Parental Alienation is a perilous accusation that should never be recognized in courts or viewed as particularly compelling in cases deciding the custody of a child, especially when resolving profoundly difficult questions concerning the scary scenario of placing that child back into the home of a domestic violence abuser.
By definition, Parental Alienation is a “syndrome” that manifest in the process of divorce when a parent
suffering from “deflated self-esteem” as “part of a normal grieving response to interpersonal
loss” to “enforce their agenda” and “The alienating parent may or may not be consciously
aware of manipulating the child and the legal/social systems. Alienating parents often believe that
the accusations they make are true, but have developed
those beliefs by a faulty reasoning process.”
First, it is important to begin by evaluating the premise
of Parental Alienation, which is not a recognized syndrome
by the American Medical Association.
Second, American Psychological Association has never
issued a position on Parental Alienation.
Third, nowhere in the vast database of the Harvard
Medical School Countway Library stacks of the History
of medicine and medical discoveries from the 16th–21st centuries, is there any information on Parental
Alienation syndrome.
Fourth, that may underline why vocal proponents of,
Parental Alienation Syndrome such as Glenn Sacks is
the Executive Director of Fathers and Families, are
captious in their language stating, “Mental Health professionals have been making progress
in increasing recognition of PA.” I am not entirely aware if the claim warranted by
The California Alliance for Families and Children who
state “It is of our opinion that the way forward to address
everyone’s concern is through better education on the issue,” is based on an awareness that such research is not
possible through The Center for the History of Medicine
Archives and Records Rare Books, Databases or Dictionaries
at Harvard Medical School or Harvard School of Public
Health?
Admittedly, proponents of Parental Alienation find
their support in precedent from not “preventing a court from considering evidence that a
parent had deliberately engaged in tactics and behavior
that intentionally estranges a childs bond with their
other parent,” but that is where their view deviates from the often
lengthy, brutal and inhumane violence that occurs right
in front of a child’s eyes forced to witness a domestic violence relationship
proceed night after night.
Furthermore, many of their citations omit any specific
objections to the use of Parental Alienation in a real-life situations where a victim is unable to obtain
restraining order barring abusers from estranged loved
one so the hope left is flee the danger.
Arguments to the contrary stand in stark contrast not
only to the history of California Protective Orders
Laws, codes and statutes but also the evidentiary precedent,
in which a victim “alienating” a child from a monster not as procedural posture,
but as survival instincts that arises when violence
is emanate.
I struggle to understand how a “syndrome” that manifests in the process of divorce changes the
fact that escaping domestic violence, even if by “alienation” merits relief no matter how it is arrived at.
As the head of Public Relations for one of only two
domestic violence survivors shelters on the Central
Coast, here at Shelter Outreach Plus, we see the faces
of the children wet from tears as a parent is forced
to keep them out of school for a week, because the
estranged parent showed up at the attendance office
at the child’s elementary and tried to take them away.
At Shelter Outreach plus, we render any claims of Parental
Alienation
invalid, because as often the last hope for a women
in crisis who has no idea if her abusers will turn
the violence from her onto the children, we absolutely
do everything we can keep that person away from those
children be-it our legal advocates through restraining orders,
our The Domestic Violence Response Team (DVRT) through hotel vouchers or one of our 2 secret facilities throughout the region to encourage
“alienation” and foster hope.
At Shelter Outreach Plus, we view Parental Alienation
as less of “syndrome” in the mind a helpless child of more of a twisted
form of
retribution in the twisted spirit of a domestic violence
abuser.
At Shelter Outreach Plus, we believe the California
court system should look to establish every safeguard
possible to avail a domestic violence victim a way
to mend a broken heart and concurringly seek out emergency
shelter without fear of facing Parental Alienation
in a future custody case.
We fully support AB 612, which is coming up vote in front of the Senate Judiciary
Committee to ban Parental Alienation Theory,
and we fully support Assembly Member Jim Beall, Jr.
(AD 24th) as author of the Bill. His continuing efforts to give
voice to the battered women who on their own, could
never find the courage to articulate the desperation
they felt as the moment they knew they had to take
their children and disappear.
Parental Alienation is at best, a deterrence that only
diminishes whatever possible benefit that might be
received from restoring the love that obliviously once
was there in the home of a family by searching for
justifications to delay a child’s removal from a terrifying situation.
In closing, I strongly believe that such views, no
matter how steadfastly held by proponents of Parental
Alienation or how many times successfully cited to
the Senate Judiciary Committee as preventing “various loyalty tests” by misguided supporters of Parental Alienation, only
miss the story that each victim brings with them into
their first night in an emergency shelter where their
goal is in no way “alienating parent may or may not be consciously aware
of manipulating the child and the legal/social systems,” but to avoid the scary scenario of
placing that child back into the home of a domestic
violence abuser.
