Significant attention was given last year to a US report published in 2019 by Joan Meier et al ‘Child Custody Outcomes in Cases Involving Parental Alienation and Abuse Allegations’. The report, now powerfully challenged, claimed that courts were failing to protect children when mothers claimed domestic abuse because of counter-claims of parental alienation.
It summarised its findings thus:
‘Overall, mothers reporting abuse – particularly child abuse - are losing custody at high rates. The data also support the critiques of parental alienation theory as it is used in custody litigation. Alienation virtually doubles the rates of mothers’ custody losses while halving the rate at which mothers’ abuse claims are believed. It operates powerfully as a defence for fathers accused of abuse, but not mothers accused of abuse.
Finally, the data also support protective parents’ critiques of GALs [Guardian Ad Litems] and custody evaluators – these purportedly neutral professionals tend to benefit fathers accused of abuse, and increase rates of mothers’ custody losses to such fathers.’
UK ideologues followed with similar claims and there is no shortage of those who make such claims, whilst ignoring important factors such as:
- The reciprocal nature of much of domestic abuse.
- The effect of bitter family separation on parental behaviour.
- Use of children as part of coercive control during separation.
- Failing to give proportionate weight to minor incidents e.g. a scuffle at a door as to serious assault or patterns of abusive behaviour.
- Failing to recognise varying degrees of psychological harm caused by each parent to the child during the separation dispute.
- A lack of curiosity as to the reason residency was changed, when it was.
Basically, studies like these are often presented as scientifically valid, but do not pass the test of even an amateur review. Now a new study by Dr Jennifer Harman of Colorado State University and Dr Demosthenes Lorandos of PsychLaw has sought to see whether such findings could be replicated and corroborated – something that is often used as a test of whether the science holds-up. The findings of that study found the previous study to be seriously wanting.
It is reported in the article below:
‘After having 19 research assistants, all blind to the study’s hypothesis, examine 967 appellate-level legal case reports where parental alienation was found or alleged to have occurred, “we didn’t find any support for what she’s claiming. In fact, we found the opposite,” Harman said. In other words, they found that parental alienation claims were not being used to override allegations of abuse.’
The sample had similar numbers of cases of fathers and mothers being the alienated parent (this is the US wherein many states shared care and changes of ‘custody’ are more common) and almost as many where PA was alleged but not found and over a fifth of cases where PA was found involved at least one allegation of abuse against the alienated parent. The report concludes as follows:
‘…based on the data reported here, that decision-makers can discern when children are at risk for family violence in the many forms it takes, including parental alienation [this is the US], and are implementing strategies to protect the best interests of children.’ The report goes on to state: ‘In conclusion, after transparently and rigorously testing six pre-registered hypotheses, our results soundly disconfirmed nearly all the findings we tested from Meier et al.’s (2019) report or discovered the findings to be in the opposite direction claimed by the authors.’
The full article published by Colorado State University College of Natural Sciences can be read using this link.
These studies are US-based. Results from the UK are likely to be different. However, it is unlikely that they would be fundamentally different as our anecdotal evidence supports. Such a view is also supported by family lawyers who simply do not recognise the assertion that family courts are disregarding credible allegations of abuse to award contact on the basis of claims of parental alienation.
Naturally, we hope that this new, more robust, study is given serious weight. The important thing, that is lost so often in these debates, is the wellbeing of the children caught in the middle and that is what the courts and Government policies must put to the fore.
What do you think?
Send us feedback!