Timeforjusticeandprotectionforthechildren

parental alienation: Internationally ban parental alienation theory and...

2012-03-01T17:10:00.000-08:00

parental alienation: Internationally ban parental alienation theory and...: Victorious Children shared a link . Via nomas.org . Parental alienation is now the leading defense for parent's accused of abu...

Jennifer Hoult 2. Law Review Coverage of PAS Is Predominately Negative

2012-03-01T16:27:00.004-08:00

Jennifer Hoult
Vol. 26 ♦ No. 1 ♦ Spring 2006
Children’s Legal Rights Journal
Evidentiary Admissibility of Parental Alienation Syndrome
http://209.198.129.131/images/EvidentiaryAmissibilityofPAW_Hoult_CLRJ_2006.pdf

Excerpts from Page 5

2. Law Review Coverage of PAS
Is Predominately Negative
Since PAS appears primarily in family court where
written decisions often are not issued and few
decisions are published, its appearance in
precedent-bearing decisions may underestimate its
influence in American courts. Another measure of
its legal impact is the frequency with which PAS
appears in legal scholarship. As of July, 19 2005,
113 law review articles referenced PAS.
83
Few of
these articles focus solely on PAS, but such
substantial referencing may indicate the extent of
PAS’s influence.
84

In this literature, the reportage of PAS was
positive in thirty articles, neutral in fifteen
articles, and negative in sixty-nine articles.
85
Thirty articles expressed a favorable view of PAS:
twenty-one cited Gardner’s work unquestioningly,
86
eight authors essentially republished
Gardner’s claims,
87
and one author alleged his exwife had abducted his daughter.
88
PAS received neutral mention in fifteen
articles: two reports on legislative initiatives to
compel judicial consideration of PAS in custody
cases,
89
two book reviews,
90
one PAS Continuing
Legal Education course advertisement,
91
two case
comments,
92
three editorial introductions,
93
three
comments on the legal status of PAS,
94
and two
passing references.
95
Sixty-nine articles described PAS negatively.
The negative coverage focused on several areas of
law: twenty-three on divorce,
96
thirteen on child
sexual abuse,
97
ten on domestic violence,
98
eight
on expert testimony,
99
seven on general family law
issues,
100
five on PAS as a defense strategy,
101
and
two on parental child abduction.
102

The majority of law review articles view PAS
negatively. Scholars report that PAS has no
empirical support
103
and is inadmissible under
both Frye and Daubert. They describe PAS as a
defense strategy for abusive fathers, facilitating
these men’s projection of blame for their children’s alienation onto mothers as a counter-claim
to, and evidentiary shield against, allegations of
abuse.
104
They note PAS’s gender bias and the
bind it creates for battered women and mothers of
abused children:
105
If these women fail to report
abuse, they may lose custody for failing to protect
their children, and if they report abuse, they may
lose custody due to claims that they are abusing
the child by alienating them.
106
Scholars also
indicate that practitioners diagnosing PAS may
make incorrect diagnoses because PAS’s diagnostic criteria sanction incomplete investigation of
family dynamics. Scholars note that PAS’s claim
to “diagnose” the truth of legal allegations is an
improper invasion of the province of the factfinder.
107
  Jennifer Hoult
Vol. 26 ♦ No. 1 ♦ Spring 2006
Children’s Legal Rights Journal
Evidentiary Admissibility of Parental Alienation Syndrome
http://209.198.129.131/images/EvidentiaryAmissibilityofPAW_Hoult_CLRJ_2006.pdf

1. American Precedent Holds PAS Inadmissible

2012-03-01T16:25:00.001-08:00

Jennifer Hoult
Vol. 26 ♦ No. 1 ♦ Spring 2006
Children’s Legal Rights Journal
Evidentiary Admissibility of Parental Alienation Syndrome
http://209.198.129.131/images/EvidentiaryAmissibilityofPAW_Hoult_CLRJ_2006.pdf

Page 3 right side
Excerpts "
1. American Precedent Holds PAS
Inadmissible
Because unreliable scientific claims pose a unique
risk of undue influence and prejudice in the
courtroom, the evidentiary admissibility of novel
scientific material is governed by gate-keeping
rules
51
that are intended to ensure that such
testimony meets adequate standards of reliability.
52
As a novel scientific theory, PAS’s
admissibility is governed by these gate-keeping
rules. Gardner published the claim that fifty
American decisions set precedent holding PAS
admissible under the relevant evidentiary rules.
53
A closer examination reveals this claim to be
unfounded; current U.S. precedent holds PAS
inadmissible.
By July 19, 2005, sixty-four precedent
bearing cases referenced PAS.
54
Only two of these
decisions, both originating in criminal courts in 4 Jennifer Hoult
Children’s Legal Rights Journal
New York State, set precedent on the issue of
PAS’s evidentiary admissibility; both held PAS
inadmissible.
55

In 1997, People v. Loomis
56
concerned a father
charged with sexually abusing his children. The
defense sought to compel the witnesses to submit
to psychiatric examinations by Gardner to determine if the sexual abuse allegations were “fabrications” motivated by PAS.
57
The court denied this
motion, noting that children’s susceptibility to
undue influence by a parent was common knowledge, and that PAS testimony was inadmissible
because it purported to determine an ultimate
issue of fact, impermissibly invading the province
of the trier of fact.
58

In 2001, People v. Fortin involved a man
charged with sexually assaulting his wife’s 13-yearold niece.
59
The defense sought to admit PAS
testimony to support the claim that the child had
lied and fabricated the abuse allegations.
60
At a
hearing requested by the People to determine the
admissibility of PAS, Gardner was the only
witness for the defense. Applying Frye v. United
States,
61
the trial court held PAS inadmissible,
finding it lacked general acceptance within the
relevant professional community.
62
The appellate
court upheld this ruling
63
and confirmed that the
trial judge had been correct in considering
Gardner’s “significant financial interest in having
his theory accepted.”
64
Despite extant legal precedent, Gardner
claimed that PAS was admissible, publishing a list
of fifty U.S. decisions under the heading,
“Recognition of PAS in Courts of Law.”
65
Other
materials on this web site indicate that Gardner
intended this list to represent decisions that set
precedent holding PAS admissible under the
evidentiary tests defined in Frye and Daubert v.
Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals.
66
However, none of
these fifty decisions set precedent holding PAS
admissible. Forty-six of the fifty cited decisions
either set no precedent, or set precedent on issues
other than PAS’s admissibility. Nearly half of the
decisions, twenty-three, were unpublished
67
and
set no precedent.
68
The remaining twenty-seven
decisions fall into several categories: thirteen
contained factual histories that did not satisfy
Gardner’s definition of PAS because they involved
sexual or physical abuse, domestic violence,
bilateral alienation by both parents, or a lack of
evidence of either parental alienation or the
child’s involvement;
69
eight decisions mentioned
PAS only in reference;
70
one decision assessed
whether the expert testified within the guidelines
of his profession but did not contest the admissibility of PAS;
71
and one decision did not mention
PAS at all.
72

The four remaining decisions discussed the
admissibility of PAS,
73
but none set precedent on
this issue. While the lower court in In re Marriage
of Bates ruled that PAS had “gained general
acceptance in the field of psychology” and was
therefore admissible under the Frye test, that issue
was not appealed and thus the appellate decision
set no precedent on the issue of PAS’s admissibility.
74
In fact, the appellate court specifically
“[threw] out the words ‘parental alienation
syndrome’” and focused on the “willingness and
ability of each parent to facilitate and encourage a
close and continuing relationship between the parents and the child.”
75
In Perlow v. Berg-Perlow, the
appellant-father claimed that PAS did not meet
the evidentiary standards required by Frye and
that the admission of expert testimony on PAS
was an error.
76
The appellate court held the issue
waived for appellate review because the father had
failed to raise it at trial.
77
The father in In re
Marriage of Rosenfeld contested the admissibility of
PAS as an unreliable theory, but the appellate
court specifically chose not to address “the issue
of whether [PAS] is a reliable theory.”
78
The
appellate court in Karen “PP” v. Clyde “QQ”
sidestepped a decision on PAS’s admissibility by
holding that the family court’s sua sponte reference
to “a book on parental alienation syndrome that
was neither entered into evidence nor referred to
by any witness” was not grounds for reversal,
“especially in light of all the testimony elicited at
the hearing.”
79

Among his citations, Gardner highlighted
Kilgore v. Boyd, claiming that Kilgore held that PAS
“satisfied [the] Frye Test criteria for admissibility
in a court of law” because it found PAS had
“gained enough acceptance in the scientific
community to be admissible in a court of law.”
80
Gardner claimed that Kilgore “will clearly serve as
a precedent and facilitate the admission of the
PAS in other cases—not only in Florida, but
elsewhere.”
81
In fact, Kilgore set no precedent. The
cited Kilgore decisions were neither published nor Evidentiary Admissibility of Parental Alienation Syndrome 5
Vol. 26 ♦ No. 1 ♦ Spring 2006
issued in written form, and the holdings were
limited to affirmations and denials of the litigants’
motions.
82

Contrary to Gardner’s claim, none of the fifty
cited decisions set precedent holding PAS admissible.

PASRailroadingchildabusevictims: All state search for therapeutic jurisprudence (pa...

2012-03-01T11:21:00.000-08:00

PASRailroadingchildabusevictims: All state search for therapeutic jurisprudence (pa...: There are children being harmed in america everyday behind closed doors. A theory placed them in the abusers home for speaking out about abu...

The Evidentiary Admissibility of Parental Jennifer Hoult, J.D. ∗ Abstract

2012-03-01T09:09:00.002-08:00

Jennifer Hoult
Vol. 26 ♦ No. 1 ♦ Spring 2006
Children’s Legal Rights Journal
Evidentiary Admissibility of Parental Alienation Syndrome
http://209.198.129.131/images/EvidentiaryAmissibilityofPAW_Hoult_CLRJ_2006.pdf

The Evidentiary Admissibility of Parental
Jennifer Hoult, J.D.
∗
Abstract
Since 1985, in jurisdictions all over the United
States, fathers have been awarded sole custody of
their children based on claims that mothers
alienated these children due to a pathological
medical syndrome called Parental Alienation
Syndrome (“PAS”). Given that some such cases
have involved stark outcomes, including murder
and suicide, PAS’s admissibility in U.S. courts
deserves scrutiny.
This article presents the first comprehensive
analysis of the science, law, and policy issues
involved in PAS’s evidentiary admissibility. As a
novel scientific theory, PAS’s admissibility is
governed by a variety of evidentiary gatekeeping
standards that seek to protect legal fora from the
influence of pseudo-science. This article analyzes
every precedent-bearing decision and law review
article referencing PAS in the past twenty years,
finding that precedent holds PAS inadmissible
and the majority of legal scholarship views it
negatively. The article further analyzes PAS’s
admissibility under the standards defined in Frye
v. United States, Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Kumho Tire Company v. Carmichael, and
Rules 702 and 704(b) of the Federal Rules of
Evidence, including analysis of PAS’s scientific
validity and reliability; concluding that PAS
remains an ipse dixit and inadmissible under these
standards. The article also analyzes the writings of
PAS’s originator, child psychiatrist Richard
Gardner—including twenty-three peer-reviewed
articles and fifty legal decisions he cited in support
of his claim that PAS is scientifically valid and
legally admissible—finding that these materials
support neither PAS’s existence, nor its legal
admissibility. Finally, the article examines the
policy issues raised by PAS’s admissibility through
an analysis of PAS’s roots in Gardner’s theory of
human sexuality, a theory that views adult-child
sexual contact as benign and beneficial to the
reproduction of the species.
The article concludes that science, law, and
policy all support PAS’s present and future inadmissibility.

APPENDIX B: PRECEDENTBEARING CASES BY JURISDICTION

2012-03-01T08:04:00.001-08:00

Jennifer Hoult
Vol. 26 ♦ No. 1 ♦ Spring 2006
Children’s Legal Rights Journal
Evidentiary Admissibility of Parental Alienation Syndrome
http://209.198.129.131/images/EvidentiaryAmissibilityofPAW_Hoult_CLRJ_2006.pdf

Excerpts see page 23-25

APPENDIX B: PRECEDENTBEARING CASES BY
JURISDICTION
Federal
1. Edwards v. Williams, 170 F.Supp.2d 727; 2001
U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18360 (E.D.Ky. 2001).
States
Alabama
2. K.B. v. Cleburne County Department of Human
Resources, 897 So. 2d 379; 2004 Ala. Civ. App.
LEXIS 740, **9 (Ala. Civ. App. October 1,
2004).
3. C.J.L. v. M.W.B., 2003 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 100
(Ala.Civ.App. Feb. 28, 2003) (to be reported);
2003 WL 21488740 (Ala. Civ. App., June 27,
2003). 24 Jennifer Hoult
Children’s Legal Rights Journal
4. M.W.W. v. B.W., 900 So. 2d 1230; 2004 Ala. Civ.
App. LEXIS 700 (Ala. Civ. App. September 10,
2004).
Alaska
5. Pearson v. Pearson, 5 P.3d 239; 2000 Alas.
LEXIS 69 (Alaska 2000).
6. Plate v. Alaska, 925 P.2d 1057; 1996 Alas. App.
LEXIS 47 (Alaska Ct.App. 1996).
Arkansas
7. Chambers v. Chambers, 2000 Ark App. LEXIS
476 (Ark.Ct.App. June 21, 2000).
California
8. In re Marriage of Condon, 62 Cal. App. 4th 533;
73 Cal. Rptr. 2d 33; 1998 Cal. App. LEXIS 231;
98 Cal. Daily Op. Service 2108; 98 Daily Journal
DAR 2924 (Cal.Ct.App. 1998).
9. Coursey v. Superior Court (Coursey), 194 Cal.
App. 3d 147; 239 Cal. Rptr. 365; 1987 Cal. App.
LEXIS 2029 (Cal.Ct.App. 1987).
10. In re the Marriage Edlund, 66 Cal. App. 4th
1454; 78 Cal. Rptr. 2d 671; 1998 Cal. App.
LEXIS 827; 98 Cal. Daily Op. Service 7552; 98
Daily Journal DAR 10449 (Cal.Ct.App. 1998).
11. In re John W. v. Phillip W., 41 Cal. App. 4th 961;
48 Cal. Rptr. 2d 899; 1996 Cal. App. LEXIS 17;
96 Cal. Daily Op. Service 205; 96 Daily Journal
DAR 283 (Cal.Ct.App. 1996).
Connecticut
12. Ruggiero v. Ruggiero, 76 Conn. App. 338; 819
A.2d 864; 2003 Conn. App. LEXIS 181
(Conn.App.Ct. 2003).
Delaware
13. Ford v. Ford, 2000 Del. Fam. Ct. LEXIS 104
(Del. Fam. Ct. Dec. 19, 2000).
Florida
14. Blosser v. Blosser, 707 So. 2d 778; 1998 Fla.
App. LEXIS 79; 23 Fla. L. Weekly D 257
(Fla.Dist.Ct.App. 1998).
15. In Interest of T.W.M.., 553 So. 2d 260; 1989 Fla.
App. LEXIS 6591; 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2733
(Fla.Dist.Ct.App. 1989).
16. Perlow v. Berg-Perlow, 816 So. 2d 210; 2002 Fla.
App. LEXIS 6179; 27 Fla. L. Weekly D 1108
(Fla.Dist.Ct.App. 2002).
17. Schutz v. Schutz, 522 S.2d 874; 1988 Fla. App.
LEXIS 411; 13 Fla. L. Weekly 387; 13 Fla. L.
Weekly D 387 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1988).
Illinois
18. In re Violetta B., 210 Ill. App. 3d 521; 568
N.E.2d 1345; 1991 Ill. App. LEXIS 312; 154 Ill.
Dec. 896 (Ill. App. Ct. 1991).
19. In Re Marriage of Bates, 212 Ill. 2d 489; 819
N.E.2d 714; 2004 Ill. LEXIS 1619; 289 Ill. Dec.
218 (Ill. October 28, 2004); 342 Ill. App. 3d 207;
794 N.E.2d 868; 2003 Ill. App. LEXIS 879; 276
Ill. Dec. 618 (Ill. App. Ct. 2003) (partly
unpublished).
20. In re Marriage of Divelbiss, 308 Ill. App. 3d 198;
719 N.E.2d 375; 1999 Ill. App. LEXIS 750; 241
Ill. Dec. 514 (Ill.App.Ct. Oct. 22, 1999) (partly
unpublished).
Indiana
21. In re Paternity of V.A.M.C., 768 N.E.2d 990;
2002 Ind. App. LEXIS 808 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002)
(also cited as Moden v. Corr).
22. Hanson v. Spolnik, 685 N.E.2d 71; 1997 Ind.
App. LEXIS 1205 (dissent) (Ind. App. 1997).
23. Kirk v. Kirk, 759 N.E.2d 265; 2001 Ind. App.
LEXIS 2067 (Ind. App. 2001).
24. White v. White, 655 N.E.2d 523; 1995 Ind. App.
LEXIS 1087 (Ind. App. 1995).
Iowa
25. In re Marriage of Rosenfeld, 524 N.W.2d 212;
1994 Iowa App. LEXIS 104 (Iowa Ct. App.
1994).
Louisiana
26. Hollingswoth v. Semerad, 799 So. 2d 658; 2001
La. App. LEXIS 2444 (La. Ct. App. 2001).
27. White v. Kimrey, 847 So. 2d 157; 2003 La. App.
LEXIS 1411 (La. Ct. App. 2003).
Maryland
28. Barton v. Hirschberg, 137 Md. App. 1; 767 A.2d
874, 2001 Md. App. LEXIS 27; (Md. Ct. Spec.
App. March 1, 2001).
Mississippi
29. Ellis v. Ellis, 840 So. 2d 806; 2003 Miss. App.
LEXIS 195 (Miss. Ct. App. 2003).
Missouri
30. Kuehne v. State, 107 S.W.3d 285; 2003 Mo. App.
LEXIS 258 (Mo. Ct. App. 2003).
New York
31. Karen B. v. Clyde M., 151 Misc. 2d 794; 574
N.Y.S.2d 267; 1991 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 463 (N.Y.
Fam. Ct. 1991) affd. sub nom Karen “PP” v.
Clyde “QC”, 197 A.D.2d 753; 602 N.Y.S.2d 709;
1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9845 (N.Y.App.Div.
1993).
32. People v. Bimonte, 185 Misc. 2d 390; 712
N.Y.S.2d 829; 2000 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 339 (N.Y.
2000). Evidentiary Admissibility of Parental Alienation Syndrome 25
Vol. 26 ♦ No. 1 ♦ Spring 2006
33. Smith v. Bombard, 294 A.D.2d 673; 741
N.Y.S.2d 336; 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4726
(N.Y. App. Div. 2002).
34. Dorothy A. DeMeyer v. Advantage Auto, 2005
NY Slip Op 25252; 2005 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1288
at *6, (N.Y. Sup. Ct. June 27, 2005).
35. In the matter of J.F. v. L.F., 181 Misc. 2d 722;
694 N.Y.S.2d 592; 1999 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 357
(N.Y. Fam. Ct. 1999).
36. People v. Fortin, 289 A.D.2d 590; 735 N.Y.S.2d
819; 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13035 (N.Y.
App. Div. Dec. 31, 2001); 184 Misc. 2d 10; 706
N.Y.S.2d 611; 2000 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 88 (N.Y.
Co. Ct. 2000).
37. Krebsbach v. Gallagher, 181 A.D.2d 363; 587
N.Y.S.2d 346; 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9832
(N.Y. App. Div. 1992).
38. People v. Loomis, 172 Misc. 2d 265; 658
N.Y.S.2d 787; 1997 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 141 (N.Y.
Co. Ct. 1997).
39. Zafran v. Zafran, 191 Misc. 2d 60; 740 N.Y.S.2d
596; 2002 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 221 (N.Y. 2002).
Nevada
40. April Raburn Martin vs. James Lee Martin, 90
P.3d 981; 2004 Nev. LEXIS 43; 120 Nev. Adv.
Rep. 38, n5 **6 (Nev. 2004).
41. Truax v. Truax, 110 Nev. 437; 874 P.2d 10; 1994
Nev. LEXIS 60 (Nev. 1994).
North Dakota
42. Loll v. Loll, 1997 ND 51; 561 N.W.2d 625; 1997
N.D. LEXIS 52 (N.D. 1997).
43. In the Interest of T.T., 2004 ND 138; 681 N.W.2d
779, 784; 2004 N.D. LEXIS 237 (N.D. June 30,
2004).
Ohio
44. Arthur v. Arthur, 130 Ohio App. 3d 398; 720
N.E.2d 176; 1998 Ohio App. LEXIS 5109 (Ohio
Ct. App. 1998).
45. Bates v. Bates, 2001 Ohio 8743; 2001 Ohio App.
LEXIS 5428 (Ohio Ct. App. Dec. 7, 2001).
46. Conner v. Renz, 1995 Ohio App. LEXIS 176
(Ohio Ct.App. Jan. 19, 1995); 1994 Ohio App.
LEXIS 6079 (Ohio Ct. App. Dec. 29, 1994).
47. Doerman v. Doerman, 2002 Ohio 3165; 2002
Ohio App. LEXIS 3183 (Ohio June 24, 2002).
48. In the Matter of S.G., 2003 Ohio 161; 2003 Ohio
App. LEXIS 109; 2003 WL 125122 (Ohio Ct.
App. Jan. 16, 2003).
49. State v. Koelling, 1995 Ohio App. LEXIS 1056
(Ohio Ct. App. Mar. 21, 1995).
50. Pathan v. Pathan, 2000 Ohio App. LEXIS 119
(Ohio Ct. App. Jan. 21, 2000).
51. Pisani v. Pisani, 1998 Ohio App. LEXIS 4421
(Ohio Ct. App. 1998).
52. Sims v. Hornsby, 1992 Ohio App. LEXIS 4074
(Ohio Ct. App. Aug. 10, 1992).
53. Sinsky v. Matthews, 2001 Ohio App. LEXIS 3479
(Ohio Ct. App. Aug. 8, 2001); 2001 Ohio 1939;
2001 Ohio App. LEXIS 5496; 2001 WL 1581569
(Ohio Ct. App. Dec. 12, 2001).
54. Toto v. Toto, 1992 Ohio App. LEXIS 157 (Ohio
Ct. App. Jan. 16, 1992)(also cited as Zigmont v.
Toto).
55. In re Adoption of Wagner, 1999 Ohio App.
LEXIS 3097 (Ohio Ct. App. June 30, 1999); 1999
Ohio App. LEXIS 3117 (Ohio Ct. App. June 30,
1999).
Oklahoma
56. Kaiser v. Kaiser, 2001 OK 30; 23 P.3d 278; 2001
Okla. LEXIS 30; 72 O.B.A.J.1050 (Okla. 2001).
Texas
57. Ochs v. Martinez, 789 S.W.2d 949; 1990 Tex.
App. LEXIS 1652 (Tex. App. 1990).
Vermont
58. Cabot v. Cabot, 166 Vt. 485; 697 A.2d 644; 1997
Vt. LEXIS 101 (dissent) (Vt. 1997).
West Virginia
59. State ex rel. George B.W. v. Kaufman, 199 W.
Va. 269; 483 S.E.2d 852; 1997 W. Va. LEXIS 25
(W.Va.1997).
Wisconsin
60. Finster v. Finster, 2003 WI App 201; 267 Wis. 2d
278; 670 N.W.2d 557; 2003 Wisc. App. LEXIS
788 (Wis. Ct. App. 2003).
61. In re Disciplinary Proceedings against David L.
Nichols, 2002 WI 60; 253 Wis. 2d 149; 645
N.W.2d 270; 2002 Wisc. LEXIS 449 (Wis. June
14, 2002).
62. Wiederholt v. Fischer, 169 Wis. 2d 524; 485
N.W.2d 442; 1992 Wisc. App. LEXIS 473 (Wis.
Ct. App. 1992).
Wyoming
63. Carlton v. Carlton, 997 P.2d 1028; 2000 Wyo.
LEXIS 44 (Wyo. March 1, 2000).
64. McCoy v. State, 886 P.2d 252; 1994 Wyo. LEXIS
154 (Wyo. 1994).

Jennifer Hoult
Vol. 26 ♦ No. 1 ♦ Spring 2006
Children’s Legal Rights Journal
Evidentiary Admissibility of Parental Alienation Syndrome
http://209.198.129.131/images/EvidentiaryAmissibilityofPAW_Hoult_CLRJ_2006.pdf

VI. Conclusion: Science, Law, and Policy Support PAS’s Inadmissibility

2012-03-01T08:01:00.004-08:00

Jennifer Hoult
Vol. 26 ♦ No. 1 ♦ Spring 2006
Children’s Legal Rights Journal
Evidentiary Admissibility of Parental Alienation Syndrome
http://209.198.129.131/images/EvidentiaryAmissibilityofPAW_Hoult_CLRJ_2006.pdf

Excerpt see page 22
VI. Conclusion: Science, Law, and
Policy Support PAS’s
Inadmissibility
As a legal matter, PAS’s inadmissibility is
appropriate given its lack of scientific validity and
reliability.
404
As a policy matter, its inadmissibility
is appropriate given its structural roots in an
unsubstantiated patriarchical theory that advocates for child sex offenders’ access to their
victims. The continued misrepresentation of
PAS’s scientific and legal status by its proponents,
including proponents’ deliberate circumvention of
legal gate-keeping by testifying about PAS under
other names, should place legal professionals on
alert for continued attempts to bring this
unsubstantiated hypothesis into American courts.
PAS’s twenty-year run in American courts is
an embarrassing chapter in the history of
evidentiary law. It reflects the wholesale failure of
legal professionals entrusted with evidentiary gatekeeping intended to guard legal processes from the
taint of pseudo-science. Courts entrusted with
divorce, custody, and child abuse cases may have
found PAS attractive because it claimed to reduce
these complex, time-consuming, and wrenching
evidentiary investigations to medical diagnoses.
The goals inherent in PAS’s origins and legal use
demonstrate the policy risk of unquestioningly
accepting simplistic answers to complex human
problems. The unique dynamics of any given
dysfunctional family are unlikely to yield to pat
diagnoses.
405
Given that most PA is adaptive and
resolves naturally in time, our legislature and
courts must determine under what circumstances
legal intervention is an appropriate or efficacious
response to PA. The answers to this complex
question will likely be found in empirically proven
science in the fields of psychology and developmental biology, not in unsubstantiated hypotheses
grounded in theories that violate public policy.
Two decades after Gardner first described
PAS, an analysis of the materials he cited in
support of PAS’s existence demonstrates that PAS
remains merely an ipse dixit. As a matter of science,
law, and policy PAS is, and should remain,
inadmissible in American courts.

Jennifer Hoult
Vol. 26 ♦ No. 1 ♦ Spring 2006
Children’s Legal Rights Journal
Evidentiary Admissibility of Parental Alienation Syndrome
http://209.198.129.131/images/EvidentiaryAmissibilityofPAW_Hoult_CLRJ_2006.pdf

2. Gardner’s Theory Mirrors ProPedophilia Advocacy 371

2012-03-01T08:00:00.003-08:00

Jennifer Hoult
Vol. 26 ♦ No. 1 ♦ Spring 2006
Children’s Legal Rights Journal
Evidentiary Admissibility of Parental Alienation Syndrome
http://209.198.129.131/images/EvidentiaryAmissibilityofPAW_Hoult_CLRJ_2006.pdf

Excerpts see
Page 20-21

2. Gardner’s Theory Mirrors ProPedophilia Advocacy
371
Gardner’s views about adult-child sex parallel
those of advocates for the legalization of adultchild sexual contact
372
and pro-pedophilia
advocacy groups like the North American Man
Boy Love Association (“NAMBLA”).
373
Founded
in 1978, NAMBLA describes itself as a “political,
civil rights, and educational organization” whose
goal is to “end the extreme oppression of men and
boys in mutually consensual relationships.”
374
The
organization claims it, “does not engage in any
activities that violate the law, nor do we advocate
that anyone else should do so.”
375
NAMBLA
provides publications and support to incarcerated
sex offenders, construing them as “unjustly imprisoned” for allegedly “consensual, loving relationships between younger and older people,” rather
than incarcerated for violations of law and harm
against children.
376
Both Gardner and NAMBLA claim that
adult-child sex is biologically natural, not inherently harmful to the child, and that any resultant
harm is caused by social stigma rather than the
sexual contact itself.
377
Gardner claimed the sole
“determinant as to whether these experiences [i.e.
a sexual encounter between an adult and a child]
will be traumatic is the social attitude towards
these encounters”
378
and stated:
[M]any societies have been unjustifiably
punitive to those who exhibit these sexual
paraphilic variations [e.g. pedophiles,
rapists, etc.] and have not been giving
proper respect to the genetic factors that
may very well be operative. Such considerations may result in greater tolerance
for those who exhibit these atypical sexual
proclivities. My hope is that this theory
will play a role (admittedly small) in
bringing about greater sympathy and
respect for individuals who exhibit these
variations of sexual behavior. [Further,]
they do play a role in species survival.
379

While Gardner claimed that “repeat offenders
must be removed from society,” he advocated that
they only be imprisoned after treatment has
failed, advocating that they not be imprisoned
with “hardened criminals,” or be subjected to
lengthy sentences.
380
As a political advocate,
Gardner lobbied to abolish mandated reporting of
child abuse, to abolish immunity for reporters of
child abuse, and for the creation of federally
funded programs to assist individuals claiming to
be falsely accused.
381
Like Gardner, NAMBLA
claims that adult-child sex is normal, healthy, and
beneficial for children, and advocates for increased
respect for pedophiles and the eradication of
sanctions through the legalization of pedophilia.
382
While NAMBLA cites an article that claims that
adult-child sex is generally not harmful to boys,
383
the U.S. Congress condemned this article and
passed a resolution specifically recognizing the Evidentiary Admissibility of Parental Alienation Syndrome 21
Vol. 26 ♦ No. 1 ♦ Spring 2006
harmfulness of adult-child sex after scholars
reported the article’s methodological deficiencies
and inaccuracies.
384
Ignoring evidence that adultchild sex harms the majority of male and female
children affected, pro-pedophilia activists and
scholars argue that children are generally not
harmed by sexual contact by adults and that not
allowing children to have sex with adults denies
children’s rights.
385
Despite his passionate advocacy, Gardner
claimed he did not condone or recommend adultchild sexual contact, maintaining he was “only
describing the reality of the world.”
386
He
maintained that he was “opposed to [NAMBLA’s]
primary principles,” claiming that adult men
having sex with boys are “exploiting them, corrupting them, and contributing to the development of sexual psychopathology in them,” and
stating that pedophiles belong in prison.
387
However, both Gardner and NAMBLA published the
view that adult-child sex is generally benign or
beneficial. Both claim to abhor exploitative,
coercive sexual conduct,
388
and neither defines
what constitutes child sexual abuse.
389

NAMBLA claims the distinguishing factor
between legal and illegal adult-child sex is the
consent of the child,
390
ignoring the common law’s
recognition of the developmental limitations that
render children incapable of giving meaningful
consent. Gardner claimed that coercion of a
“weaker and/or younger” person, including pedophilia, is per se “exploitation of an innocent
party.”
391
He described NAMBLA’s view that if
the child consents, pedophilia is “acceptable and
even desirable” as a “rationalization for depravity.”
392
Gardner indicated he did not believe a
child could give consent, but he often describes
adult sexual contact with children as a benign
social norm that is not inherently harmful.
393
Simultaneously asserting that pedophilia and
incest are not inherently harmful, and that they
are inherently harmful, Gardner claimed we are all
nascent pedophiles.
394
Despite his few claims to
the contrary, Gardner’s theoretical work is largely
consistent in the view that adult-child sex is
benign or beneficial.
The fact that PAS is rooted in theory that can
fairly be described as “pro-pedophilia” raises
policy concerns for our legislature and judiciary.
PAS’s roots and functional use demonstrate that it
is a political-legal tool designed and used to shield
child abusers from liability, and to promote their
unfettered access to their children through judicial
orders of sole paternal custody.
In essence, PAS describes women and children offending as patriarchical norms
395
by
showing disrespect or refusing to show affirmative
respect for men.
396
It presumes all reports of male
violence are false, ignoring empirical evidence that
men inflict far more harm through violence than
women,
397
and mirrors patriarchic law, under
which male violence towards women and children
is legal. It punishes women who exercise their legal
rights, mirroring women’s lack of legal rights
under a patriarchical system. Gardner called PAS
a form of child abuse worse than the child’s
death.
398
Certainly, while a dead child cannot
withhold fealty from his father, a living child who
does so challenges and undermines his power as
the patriarchic. Under a patriarchical system, a
child’s disrespect to his father is outrageous
because the child is the father’s “possession.”
399
While PAS allegedly harms children,
400
the only
PAS-caused harm Gardner documented is the
rejected male’s grief.
401
Posing as a medical
syndrome, PAS diagnoses as pathological women’s
and children’s rejection of men. While such
behavior is not pathological, it does represent the
ultimate narcissistic insult to male authority.
Thus, PAS seeks to use coercive state action to
force women’s and children’s compliance with
male demands for affirmative displays of
respect,
402
and seeks to protect the unfettered
access of intra-familial sex offenders to their
victims through the award of sole paternal
custody. Alarmingly, undaunted by PAS’s lack of
scientific validity, and determining to use PAS in
court, PAS proponents advise one another to
circumvent evidentiary admissibility standards by
testifying about PAS without calling it by name.
403
Both PAS’s underlying theory and functional
use in court demonstrate that its admissibility
violates public policy with regards to women’s and
children’s legal rights and well being.

Jennifer Hoult
Vol. 26 ♦ No. 1 ♦ Spring 2006
Children’s Legal Rights Journal
Evidentiary Admissibility of Parental Alienation Syndrome
http://209.198.129.131/images/EvidentiaryAmissibilityofPAW_Hoult_CLRJ_2006.pdf

1. Gardner Claimed That Pedophilia and Incest Are Not Child Abuse

2012-03-01T07:58:00.005-08:00

Jennifer Hoult
Vol. 26 ♦ No. 1 ♦ Spring 2006
Children’s Legal Rights Journal
Evidentiary Admissibility of Parental Alienation Syndrome
http://209.198.129.131/images/EvidentiaryAmissibilityofPAW_Hoult_CLRJ_2006.pdf

Excerpts see page 19-20

1. Gardner Claimed That Pedophilia
and Incest Are Not Child Abuse

The increase in reported incest during the 1980s
led to allegations of a hysterical epidemic of false
child abuse allegations. Gardner claimed that
“hundreds (and possibly thousands)” are currently
incarcerated in the U.S. for sex crimes they did
not commit,
348
without citing even one case to
support this claim.
349
The New Yorker ran an
article claiming that “thousands” of people had
been accused of child sex abuse based on false
memories,
350
but when a leading psychiatrist asked
how many of these “thousands of cases” the
reporter had documented, he cited one case in
which a man confessed to sexually abusing his two
daughters and pled guilty to criminal charges.
351

In fact, there is no evidence of an epidemic of
false child abuse allegations, whether in intact or
divorcing families. The APA Task Force reported
that “[c]ontrary to widespread beliefs, research
findings suggest that reports of child sexual abuse
do not increase during divorce and actually occur
in only about 2% to 3% of the cases,” noting that
during custody disputes, less than ten percent of
cases involve child sexual abuse allegations,
further noting that these reports are “as likely to
be confirmed as reports made at other times.”
352
In keeping with studies indicating that approximately twenty-five percent of American girls and
ten percent of American boys are sexually abused,
most in their own homes,
353
Gardner claimed that
“probably over [ninety-five percent]” of all sex
abuse allegations are valid.
354
He acknowledged
that “intact” intra-familial settings are at “quite
high risk for sex abuse” but, nonetheless, maintained that the majority of sex abuse allegations in
“vicious custody dispute[s]” are false,
355
premising
PAS on the alleged “epidemic” of false child sex
abuse allegations created by divorcing women.
356

While Gardner vociferously denied that his
work was sexist,
357
he claimed that women project
“their own sexual inclinations” onto their divorced
husbands, fueling false sex abuse accusations and
PAS, and are driven by the “‘hell hath no fury like
a woman scorned’ phenomenon;”
358
that divorced
women seek female therapists who are themselves
“antagonistic toward men;”
359
that professional
Child Advocates are primarily “overzealous
women” who act “in the service of venting rage
upon men;”
360
and that “[f]ueling the program of
vilification is the proverbial ‘maternal instinct’…
Throughout the animal kingdom mothers will
literally fight to the death to safeguard their
offspring and women today are still influenced by
the same genetic programming.”
361
Throughout his
PAS publications, Gardner portrayed women as
paranoid, irrational, selfish, and psychopathic
liars,
362
and men as the hapless, passive victims
363
of unjustified female rage.
Gardner’s attempt to distinguish between
true and false allegations of child sex abuse led to
his creation of various tools including PAS and
the Sexual Abuse Legitimacy Scale (“SALS”).
364
In
fact, SALS does not actually measure whether an 20 Jennifer Hoult
Children’s Legal Rights Journal
allegation is true or false. Gardner designed it to
grade some real cases of abuse as “false” by using a
“legal preponderance” standard.
365
While Gardner
specified that SALS was not designed for use in
extra-familial child abuse cases,
366
neither this
limiting statement nor SALS’ preponderance
standard are mentioned in the SALS diagnostic
definition. Thus, practitioners and legal professionals might be unaware of its limitations. Like
PAS, SALS appears to have a high error rate. One
author applied SALS to a case involving oral sex
and attempted rape of a six-year-old, crimes that
were witnessed by a neighbor, and to which the
perpetrator confessed. SALS graded the claim as
predictive of a false claim and indicated the child’s
mother’s behavior was evidence that the “sex
abuse allegation is extremely likely to have been
fabricated.”
367

Since Gardner’s child sex abuse assessment
tools purport to determine legal fault under the
guise of medical diagnosis, it is not surprising that
legal precedent holds them inadmissible. The
court in Page v. Zordan held that SALS “was not
supported by any evidence concerning its recognition and acceptability within the scientific community,” and that its admission was one basis for
reversible error.
368
The Loomis decision, one of the
two cases that set precedent holding PAS inadmissible, cited Page noting that SALS had been found
to be “not generally accepted” and thus inadmissible under Frye.
369
The court in Tungate v.
Commonwealth of Kentucky held inadmissible
Gardner’s twenty-four “indicators for pedophilia,”
which purported to identify pedophiles, because
the testimony impermissibly addressed the issue
of guilt or innocence and the profile did not
satisfy either Frye or Daubert.
370
Jennifer Hoult
Vol. 26 ♦ No. 1 ♦ Spring 2006
Children’s Legal Rights Journal
Evidentiary Admissibility of Parental Alienation Syndrome
http://209.198.129.131/images/EvidentiaryAmissibilityofPAW_Hoult_CLRJ_2006.pdf

V. Policy Considerations: PAS’s Theoretical Roots

2012-03-01T07:57:00.001-08:00

Jennifer Hoult
Vol. 26 ♦ No. 1 ♦ Spring 2006
Children’s Legal Rights Journal
Evidentiary Admissibility of Parental Alienation Syndrome
http://209.198.129.131/images/EvidentiaryAmissibilityofPAW_Hoult_CLRJ_2006.pdf

Page 18-19

V. Policy Considerations: PAS’s
Theoretical Roots

As the analysis supra indicates, twenty years after
Gardner first described PAS, it remains an ipse
dixit. To understand the policy implications
involved in its admissibility requires an
examination of its theoretical roots.
The 1980s revealed a previously unimagined
epidemic of child sexual abuse. Increased awareness of intra-familial abuse resulted in a concomitant increase in the frequency of incest allegations
arising during divorce, the majority of which were
found to be true.
325
Burgeoning social and legal
response to child abuse raised both the possibility
of care and protection for abused children and the
spectre of legal accountability for crimes that had
previously been committed with impunity. The
majority of the accused perpetrators were men
326
who deflected claims of abuse with counter-claims
of maternal coaching.
327
Abusive fathers remain
twice as likely as nonviolent fathers to seek sole
physical custody, and if they lose custody, they
are likely to continue to threaten and harass
mothers using legal actions.
328
Battering fathers
are “three times as likely to be in arrears in child
support and are more likely to engage in
protracted legal disputes over all aspects of the
divorce.”
329

Gardner’s child sex abuse work responded to
this emerging social consciousness and increased
litigation over child sex abuse, which he deigned a
modern “hysteria.”
330
He delineated the foundation of PAS and his other tools, that purport to
differentiate between true and false allegations of
child sexual abuse, in his theory of human
sexuality appearing in his self-published work,
True and False Allegations of Child Sexual Abuse.
331

In this work, which cites no empirical
support, Gardner argued that all human sexual
paraphilias (deviant behaviors) are natural adaptive mechanisms that foster human procreation,
thereby enhancing the species’ survival. Thus,
pedophilia, sadism, rape, necrophilia, zoophilia
(sex with animals), coprophilia (sex with feces),
and other paraphilias served to enhance the
survival of the human species by increasing
procreation.
332
Construing men as sperm donors
and females as sperm recipients, he claimed these
“atypical” sexual behaviors served to “[keep the
male’s] juices flowing and increasing, thereby, the
likelihood of heterosexual involvement with a
person who is more likely to conceive,”
333
and
characterized any situation where a female was a
sperm recipient as fostering the survival of the
species.
334
He asserted that human females are
naturally “passive,” and that the role of rape or
incest victim was a natural extension of this
passivity,
335
stating that “by merely a small
extension of permissible attitudes,” women’s
sexual passivity leads them to become masochistic
rape victims who “gain pleasure from being
beaten, bound, and otherwise made to suffer,” as
“the price they are willing to pay for gaining the
gratification of receiving the sperm.”
336
He claimed
that incest was not harmful in itself, but, citing
Shakespeare, claimed only “thinking makes it
so.”
337
Evidentiary Admissibility of Parental Alienation Syndrome 19
Vol. 26 ♦ No. 1 ♦ Spring 2006
He claimed that sexual activities between
adults and children were “part of the natural
repertoire of human sexual activity,”
338
and that
adult-child sex was a positive procreative practice
because pedophilia sexually “[charges] up” the
child, making the child “highly sexualized” and
more likely to “crave” sexual experiences that will
result in increased procreation.
339
Since his
analysis focused on male paraphiliacs, Gardner
thus claimed that homosexual sex increases the
species’ reproduction despite the fact that homosexuals generally do not engage in heterosexual
(i.e. reproductive) sex.
340
Gardner claimed that any harm caused by
sexual paraphilias is not a result of the paraphilic
conduct itself but, instead, solely a result of
extraneous social stigma, and argued that
paraphiliacs deserved social respect and sympathy.
341
This explains his seemingly contradictory
statements that real abuse absolutely precludes
PAS,
342
that real abuse “may” justify alienation,
343
that PAS may exist in cases of real abuse,
344
and
that PAS “may be even worse than other forms of
abuse,” including physical abuse, sexual abuse,
and neglect.
345
Gardner’s theory, holding male
sexual violence to be reproductively beneficial to
the species, does not construe sexual violence as
abuse.
346
This theoretical structure may explain
PAS’s presumption that abuse allegations are
always false. If incest is not abuse, then it can
never be the basis for justified alienation, and a
mother’s attempt to prevent a father’s sexual
contact with his children harms species’
survival.
347

Jennifer Hoult
Vol. 26 ♦ No. 1 ♦ Spring 2006
Children’s Legal Rights Journal
Evidentiary Admissibility of Parental Alienation Syndrome
http://209.198.129.131/images/EvidentiaryAmissibilityofPAW_Hoult_CLRJ_2006.pdf

4. FRE 704(b): Expert Opinion on Ultimate Issues

2012-03-01T07:55:00.004-08:00

Jennifer Hoult
Vol. 26 ♦ No. 1 ♦ Spring 2006
Children’s Legal Rights Journal
Evidentiary Admissibility of Parental Alienation Syndrome
http://209.198.129.131/images/EvidentiaryAmissibilityofPAW_Hoult_CLRJ_2006.pdf

Page 17 bottom to 18

4. FRE 704(b): Expert Opinion on
Ultimate Issues
FRE 704(b) prohibits expert testimony about an
ultimate issue of fact relating to an element of the
crime or an applicable defense, because this
invades the province of the fact-finder.
319
The 18 Jennifer Hoult
Children’s Legal Rights Journal
Advisory Committee Notes on this rule note that
scientific experts have an aura of inviolability, and
their testimony thus creates a unique risk of
usurping the role of the fact-finder by “merely
[telling] the jury what result to reach.”
320
When
experts use psychological syndromes to diagnose
fault or an underlying legal claim, such as child
abuse or spousal battering, such testimony may be
particularly likely to have undue influence because
the expert’s assessment of credibility is presented
as a scientific finding rather than a personal
opinion and, thus, may appear inviolable to the
judge or jury.
321
Claiming to diagnose false abuse
allegations, PAS clearly bears this risk.
Rule 704(b) limits psychiatric experts to
“presenting and explaining their diagnoses,” and
bars their opinions on “ultimate issues” such as
whether a criminal defendant is legally insane.
322
Gardner stated that PAS is a form of child
abuse.
323
The DDC diagnose legal fault and
mandate legal responses. While Loomis was a state
court decision setting no precedent on admissibility under Rule 704(b) of the FRE, that court
held PAS inadmissible, observing that New York
practice does not permit an expert to testify to an
ultimate issue of fact, and noting that Gardner
“[purported] to make such a determination by
determining if a particular accusation has the
criteria of a truthful accusation or a false
accusation.”
324

"F. Lacking Reliability, PAS Is Inadmissible under Daubert & Kumho Tire"

2012-03-01T07:50:00.003-08:00

iii. Gardner’s Cited Peer-Reviewed Articles Provide No Empirical Support for PAS

2012-03-01T07:49:00.002-08:00

Jennifer Hoult
Vol. 26 ♦ No. 1 ♦ Spring 2006
Children’s Legal Rights Journal
Evidentiary Admissibility of Parental Alienation Syndrome
http://209.198.129.131/images/EvidentiaryAmissibilityofPAW_Hoult_CLRJ_2006.pdf

Excerpt see link page 13
iii. Gardner’s Cited Peer-Reviewed
Articles Provide No Empirical Support
for PAS

D. Peer-Review Has Not Demonstrated PAS’s Reliability or Validity

2012-03-01T07:48:00.000-08:00

C. No Inter-Rater Reliability Tests Have Confirmed PAS’s Existence

2012-03-01T07:46:00.001-08:00

http://209.198.129.131/images/EvidentiaryAmissibilityofPAW_Hoult_CLRJ_2006.pdf

Children’s Legal Rights Journal
Evidentiary Admissibility of Parental Alienation Syndrome
Vol. 26 ♦ No. 1 ♦ Spring 2006
Jennifer Hoult

Excerpt see link page 10 to 11

C. No Inter-Rater Reliability Tests Have
Confirmed PAS’s Existence

i. PAS Tautologically Presumes

2012-03-01T07:44:00.000-08:00

http://209.198.129.131/images/EvidentiaryAmissibilityofPAW_Hoult_CLRJ_2006.pdf
Page 8
Vol. 26 ♦ No. 1 ♦ Spring 2006
Jennifer Hoult

Evidentiary Admissibility of Parental Alienation Syndrome
Children’s Legal Rights Journal

Excerpt see link
i. PAS Tautologically Presumes
Pathology & Lack of Justification
Gardner defined PAS as pathological and
unjustified alienation. Since PAS is allegedly a
subset of PA, the DDC must accurately distinguish between PA and PAS; between adaptive and
pathological alienation. Furthermore, according to
Gardner’s definition, it must distinguish between
justified and unjustified alienation.

http://209.198.129.131/images/EvidentiaryAmissibilityofPAW_Hoult_CLRJ_2006.pdf

B. PAS’s Error Rate Is Unacceptably High

2012-03-01T07:42:00.001-08:00

http://209.198.129.131/images/EvidentiaryAmissibilityofPAW_Hoult_CLRJ_2006.pdf
Vol. 26 ♦ No. 1 ♦ Spring 2006
Jennifer Hoult
Children’s Legal Rights Journal
Evidentiary Admissibility of Parental Alienation Syndrome
Page 8

Excerpt

B. PAS’s Error Rate Is Unacceptably High
Valid diagnostic criteria for unique medical
syndromes distinguish the set of symptoms for the
specified syndrome from other similar sets of
symptoms with a high degree of accuracy.
155
To
satisfy Daubert’s reliability requirement, the rate of
inaccurate diagnosis, or “error rate,” must be low.
Because there are no published studies measuring
PAS’s error rate, I will examine whether Gardner’s
DDC can reliably diagnose PAS according to his
definition."

http://209.198.129.131/images/EvidentiaryAmissibilityofPAW_Hoult_CLRJ_2006.pdf

v. PAS Treatment Violates Medical and Legal Duties of Care

2012-03-01T07:39:00.003-08:00

http://209.198.129.131/images/EvidentiaryAmissibilityofPAW_Hoult_CLRJ_2006.pdf
Vol. 26 ♦ No. 1 ♦ Spring 2006
Jennifer Hoult
Children’s Legal Rights Journal
Evidentiary Admissibility of Parental Alienation Syndrome
page 7 to 8

v. PAS Treatment Violates Medical and
Legal Duties of Care
Medical professionals have a legal duty to act in
the best interest of their patients.
147
While
standard psychiatric practice provides a separate
therapist for each family member, with each
therapist having duties of care to his individual
client, PAS treatment requires that one PAS
therapist treat the entire family.
148
Additionally,
Gardner instructs PAS therapists to act, not in
privity with the interests of the mother or child,
but as state agents who promote the interests of
the father.
149
He instructs therapists to violate
their patients’ confidentiality,
150
to ignore and
deny children’s reports of abuse (violating
mandated reporting laws),
151
and to threaten the
children into compliance with their abusers.
152
Additionally, while coercive medical treatments
are used in emergencies for patients who pose
risks to themselves or others, there is no evidence
that alienated children or women who express
negative views of their ex-husbands pose such
risks. Using coercive treatment in non-emergency
situations circumvents women and children’s legal 8 Jennifer Hoult
Children’s Legal Rights Journal
rights to refuse treatment. Given these violations
of medical ethics and legal duties, PAS treatment
appears to constitute per se medical malpractice.
Gardner similarly instructs attorneys for
children diagnosed with PAS to violate child
abuse reporting laws; instead of instructing attorneys to “align themselves” with their child-client’s
interests, Gardner instructs attorneys to coerce
their clients into unwanted contact with the
rejected.
153
Gardner claims that attorneys who act
in their client’s interest contribute to the client’s
pathology, thus he argues that attorneys in PAS
cases must “unlearn” the principle of zealous
advocacy.
154
These suggestions require that attorneys violate the rules of professional conduct.
http://209.198.129.131/images/EvidentiaryAmissibilityofPAW_Hoult_CLRJ_2006.pdf

iii. PAS Pathologizes Women’s Exercise of Legal Rights

2012-03-01T07:37:00.003-08:00

http://209.198.129.131/images/EvidentiaryAmissibilityofPAW_Hoult_CLRJ_2006.pdf
Children’s Legal Rights Journal
Evidentiary Admissibility of Parental Alienation Syndrome 7
Jennifer Hoult
Vol. 26 ♦ No. 1 ♦ Spring 2006

iii. PAS Pathologizes Women’s Exercise
of Legal Rights
PAS’s diagnostic criteria for determining a child’s
treatment focus on maternal legal actions,
evaluating the mother for:
1. presence of severe psychopathology
prior to [marital] separation,
2. frequency of programming thoughts, Evidentiary Admissibility of Parental Alienation Syndrome 7
Vol. 26 ♦ No. 1 ♦ Spring 2006
3. frequency of programming verbalizations,
4. frequency of exclusionary maneuvers,
5. frequency of complaints to police and
child protection services,
6. litigiousness,
7. episodes of hysteria,
8. frequency of violation of court orders,
9. success in manipulating the legal system
to enhance the programming, and
10. risk of intensification of programming if
granted primary custody.
132

With the exception of the first criterion, there
is no evidence that any of these criteria indicate
pathology.
133
Women are entitled to exercise their
legal rights, and as mothers they are expected to
protect their children from paternal abuse. Many
divorced women hold and express negative
opinions about their ex-husbands. Such expressions are protected under the First Amendment.
134
Many people, including successful litigators,
satisfy Gardner’s definition of “hysteria,” which
includes “intensification of symptoms in the context of lawsuits,” “emotional outbursts, dramatization, attention-getting behavior, release of anger
with scapegoatism.”
135
In effect, the DDC
diagnose women with PAS primarily when they
exercise their legal rights. Because the DDC do
not examine the father’s conduct, his psychiatric
history, violent conduct, and exercise of legal
rights are not construed as symptoms of pathology.

ii. PAS Is Diagnosed Based on Third- Party Symptoms

2012-03-01T07:36:00.000-08:00

ii. PAS Is Diagnosed Based on Third-
Party Symptoms
Page 6
Jennifer Hoult
Vol. 26 ♦ No. 1 ♦ Spring 2006

http://209.198.129.131/images/EvidentiaryAmissibilityofPAW_Hoult_CLRJ_2006.pdf

i. PAS’s Etiology Is Legal, Not Medical page 6

2012-03-01T07:34:00.004-08:00

Vol. 26 ♦ No. 1 ♦ Spring 2006
Jennifer Hoult
Evidentiary Admissibility of Parental Alienation Syndrome
http://209.198.129.131/images/EvidentiaryAmissibilityofPAW_Hoult_CLRJ_2006.pdf

Page 6

i. PAS’s Etiology Is Legal, Not Medical
Gardner claimed that the cause of PAS was
maternal programming stemming from laws that
threaten to take children from their mothers.
122
He claimed that PAS only existed in countries
that use an adversary legal system,
123
and that
judges, lawyers, guardians ad litem (“GALs”),
children’s counsel, and therapists promulgate
PAS.
124
Gardner claimed that legal processes cause
PAS and make mothers and children psychopathic,
125
and that adversary proceedings “intensify psychopathology” generally.
126
However, he
provided no evidence that laws or litigation can or
do cause medical pathology, and no evidence that
women and children become psychopathic as a
result of adversarial litigation.
127

iv. PAS Treatment Is Legal Coercion, Not Medical Treatment

2012-03-01T07:32:00.001-08:00

Evidentiary Admissibility of Parental Alienation Syndrome

Jennifer Hoult, J.D.

Page 7

iv. PAS Treatment Is Legal Coercion,
Not Medical Treatment
http://209.198.129.131/images/EvidentiaryAmissibilityofPAW_Hoult_CLRJ_2006.pdf

Children’s Legal Rights Journal
American Psychological Association (“APA”). The
1996 APA Presidential Task Force on Violence
and the Family (“APA Task Force”) specifically
noted that there is no data supporting PAS’s
existence.
113
Following the 2005 airing of a film
about PAS on the Public Broadcasting Service, the
APA issued a statement indicating that the
organization takes no official position on this
“purported syndrome.”
114
While Gardner claimed
PAS is admissible under Frye, PAS lacks any
indicia of general acceptance by major medical
institutions making it inadmissible under Frye.
2. Daubert & Kumho Tire: Reliability
115
In Daubert, the United States Supreme Court held
that FRE 702 superseded Frye in federal court.
Daubert defined an admissibility test whose
“overarching subject is the scientific validity—and
thus the evidentiary relevance and reliability—of
the principles that underlie a proposed submission.”
116
Defining “scientific knowledge,” Daubert
noted that “the word ‘knowledge’ connotes more
than subjective belief or unsupported speculation”
and specified that to qualify as knowledge “an
inference or assertion must be derived by the
scientific method.”
117
The Court intended
Daubert’s test to be more flexible than the Frye
test, allowing courts to consider several factors to
determine admissibility.
118
Relevant factors
include whether the theory can be and has been
tested, whether it has been the subject of
publication and the scrutiny of the scientific
community through peer-review, and its known or
potential error rate.
119
While Daubert claimed to
discard Frye’s “general acceptance” standard, the
decision includes “widespread acceptance” as a
relevant factor, noting that “a known technique
which has been able to attract only minimal
support within the community” may properly be
viewed with skepticism.
120

The relevant factors for determining whether
PAS is admissible under Daubert are PAS’s lack of
widespread acceptance discussed above under the
Frye standard, an analysis of whether it is a valid
medical syndrome, the error rate of its diagnostic
criteria, the results of inter-rater reliability testing,
and the nature of peer-review reportage.

PAS’s diagnostic criteria for determining a child’s treatment focus on maternal legal actions, evaluating the mother for:

2012-03-01T07:27:00.003-08:00

PAS’s diagnostic criteria for determining a child’s
treatment focus on maternal legal actions,
evaluating the mother for:
1. presence of severe psychopathology
prior to [marital] separation,
2. frequency of programming thoughts, Evidentiary Admissibility of Parental Alienation Syndrome 7
Vol. 26 ♦ No. 1 ♦ Spring 2006
3. frequency of programming verbalizations,
4. frequency of exclusionary maneuvers,
5. frequency of complaints to police and
child protection services,
6. litigiousness,
7. episodes of hysteria,
8. frequency of violation of court orders,
9. success in manipulating the legal system
to enhance the programming, and
10. risk of intensification of programming if
granted primary custody.
132
http://209.198.129.131/images/EvidentiaryAmissibilityofPAW_Hoult_CLRJ_2006.pdf

Excerpt last paragraph

"While legal coercion can motivate people to
change chosen behavior, there is no evidence that
it can cure medical disease.
142
It is perhaps not
surprising that the scientific literature overwhelmingly reports that PAS treatment fails,
143
reporting only three instances of successful treatment.
144
Furthermore, it is unclear how such
success can be measured. There is no evidence
that legal coercion can create love or respect,
145
nor is there a way to distinguish genuine changes
of affection from charades feigned for survival.
Like prisoners of war and battered women, abused
children whose survival depends on placating their
abusers often feign submission or affection to
survive. PAS treatment’s reliance on legal coercion
indicates that PAS is chosen behavior, not
pathology."
146

LETTER WRITING CAMPAIGN

2012-02-29T20:52:00.003-08:00

LETTER WRITING CAMPAIGN

We have a unique window of opportunity right now, in light of the Jerry Sandusky and Josh Powell horrors. There have been two Congressional briefings and one Senate hearing on the subject of child abuse last fall. Plus, the election is looming and politicians are listening. The reason Batterers' Rights groups have gotten so far is that they contact their representatives incessantly. We need to engage in the same way.

Our cause is far better than theirs: the modern enslavement women and children. The suffragists fought for half a century for women for the right to vote. We need to contact the representatives we voted for, to tell them that safe mothers are losing custody to batterers and molesters in family courts throughout the nation.

Legislative aides told us that letters and letter writing campaigns make a big difference. Emails and calls are great, but hard copy letters shows a much bigger commitment on the part of the writer. We've heard that each letter represents 1,000 constituents, which translates into precious votes. So here's the plan:

Step 1. Find 7 envelopes, 7 stamps and about 30 minutes of time.
Step 2. Write a letter asking for oversight hearings. You can use the following letter if you wish. If you wish, send a one page summary of your case, and say you will provide other information as needed.
Step 3. Send one letter to Senator Barbara Mikulski (Maryland) who is the chair of the Sub-committee on Children and Families. She chaired the December 2011 Senate hearing on child abuse resulting from the Sandusky case.
Step 4. Find your two U.S. Senators and one US Congress Member athttp://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml
Step 5. Address and send the same letter to each of them. (They pay close attention to letters from their own constituents.)
Step 6. Send letters addressed to President Barack Obama, First Lady Michelle Obama and Vice President Joe Biden at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, NW, Washington, D.C. 20006.

If you want to help make the maximum impact and can find another hour of time and 17 more envelopes/ stamps, join me in sending a letter to each Children and Families sub-committee member listed below.

Senator Patty Murray (Washington), 448 Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20510
Senator Bernie Sanders (Vermont), 332 Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20510
Senator Bob Casey (Pennsylvania), 393 Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20510
Senator Kay Hagan (North Carolina), 521 Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20510
Senator Jeff Merkley (Oregon), 313 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20510
Senator Al Franken (Minnesota), 309 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20510
Senator Michael Bennet (Colorado), 458 Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20510
Senator Richard Blumenthal (Connecticut), 702 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20510
Senator Tom Harkin (Iowa), 731 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510
Senator Richard Burr (North Carolina), 217 Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510
Senator Lamar Alexander (Tennessee), 455 Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510
Senator Johnny Isakson (Georgia), 131 Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510
Senator Rand Paul (Kentucky), 208 Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510
Senator John McCain (Arizona), 241 Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510
Senator Pat Roberts (Kansas), 109 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510
Senator Mark Kirk (Illinois), 524 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington DC, 20510
Senator Mike Enzi (Wyoming), 379A Senate Russell Office Building, Washington DC, 20510

Yes we can!

Imagine the impact if 500 of us sent letters!

YOUR ADDRESS

TODAY'S DATE

The Honorable Barbara Mikulski
Chair, H.E.L.P. Sub-Committee on Children and Families
503 Senate Hart Building
Washington, DC 20510

RE: Request for Oversight Hearings on the Failure of Family Courts and Child Protective Services to Protect Children
Dear Senator Mikulski:
I am writing to request oversight hearings on the failure of family courts and Child Protective Services to protect children, particularly child victims of incest and domestic violence. The sexual assault, torture and murder of children across the United States is an ongoing barbarism that undermines our society and creates a new generation of pedophiles, torturers and murderers.
In Family Courts across the country, judges are making ill-informed custody and visitation decisions that violate the constitutional rights of women and children because of the lack of recognition and understanding of the dynamics in domestic violence and child physical and sexual abuse. Consequently, children are being placed back into harm's way at the hands of their abusers. This phenomenon is so common it has come to be called "court-imposed child abuse."

I cannot overstate my concern regarding the issue of child physical and sexual safety. Jerry Sandusky's pedophilic rape in Pennsylvania and Josh Powell's perversion and double filicide in Washington are just the most public and recent sickening events. These crimes happen every day. Yet our political candidates are silent on children's issues. Is it because children can't vote? Or do perpetrators have money and influence? The silence is unraveling our moral fiber.

The lack of interest in child physical and sexual safety is fueled by Federal programs at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. While impoverished citizens are forced to live in their cars and educational programs are slashed because of the Great Recession, the Federal government continues to pour billions of taxpayer dollars into counterproductive, corruption-inducing HHS programs that do not protect, and in some cases endanger, children.

20% of the HHS budget ($80 billion) goes to the Administration for Children and Families ($16 billion). We see our nation's priorities clearly in the budget: Child Support programs receive nearly $4 billion, while Violent Crime Reduction and Child Abuse prevention programs combined receive only $226 million.

22 times more taxpayer dollars flow to child support enforcement than to violence prevention.http://transition.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/assets/fy2012apt.pdf

This hugely disparate allocation paradoxically provides an incentive program for irresponsible fathers to avoid paying child support.

HHS Responsible Fatherhood program works to reunite ex prisoners, including felons, batterers, and addicts, with children. Although the program purports to encourage these men to get jobs and pay child support, the likely well-intentioned funding is backfiring badly on children due to a variety or reasons, including corrupt local practices.
Because child support is based on parenting time, abusive fathers realize they can avoid paying child support if they get custody.
They receive an added bonus of child support paid by mothers, and access to incest victims. Therefore, they have a strong incentive to request custody in Family Court.
Studies show that 70% of batterers who ask for custody receive it.
Batterers generally have more resources than their victims. A cottage industry of private mental health professionals and attorneys who receive lucrative court appointments and payment by the wealthier parent has sprung up to help them.
Child Protective Services does not act to protect children in custody matters, assuming incorrectly that family court has done that.
Because reports of child crimes are directed to social services, evidence may be tampered with by the time law enforcement investigators become involved. These types of crimes are inappropriately reported to and investigated by social services workers instead of law enforcement.
Mandated reporters are sued by the abusers, despite laws against this, which has a chilling effect.
The result is that children are being placed at risk.

Additionally, boutique programs such as Healthy Marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants ($150 million), Family Connection Grants ($15 million), Personal Responsibility Education ($75 million) and Abstinence Education ($50 million) have not been shown to ensure child safety. $300 million is being diverted from proven violence prevention programs. This is unconscionable. Fatherhood programs are often corrupted on the local level from helping ex-prisoners and other irresponsible fathers get jobs and pay child support to advising irresponsible, often violent fathers to obtain custody and child support from the mothers. 70% of batterers who ask for custody receive it, according to the American Judges Association. This harms children, rather than helping them.
We are branded by the Inter American Commission on Human Rights as a nation that commits human right violations against battered mothers and children. This is more than embarrassing; it is scandalous. http://www.law.miami.edu/hrc/hrc_gonzalez_usa.php. We must follow their recommendations to create better laws, and assure compliance.
Mandated reporters are often picketed and sued by accused perpetrators, which results in lack of compliance. Furthermore, stronger mandated reporting laws will not fix the problems occurring after the report is made.

We need to:

Ensure through public policy and funding allocations that child physical and sexual safety is the highest priority in our country.
Eliminate expensive programs that do not ensure child physical and sexual safety.
Reverse the money flow so that domestic violence prevention receives 22 times more of our taxpayer dollars than child support enforcement.
Assure that the incentive for misappropriation of federal funds is reduced through strict oversight and accounting procedures.
Create effective citizen review board oversight.
Disconnect parenting time from child support to remove perverse financial incentives. Federal funds are facilitating incestuous child sexual predators to have open access to their victims.
Require that child physical and sexual crimes are reported to law enforcement, not social services.
Treat victims of violent crime with the same professional standards of investigation, regardless of the relationship to their perpetrator.
Withhold funding from states that do not implement specialized domestic violence courts to hear cases in which crimes are alleged.

I urge you to schedule oversight hearings on the failure of family courts and Child Protective Services to protect children.
Sincerely,
YOUR SIGNATURE

Thank your customer, tell them how valuable they are to you, but don't go overboard. Insincerity is easy to spot.

Sincerely,

Connie Valentine
CA Protective Parents Association

One reason why courts may be placing sexually abused children with pedophiles:

2012-02-29T20:52:00.000-08:00

One reason why courts may be placing sexually abused children with pedophiles:

http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2012/02/15/sacramento-juvenile-court-official-arrested-on-child-molestation-charges/

Petition to help children

2012-02-29T20:51:00.006-08:00

Petition to help children

http://www.change.org/petitions/justice-for-children-stop-court-ordered-child-abuse

September 9-12 International Violence, Abuse and Trauma conference at the Town & Country Resort & Convention

2012-02-29T20:51:00.003-08:00

September 9-12 International Violence, Abuse and Trauma conference at the Town & Country Resort & Convention Center, 500 Hotel Circle, San Diego, CA. For conference information, go tohttp://ivatcenters.org/Conferences.html#affiliated

August 10-12 SMART Ritual Abuse Conference at the Double Tree Hotel near Bradley International Airport,

2012-02-29T20:50:00.002-08:00

August 10-12 SMART Ritual Abuse Conference at the Double Tree Hotel near Bradley International Airport, 16 Ella Grasso Turnpike, Windsor Locks, CT. For conference information, go to http://ritualabuse.us/smart-conference/ A one day Ritual Abuse And Extreme Abuse Clinician's Conference 2012 conference precedes the regular conference and is open to licensed

July 21-25 15th National Coalition Against Domestic Violence conference and National Organization of Men Against Sexism's 37th

2012-02-29T20:49:00.008-08:00

July 21-25 15th National Coalition Against Domestic Violence conference and National Organization of Men Against Sexism's 37th National Conference: Preserving Our Roots While Looking to the Futurein Denver, CO. For more information, go to http://www.ncadv.org.

May 19-20 Survivorship Ritual Abuse and Child Abuse 2012 Conference

2012-02-29T20:49:00.005-08:00

May 19-20 Survivorship Ritual Abuse and Child Abuse 2012 Conference at the Executive Inn & Suite, 1755 Embarcadero, Oakland, CA.Our Healing Journey: Past, Present, Future. For conference information, go to http://survivorship.org/2012conference.html

May 6-8 Fourth Annual Mothers of Lost Children Mothers Day demonstration/lobbying inWashington DC.

2012-02-29T20:49:00.002-08:00

May 6-8 Fourth Annual Mothers of Lost Children Mothers Day demonstration/lobbying inWashington DC. We are holding this event the week before Mothers Day this year.

Sun, May 6

Time: 11:00 am to 3:00 pm for a silent vigil and march around the White House.

6:30 - 7:30 pm for a silent candlelight vigil.

Place: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW in front of the White House.

Mon, May 7

Time: 10:30 am to 3:30 pm for our first formal coalition meeting and lobbying workshop.

Place: Sewall Belmont House Suffragists' Headquarters, 144 Constitution Ave, NE

Contact cppa001@aol.com right away to sign up for the workshop (seating is limited).

A small fee of $40 is needed due to high cost of the historic space.

Tues, May 8

Time: 10:00 am to 4:00 pm to lobby at the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives

Most of us stay at the inexpensive International Hostel, 1009 11th St NW, Washington(202) 737-2333
Be sure to bring your Mothers of Lost Children t shirts! We will bring more in case you don't have one. We wear white like the Liberian women www.praythedevilbacktohell.com.
We follow in the footsteps of the mothers who demonstrated every Thursday afternoonat the Plaza de Mayo in Buenos Aires, Argentina to protest government torture and murder of their adult children. In Sacramento we demonstrate on Thursday afternoon at the family court to protest the legalized beatings, rape and murder of children.
For information on previous Washington DC demonstrations, go to www.mothers-of-lost-children.com.

April 28 Eighteenth Annual Child Sexual Abuse Conference at the Veterans Memorial Center,

2012-02-29T20:48:00.005-08:00

April 28 Eighteenth Annual Child Sexual Abuse Conference at the Veterans Memorial Center, 203 East 14th Street, Davis, CA from 9:30 am to 5:00 pm. Healing from Trauma: Clergy Abuse with Keynote Speaker Jaime Romo http://jaimeromo.com. For more information, go tohttp://www.issb.us. The conference is no cost.

March 19-21 The U.S. Attorney General's National Task Force on Children Exposed to Violence (the "Defending Childhood Task Force")

2012-02-29T20:48:00.002-08:00

March 19-21 The U.S. Attorney General's National Task Force on Children Exposed to Violence (the "Defending Childhood Task Force") will hold the third public hearing in Miami, FLAfocused on children's exposure to violence in their communities and at school.http://www.justice.gov/defendingchildhood/index.html If you cannot attend, you can e-mail comments by April 24 to defendingchildhoodtaskforce@nccdcrc.org or send to NCCD, Attn: Defending Childhood Task Force, 1970 Broadway, Suite 500, Oakland, CA, 94612

March 16-17 Conference in Phoenix AZ on Our Broken Family Court System.

2012-02-29T20:47:00.001-08:00

March 16-17 Conference in Phoenix AZ on Our Broken Family Court System. For more information, go to http://thecummingsfoundation.ticketleap.com/our-broken-family-court-system/

Sep 24, 2008Child Abuse Professionals Rally Around American Fugitive.

2012-02-29T19:31:00.003-08:00

Child Abuse Professionals Rally Around American Fugitive...

‎

newswise.com - Sep 24, 2008

The court acknowledged abuse had taken place but was swayed by the bogus legal argument that the children's fears were a result of "Parental Alienation ..

Sep 23, 2006Women in Science Given Boost; Abusers Gain Custody | Womens...

2012-02-29T19:30:00.002-08:00

Women in Science Given Boost; Abusers Gain Custody | Womens...

‎

Women's eNews - Sep 23, 2006

Parental alienation, a discredited concept that has become a leading defense ... Parental alienation is a psychological theory that one parent will make a ...

Dec 20, 2011 – In addition, anywhere from 3 to 10 million children are exposed to domestic violence each year (3

2012-02-29T08:18:00.002-08:00

PTSD in Children and Adolescents - NATIONAL CENTER for PTSD

www.ptsd.va.gov/.../ptsd_in_children_and_adolescents_overview_fo...

Dec 20, 2011 – In addition, anywhere from 3 to 10 million children are exposed to domestic violence each year (3), 40-60% of which cases also involve child .

“Promoting Prevention, Targeting Teens: An Emerging Agenda to

2012-02-29T08:13:00.005-08:00

“Promoting Prevention, Targeting Teens: An Emerging Agenda to

www.hewlett.org/uploads/.../PromotingPreventionTargetingTeens.pd...

File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
domestic violence, its causes and consequences, and to define the ..... is prevalent, and teens may also be exposed to domestic violence in their homes. Teens .

Effects of Domestic Violence on Children and Adolescents: An ...

2012-02-29T08:13:00.002-08:00

Effects of Domestic Violence on Children and Adolescents: An ...

www.aaets.org/article8.htm

Domestic violence has adverse effects on individuals, families, and society in general.... Exposure to this form of violence has considerable potential to be perceived as .... An estimated 1/5 to 1/3 of all teenagers who are involved in dating ..

Children Exposed to Violence Introduction

2012-02-29T08:12:00.006-08:00

[PDF]

Children Exposed to Violence Introduction

www.nccd-crc.org/nccd/dnld/Home/focus0809.pdf

File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
example, children exposed to domestic violence are more likely than ... NCCD study on teenage victimization found that these youth experience more problems ..

Healing the Invisible Wounds: Children's Exposure to Violence

2012-02-29T08:12:00.003-08:00

[PDF]

Healing the Invisible Wounds: Children's Exposure to Violence

www.safestartcenter.org/pdf/caregiver.pdf

File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
Sarah sees police breaking up a fight between two groups of teenagers ... In cases ofdomestic violence, knowing what to do can help a child feel safer and in ...

Exposure to domestic violence can limit children's cognitive development and their ability to

2012-02-29T08:12:00.000-08:00

[PDF]

Children Exposed to Domestic Violence - Rhode Island Kids Count!

www.rikidscount.org/matriarch/documents/domesticviolence.pdf

File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
Exposure to domestic violence can limit children's cognitive development and their ability to .... on the prevalence of teen dating violence among middle-school ..

Teens Exposed to Domestic Violence Page...

2012-02-29T08:11:00.002-08:00

[PDF]

Compiled by the Wisconsin Coalition Against Domestic Violence

www.wcadv.org/.../...

File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
Feb 2, 2012 – Healthy Relationships & Social Change Page 4-6. Sexual Violence. Page 7. Digital Abuse. Page 8. Teens Exposed to Domestic Violence Page .

National Teen Dating Abuse Helpline: 866-331-9474, TTY 866-331-8453. ..

2012-02-29T08:10:00.005-08:00

VAWnet Applied Research Papers

www.vawnet.org/applied-research-papers/

National Online Resource Center on Violence Against Women ... (RAINN) Hotline: 800-656-4673 | National Teen Dating Abuse Helpline: 866-331-9474, TTY 866-331-8453. ....Emerging Responses to Children Exposed to Domestic Violence ..

CHILDREN - THE HIDDEN VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

2012-02-29T08:10:00.002-08:00

CHILDREN - THE HIDDEN VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

marinarosa.hubpages.com › ... › Parenting Skills, Styles and Advice

WITNESSING PARENTAL ABUSE – Common effects on children and teens. CHILDREN AND TEENS EXPOSED TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE. At least 3 million ..

Behind Closed Doors The Impact of Domestic Violence on Children

2012-02-29T08:09:00.008-08:00

[PDF]

Behind Closed Doors The Impact of Domestic Violence on Children

www.unicef.org/protection/files/BehindClosedDoors.pdf

File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
teenagers have been exposed to extreme domestic violence.19. There is a strong likelihood that this will become a continuing cycle of violence for the next

The Future of Teens Exposed to Domestic Violence as Children

2012-02-29T08:09:00.005-08:00

[DOC]

The Future of Teens Exposed to Domestic Violence as Children

forums.perrla.com/getattachment.ashx?fileid=2

File Format: Microsoft Word - Quick View
In teens exposed to domestic violence in the home as children, witnessed or experienced, do peer support groups as compared to formal counseling result in an .

Youth Exposure to Violence - The National Center for Victims of ...

2012-02-29T08:09:00.002-08:00

Youth Exposure to Violence - The National Center for Victims of ...

www.ncvc.org › Home › Library › Document Viewer

Stalking Resource Center. Teens. Dating Violence Resource Center ... According to the 2008 National Survey of Children's Exposure to Violence, more ... statutes in 22 states and Puerto Rico address children witnessing domestic violence.

3.3 million teens are exposed to domestic violence, especially at home

2012-02-29T08:08:00.002-08:00

Physical abuse -the most visible & lethal Domestic violent teens are ...

www.a-troubled-teen.com/Physical-abuse.html

More than 3.3 million teens are exposed to domestic violence, especially at home where they are physically abused and neglected at a rate 15 times higher than ...

2010 -Post-traumatic stress symptoms in siblings exposed to intimate partner violence: the role of mother-child relationships

2012-02-29T08:05:00.003-08:00

Post-traumatic stress symptoms in siblings exposed to intimate partner violence: the role of mother-child relationships

[PDF] from umanitoba.ca

A Stewart-Tufescu - 2010 - mspace.lib.umanitoba.ca

It is well documented that exposure to intimate partner violence (IPV) negatively affects
children's developmental outcomes (Chan & Yeung, 2009; Evans, Davies & DiLillo, 2008)
and may lead to the expression of symptomatology consistent with post-traumatic stress ...

2008 - Springer Symptom patterns among youth exposed to intimate partner violence

2012-02-29T08:04:00.003-08:00

Symptom patterns among youth exposed to intimate partner violence

[PDF] from childwitnesstoviolence.org

JM Lang… - Journal of Family Violence, 2008 - Springer

Abstract Children and adolescents exposed to intimate partner violence display a broad
range of symptoms. We sought to differentiate symptom patterns and predictors of these
patterns using a person-oriented approach. Previous cluster analysis research of exposed ...

Cited by 10 - Related articles - All 5 versions

1999Cited by 19 -Children's understanding of parental violence

2012-02-29T08:02:00.004-08:00

Children's understanding of parental violence

SR Ornduff… - Child and Youth Care Forum, 1999 - Springer

This paper describes domestic violence from the perspective of 56 preschool and school-
age children during their temporary residence at a shelter for battered women. Data were
extracted from transcripts of individual counseling sessions that explored the childrens' ...

Cited by 19 - Related articles - BL Direct - All 4 versions

2009 Cited by 11 Children's actions when experiencing domestic violence

2012-02-29T08:01:00.007-08:00

Children's actions when experiencing domestic violence

C Överlien… - Childhood, 2009 - chd.sagepub.com

Abstract The aim of this article is, by analysing children's discourses, to investigate their
actions or absence of actions during a domestic violence episode. The empirical data are
recorded group therapy sessions and individual interviews with children who have grown ...

Cited by 11 - Related articles - All 4 versions

Children Exposed to Domestic Violence

2012-02-29T08:01:00.002-08:00

Children Exposed to Domestic Violence

C Øverlien - Journal of Social Work, 2010 - jsw.sagepub.com

• Summary: This article examines and discusses the research field of children exposed to
domestic violence, a field which has greatly expanded during the last 10 years. The author
presents an overview of this research, discusses its implications, and describes future ...

Cited by 10 - Related articles - All 2 versions

] The Convergence of Neurobiology and Epidemiology: - (ACE) Study

2012-02-29T08:00:00.002-08:00

[PDF]

The Convergence of Neurobiology and Epidemiology: - (ACE) Study

acestudy.org/.../Review_of_ACE_Study_with_references_summary_t...

File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
by R Anda - Cited by 5 - Related articles
The ACE Study calls for an integrated approach to intervene early on children growing up being abused, neglected, witnessing domestic violence, or with ..

2011 Children exposed to domestic violence exhibit disrupted .

2012-02-29T07:59:00.003-08:00

Growing up in a domestic violence environment: relationship with ...

jech.bmj.com/content/early/2011/01/31/jech.2010.110932.full.pdf

by HJ Jun - 2011 - Related articles
Feb 4, 2011 – Children exposed to domestic violence exhibit disrupted .... Studydesign. The Growing Up Today Study (GUTS) is an ongoing nationwide ..

Effects of Domestic Violence on Children and Teenagers ...

2012-02-29T07:58:00.004-08:00

Effects of Domestic Violence on Children and Teenagers ...

www.findcounseling.com › ... › Domestic Violence: An Overview

"In homes where domestic violence occurs, children are physically abused and ...Several studies have shown that in 60% to 75% of families in which a woman is battered... They are forced to grow up faster than their peers, often taking on the ..

Children and Domestic Violence f2005

2012-02-29T07:58:00.001-08:00

[PDF]

Children and Domestic Violence

members.aapa.org/aapaconf2005/.../5003CohenDomesticViolence.pd...

File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
Research also indicates children exposed to domestic violence .... Children whogrow up seeing abuse may have a higher risk of becoming an abuser or a .

The Youngest Victims of Domestic Violence | 4therapy.com

2012-02-29T07:57:00.002-08:00

The Youngest Victims of Domestic Violence | 4therapy.com

www.4therapy.com › Articles › Life Topics › Family & Relationships

There is growing evidence that as child-witnesses to domestic violence grow up, they have a 74% higher likelihood of committing assault as adults. No studies ..

[PDF] The Facts on Children and Domestic Violence

2012-02-29T07:54:00.006-08:00

[PDF]

The Facts on Children and Domestic Violence

www.futureswithoutviolence.org/userfiles/.../Children.../Children.pdf

File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
In fact, research has shown that the non-abusing parent is often the strongest protective factor in the lives of children who are exposed to domestic violence. However,growing up ... the effects of domestic violence on children can be mitigated.

Jan 11, 2011 Link: Domestic Violence, Child Abuse, and Youth Violence ...

2012-02-29T07:54:00.003-08:00

Link: Domestic Violence, Child Abuse, and Youth Violence ...

www.mincava.umn.edu/link/documents/fvpf2/fvpf2.shtml

by J Carter - Cited by 11 - Related articles
Jan 11, 2011 – Data also show that children growing up in violent families are more likely to .... Similarly, research on domestic violence risk factors shows that .

[PDF] Nonfamily Abducted Children: National Estimates and Characteristics by D Finkelhor - 2002 -

2012-02-28T21:40:00.002-08:00

[PDF]

Nonfamily Abducted Children: National Estimates and Characteristics

www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojjdp/196467.pdf

File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
by D Finkelhor - 2002 - Related articles
David Finkelhor, Heather Hammer, and .... thority or parental permission, or (2) an episode in ... tent, and without lawful authority or parental per- ...... David Finkelhor,Ph.D., is Professor of Sociology and Director, Crimes against Children

The Effects of Domestic Violence on Children 3-4 million children between the ages of 3-17 are at risk of exposure to domestic violence each year

2012-02-28T20:16:00.003-08:00

Excerpt from source

http://www.domesticviolenceroundtable.org/effect-on-children.html

The Effects of Domestic Violence on Children

How many children witness the abuse of their mothers?Studies show that 3-4 million children between the ages of 3-17 are at risk of exposure to domestic violence each year. U.S. government statistics say that 95% of domestic violence cases involve women victims of male partners. The children of these women often witness the domestic violence.

Impact of Domestic Violence on Children childwelfare.gov

2012-02-28T20:15:00.004-08:00

http://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/factsheets/domesticviolence.cfm

Impact of Domestic Violence on Children

Children who live with domestic violence face increased risks: the risk of exposure to traumatic events, the risk of neglect, the risk of being directly abused, and the risk of losing one or both of their parents. All of these may lead to negative outcomes for children and may affect their well-being, safety, and stability (Carlson, 2000; Edleson, 1999; Rossman, 2001). Childhood problems associated with exposure to domestic violence fall into three primary categories:

Behavioral, social, and emotional problems. Higher levels of aggression, anger, hostility, oppositional behavior, and disobedience; fear, anxiety, withdrawal, and depression; poor peer, sibling, and social relationships; and low self-esteem.
Cognitive and attitudinal problems. Lower cognitive functioning, poor school performance, lack of conflict resolution skills, limited problem solving skills, pro-violence attitudes, and belief in rigid gender stereotypes and male privilege.
Long-term problems. Higher levels of adult depression and trauma symptoms and increased tolerance for and use of violence in adult relationships.

Effects of Domestic Violence on Childrenupdated April 2010

2012-02-28T20:15:00.000-08:00

Effects of Domestic Violence on Children

http://www.stopvaw.org/effects_of_domestic_violence_on_children.htmllast updated April 2010

Excerpt
Children living in families where domestic violence occurs may be exposed to intimate partner violence and abuse in a number of ways. They may be direct witnesses to abuse, may suffer harm incidental to the domestic abuse, may have their lives disrupted by moving or being separated from parents, may be used by the batterer to manipulate or gain control over the victim, and they themselves are more likely to be abused. Exposure to domestic violence is widespread internationally and it is associated with other forms of child maltreatment, according to a 2006 UNICEF World Report on Violence Against Children. see link http://www.stopvaw.org/effects_of_domestic_violence_on_children.html

Impacts on Children .aardvarc.org/dv/effects.shtml

2012-02-28T20:14:00.000-08:00

http://www.aardvarc.org/dv/effects.shtml

Impacts on Children

One-third of the children who witness the battering of their mother demonstrate significant behavioral and/or emotional problems, including psychosomatic disorders, stuttering, anxiety and fears, sleep disruption, excessive crying and school problems. (Jaffe et al, 1990; Hilberman & Munson, 1977-78)

Those boys who witness abuse of their mother by their father are more likely to inflict severe violence as adults. Data suggest that girls who witness maternal abuse may tolerate abuse as adults more than girls who do not. (Hotaling & sugarman, 1986)

These negative effects may be diminished if the child benefits from intervention by the law and domestic violence programs. (Giles-Sims,1985)

The long-term effects of child sexual abuse include depression and self-destructive behavior, anger and hostility, poor self-esteem, feelings of isolation and stigma, difficulty in trusting others (especially men), and martial and relationship problems, and a tendency toward revictimization. (Finkelhor & Brown, 1988)

Other effects identified include runaway behavior, hysterical seizures, compulsive rituals, drug and school problems. (Conte, 1988 & 1990) see link http://www.aardvarc.org/dv/effects.shtml

Children who witness domestic violence suffer long-term effects

2012-02-28T20:13:00.001-08:00

http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/Global/story.asp?S=13375065

Children who witness domestic violence suffer long-term effects

Posted: Oct 23, 2010 12:39 AM CDTUpdated: Oct 23, 2010 12:49 AM CDT

, March 13, 2008Custody Cases Put Under Supreme Legal Watch By Alison Bowen

2012-02-26T13:16:00.002-08:00

Custody Cases Put Under Supreme Legal Watch

By Alison Bowen

WeNews correspondent

Thursday, March 13, 2008

http://www.womensenews.org/story/the-courts/080313/custody-cases-put-under-supreme-legal-watch

J.A. v. P.G.

MD 2009

http://www.dvleap.org/Programs/AllStatesLitigationProject/Cases.aspx

Parental Alienation Fraud Blog urges you to reject the proclamation for Parental Alienation Awareness

2012-02-25T14:44:00.002-08:00

Dear Governor:

Your office may receive or has already received a request to sign a proclamation declaring April 25th as Parental Alienation Awareness Day. Parental Alienation Fraud Blog is writing to urge you to reject that request.

Proponents of Parental Alienation Awareness Day attempt to portray parental alienation as a destructive family dynamic in which one parent turns the child against the other, usually during custody proceedings.

Parental Alienation Syndrome, however, is not based in empirical evidence and has been widely discredited by legal and mental health experts. Three leading professional organizations—the American Bar Association, the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, and the American Psychological Association—have state unequivocally in their publications that Parental Alienation Syndrome is neither a scientifically valid nor a professionally recognized psychological syndrome, and as such, should not be admissible as evidence in a court of law.

Youth and domestic violence advocates point out that a child may have legitimate reasons for having negative feelings toward one of his or her parents, particularly when a parent is abusive. Rather than investigating allegations of abuse, the concocted notion of parental alienation can wrongly turn the court's focus to the victims' motives.

Many abusers are invoking Parental Alienation Syndrome and parental alienation to convince family courts to ignore children's allegations of abuse. They wrongly claim that the protective parent is behind a child's claims of abuse and should be punished by not getting custody of the children.

When courts award visitation or custody to the parent to whom the child has an aversion, in many instances, the courts are awarding custody to a violent abuser. The consequences could be dire.

Some children placed in the custody of their abusers have committed suicide; others have run away, and countless others have endured the abuse and are permanently traumatized. In recent years, children placed in custody of their abusers have been coming forward to tell their stories and to warn of the danger surrounding the fictitious syndrome. http://www.courageouskids.net/

Parental Alienation Fraud Blog urges you to reject the proclamation for Parental Alienation Awareness Day. Instead, take actions to ensure that abuse allegations are thoroughly investigated before custody decisions are made. Your leadership will help some of the most vulnerable children stay safe.
Sincerely,
Parental Alienation Fraud Blog

Anna Salter, one of the foremost experts on sex offenders in the country

2012-02-25T14:42:00.000-08:00

EXCERPT:
Another perspective on the problem is offered by Anna Salter, one of the foremost experts on sex offenders in the country. She writes the following in her popular book Predators:

"The dry research figures only confirm what I have seen over and over in this field: there are a lot of sexual offenses out there and the people who commit them don't get caught very often. When an offender is caught and has a thorough evaluation with a polygraph backup, he will reveal dozens, sometimes hundreds of offenses he was never apprehended for. In an unpublished study by Pamela Van Wyk, 26 offenders in her incarcerated treatment program entered the program admitting an average of 3 victims each. Faced with a polygraph and the necessity of passing it to stay in the treatment program, the next group of 23 men revealed an average of 175 victims each."
http://leadershipcouncil.org/1/res/rcd.html

COMMENTARY ABOUT THE FEDERALLY FUNDED STUDY TO MEASURE PORN AROUSAL

2012-02-25T14:40:00.000-08:00

EXCERPTS:
.S. Representatives and others outraged at NIH's "misplaced" priorities, need to know who is behind this federally funded perversion. It is already well documented that the so-called "fathers' rights" movement and its' allied psychological "experts", concocted "Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) -- a legal defense of child molesters -- as the means to conceal a pedophile "ring" operating through family courts. PAS methodology calls for diverting federal grant program funding through child custody cases, in the guise of promoting "responsible fatherhood.". Click.
Lamb is associated with Ralph Underwager, one of the "psychologists" identified in the Robert Knight report, who -- in an interview in Paidika (a Dutch pedophile publication), with his wife Hollida Wakefield -- stated:
Pedophiles can boldly and courageously affirm what they choose. They can say that what they want is to find the best way to love...Pedophiles can make the assertion that the pursuit of intimacy and love is what they choose. With boldness they can say, "I believe this is in fact part of God's will." See Paidika Interview: Hollida Wakefield and Ralph Underwager. Click.

Lamb's connection to Underwager comes primarily through the Children's Rights Council (CRC), the "umbrella" organization of the fathers' rights movement. CRC, formerly called National Council for Children's Rights, is also affiliated with other pedophiles and incest advocates, including Richard Gardner -- who coined the term PAS -- and Warren Farrell.

Richard Gardner's bizarre writings include discussions of sexually inhibited wives being the cause of 'false child abuse allegations', because mothers are envious of fathers' ability to relate sexually to others, including their children. Gardner believes that both women and children should be taught to use vibrators to make them less "up tight" about sex. Click.
http://www.newsmakingnews.com/ross,cindy12,31,02commentary.htm

Cindy Ross is the California Director of the National Alliance for Family Court Justice. nafcj.org/Click

PARENTAL ALIENATION SYNDROME (PAS) by: Julie R. Ancis, Ph.D.

2012-02-25T14:38:00.000-08:00

EXCERPTS:
Julie Ancis PhD would appreciate if you could briefly share any stories or issues you think are important to address to the group considering PAS inclusion in the DSM. Please email Julie Ancis with your input at julieancis@yahoo.com

Click the JOIN button (below right)- and join to be heard and to Stop theses Pseudo-Whacko NON-Scientific theories that are killing Women and Children Legally in the family Courts.
Join the Facebook Group too: AWP
PARENTAL ALIENATION SYNDROME (PAS)
by: Julie R. Ancis, Ph.D.
Parental Alienation Syndrome, which is being proposed for inclusion in the DSM-V, has been generally defined as a child’s denigration of a parent without justification. The creation of “Parental Alienation Syndrome,” otherwise known as PAS, is partly the result of two major trends: 1) a backlash against sexual abuse survivors who disclosed the abuse and 2) an increase in the divorce rate in North America when both parents and child custody assessors became more likely to notice signs of child abuse (Caplan, 2004).
Statistics indicate that 1/4 of girls and 1/6 of boys are survivors of Child Sexual Abuse (CSA) (http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/ace/prevalence.htm). According to the World Health Organization (2006), worldwide prevalence of sexual violence involving forced intercourse and touch in children under 18 years of age is 150 million for girls and 73 million for boys and 150 million for girls. The majority of CSA perpetrators are men (Finkelhor, 1994; U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, 2010), and more mothers than fathers tend to report that their ex-spouses might be abusing their children (Bala & Schuman, 1999).
Richard Gardner (1985/87) argued that the majority of children in child custody litigation suffered from the so-called disorder of Parental Alienation Syndrome. His focus was almost exclusively on mothers as turning a child against the father, allegedly in order to get or retain custody of the child. He included denigration of the father via ‘‘programming (‘brainwashing’),” as well as the child’s own contributions to vilifying the target parent. Gardner claimed that many reports of CSA in the context of divorce cases were false allegations. In this connection, it is important to note that Bala and Schuman (1999) found that only 1.3% of mothers’ allegations of abuse by their children’s fathers were deemed by civil court judges to be intentionally false, in contrast to 21% of cases in which fathers had made such allegations against mothers. And Meier (2009) reports after reviewing the research that it is a mistaken belief that mothers’ allegations in child custody proceedings that fathers have sexually abused their children are usually false.
The use of the term PAS and variants such as “parental alienation” has been extended in recent years, so that it is applied even to cases in which a child refuses to visit the noncustodial parent, whether or not the child’s objections entail abuse allegations.
http://parentingnewsnetwork.com/?p=1123&cpage=1

Male Survivor Conference – Minneapolis, MN –

2012-02-25T14:34:00.000-08:00

Dr. Richard Gardner: A Review of His Theories and Opinions on Atypical Sexuality, Pedophilia, and Treatment Issues by Stephanie J. Dallam, RN, MSN, FNP Please note: I do not agree with Gardner’s ideas. “Richard A. Gardner, M.D., is a prominent forensic expert with an extensive career of evaluating children, especially during custody disputes between parents.” “Gardner (1992, p. 588) does not believe in doing therapy with fathers who deny committing sexual molestation. If father desires treatment, the therapist should focus on enhancing his self-esteem. This is accomplished by helping him to appreciate that “there is a certain amount of pedophilia in all of us” and that “pedophilia has been considered the norm by the vast majority of individuals in the history of the world”(Gardner 1992, ppi.592-3).” “Gardner’s Views on Pedophilia – “The sexually abused child is generally considered to be the victim,” though the child may initiate sexual encounters by ‘seducing’ the adult.” “Gardner (1991, p. 118) suggests that Western society’s is “excessively moralistic and punitive” toward pedophiles.” published in Jan/Feb 1998 issue of Treating Abuse Today; the second part was published in the Mar/Apr 1998 issue (Volume 8, issue 2). Back issues can be obtained from Treating Abuse Today, P.O. Box 3050, Lancaster, PA 17604-3030. (717) 291-1940 –http://www.geocities.com/nafcj/Dr.RichardGardnerAReviewof.html
Neil Brick’s Ritual Abuse/Mind Control Presentation
Male Survivor Conference – Minneapolis, MN – September 20, 2003
This page was put on the web by smartnews@aol.com
http://ritualabuse.us/ritualabuse/articles/ritual-abusemind-control-presentation/

Excerpt "In reality, many protective parents feel as if this were a witchhunt against them -

2012-02-25T14:31:00.002-08:00

November 17, 2010 - 9:21am
EXCERPT: Poisonous comments
Many of us understand the origins of PA are rooted in the misogynist and pro-pedophilia attitudes of Dr. Richard Gardner, who thought the mass sexual-abuse hysteria was caused by vindictive women falsely accusing fathers of abuse. (8) In reality, many protective parents feel as if this were a witchhunt against them -- mothers are not trusted, they’ve cast a spell on the kids to hate Dad --they must be punished! Jail them! Fine them! Take away their children! Like the “witches” of long past who would either sink or swim, mothers are in a similar bind – if they report abuse, they’re punished for being an alienator; if they don’t report it, they can be punished for failure to report.
Meanwhile, many of the alienating behaviors readers commented on can be attributed to personalities, parenting skills, or, in cases of abuse, domestic violence by proxy, whereby one parent continues to exert control and/or abuse over another. One advocate keeps a blog of parents that kill their child(ren) in cases pertaining to divorce and custody. She’s up to 136. Despite the fact that these marriages ended, the domestic violence continues and these deaths would be classified as domestic violence fatalities.Overwhelmingly, these killings are committed by men – with no tango partner, Mr. Warshak. In other words, party of one.By Joan Dawson November 17, 2010
http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2010/11/17/huffpos-divorce-section-room-reason-domestic-violence

Excerpt "There needs to be a denouncement by Congress of these pro-pedophilia theories of parental alienation developed by Richard Gardner.

2012-02-25T14:29:00.002-08:00

From Battered Moms Lose Children to Abusers:

There needs to be a denouncement by Congress of these pro-pedophilia theories of parental alienation developed by Richard Gardner. Previously, the APA had published research called the Rind Study that Congress filed a public resolution denouncing for its pro-pedophilia ideology. The same needs to happen with this pseudo-scientific theory of parental alienation. There has been admission by these so-called experts that Gardner’s theory has been ruled out, and repeated discrediting of his ideas. Yet pushers of this philosophy still go into courtrooms and testify against women and children who have been victimized by domestic abuse.

The results of a mother being accused of being an “alienator” are to give visitation and/or custody to the abuser. The mother and child suffer for years while the child is under 18. Some children who are removed from their protective parent then become so bonded and enmeshed with the abuser that they don’t ever want to see the mother. But yet when fathers force children to recant abuse (isn’t this witness tampering?…and coaching?…), badmouth the mom continuously, make false accusations of child abuse against the mother, and file endless frivolous motions in court, somehow these same so-called parental alienation experts do nothing and don’t seem to see how this behavior by the father is nothing but a big setup. The abusive fathers who claim alienation have no other goal than to continue the abuse through the court system by terrorizing the mother and taking her children away. Shared parenting certainly is not a goal, unless they want to continue to make the mother be under their control. Also, shared parenting is NEVER appropriate when there has been domestic abuse, the abuser will just continue the abuse anyway possible, just changing how they do it becoming sneakier. These malevolent abusers are the ones claiming parental alienation in these family court cases that go on until children turn 18. Also, in this scenario that I just described, it is a father with more finances than the mother that inflicts this “legal abuse” on the mother and child(ren).
SEE link for rest of article http://www.randijames.com/2009/01/denouncing-parental-alienation.html

Excerpt "The Access/Visitation (A/V) and predecessor Child Access Demonstration Project.

2012-02-25T14:27:00.003-08:00

Here's Liz's summary:

PRINCIPAL ORGANIZATIONS AND INDIVIDUALS INVOLVED IN THE
FEDERAL PARENTING AND CUSTODY GRANT CORRUPTION
Dr. Richard Gardner is the centerpiece of the fathers rights movement and their public policy efforts. He is the featured speaker at all their events, his publications are sold through their membership network, and has been instrumental in the implementation of CRCâ€™s self-devised federal â€œcustodyâ€ program - The Access/Visitation (A/V) and predecessor Child Access Demonstration Project. Gardnerâ€™s writing are very pro-offender and pro-incest, including such statements that a mother who is angry at the father for incestuous relations with the daughter, should be sobered up and told to use a vibrator to make her more sexually responsive so that the father will not need to seek sex from his daughter. Despite being frequently discredited, local judges adhere to his theories is custody cases.

John Money and Warren Farrell are also incest/pedophile advocates. Money interviewed for the notorious Dutch pedophile publication Paedika, endorsing the legitimacy of sadomachoistic sex, and justifying a death during such a ceremony as free choice. Farrell interviewed for Penthouse on positive incest, saying it can be better for a teen girl to have her first affair with her father.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FAMILYCOURTREFORM/message/16472

.crimesagainstpeople.org/May 17, 2007PAS keeps making appearances in courts across the country,

2012-02-25T14:24:00.002-08:00

May 17, 2007
I know you think I'm talking about "Opie and Anthony," recently suspended from their radio talk gig for "joking" with a guest, "Homeless Charlie," who said he wanted to rape Condoleezza Rice and Laura Bush. The hosts encouraged these horrifying remarks -- in fact they laughed and imagined "the horror" on Rice's face as she is held down and punched in the face.
No, I'm talking about another sick reality. Let me ask you first: Would you trust a guy who wrote that rape victims "gain pleasure from being beaten, bound, and otherwise made to suffer" as "the price they are willing to pay for gaining the gratification of receiving the sperm?" A guy who published his belief that "the child who has suffered bona fide abuse may very well have enjoyed the experience..."? A guy who claimed that incest is not harmful, (citing Shakespeare) only "thinking makes it so"?
And I know I don't even have to ask this -- but would you trust this guy with your kids?
I thought not. Which leads me to ponder how on earth the "theory" this guy thought up has found its way into court rooms across the country, and is currently influencing child custody decisions, especially those involving child abuse. That's right, this guy, a psychiatrist named Richard Gardner -- who, by the way, also asserted that adult-child sex is normal AND beneficial for both parties as well as for the survival of the human race -- is being given credence in cases involving the fate of children and families.
And believe it or not, it seems that nine state governors have jumped on Gardner's pro-pedophilia bandwagon. In Florida, Indiana, Connecticut, Kentucky, Nebraska, Iowa, Maine, and Nevada, there is now reportedly a whole day officially dedicated to raising "awareness" about Gardner's theory called Parental Alienation Syndrome, in which the very reports of abuse by a child against a father are themselves evidence that the child is being brainwashed by the mother (and if the child is angry at the father, or doesn't want to visit, that's even more evidence) and the only "cure" for this syndrome is to force the child to live with the abuser and deny ANY contact with the protective mother, who has no history of abuse.
C'mon, you're thinking, what judge would buy this crock? Doesn't it matter if the abuse really happened? Apparently not.
Although it may sound like it, this is no sick joke. It's a sad, sick reality. And anyone who cares even a little about children's human rights and the epidemic of family violence should take note and take action.
Let's start with the lowdown on "parental alienation syndrome" (PAS), which is also being called "parental alienation." Like I said, Richard Gardner thought it up. The late Dr. Gardner was a child psychiatrist who liked to tell people he was a full professor at Columbia University's College of Physicians and Surgeons. Actually, he was an unpaid volunteer. But hey -- professor, volunteer; child sexual abuse, fun adult-child sex -- hey, what's the difference? If you're Richard Gardner, not much.
But I digress. While Gardner was volunteering at Columbia in the 1980s, he formed some opinions and made some personal observations that, together, he decided to call "parental alienation syndrome." He defined PAS as a condition arising from one parent's (mostly mothers, he said) "programming" of the child to wage an unreasonable "campaign of denigration against" the other parent (most of the time, the father, according to Gardner). PAS, he said, arises most often during child custody disputes, usually involves false allegations of child sexual abuse as part of the programmer parent's attempt to turn the child against the other parent, and causes "enormous grief" in the alienated parent.
Gardner's diagnostic criteria included finding out from the child the parent's "frequency of programming thoughts" and the parent's "success in manipulating the legal system to enhance the programming." The ridiculousness of these criteria goes without saying. Gardner was insistent that the "programming parent" is the mother, and that the alienated parent is the father. He opined that treatment involve forcing the mother to stop expressing negative views about the father and granting custody of the child to him and denying any visitation to her. No part of the PAS diagnostic process involves examining the father's psychiatric history or conduct, or even inquiring whether he had actually engaged in abuse.
According to an article by Dr. Paul J. Fink, past president of the American Psychiatric Association, and Hon. Sol Gothard, retired judge and former faculty member for the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges:
"Parental Alienation Syndrome has been used nationwide by batterers as a courtroom tactic to silence abused children by attempting to discredit their disclosures of abuse. This theory is not recognized as valid by the American Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, or the American Medical Association. Parental Alienation Syndrome is not accepted as a psychiatric diagnosis, and has been rejected by the mainstream psychological community. Parental Alienation Syndrome is junk science; there is no valid research or empirical data to support this unproven theory."
To date, none of the studies necessary to judge the validity of Gardner's so-called syndrome have been conducted. In 2006, the Children's Legal Rights Journal (a multi-disciplinary journal published in conjunction with the American Bar Association Center on Children and the Law, the National Association of Counsel for Children, and the Loyola University School of Law) and the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges each published analyses finding no scientific or legal basis for the use of PAS.
And yet, PAS keeps making appearances in courts across the country, subverting and perverting the pursuit of justice one family at a time. According to the Children's Legal Rights Journal, a North Carolina court incarcerated a teenage girl who refused to visit her father, and a New Jersey court suspended a mother's contact with her two children, granting sole custody to the father despite "'foreseeable emotional upset and possible trauma'" to the children (Hoult, 1). In Pennsylvania, a court ordered a teenager into "PAS treatment," and he subsequently hung himself.
Young people who have suffered due to inhumane court rulings involving PAS are speaking out.
They are not the only ones. This month, the NOW Foundation joined other leading organizations working on family law and family violence in a complaint filed against the United States with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. The complaint charges that U.S. courts are failing to protect the life, liberties, security, and other human rights of abused mothers and children by frequently awarding child custody to abusers and child molesters. PAS is one predominant strategy being used by lawyers to place children in such danger. A recent Newsweek article noted the finding of a Harvard study that in custody cases involving documented spousal abuse, 54% granted custody to the batterer, and parental alienation was used as an argument in nearly every single one.
This is not a trend that will fade away. It's junk science that's gaining momentum, amassing victims, fooling powerful government officials, and even attracting an unfortunately famous ally or two like Alec Baldwin. PAS advocates play down the theory's unquestionably absurd roots in Gardner's pseudo-science, pathologize and punish mothers fighting to protect themselves and their children, and stand faithfully by fathers' so-called right to unfettered access to their children despite any history of assault or abuse. And the judges and the media are buying it hook, line and sinker.
Do something about it. Contact the governors who've proclaimed "Parental Alienation Awareness" days and raise their awareness about what's in the best interest of our families. Contact the media outlets who are giving PAS advocates like Alec Baldwin a platform to lie to the public. Pressure your judges to educate themselves and get our justice system back on track
Gloria Steinem said, "The truth will set you free, but first it will piss you off." I'm definitely pissed off about PAS and hope you are, too. It's just what we need to set our families free from junk science, junk justice, and sick realities..

http://www.crimesagainstpeople.org/

Parental Alienation Syndrome” Exposed: End Ritual Abuse The Website of Ellen P. Lacter, Ph.D

2012-02-25T14:20:00.000-08:00

Parental Alienation Syndrome” Exposed: End Ritual Abuse The Website of Ellen P. Lacter, Ph.D

The Evidentiary Admissibility of Parental Alienation Syndrome: Science, Law, and Policy Jennifer Hoult – Children’s Legal Rights Journal, Vol. 26, No. 1, 2006 http://ssrn.com/abstract=910267
paper available at : http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=642440
Parental Alienation Syndrome and Parental Alienation: Getting It Wrong in Child Custody Cases Carol S. Bruch University of California, Davis 35 Family Law Quarterly 527 (2001)
paper available at : http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=228611
Information on Parental Alienation Syndrome: http://ritualabuse.us/research/parental-alienation-syndrome/
Report of the American Psychological Association Presidential Task Force On Violence And The Family – ISSUES AND DILEMMAS IN FAMILY VIOLENCE Issue 5:
http://web.archive.org/web/20000307233013/www.apa.org/pi/pii/familyvio/issue5.html
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review 29:1367-1415 (1994) the Parental Alienation Syndrome: a Dangerous Aura of Reliability Cheri L. Wood: http://fact.on.ca/Info/pas/wood94.htm
Dr. Richard Gardner: A Review of His Theories and Opinions on Atypical Sexuality, Pedophilia, and Treatment Issues by Stephanie J. Dallam, RN, MSN, FNP Reference: Dallam, S. J. (1998). Treating Abuse Today, 8(1), 15-23: http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/1/res/dallam/2.html
http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/1/pas/faq.htm
The Parental Alienation Syndrome: Is It Scientific? by Stephanie J. Dallam, RN, MSN, FNP Dallam, S. J. (1999). In E. St. Charles & L. Crook (Eds.), Expose: The failure of family courts to protect children from abuse in custody disputes . Los Gatos , CA : Our Children Our Children Charitable Foundation.http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/1/res/dallam/3.html
Faller, K. C. (1998). The parental alienation syndrome: What is it and what data support it? Child Maltreatment, 3(2), 100-115: http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/docs/Faller1998.pdf
Parental Alienation Syndrome: What Professionals Need to Know Part 1 of 2 Update – Volume 16, Number 6, 2003 By Erika Rivera Ragland & Hope Fields: http://www.stopfamilyviolence.org/info/custody-abuse/parental-alienation/parental-alienation-syndrome-what-professionals-need-to-know-part-1
Parental Alienation Syndrome: Frye V. Gardner in the Family Courts by Poliacoff, Ph.D., P.A., Greene, Esq., and Smith, Esqhttp://web.archive.org/web/20051124134133/http://www.gate.net/~liz/liz/poliacoff.htm
RICHARD A. GARDNER: IN HIS OWN WORDS “At the present time, the sexually abused child is generally considered to be the victim,” though the child may initiate sexual encounters by ’seducing’ the adult.” Gardner, Richard A., Child Custody Litigation (1986), p.93:
http://web.archive.org/web/20061012010857/http://www.gate.net/~liz/liz/pedoph.htm
Video: Breaking the Silence: Children’s Stories:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lR4pMTwTXg0&feature=related
Trauma Web Resources for Parents, Teachers, and the General Public:
http://endritualabuse.org/links-references/

End Ritual Abuse
The Website of Ellen P. Lacter, Ph.D.

By Judith A. Reisman, Ph.D Kinsey's Research on Children

2012-02-25T14:15:00.002-08:00

By Judith A. Reisman, Ph.D
Kinsey's Research on Children
Not only was Kinsey's research on adult sexuality based on his own homosexual and sadomasochistic perversions, but the data he collected on the alleged sexuality of children were based on brutal sex crimes against children. For example, part of Kinsey's research protocol involved "orgasm" experiments on children, some as young as 2 months of age.
The pedophilic experimenters claimed that the 317 to 2,045 (reports vary) abused infants and children were unharmed by the masturbation, sodomy and rape perpetrated to test these alleged "orgasmic" responses (see: British Yorkshire Television's Kinsey's Pedophiles). On pages 160-161 of Kinsey's Male volume, the children's "screams," their "convulsions," their "hysterical weeping," "fighting," and "striking the partner" (the adult) are judged by Kinsey as reflecting "definite pleasure from the situation."
My book Kinsey: Crimes & Consequences (1998, 2000) details how children were obtained and experimented upon, and how Kinsey used such child sex experimental data as part of an on-going collegial, cross-cultural, multinational, "fact-finding" research project. For example, some of Kinsey's data was derived from sexual experiments performed on children by Dr. von Balluseck, a Nazi collaborator in Germany who Kinsey described as an educated man of a "scientific bent."2 It should be noted that Kinsey corresponded with Dr. von Balluseck during a time in history when Nazis were conducting similar human experiments en masse.
Based on his allegedly scientific data, Kinsey claimed that children enjoyed sex and the real harm of adult-child sex stemmed from "hysterical" parents, teachers and professionals who reacted with anger and horror to children's disclosures. Based on his findings, many legislatures lightened or eliminated penalties for sexual offenses -- reversing the judiciary's traditional leniency toward women as the "weaker sex" in cases of sex abuse and betrayal, and toward children as "victims" in cases of incest and child molestation. Since this time, the courts have been increasingly distrustful and punishing of victimized women and children.
http://www.drjudithreisman.com/archives/2005/08/implications_of.html

excerpt This is the basis of "PAS" and the strongest reason why PAS is not valid.

2012-02-25T12:40:00.000-08:00

Leadership Council member, Stephanie Dallam, has written some of the best articles exposing Gardner & PAS as pro-incest. Look for the section titled "Therapy for the Mother", in which Gardner offers the disgusting advice to therapists treating an "incest" family. Gardner says the mother should be encouraged to use a vibrator so the father won't have to seek sex from his daughter. Most of what Gardner writes actually justifies incest and blames the problem on the mother or the victimized child. This is the basis of "PAS" and the strongest reason why PAS is not valid.
http://leadershipcouncil.org/1/pas/dv.html