “America’s Most Wanted” to spend more time with his son Max, urges more dads to play active roles in their children’s lives.

And, in fact, most moms do want their partners to be more involved with the children. A survey from Working Mother Media found that 68 percent of dads take no child-care leave at all and that most mothers say they would like more help from fathers.

Just say no to nitpicking
Aaron Rochlen, a psychologist and researcher on primary-care dads at the University of Texas in Austin, says being less critical seems to be the key to happiness when it comes to moms who want their partners to take on child-care responsibilities.

“We found that the guys who had a supportive wife, family and friends were the most likely to be doing well in their role as a primary parent,” Rochlen says.

Another factor: parental self-efficacy. If the dad felt competent as a parent, he was happier and more likely to continue to be heavily involved.

McClure-Metz agrees that nitpicking doesn’t work. “Sometimes my husband will say, ‘OK, I get it.’ And he’ll try to change his parenting tactics,” she says. “But overall I’ve just had to let go and appreciate his way of doing things and that this arrangement works for our family. Our daughter is doing incredibly well.”

When it’s Mom’s time to take care of their daughter, Brian Metz agrees that he also backs off now and lets her take over. “(Now) I only use momblocking in fun,” says Metz. “If my wife tries to do something with our daughter that isn’t quite working out for her, I will say, ‘Let me try, I’m the primary caregiver.’ But it’s always as a joke, and she knows it.”

If couples can work out their differences, there are benefits to reap from having a heavily involved dad. Studies show social and academic advantages.

“Research also points to fathers playing more with their children, and through that play kids learn lots of things, like self-regulation, exploration, different uses of their body, sounds and space,” Garfield says. Mothers certainly play too, but they are usually more quiet and relational. “Kids can learn a lot from both types,” he says.

Garfield says the best parenting is done with mutual respect between parents with an eye toward what’s best for the child. Even if you get a daughter who is a wrestling fan.

URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19092063/page/2/

Friday, December 8, 2006

The £20 billion annual cost of family breakdown

by STEVE DOUGHTY

Last updated at 22:00 08 December 2006

The report notes the disparity in family background between children most likely to do well in school and those who fail

Family breakdown costs the country £20 billion a year, a report produced for the Tory party found yesterday.

It estimated the cost of family collapse including the burden of welfare benefits on the taxpayer, the amount of debt incurred by single parents trying to survive, and the price to society of coping with associated problems like drug abuse.

And the inquiry set up to provide a basis for party leader David Cameron's policy reviews linked the failures of white boys at school to the increasing likelihood that boys from poor white backgrounds will come from families without fathers.

The full report of the Tory's social justice review group, called Breakdown Britain, is to be published on Monday.

It puts Mr Cameron under pressure to reverse Labour's attempt to sideline marriage and put support for the married family at the heart of party policy when he produces firm ideas to back his promises of cutting poverty next year.

The social justice group, led by former Tory leader Iain Duncan Smith, said that half of all live-in cohabiting couples who have children have split by the time the child reaches the age of five.

But only one in 12 married couples break up in the first five years of their child's life.

The report also notes the disparity in family background between children most likely to do well in school and those who fail.

Last month the Daily Mail revealed figures showing that poor white boys have now become the worst-performing group in schools, falling behind poor Caribbean boys who have in the past been expected to do worst. The report links performance with family background. Children from Indian families - only 15 per cent of whom come from broken or single-parent families - do best in schools. Poor white boys, as measured by whether they get free school meals, come from single parent families more frequently than the national average, which shows that just under one in four children are brought up by one parent. Caribbean boys have the highest rate of single parent families of all. More than half are brought up by one parent.

Mr Duncan Smith told the BBC yesterday: "What we found was one of the fastest growing groups that are having children in society are cohabting parents. "But what was startling about the figures was that among cohabitees one in two are going to break up and leave a single parent household before the child is five." He said the state was left to 'pick up the pieces' of impoverished broken homes. "We can't have a stable workforce and a productive economy if a grwoing number of people at the bottom end of society are workless and without hope," he added.

The report suggests the welfare state has replaced the 'welfare society' of self-supporting stable married families and the links between them. Labour ministers have increasingly sought to intervene in family life to try to improve the lives of poor children.

Chancellor Gordon Brown's welfare system of tax credits has pumped more than £15 billion a year in extra benefits mainly into single parent families, while projects like the £3 billion Sure Start system have tried to supervise the upbringing of their children. Ministers have advised on how children should brush their teeth and called for classes to teach mothers how to sing their children nursery rhymes. But at the same time remaining tax support for married couples has been stripped away, and the Government insists that marriage is a mere lifestyle choice that has no bearing on the success of families.

Thursday, July 13, 2006

Women more likely to be perpetrators of abuse as well as victims

Filed under Education, Family, Gender, Law, Research on Thursday, July 13, 2006.

GAINESVILLE, Fla. — Women are more likely than men to stalk, attack and psychologically abuse their partners, according to a University of Florida study that finds college women have a new view of the dating scene.

“We’re seeing women in relationships acting differently nowadays than we have in the past,” said Angela Gover, a UF criminologist who led the research. “The nature of criminality has been changing for females, and this change is reflected in intimate relationships as well.”

In a survey of 2,500 students at UF and the University of South Carolina between August and December 2005, more than a quarter (29 percent) reported physically assaulting their dates and 22 percent reported being the victims of attacks during the past year. Thirty-two percent of women reported being the perpetrators of this violence, compared with 24 percent of men. The students took selected liberal arts and sciences courses. Forty percent were men and 60 percent were women, reflecting the gender composition of these classes.

In a separate survey of 1,490 UF students, one quarter (25 percent) said they had been stalked during the past year and 7 percent reported engaging in stalking, of whom a majority (58 percent) were female.

Although women were the predominant abusers, they still made up the largest number of victims in both surveys, accounting for 70 percent of those being stalked, for example.

The reason more college men weren’t victims may be that women in the study did not exclusively date them, preferring men who had already graduated, not yet enrolled in college or chose not to attend college at all, Gover said. “It shows that students who are perpetrating these attacks aren’t just targeting other students on campus,” she said.

It also is possible that some of the physical attacks women claim they are responsible for are actually acts of self-defense, Gover added. “Maybe some of these women have been abused by their partner for some time and they’re finally fighting back,” she said.

Recent studies on domestic violence suggest that whereas in the past victims might have felt trapped in violent situations, today’s women are more likely to understand they have options instead of putting up with mistreatment, she said.

“I think we may also be seeing sort of a new dynamic in dating relationships in terms of women feeling more empowered,” she said. “They recognize they don’t have to be in a dating relationship forever. They can get out of it.”

Child abuse was the single biggest determining factor for men and women becoming perpetrators or victims of either dating violence or stalking, Gover said. Even if one never personally experienced abuse, witnessing violence between one’s parents as a child increased the likelihood of stalking or being stalked as a young adult and it made girls more susceptible to becoming victims of dating violence when they grew up, she said.

The survey found that men and women who were abused as children were 43 percent more likely than their peers who were not mistreated to perpetrate physical violence and 51 percent more likely to be victims of physical violence in a dating relationship. Violent acts included kicking or slapping, pushing or shoving, punching or hitting with a hand or object, slamming someone against a wall and using force to make a partner have sex, she said.

Sexual risk-taking – the age when survey respondents first had sex and the number of sexual partners in their lifetime – was another important risk factor, but surprisingly, attitudes toward women made no difference, said Gover, who did her research with Catherine Kaukinen, a University of South Carolina criminology professor, and Kathleen Fox, a UF graduate student in criminology. Some of the findings were presented at the American Society of Criminology annual meeting in November in Toronto.

The study also was among the first to look at psychological abuse. Examples included preventing partners from seeing family or friends, shouting at them and using threats to have sex. Fifty-four percent of respondents reported being psychologically abusive, and 52 percent said they were victims of this type of behavior. Women were more likely to be psychologically abusive, with 57 percent saying they were perpetrators versus 50 percent of males.

Shelley Serdahely, executive director of Men Stopping Violence, in Decatur, Ga., questions the validity of studies showing women are more violent. “Women might be more likely to get frustrated because men are not taught how to be active listeners and women feel like they are not being heard,” she said. “Often women are more emotional because the relationship matters a lot to them, and while that may come out in a push or a shove or a grab, all of which are considered dating violence, it doesn’t have the effect of intimidating the man.”

Fathers and Mens Rights

Sunday, May 4, 2008

References Relevant to Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS)

Tuesday, April 8, 2008

Who’s oppressing who?

One of Canada’s leading newspaper columnists takes on the ideology of feminism.

Wednesday, January 23, 2008

One Out Of Four Children Involved In A Divorce Undergoes Parental Alienation Syndrome

Monday, June 11, 2007

Gatekeeping ~ ‘Momblocked’ mothers edged out by dads

Friday, December 8, 2006

The £20 billion annual cost of family breakdown

Thursday, July 13, 2006

Women more likely to be perpetrators of abuse as well as victims

Fatherhood ~ The Best Job on the Planet

Feeds on Family Law and DV Issues Worldwide

Search This Blog

Followers

My Blog List

Blog Archive

About Me

Feminism On Trial Powered By Ringsurf

Counting 1 - 2 - 3

Leading causes of Injury to Women 2006

Injury related Emergency Department Visits