NewsParental Alienation SyndromeOct 27, 2006 Parental Alienation Syndrome when first identified in 1991 by Dr. Richard Gardner in his book by the same name provided new insight for the cause of parental rejection by children in divorce. "PAS" is the shortened reference for the syndrome periodically arising among families breaking up in court where the kids exclude one parent in preference for the other. Dr. Gardner published his findings after years of research in divorcing families and actually found that the mother was the alienating parent in 90 present of the cases evaluated. His explanation has been that mothers are the ones most disturbed and frightened by the divorce process and are, accordingly, more prone to resort - consciously or unconsciously - to alienating tactics. Gardner sees her as trying to protect herself from the pain and uncertainty of the court proceedings. His research also found that PAS operates through a range of severity from mild symptoms, to hostility and total rejection by the kids for the alienated parent. Dr. Gardner reserves the tag "syndrome" for the advanced cases and proposes for these cases only court ordered separation of the children from the alienating parent with possible hospitalization and drug therapy, where indicated to break the cycle. One San Diego case that recently went awry involved a court appointed expert who 'diagnosed' PAS in children that were claimed to have been alienated by Dad. The kids were immediately quarantined with Mom; - Dad was limited to one, short call per week for months. Father's Rights Law Center devoted months on Dad's behalf to reunited Dad with his children. Dad first got into trouble by representing himself, even when Mom had experienced counsel. Dad initiated the proceedings only seeking to expand his custodial time with his 13 and 11 year old sons at their urging. The court obliged Dad's request with a counseling review and the appointment of an independent expert who was selected to perform a psychological evaluation of the family. During the evaluation, the boys told Mom they were moving in full time with Dad but continued to want to see Mom explaining to the court's expert that Mom as abusive and cruel toward them over school and activity issues. From this, court's expert concluded that the kids had been programmed by Dad and the quarantine order was recommended supported by expert's diagnosis of PAS. When Dad retained FRLC, Dr. Gardner was immediately consulted to review the case and recommend action. Dr. Gardner suggested the retention of his colleague, Dr. William Schwartzman, M.D., Ph.D. of San Francisco, as Dad's expert to review the court's expert's findings. Dr. Gardner and Dr. Schwartzman concurred after consultation that the PAS diagnosis was suspect. That suspicion was confirmed for them after FRLC deposed court's expert and obtained expert's complete file and test results, notes and interview records. During his deposition that was spread over several weeks between sessions, the courts expert admitted to not having read Dr. Gardner's works; he was unfamiliar with much of the PAS theory as developed and refined by Dr. Gardner. Court's expert had also failed to approach the testing and interviews with some of the precautionary methods recommended by Gardner to cancel out false positives planted by Mom. He proudly resisted impeachment, nevertheless, with the claim that he was independently qualified and experienced in his field - child psychology - to diagnose and treat PAS. Between deposition sessions, however, he did ‘bone up' on Gardner's book, The Parental Alienation Syndrome (1991) admitting that Mom's lawyer had provided him his copy to read. On the day of trial, Mom agreed to attempt a resolution by having the matter reviewed by a third, mutually selected expert, approved by the court. The new consultant was provided complete access to all records, including those of the courts expert as well as access to Dr. Schwartzman's evaluations. Within several months, the family was back to the original time share and within six months, the children were spending equal time with both parents - what Dad had wanted all along. During the quarantined separation period that spanned nearly a year, the children were depressed, their school performance suffered, and they continued to persist in their desire to live with Dad, even with their own therapist, who had been chosen by Mom during the quarantine period. FRLC declined Dad's request to prosecute a civil action against the court appointed psychologist on Dad's behalf. Dad sought new counsel and pursued a malpractice claim that was dismissed based on recent California case law that grants civil immunity to court appointed experts. In the March, 1991 "Addendum #1" to his book, Dr. Gardner recognizes a frequent misinterpretation of PAS by child psychologists, psychiatrists and others. "It has come as a surprise to me form reports in both the legal and mental health literature that the concept of the parental alienation syndrome is often misinterpreted. Specifically, there are many who use the term as synonymous with parental "brainwashing" or "programming". Those who do this have missed an extremely important point regarding the etiology, manifestations and even the treatment of the parental alienation syndrome. The disorder refers to a situation in which the parental programming is combined with the child's own scenarios of denigration of the allegedly hated parent. Were we to be dealing here simply with parental indoctrination, I would have probably stuck with the term brainwashing or programming. Because the disorder involves the aforementioned combination, I decided a new term was warranted, a term that would encompass both contributory factors. It was the child's contribution that led me to my theory about the etiology and pathogenesis of this disorder. Furthermore, the understanding of the child's contribution is of importance in implementing the therapeutic guidelines described in this book". It was such a misinterpretation of PAS that Dr. Schwartman believed had led to the misdiagnosis here: - first, Dr. Schwartzman felt that it was highly unlikely that even a mild case of PAS was properly diagnosed for the children; - second, h determined that the boys feelings for Mom were supported by their complaints about her anger for Dad and them, and not on programming by Dad. The symptoms were not such as to qualify for the quarantine recommended by the courts expert in any case. |
Free Legal ConsultationPlease enter your information below to have your case evaluated by our firm at no charge. Please note that submitting this form does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. |