‘I struggle with the suggestion that parental alienation is not “real”. The label may be problematic, but parents can manipulate and coach children against another parent.’ Photograph: William Barton/Alamy View image in fullscreen ‘I struggle with the suggestion that parental alienation is not “real”. The label may be problematic, but parents can manipulate and coach children against another parent.’ Photograph: William Barton/Alamy Child protection Letters Parental alienation and the pain of custody battles in the the family courts Readers respond to an article about a mother who feels let down by the family courts
Hannah Summers’ article raises disturbing concerns about the misuse of parental alienation allegations in family courts ( ‘Just like that, I lost my girls’: the mother who feels betrayed by the family courts, 29 September ). However, I believe that it would benefit from a clearer distinction between the discredited theory of “parental alienation syndrome” (PAS) and genuine, demonstrable alienating behaviour.
PAS proposed that a child’s unjustified rejection of a parent could be identified as a distinct syndrome. It is no longer an accepted clinical diagnosis, since a child’s rejection of a parent cannot itself establish manipulation, therefore treating it as diagnostic risks overlooking abuse or other legitimate reasons for the child’s feelings.
However, rejecting PAS as a clinical diagnosis should not obscure the reality that one parent can manipulate a child into rejecting the other. Persistent denigration, emotional pressure and demands for loyalty can leave a child feeling that loving one parent means betraying the other. No child should have to carry that burden.
The Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass) deliberately uses the term “ alienating behaviours ”, recognising that these can damage children’s identity, self-worth and wider family relationships, and that manipulation or coercion may amount to emotional abuse. The Family Justice Council similarly distinguishes the unsupported syndrome from behaviour whose existence and consequences courts must determine as matters of fact.
For a child, being made to feel that loving one parent betrays the other is an intolerable burden. For the rejected parent, losing a relationship with a living child can bring devastating grief. These experiences deserve recognition alongside the suffering caused to both the child and rejected parent.
Children must be heard, domestic abuse taken seriously and allegations carefully examined. Rejecting an unsupported diagnosis should strengthen that scrutiny, without obscuring the reality of harmful parental manipulation.
Balanced reporting should acknowledge both the danger of unfounded allegations and the anguish caused by proven manipulation. These are not competing concerns. Both demand our attention if children and families are to be protected. Name and address supplied
Reading this article was painfully familiar. I lost custody of my daughters in 2013 after initially applying for shared, 50/50 care.
My experience was complicated by the fact that my barrister argued that it was my ex-husband who was alienating the children from me. My daughters, now adults, have since told me that their father and his family coached them on how to answer Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass) questions and encouraged them to believe that I was mentally ill and did not want to care for them.
At th…