- Home
- Find a Therapist
- Topic Streams
- Get Help
Mental Health
Addiction
ADHD
Anxiety
Asperger's
Autism
Bipolar Disorder
Depression
Eating Disorders
Insomnia
OCDPersonality
Passive Aggression
Personality
ShynessPersonal Growth
Happiness
Goal Setting
Positive PsychologyRelationships
Low Sexual Desire
Relationships
SexEmotion Management
Anger
Procrastination
StressFamily Life
Adolescents
Child Development
Elder Care
Parenting
SiblingsRecently Diagnosed?
Diagnosis Dictionary
- Magazine
- Tests
- Psych Basics
- Experts
Using a medicalizing label to mask child sexual abuse Read More
I definitely don't think PAS
I definitely don't think PAS should be added to the DSM.
Is it just me or is the DSM becoming more and more ridiculous?
Soon everyone in the world will be able to be diagnosed with some form of normality!
Vixey
It is indeed becoming increasingly ridiculous. It's already the case that everyone fits one or more of the 374 categories in the current DSM.
I hope you will consider going to their dsm5.org site and sending them a comment to express your views.
normality
Exactly, Vixey ! I have heard jokes about the DSM for years. Thing is, it is no joke when a theory (pas/pad/pa) is used in court to destroy already hurt children and often, their reporting mothers.
Perhaps you may re-consider your post . . .
I am really sorry for the length. Parental alienation is a horrible thing to watch a father/mother go through. Look at the news. Do a search. It is real. Do you have children? Think about it. Here is the real definition to give you an idea of what defines Parental Alienation: "Parental alienation is a dilemma, occurring due to divorce or separation, when a child expresses hatred or strong dislike for no apparent reason of one parent. The pathological parent makes access to the child impossible despite court appeals and requests. These feelings are influenced by years of manipulation and debauchery by the obsessed parent and by the characteristics they display, such as lack of empathy and warmth of the rejected parent. Parental alienation includes: keeping the child away from the non-custodial parent, disturbed perceptions on healthy parent-child bonding, visitation refusal (even with court order), and extreme pathological alienation of the non-custodial parent, (Wikipedia, 2010)." This eventually severs all bonds with the non-custodial parent.
I have a friend who I was active duty with. He went to Bosnia during a war effort when his wife of 15 years became pregnant by another soldier on base. She decided to take both of their children, and leave. She had power of attorney over all their finances, housing, children, everything when he was overseas – (this is mandatory by the military when you go overseas). She continued to receive full benefits, his monthly checks, was able to use his military cards, went on shopping sprees, went on base and charged several accounts, bought a new car in his name, etc. After coming back, he was disabled from this war. He became so distraught from his family and personal belongings being gone. Furthermore, she couldn't be found for 7 years. We tried every avenue of approach, but nothing prevailed. He now receives $1200/mo in benefits/disability, in that $600 goes to her and the children that he has not seen in 12+ years, and still does not know where they are. We have filed court motions to get a phone number or address, all have been denied. He cannot afford an attorney on such an income, and free legal aid cannot help him since it is a family/custody issue. It's been 12+ years, and he still has pictures on his walls of his kids. He goes to counseling to deal with the pain. He cries a lot although it's been so long. He doesn’t understand why this happened. He feels empty inside and says "my heart feels like it has been shattered in a thousand pieces". He feels like his children suddenly died and he never got to say goodbye or have closure. This part of flesh and blood was stolen from him and is a violation. If anything, it should be against the law - because I have seen the emotional damage it has done to this man. He displays similar symptoms of a parent whose child has been kidnapped. It is devastating. It’s easy to throw out a comment when one has never experienced such trauma. However, if, for just a moment, you could imagine this predicament, or even meet some of the people who have gone through this, things would be perceived much differently.
On another note, yes, they are adding more to the DSM, but not everything requires a specific diagnosis. And not all items listed are serious. Just as there are medical books that list hundreds of ailments with the human body, there is a book that discusses proven ailments of the human brain. We have a brain; the brain is an organ, just like our other organs. We can have diseases and disorders of our brains. It makes practical sense. It’s years of research, technology, and people out there who want to make a difference. Although I am perfectly healthy, I may have a few symptoms under something in there. That doesn’t mean I have that illness. In order to qualify for a particular illness, a person would have to have X amount of symptoms for an extended period of time, and possibly re-occurring. Look on the bright side rather than negative, today in our times, we don’t have to suffer. We know what illness we have, and for many of them, we can treat with medications. We have knowledge, knowledge is power – power is what we need to gain control over our illness to bring our body/mind/spirit back to a sound state.
Perhaps you may re-consider your post . . .
reply to BScforensic_psych
It's always sad when someone who is a good parent loses a relationship with their child. But your description of your friend's experience is followed by two stunningly inaccurate statements, that the DSM contains "proven ailments of the human brain" (I have written one book, edited a second book, and written numerous papers based in part on my time on two DSM committees and in part on a critical thinking review of the relevant research, and there is no justification for that statement of yours), and that for many mental illnesses, we can treat them with medications. Well, about that second allegation, if by "treat" you do not necessarily mean "help ameliorate," then sure, one can always prescribe meds for anything, but the sad fact is that -- though some people are helped by some psychiatric drugs and should be allowed to take them if they choose and if they are fully informed about the drugs and about other approaches that can help -- as scrupulously documented by Robert Whitaker in his book, Anatomy of an Epidemic, vastly more people are seriously harmed by these meds than are helped. News stories are coming out at a rapid rate that provide even more support for Whitaker's findings.
And if you are indeed a forensic psychologist or psychiatrist who posted a comment here, part of which included bold claims that in fact go against what the good scientific research shows, it is interesting that you chose to conceal your identity behind a username that leaves out your actual name. Science only gains when people stop sending out claims about it while hiding who they are.
parental alienation is real- and it happens to both mothers and fathers
I was someone who was hoping parental alienation would make it into the DSM so that parents like me and so many others might have another tool in which to help get our children back. Parental alienation is nothing short of child abuse and it harms our children's long-term well-being. Seeing it recognized in the DSM would elevate it to perhaps legal and psychological standards that would command better attention to this insidious phenomena. When are professionals going to start taking it seriously? Until their kids are affected? I am sorry if women are being falsely accused of being alienators while sexual abuse is happening. However, how many of us mothers-and fathers- are suffering out there not having anywhere to turn because people are still debating whether it exists, whether it masks other things, whether women or men are getting a bad rap... At least, if it was in the DSM, the courts and therapists would take it more seriously. There are over 740,000 children in the United States who are alienated (and my ex is a narcissist- I don't need the DSM for that diagnosis). Two of my kids are part of that statistic. Not all of the alienated children are suffering from sexual abuse. I for one have had to deal with false allegations of (physical) abuse from my own children. Please keep in mind that there is a huge population of targeted parents who are fed up with some of the misinformation or misguided opinions out there. We need help, we need support, we need guidance. Not derisiveness, not condescension, just solutions because we want our kids back!
Hoping for Inclusion to the DSM-V
I am also a mother who has been victimized by my former spouse. My ex-husband used the children in a war against me. He knew the best way to hurt me was through my children and he emotionally abused them to do so. My once loving relationshihp with my children was eroded by a very sick man. And because he was the father, I had little or no recourse to protect them. His rights seemed paramount to mine and even my children's right to a loving relationship with their mother.
It saddens me that so many readers and the author have dismissed and trivialized so many of us who have gone through this horror. Believe me when I tell you that if you or someone you love ever experiences the gut-wrenching, hearbreaking situation of PA/PAS you will definitely have a new appreciation for the pain it causes. I think you will then believe that it should be classified in such a way that allows the court/legal system the ability to treat these people as they are -- criminals (albeit mentally ill ones). All we have to do is to look at the effects of emotional abuse and its far reaching effects into adulthood (substance abuse, inability to maintain quality relationships, depression, etc) to know that it's every bit as damaging as phsyical abuse, if not more so, and should be classified as a criminal offense that is worthy of similar punishment....from loss of custody of the child/children and up to jail time.
Furthermore, I must state emphatically that Gardner did not 'invent' PAS. He may have coined the term by his observations, but he by no means invented it. And while he certainly had some contraversial opinions (which I don't believe were fully used in context), the baby should not be thrown out with the bath water. He nailed PAS pretty much head on. He understood in a way that only those who have lived through it understand.
PAS is a Crime and is real!
PAS is a Crime and is real! Hav you been Falsely Accused??
I have just always thought of
I have just always thought of PAS as when one of the parents uses their children to get back at their spouse, and yes by telling the children aweful things about the other resulting in the child not wanting to have anything to do with the other spouse. Maybe it shpuldt be in dsm but it does happen. My mother vaguely tried doing it to me when my parents divorced. Its like I became her best bud she dumped all her emotional baggage on. And no my dad was not a saint but neither was my mother.
In Line with History
The psychiatric industry has a long history of blaming women, labeling us and "treating" us with methodologies than can be more accurately described as torture. While this is shockingly evil, it is no surprise.
various comments about PAS
Anonymous, If you look at what I actually wrote, I did not say at all that no parent has ever tried to turn a child against the other parent. Of course that happens, and it can happen on either side. You are right that it does not belong in the DSM. Please reread the essay so that you will be clear about what I am saying.
And to Robert Saferty: It is not surprising that someone representing a pro-PAS organization would want to defend it. Please reread my essay here, and then read all of the references. To claim falsely that I said the courts refuse always to take domestic violence seriously is pretty amazing and indicates that you failed to read what I actually wrote. But instead of writing a comment that just alleges that there is a lot of research about it (there is a lot of research about many things that are not scientifically grounded and are misleading and harmful), you might address the specific points that were made in the essay. And if you want to cite the American Psychological Association, as you do, as an authority, (1)all that citation you gave is about is that they had previously cited the lack of data about PAS and have no official position about it, and (2)do you want to cite as an authority a lobby group for psychologists that is extremely powerful and has for years refused to say, as even the American Psychiatric Association did say, that its members ought not to participate in any way in torture?
I have done as you asked and
I have done as you asked and reread the post. I will be a bit longer in this response if you like and quote a few of the sections I find problematic.
If by this you mean the defined behaviours merely result in a squabble between 2 parents I would point you to the many examples of depression/anxiety which result. As an example and amongst the most extreme are recounted by Pamala Richardson, in her book “ A Kidnapped Mind”. She tells of her divorce which ends with her alienated son Dash, taking his life. In these cases, and there are far too many,no-one is speaking of merely a squabble.
In many places you characterize the complaining parent as the abusive father. The members and board of Parental Alienation Awareness Organization (PAAO) are mainly women. Alienated women account for up to half of all alienated parents. This simply demeans their pain, I cannot believe you intend to do so. Domestic violence workers, child protection agencies, social workers and most professionals in the field did have your perspective for many years. That is no longer the case. These professionals still do not agree about where, or if, PAS has a place in the DSM. They do not disagree about the definition, nor the potential outcomes. The main disagreements center on the remedies in specific cases. The Afcc is a 50 year old body of mental health professionals, lawyers, judges and others involved with the family courts. Not only do they discuss PAS regularly, they held their 2010 annual conference in Denver entitled “Traversing the Trail of Alienation: Rocky Relationships, Mountains of Emotion, Mile High Conflict”, and published “Family Court Review, Vol. 48, No. 1, January 2010” both devoted to this issue.
Through Dr. Julie Ancis, you site
I would be happy to further inform your current understanding of PAS if you so wish, I hope you understand the need for that better now.
Thank you . . .
Thank you so much for the useful information (links and books). I will pass them on to my fellow comrades. . .
way off base
As an adminsitrator of a large public child welfare organization I find your post very one sided. Although I have mixed feelings about PAS being included in the updated DSM, it is all to real. More often than not it has nothing to do with domestic violence or child sexual abuse.
I have found that a parents are often motivated by so many different things, sometimes financial incentives, sometimes they are caught up in their own emotional process.
Our Family Courts here take domestic violence and child sex abuse very seriously and more often than not err on the side of being overly cautious.
There needs to be much more research and public child welfare needs to be involved. Many of these families attempt to utilize the child protective systems to mediate visitation and custody disputes.
Who's off base???
I guess you're not familiar with PAS "threat therapy", that calls for jailing mothers for reporting abuse and institutionalizing children to convince them that abuse never occurred, but their mothers are crazy.
PAS proponents are losing their licenses and being sued, because the truth is finally getting out about how they literally torture and abuse children in the guise of PAS programming via unlicensed facilities like the Rachel House. In fact, it's only a matter of time now that the rest of the "psychos" promoting this disgusting corrupt and perverted agenda will be exposed for the frauds and criminals they actually are.
Missing the Point
I think most of the above comments are missing the point, and to be fair, it is perhaps because you are not folks who commonly run headlong into a DSM diagnoses. Essentially, inclusion in the DSM indicates that the psychiatric industry has deemed the syndrome to be a BIOLOGICAL DISEASE, treatable with pharmaceutical interventions. (for the most part- sometimes they will use electricity) Whether or not this is a legitimate issue is not the point! The point is; do ya think a PILL is going to fix it? I don't.
Response to Amy Smith
Sorry Amy... you are mistaken as to the makeup of the DSM.
The DSM is full of relational and short-term adjustment issues. Eating disorders, separation issues, irrational fears -- these are just some of the non-biological issues that comprise the DSM. I believe the DSM Review Board has already ruled out, and correctly ruled out, parental alienation as an Axis I diagnosis -- what you would call a biological disease. However the Review Board is still considering parental alienation for inclusion under other categories -- and parental alienation's inclusion in the DSM will help mental health professionals help countless children, parents and families properly address this destructive family dynamic.
Sincerely,
mike jeffries
Author, A Family's Heartbreak: A Parent's Introduction to Parental Alienation
Mike Jeffries' message to Amy Smith
One of the problems, to which I think Amy Smith was referring, is that so often, no matter what part of the DSM a particular diagnosis is placed in, assumptions are made by therapists and laypeople alike that the cause is medical, biological, physiologically-based, because the DSM is deeply rooted in the medical model.
Perhaps you or someone else would like to suggest what is gained by using the term "PAS" rather than terms everyone can understand, such as "a parent who is purposely and unjustifiably trying to turn the child against the other parent." When such behavior is in fact unjustified, don't we want to call it mean, self-centered, etc., rather than calling it a mental illness?
Why medicalize bad behavior?
Thanks for asking the question directly Paula. You asked Jeffrey and I hope he is alright with my budding in here.
The short answer to why call it PAS is that defining the term will help those evaluating the behaviors identify whether the behaviors are caused by PAS, justified estrangement or in fact abuse.
As to why to "medicalize" it I would say the following. PAS behavior, whether pathological or naive, leaves a child believing and acting on things that are not real.
For example, a father may repeatedly say to or in front a child, "When, your mom was pregnant with you she wanted to abort you, but I wanted to have you, and thats the only reason you're alive today". This dad clearly intends to create a sense of abandonment or even fear of mom within the child by using a fictitious circumstance.
In another case the mom may regularly be speaking on the phone to her friends and say, "I love Jack so much I can't bear to think what will happen if I loose custody of him to his dad. I'm afraid something bad will happen and I won't be there to rescue him".
In the first case, the pathological dad is telling the child a lye, which the child will very likely come to believe. In the second case, naive mom is unaware that she is indicating to the child that being with dad is dangerous, something might happen to the child, and she needs him, in addition she is probably unaware that the child even heard what she said. These comments are nonetheless taken as truths and damaging to the child.
In both cases the child begins to have delusions and will act on them. Over time the delusion will both increase in scope, and be transfered to others on the target parents side of the family.
In many cases of mild and moderate PAS, and in all cases of extreme PAS, these delusions can not be corrected by merely telling the child he was mistaken. Various forms of therapy, usually talk therapy by trained therapists, along with other interventions are necessary to relieve the pain and correct the delusion of the child's mistaken belief.
In other cases, for example when the child is older and he doesn't believe the story, but is simply saying what he believes the aliened parent wants him to say. These cases result in codependencies, which are no less easy to correct, and need mental health intervention too.
I hope this explains a bit of why PAS would warrant medical scrutiny and not be left as merely bad behaviour like not getting to school on time.
However, you are free to continue to argue that it is a medical condition that does not belong in a particular place in the DSM.
For that though, I would hope we talk in terms of the clinical studies done to date and what they show about the relationship of the alienating parent or victimized child to the DSM criterion.
You make an important clarification as to the danger of alienation.
That clarification being that the child actually becomes to believe something about the alienated parent that isn't actually reality. I know some of these posts are older but I feel compelled reading them to respond here. My brother as been battling this very thing through the last year while divorcing his Borderline (diagnosed by a professional) now ex-wife.
It would be one thing if she had told the kids a lie about their dad and they came to believe it to be true because nobody knew about it and contradicted it. What has happened with his children is totally different. She AND her family has convinced them that their dad has a drinking problem by implanting in their heads that when e goes downstairs to put wood in the burner that he is actually drinking hidden liquor. Or, when he goes outside he is sneaking liquor. A recent claim was made by one daughter that he bought liquor with them in his presence at a store on his weekend. Once analyzed with simple logic the entire story was shown to be totally ridiculous and impossible yet his daughter believes it really happened. His ex-wife and her family's campaign to demonize him and alienate him has shown up in their journals as both his daughter's have written "testimonies" about his drinking that weren't even factually correct in the slightest (dates and times as well as locations were totally incorrect).
This "drinking problem" has been addressed multiple times with them. They have been told they can smell their dad's cup any time they want, he has quit going downstairs with any kind of cup in his hand, he has tried in other ways to alleviate any doubt they have that he is sober. Even their grandmother who they adore tried to ease their anxiety by talking with them and assuring them their dad was OK. She then showed up in one of the girls' journals in "mom speak". I am calling "mom speak" the tone and voicing of their mother being channeled through them in their journals. It is not easily describable, but the strength of their belief that this false information is true is hard to put into words. Bizarre, sickening, ill? I am not sure, but it goes beyond one parent screwing with another out of spite as Dr. Caplan seems to believe alienation is. The child(ren) literally believe something shown to be inaccurate or flat out false as truth even in the face of total exposure.
More on thDSM
Thank you for you response.
A mental health professional should never assume that a diagnosis in the DSM imust be biological or medical-based. They should know better, and if they don't they have no business working in the field. What lay people believe about the DSM shouldn't even be part of the discussion. The DSM is a professional resource.
As far as what to call alienation, I imagine we could come up with many labels to describe the emotional issues that drive one parent to damage, and sometimes destroy, a previously normal healthy relationship between the child and the child's other parent. As long as the the professionals know how to identify and address the issue, the rest is semantics among lay people. Putting the issue in the DSM will help educate the individuals who need the information.
responses to recent comments from a couple of people
I have not much new to say except that (1)of course therapists should never assume that a diagnosis in the DSM must be biologically-based or a medical condition, but it is important to deal with the reality that that is in fact what happens; (2)it is naive to believe that therapists know how to undo the effects of mistreatment of all kinds, though some have more skill than others, but it certainly is not the case that naming something a mental illness makes it one whit easier to change; and (3)I will not respond further to messages that are simply going over the same ground, but I want to repeat one last time that something can be seriously damaging (not like, as someone said in a trivializing and distorting way, being late to school) and yet not be a mental disorder, and those who pay no attention to that fact and to the serious risks of applying labels of mental illness are choosing to ignore the dangers.
"What lay people believe about the DSM shouldn't even be part of the discussion" ?
I think that sums up rather well the arrogant, over-bearing contempt far too many so-called professionals in mental health, especially those in the upper echelons of medicine and psychiatry have towards those they are supposed to serve - the layperson or patient. Far too many display attitudes such as: Who cares what the common riff-raff think, or feel or believe? They are merely our lab rats to label and medicate as we think best. Who cares what they experience? We'll decided who's mentally sick and who's not.
I would argue that those 'professionals' who actually write the DSM category descriptions should be fined thousands of dollars for every word, every term, every phrase, every concept in their category descriptions which is not easily understood by every layperson with a common language grade six level of literacy.
If they don't understand why this should be the case, they shouldn't be doctors, psychiatrists or other mental health 'professionals'.
I beg to differ
I think alienating behavior, when directed at a child, could be considered a mental illness or disorder. It's an unnatural behavior. It's abusive at the very least and has long-term repercussions for our children. As for the DSM, the American Psychiatric Association says this about it: The DSM contains a listing of psychiatric disorders and their corresponding diagnostic codes. Each disorder included in the manual is accompanied by a set of diagnostic criteria and text containing information about the disorder, such as associated features, prevalence, familial patterns, age-, culture- and gender-specific features, and differential diagnosis. No information about treatment is included. The DSM is used by mental health professionals from a variety of disciplines and backgrounds in a wide range of settings, including clinical, research, administrative, and educational.
A Real Issue
Thank you, Dr. Caplan, for discussing a topic that many would rather avoid. Several of the above comments here are inaccurate and misleading. Paul Jay Fink (2010), past president of the American Psychiatric Association, in a chapter found in the text Domestic Violence, Abuse, and Child Custody, clearly indicates that PAS "has no scientifc basis, and thus there is no valid or reliable means of making a diagnosis." (p. 12-8) He also indicates, in the same chapter, that "By using PAS against mothers who are trying to protect their children from abusive fathers, custody courts, in effect, overlook, excuse, and even enable the abuse and reabuse of children." (p. 12-4) In addition, Meier's (2009) work is also very current and provides an historical account of the misuse of PAS in the courts. It has been established that PAS is NOT a syndrome or a disorder. PAS "has NOT been recognized by the American Psychological Association, the American Medical Association, or the American Psychological Association as a legitimately, researched, evidenced-based condition" (Fink, 2010, p. 12-2). Fink helped to create The Leadership Council to counter misinformation that helped to perpetuate abuse of children. These are the facts and can be found with careful reading of the sources. Most custody evaluators do not have adequate training or education in issues of abuse and psychological dynamics and are thus not skilled to conduct accurate and valid assessments. Caplan's piece goes beyond the issue of parents badmouthing each other. Please read it carefully. Listen to the stories of children who were taken from their nonoffending parent and forced to live with their abused parent via accusations of PAS. Look up the Courageous Kids Network.
re more of the comments about PAS
Just to be clear, since a number of people who sent comments clearly misread at least part of what I wrote: (1) It would be absurd to say that no parent ever tries to turn a child against another parent, and of course I have never said such thing. (2) Some fathers have been treated badly in the courts, and when they are good fathers, that is tragic, as it is when good mothers are treated badly in the courts. But if you read such important work as Phyllis Chesler's recently revised book, Mothers on Trial, you will see extensive documentation of the fact that anti-mother bias in the courts is far more common than anti-father bias. To add to the anti-mother armamentarium the unscientifically-based but official-sounding label of PAS, especially if it goes in the DSM, is wrong. Bias against any person or group in a court is wrong.
more about PAS
Thanks to Amy Smith for clarifying a key issue and to Dr. Julie Ancis for providing factual material.
Some of the comments here include astonishing claims about things I supposedly wrote, which I did not write (such as that the courts usually ignore allegations of domestic violence -- I did not address that issue...or that I think no parent ever tries to turn a child against another parent, which of course I never said and never would say), and then their writers go on to "answer" those alleged comments of mine at length. This is so bizarre.
I just noted the following review of Chesler's new book, which everyone who cares about children's welfare would do well to read.
Here it is:
"Chesler, Phyllis. Mothers on Trial: The Battle for Children and Custody. 2d ed. Lawrence Hill: Chicago Review, dist. by IPG. Jul. 2011. c.512p. bibliog. ISBN 9781556529993. pap. $18.95. Law
In this new edition of her 1986 groundbreaking book, Chesler, a psychotherapist and women’s studies scholar, retires dated material and adds eight new chapters. By supporting her original contentions with new cases, the author demonstrates again that despite commonly held notions, courtroom custody battles continue to victimize mothers and their children, too often favoring fathers who are abusive, neglectful, or otherwise unfit. Chesler presents a good review of present-day legal trends, including the current darling of family courts, the joint-custody agreement. She relies on studies and experts to call into question the effectiveness of joint custody in all but the most mature and cordial of splits. Also new is a well-presented discussion of the challenges and biases lesbians face in custody fights with former husbands and the sometimes onerous conditions under which these mothers are allowed to retain custody. VERDICT: Heavily documenting her book with legal precedent, expert input, and studies, Chesler makes her case with all of her zeal intact. Fresh, timely content, extensive annotations, and a helpful listing of resources on women’s and children’s issues recommend this book for legal and women’s studies collections.—Joan Pedzich, Harris Beach PLLC, Rochester, NY"
PAS Is Real
Paula
Before you do any more harm to those of us who lost our children at the hands of our former spouses, check your facts! I am a PhD student in Psychology, as well as a childless mother who is as much a victim of Parental Alienation Syndrome as my kids are. The only problem is that my children don't realize what their father has done but rather believe what they are told. Here's the facts you need to understand:
1. Parental Alienation exists. It's gender neutral meaning that it affects equal numbers of fathers and mothers.
2. We need the inclusion of PAS in the forth coming DSM because without it, this horrendous condition will go on unchecked due to the resistance of the courts to allow the diagnosis as admissible as evidence. With PAS in the DSM, the Frye Standard can be upheld and hence PAS is then admissible.
3. Most perpetrators of PAS are those individuals who believe they are above the law and tend to show narcissistic tendencies.
There are so many resources on the topic of PAS including a wonderful support group called Parents against Parental Alienation. You should use these resources.
Paula I don't know if you have any children, but take it from a mother who lost ALL CONTACT WITH HER CHILDREN--it sucks beyond words. Imagine Mother's day without hearing from your kids; think about birthdays and holidays you can't celebrate because your former spouse decided in his or her narcissistic mind that you have to be punished. This is what PARENTAL ALIENATION IS. I am doing my dissertation on the topic and I can tell you from my research AND MY OWN EXPERIENCES SINCE I STOPPED BEING ALLOWED TO BE BECCA AND NICKY'S MOMMY IN 1998, that PAS is not imaginary nor is it an attempt by perverts to prey upon their children. Most of us are well educated and at one point were extremely wonder and caring parents.
Thanks so much for blogging on this topic that you obviously haven't experienced first hand. Next time walk the walk and talk to parents who lived through it. This blog is as bad as the courts enabling our former spouses to abuse our children and ourselves.
PAS is real
My case of PAS is disguised from the sexual abuse my ex was doing to my children. I am very sorry to hear about your case.
Eleanor, you need to get the facts straight
"Before you do any more harm to those of us who lost our children at the hands of our former spouses, check your facts! I am a PhD student in Psychology, as well as a childless mother who is as much a victim of Parental Alienation Syndrome as my kids are. The only problem is that my children don't realize what their father has done but rather believe what they are told. Here's the facts you need to understand:
1. Parental Alienation exists. It's gender neutral meaning that it affects equal numbers of fathers and mothers.
2. We need the inclusion of PAS in the forth coming DSM because without it, this horrendous condition will go on unchecked due to the resistance of the courts to allow the diagnosis as admissible as evidence. With PAS in the DSM, the Frye Standard can be upheld and hence PAS is then admissible.
3. Most perpetrators of PAS are those individuals who believe they are above the law and tend to show narcissistic tendencies."
Eleanor,
Let me start off by saying that I feel for you. Unfortunately, your situation is very typical of what happens when mothers try to get out of abusive (or just plain really bad) marriages and maintain custody of their own children.
But, I'm afraid it's you that needs to get your facts straight! In fact, throwing around your credentials as a PhD candidate, while trying to validate a LEGAL STRATEGY designed to shift blame to mothers, reflects ignorance, and is ultimately going to harm you, your children and all the other mothers and children who are being victimized with this nonsense.
As even you have pointed out, it is those men who abuse, lie and "alienate" the children who invariably get custody. Haven't you figured out that it is ALWAYS the mother who gets labeled the alienator in court.
Yes, even you...That's because PAS was crafted to vilify and criminalize MOTHERS, while concealing evidence of paternal abuse, so that ANY man -- no matter how abusive, unfit, etc., can get custody, in ANY case where the women and children really are being victimized.
Please don't think this has anything to do with actual child welfare issues. There are tremendous financial incentives to the family court and its appointees to grant fathers custodial rights. Of course, that's not so say that most fathers shouldn't have custodial rights. However, corrupt court officials -- working with some pretty perverse "experts" ("sexperts")have figured out that there are huge pots of funding that can be diverted through the minority of cases involving domestic and child abuse. If you haven't already done so, please read this article I wrote a number of years ago, prior to Richard Gardner's death:
http://www.newsmakingnews.com/ross,familycourtcorrupt2nd2,19,03.htm
On a final note, in a sense you could actually say that PAS is "real". In fact, it is a very "real" strategy used to shift blame away from abusive men, while punishing women and children in jails and mental institutions a la Gardnerian "threat therapy". (I don't have time to look for all the links right now, because following Gardner's suicide, his website was taken down and many of the documents are no longer available. However, his works were especially disturbing in that they call literally for putting children in foster homes and lockdown facilities, while their mothers go to jail for the kids' refusal to see their (abusive) fathers. You should also look up the case of Nathan Grieco, a young man who committed suicide in such a case. It was originally written in the Pittsburgh Post Gazette, Casualties of a Custody War). PAS is also very real in the real "estate" sense. Look it up: "Alienation" refers to the transfer of property (in this case children), from one "owner" (the mother) to another (the father), willingly, or unwillingly.
PS PAS/PAD was fabricated as a diagnosis of children. Mothers were identified by Gardner as the primary alienation inducers, but the label "PAS" was not applied to the "alienator". So please, get your facts straight. On that concept alone, PAD should not be included in the DSM, because something that parents may "do" is not a mental disorder. Moreover, gender neutral does not imply equal numbers of men and women being "affected" by PAS/PAD. In reality, because PAS as a legal strategy is only used in cases where the father is abusive, the vast majority of these cases involve male alienator/abusers. And, the vast majority of victims of the PAS legal maneuvering are women (and children of both genders) because they're the ones who invariably lose custody, are endangered, and get punished via court orders.
Post new comment