Parents at war risk losing children

[DrBlackbird]

Anyone else alarmed by the new 'initiative' being rolled out by Cafcass - the government organisation deemed 'not fit for purpose' in the past by Chair of Chair of the UK Commons Public Accounts Committee - that includes the possibility of it stopping contact between child and parent due to parent alienation?!

First of all, this organisation has created a threat that ultimately harms the very people they are supposed to protect. Secondly, the article in The Guardian yesterday carefully avoids using gender pronouns, but concluded with a quote by the Chair of Families Need Fathers saying that this new approach was 'welcome news'. Strikes me that this initiative is at risk of being used (abused) more by malicious fathers than mothers. This concern is based on two observations.

One, witnessing the vindictive and extremely manipulative actions of the ex's of my SiL's as well as several friends. In each case they were incredibly vicious to their ex-wives and went to huge lengths to ruin them financially ('welcome to a life on benefits' / 'I'm going to make you spend every penny you have and your parents') as well as emotionally (telling Cafcass workers that they these women were unbalanced etc). Strangely, in each of the cases it was the ex having an affair that split the marriage up.

Two, in each case the Cafcass reps were poorly trained, often young, and not well trained in collecting and analysing evidence relying instead on subjective impressions. This is not just my impressions either as Ofsted has criticised Cafcass in the past for "no evidence of a consistent assessment model used by staff" and "•case records often did not show how Cafcass had come to its conclusions about children".

And this is the organisation that has developed this 'ground-breaking process' that can ultimately end in severing contact between a child and one parent?

It is, there is very little research or data about it, so how can it be used in courts when it has not been under review or scrutiny!

www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/how-parental-alienation-syndrome-is-changing-custody_us_5939d367e4b094fa859f1719

fact.on.ca/Info/pas/wood94.htm

It should therefore be approach with a lot of caution, and not to be taken as gospel.

I would not regard Huffington Post as a reliable source. What it says about allegations of parental alienation "often swaying the judge" is not true in either the USA or the UK.

As for the other link, it is an article from a legal review published in 1994. It is not a reflection of the current state of research. A lot more evidence has emerged, including from adults who were victims of parental alienation as children.

There is now plenty of peer reviewed research supporting parental alienation. See, for example:

Baker, A. (2010). “Adult recall of parental alienation in a community sample: Prevalence and associations with psychological maltreatment.” Journal of Divorce and Remarriage, 51, 16-35.

Bernet, W. et al (2010). “Parental alienation and the DSM V.” American Journal of Family Therapy, 38, 76-187.

Fidler, B. and Bala, N. (2010). “Children resisting postseparation contact with a parent: Concepts, controversies, and conundrums.” Family Court Review, 48 (1), 10-47.

That is just a small sample. There is much more. As I said previously, whilst mental health professionals disagree as to whether or not parental alienation should be recognised as a distinct syndrome as opposed to using the more general diagnosis of "Parent-Child Relational Problem", there is general acceptance that parental alienation is genuine.

I totally disagree, it needs far more research and peer review first. Whilst some parents do maliciously alienate children from the other parent, that is not so in all cases, especially when there has been proven evidence of domestic abuse, the mother has to escape and try to protect the child from the abuser which is usually the father. I am on a domestic violence support group, and a couple of my friends have been subjected to extreme emotional and physical abuse from their partners. I have heard of course using PAS as a tool to remove the child from a protective parent to an abusive one. This is wrong.

SS say I need to decide whether to allow contact centre contact for my DD and ex or none at all, and wait for him to start court proceedings, if he does. They say it's my decision and they can't tell me what to do.

He's a mentally unstable drug addict and is very inconsistent both with contact and in mood.

But I'm fucking terrified of CAFCASS, even though I'm a good parent.

Have no idea what to do.

123 its very sad, I see this situation off in the support group. The women there say that they are abused again through the court system.

1234567m In your position, I offer contact centre always as a first option. If he refuses, then stop contact completely in my opinion. That is far too an unpredictable and dangerous situation to continue. You have spoken to SS, that will be on record. I would let him make the application if not prepared to do supervised or indeed address the issues that have led you to this position in the first place.

Don't be afraid of Cafcass. I understand this, I am in the middle of if currently. However, whilst they can make recommendations, the judge makes the decisions and a drug addicted, unpredictable father is not going to win custody of your daughter.

Whilst some parents do maliciously alienate children from the other parent, that is not so in all cases

More research is always a good thing. And I note that you accept that parental alienation happens. No, it doesn't happen in all cases. No-one is saying it does. As I said previously, the fact that a parent is denying contact does not necessarily mean it is a case of parental alienation.

Unfortunately, one of the problems the courts face is that some parents make unfounded allegations of abuse in an attempt to prevent contact. Sometimes it is easy to spot a false allegation, sometimes it isn't. Inevitably, this means the courts want evidence to support allegations. Sometimes there will be genuine abuse but the parent is unable to provide enough evidence to convince the court, resulting in the court making the wrong decision. I wish the courts always got it right but realistically that will never happen.

Moving the child's residence is a big step which the courts only take with very clear evidence that it is in the child's best interests. I won't say they always get it right. They don't. But it takes repeated court appearances and a lot of evidence before the courts conclude that parental alienation is taking place and that this is sufficient justification to move the child. It is not something the courts do lightly.

Whenever it happens, friends of the mother (assuming she was the parent with care) almost invariably believe the child is being taken away from a protective parent and given to an abuser. Sometimes they are right. However, the evidence available suggest that in the vast majority of cases they are wrong.

My ex is trying to accuse me of patental alienation currently. He has no contact with dd other than phone calls for 5 months due to me stopping contact as he refused to deal with his drinking and mental health issues. Awaiting section 7 report. He's apparently recorded me telling dd that he wasn't allowed to see her because of his drinking. He's not so I'm not worried. Apparently he's now cured of his alcoholism and mental health issues........🤔......we will see if Cafcass side with him?

My friend has to send her 9 year old boy to his abusive dad, in case she has residency removed from her. She is considered a protective parent, court has said that because is with her most of the time, he is safe. But has ignored hard evidence of abuse and judge has ignored the high courts recommendation of supervised contact, as the father said in court, if he has supervised then he won't bother to see him. I said to my friend that when her ds starts senior school, he can make his own decision not to go to contact with his father after school.

A lot of men use the court as a continuation of their abuse and control, and judges have to be on the ball. Judge Mumby the head of the Family court has proposed positive changes which will see the end of this, and victims of domestic abuse being cross examined by their abuser. I hope they come about soon.

Yes I do believe that it does happen, but court should not be using that as a reliable tool to use in every case, each case should be treated individually.

1234567m when I was practising in this area with was my experience that parents who do not put their children first rarely comply consistently with contact arrangements. After 2 or 3 sessions come the excuses -- missed the bus, no money for the bus, sick, had to wait in for a new couch to be delivered ( honestly!) and thee silence. When contacted they say they aren't comfortable in the contact centre setting. You then say that the children get upset/unsettled with non appearance and you'll only send them when centre informs you dad has arrived. He will object to waiting round but this is in children's interest. After 3 or 4 weeks you say "enough" and no court will find you unreasonable. You have attempted to facilitate contact. If it ever gets to court ask for a parenting assessment and drug and alcohol assement
Scarey situation, I know but you are on firm ground.

But it takes repeated court appearances and a lot of evidence before the courts conclude that parental alienation is taking place and that this is sufficient justification to move the child

It don't know about parental alienation but I have known people who do their best to turn their child agains the other parent. But if the child is, justly or unjustly, severely prejudiced against the other parent, it must be very traumatic for them then to be sent to live with that person.

Only cases where this was a factor (rare) was where mother had MH issues and went to elaborate lengths to avoid any contact at all and defied court orders. In the end the courts get exasperated and removing custody only remedy. As far as I am aware the non custodial parent in these cases was not guilty of harming children or DV but the subject of ex's hate campaign. Not many cases would fit the alienation syndrome scenario

I have not read the articles or the full threads yet but from what I have read on here the only way I can see this being in the kids interests is with extremely well qualified psychologists understanding the full ramifications of emotional & financial abuse towards mothers ( and fathers when it occurs) and by default the kids. It is impossible to protect kids - they will sense the tension - a person being continually abused is not going to be able to hide this unless they are emotionally dead and if this is the case they are not in a good place for the kids anyway.

Are the parents going to be subject to pscycological therapy so all those that say they are dealing with a narc - are they going to be forced to undergo some form of assessment?

If we do not inform our kids that certain behaviour is controlling, manipulative, emotional blackmail and harming their long term mental health or at worse setting them up for abusive relationships themselves because we have had to protect them from this by not discussing it - are we not abusing them ourselves anyway?

Unless this gets talked about in schools, in the media, in families who is going to teach them - we thought sexual abuse was pretty well understood look at what is currently happening - stufff from 15/20 years just coming to the surface -

I will read the thread and articles my instinct is that it is not going to be good - just more bollocks from people that really have no idea what goes on in the real world

And I've just caught Cindies post - do we know why the mother had MH issues? Maybe she needed help not the removal of kids that were probably her only motivation to keep going?

Just about says it all!

Yes I do believe that it does happen, but court should not be using that as a reliable tool to use in every case, each case should be treated individually

Agree completely with that and also with your previous post, although obviously I can't comment on the specific case you describe.

Prh, I'd be interested to read the actual study that cites "The evidence available suggests that parental alienation is a factor in around 80% of the most intransigent cases coming before the family courts."

It appears that Gardner based his 'theory' primarily on his private practice, not on solid, sustained, and replicable research.

And having just now read several of Gardner's papers, it is more than clear that, in his opinion, the majority of the allegedly alienating parents were the mothers. That is, in his view, it was the mother who was the alienating parent attempting to damage or sever the child's relationship with the father

There are many many critical voices of Gardner's (unsubstantiated) claims. One of the critical voices includes Professor Bruch, a professor of Law from the University of California, Davis. In this paper, Bruch concludes: "The deficiencies in PAS theory are multiple" (2001:530) and "PAS as developed and purveyed by Richard Gardner has neither a logical nor a scientific basis. It is rejected by responsible social scientists and lacks solid grounding in psychological theory or research. PA, although more refined in its understanding of child-parent difficulties, entails intrusive, coercive, unsubstantiated remedies of its own."

Bruch notes that rather than considering whether the allegedly 'alienated' or target parent was actually the untruthful parent or had behaved in a way that might explain the child’s aversion, Gardner focused attention whether the child was lying or being manipulated by the custodial/so called alienating parent, typically the mother. This is the experience of many of my friends. That cafcass workers criticised the mothers and never sought to establish whether the ex-h's behaviour was the cause for the child wishing to avoid them.

Hence, why this initiative worries me and why I see the potential for misuse and abuse by controlling and manipulative ex-h's.

www.thelizlibrary.org/~liz/liz/bruch.pdf

Ultimately what it does is raises the stakes for revenge by abusive men.

It all seems very naive and poorly considered.

That is a Cafcass figure. Similar figures are reported in some other jurisdictions.

The important thing here is that we are talking about the "most intransigent" cases. These are cases where the courts have ordered contact and the parent with care has persistently refused to comply with court orders. So Cafcass suggest that in 20% of those cases there is no attempt by the parent with care to alienate the child from the absent parent (or at least, not enough of an attempt to class as parental alienation).

Is the figure accurate? Difficult to say but those who work in the family courts generally accept the figure as feeling about right.

You are right that it is important to distinguish between cases where the parent with care is genuinely engaging in parental alienation and those where the child's views of the absent parent have been caused by that parent's behaviour.

When we are looking at parental alienation we are always dealing with a situation where the parent with care has breached court orders multiple times. The courts will have heard the parent with care's allegations against the other parent and made a finding of fact. It is not up to Cafcass to re-investigate the issue although they should bring any evidence they find to the court. The finding of fact can only be changed by the court. The most likely route to a successful challenge is if the parent with care can provide evidence to support their allegations. One can argue that it should be different but that is how the system currently stands.

Any measure which seeks to ensure that children can maintain a relationship with both parents has the potential for misuse and abuse by controlling and manipulative ex's. I don't think that on its own is a good reason to stop putting those measures in place. The counterbalance is that the courts must try to identify controlling and manipulative ex's and use their powers to stop them misusing and abusing the courts, e.g. by making them apply for leave from the court before making any further applications for court orders.

Can I just say again that I am not saying either the family courts of Cafcass are perfect. Judges and Cafcass workers are human so mistakes will be made on both sides - loving absent parents will be denied contact, abusive absent parents will be given contact. I wish I had a magic wand I could wave to make sure the courts always got it right.

I have read all the articles and the more I Think about this the more it concerns me - the message I hear over & over is protect the kids interests and welfare in divorce yet this will do the very opposite in the majority of cases - giving abusive fathers another 'legitimate stick'' to beat the mothers with under the guise of 'what's best for the kids'

The article refers to no fault divorce - in my view this is where the issue starts - if both parties agree to a divorce and it is amicable the kids will be ok.

But if most divorces that end up in court are as a result of one party being at fault either through adultery or unreasonable behaviour this is a significant factor in how the whole process will pan out and gives an indication of the moral compass of one of the parties and already indicates that one of the parties is unable to prioritise the kids welfare over and above their own needs and/or behaviour.

Have the courts/ legal system shot themselves in the foot? Unable to cope with the demand for divorce - I would like to know what % of the 80% of cases were instigated by women - so simplify the process but realise their bread and butter comes from long drawn out cases.
So do they need another income stream ?

How many of the cases where contact is an issue involve fathers not paying their full maintenance - how many are being processed through CMS which from experience take too long to resolve. If the interests of kids are a priority this needs to be addressed. Fathers cannot claim to be alienated when they are not meeting their own responsibility as dictated by the courts.

Is it any wonder that mothers MH is under pressure when dealing with all this - most of the problems caused by organisations/ processes claiming to help them but actually causing them more strain. Any parent having to involve CAFCAS is already likely to be under immense strain.

I can't help thinking that this is only going to be in the interests of the legal profession - they will now become more involved as a result of the number of fathers who will look to pursue this avenue.

I would like to know what WA view is on this? Why is a charity that supports women in desperate situations and by default the children continually getting their funding cut? Are we trying to pretend DA does not happen on the one hand but acknowledge it does on the other?

My own experience of divorce and the courts - a hugely expensive and damaging farce - this just sounds more of the same but with the kids being put firmly in the middle of it all - exactly what they proclaim should not happen!

But it's a crap figure and I have no doubt includes genuine cases of abuse where they have decided incorrectly ( as in my case) it was parental abuse.

Family Court wouldn't have a clue either because he never return it to court after he caused provable physical injury.

And believe me I was very intransigent about sending my kids. Although I just said no I didn't play games about it and I didn't ignore any court orders. Although my ex did. Repeatedly but apparently it's OK to not do what a court has ordered you to do if you are a "hardworking male"

I'd love to shout at them now about the damage their assumption of parental alienation did. It will do so much damage to so many kids all because of crap statistics ando assumptions with no follow through to confirm those assumptions are correct.

It sheer arrogance but it children of abusive father's who will suffer.

My experience was that CAFCASS and the court did recognise attempts by my exH to disrupt our relationship in this way. To be fair, exH is not a subtle man and made it easy, eg.

• dd aged 5 told the school that her mummy was trying to kill her, her daddy had told her so (the School reported this to SS without my knowledge)
• he made multiple false allegations against me to SS, which were taken seriously and investigated, and all led to a finding of no concern
• he told the judge that he wanted dd to be entirely in his care, with no set arrangement to see me. ExH said he would determine when dd could see me again, but it would be a couple of years before he would allow this.

The fact that he maintained in court every single teacher, CAFCASS officer and social work, previous judge, solicitor (including his own) and social worker was biased against him didn't help him very much either.

The judge's face was a picture.

ExH shot himself in the foot by self-representing in court after his previous solicitors refused to keep representing him). I feel so lucky that he's arrogant and over-estimated his own cleverness - someone more sophisticated in their approach could have done a lot more harm.

I am about to go to court as my abusive ex wants 50/50 custody (on grounds that his latest girlfriend will do his childcare) as he doesn't want to pay maintenance and is determined to eventually get full custody as my 'punishment' for my leaving him. My local WA are unable to help as they don't have enough funding. My ex has been telling our young child all sorts of things about me and trying to manipulate so he can get what he wants. He is doing everything he can to alienate them from me. My child has severe anxiety as a result and I am powerless.

My solicitor has recommended I submit a C1A form as a counter but I am afraid that I won't be believed in court (I have plenty of paperwork of abuse I suffered but I've never been fully believed) and my ex is very clever. He knows how to play the system.

I am terrified of CAFCASS and that they'll be sucked in by him too.

I am about to go to court as my abusive ex wants 50/50 custody (on grounds that his latest girlfriend will do his childcare) as he doesn't want to pay maintenance and is determined to eventually get full custody as my 'punishment' for my leaving him. My local WA are unable to help as they don't have enough funding. My ex has been telling our young child all sorts of things about me and trying to manipulate so he can get what he wants. He is doing everything he can to alienate them from me. My child has severe anxiety as a result and I am powerless.

My solicitor has recommended I submit a C1A form as a counter but I am afraid that I won't be believed in court (I have plenty of paperwork of abuse I suffered but I've never been fully believed) and my ex is very clever. He knows how to play the system.

I am terrified of CAFCASS and that they'll be sucked in by him too.