Introduction
According to Beverly (2013, p. 1), parental alienation refers to the situation where one parent is irrationally rejected by their child, usually because the other parent has influenced the child negatively towards them. There are cases where the cases are severe that the case of Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) develops. In this scenario, the symptoms mentioned repeat themselves and the behavior are affected. The causes of this problem are usually triggered by both parents, especially those that provide the child with a hostile living environment. This environment could be triggered by parents who are undergoing a divorce or parents who have damaging habits and are unwilling to adjust them. In the long run, the alienation is a retaliation of the child being ‘caught in the middle’ of the high-conflict separation (Ellis 1996, p. 1). Due to the in the number of such cases, there have been some legal steps taken by the courts to handle such cases.
Prevention and Early Intervention for Parental Alienation in Family Courts
Ellis (1996, p. 1) suggests that an approach that includes a parental coordinator, a child therapist and strategic planning for the psychotherapy sessions for the child usually help as an intervention program to reduce alienation of the parent. Courts have effectively stepped in and offered solutions for parental alienation, although they can either be in tort or family law contexts.
Under family law, there are three considerations to be made, of which the first is Subsection one, which upholds the child’s best interest while the second one, Subsection 2, considers the material changes present in the case and the circumstances that might lead to the shift in custody. The final option, Subsection 3 declares the therapeutic approaches, penalties and coordination that can be adopted and implemented as effective remedies for this problem (Schwartz 2015, p. 5).
Family Court Reforms to Combat Parental Alienation
One of the methods that the courts have applied to combat this problem is to formulate a statute that declares that the parents of a child have to provide an environment that is peaceful, consistent, loving and stable despite being divorced, separated or in the course of the two (Moses and Townsend 2011, p. 1). It further demands that each of the parents refrain from speaking badly about the other person or their family and instead encourage the child to accept the other parents. In so doing, the child will eventually feel comfortable with either of the parents and reduce the possibility of parent alienation. Such a statute was passed in Tennessee under the Permanent Parenting Plan.
These actions can be considered to be a child-centered approach to social science used to curb this problem. It can be referred to as reunification, which simplifies it to mean that it is proper co-parenting after divorce or separation (Kruk 2013, para 2). The author explains that this approach is essential because the alienation of a parent by a child is usually a deeper longing for the same parent whom they outwardly claim to hate. Another social course that could be applied in such a case is the implementation of the Family Bridges Program, which calls for an experimental yet educative approach to achieve numerous goals for both child and parents.
Subsection 1: Child’s Best Interest
Here, is argued that while deciding on the custody, the presiding judge has to consider if the decision to be made will be of benefit to the affected child psychologically and emotionally, although even the physical aspect is assessed. This approach has however been controversial because it is not clear whether it should be guided by case laws or statutory factors or application of both. The reason is that the legislative consideration is at times too general while in some cases its gets too specific on how to approach the issue. For instance, in the case of Cuban v. Mohammed, the parents were equally importance as per the statutory plan. The courts can however also be guided by the Uniform Marriage and Divorce Act to determine the best interest, which is usually, parent cooperation, moral fitness, parent’s wish, and school community among others.
Sub-Section 2: Material change to Circumstances of Custody
Parental alienation is a valid material change in this case. The court has to consider the reasons for the child’s alienation towards a specific parent as witnessed in the case of Grove v. Grove in Arkansas. The mother had not cooperated during counseling and was accused of trying to alienate the father and child by making false accusations, thereby qualifying for a material change. These alienating behaviors also led to the end of the case of Hibbard v. Hibbard, where the mother was also found guilty of such actions. The third referral is Bennett v. Schultz, where it was decided that alienating the child’s other parent is against best interest considerations and as such that parent is unfit to take the child’s custody.
Subsection 3: Therapeutic options, penalties and coordination of other remedies
Sometimes a parent may be in contempt of court if they violate a court order as in the case of Woodward v. Woodward where the mother was found in contempt after denying the father his visiting rights to the child. In this case, the father had the right to cite parental alienation as his defense, especially in matters of child support. In some cases, however, the judge usually declares therapy as the best way to curb parental alienation such as the Multi-Modal Family Integration (MMFI). In this case, the entire family attends therapy, case management and gets educated in a comprehensive manner of intervention that is meant to enhance reunification.
Intervention
The primary approaches the parental alienation problem during custodian disputes is by the implementation of the three methods. The Family approach keeps the child as the center of interest during the process. All decisions that are made are regarding the child. Tort law on another hand is meant to compensate the affected parent. They get to sue for loss of affection of their child. Finally, the use of the therapeutic approach. Where with the child in mind the parent gets to benefit from psychologic counseling to help them get through alienation.
Protection
The courts device the best ways to deal with alienation which is beneficial to the child. The emotion, psychological and physical wellbeing of the child is a matter of great concern during decision-making times. The changes that have been made to the child interests as a measure of the custody include the family law which is beneficial to both the parent and the child. The alienated parents get access to the child at designated times. Implementing a therapeutic approach is what suits the situation the best. The alienated parent gets to be given psychological help. The child has also counselled that it is only the parents that cannot live together, but that does not translate to them. They have the opportunity to have both parents although apart. In this case, the child’s interests are kept in mind while the parents get to solve their problems and hence conclude the custodian issue more amicably.
New Approach
However, the same courts give a provision where both parents are allowed to keep close contact with the child and continue with their obligations (Schawartz, 2015, p.6). The interests of the child are the guide as to the decisions that the court makes towards custody. Some of the factors include; the wishes of the parents whereby some of the parents may opt to give away the charge in case they are not in a comfortable position to raise the child. The morality of the parent is significant in the modeling of the child.
The parents both have a responsibility of coordinating to make the life of this child better to help ease adjustment in the new home, at school and the community they have to move to (Moses & Townsend, 2016 p.2). In the United States, the case Cuban vs. Mohammed revolutionized how cases of divorce and alienation were to be solved by it hereafter. Previously the usual and expected outcome of such cases was that the mother would be the custodian of the child especially if they are under age. The courts adopted a gender-neutral approach. This change gave responsible fathers the opportunity to become the guardians in case of divorce
Conclusion
The family and the therapeutic approaches are deemed as the best as they complement each other. Tort law has been thought to be a benefit seeking one. It can show a lack of interest in the parent that seeks compensation. A parent that has been alienated can file for compensation for the loss of the child. If the reason given to the mother are not satisfactory, they have the legal ability to be paid. Alienation has the potential to create some long-lasting effects on the child more than the parents. The court is obliged to prevent such circumstances especially during the implementation of the family law. The child has the right to therapy has to be used to prevent alienation tendencies.
References
Beverly, B. L. 2013. A Remedy to Fit the Crime: A Call for the Recognition of the Unreasonable Rejection of a Parent by a Child as Tortious Conduct. Journal of Law and Family Studies, 153 (15), pp. 1-5
Ellis, J. W. 1996. Caught in the Middle: Protecting the Children of High-Conflict Divorce. NYU Review of Law and Social Change, 253, pp. 1-6
Kruk, E. 2013. Parent-Child Reunification after Alienation. Psychology Today. [online]. 9 May. Available at: < https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/co-parenting-after- divorce/201305/parent-child-reunification-after-alienation> [accessed 9 April 2016]
Moses, M. and Townsend, B. A. 2011. Family Matters - Parental Alienation in Child Support Custody Disputes. Tennessee Bar Journal, 25, pp. 1
Schwartz, K. 2015. The Kids are not All Right: Using the Best Interest Standard to Prevent Parental Alienation and a Therapeutic Intervention Approach to Provide Relief. Boston College Law School, pp. 1-10
Cases
Bennett v. Schultz
Cuban v. Mohammed, 441 U.S 380 (1979)
Woodward v. Woodward, 2013 ND 58
Hibbard v. Hibbard, 55 A. 3d 301, 308
