Malpractice & Licensing Pitfalls for Therapists: A Defense Attorney's List Brandt Caudill, Jr., Esq.
Excerpts section
Use of Inappropriate Syndrome Testimony
As early as September of 1989 Dr. Gary Melton and Susan Limber in an article entitled "Psychologists' Involvement in Cases of Child Maltreatment" [American Psychologist Vol. 44, No. 9, pp. 1225-1233] commented on the inappropriate use by therapists of syndromes that are not found in the various versions of Diagnosis and Statistical Manual. There have been a proliferation of such syndromes over the last several years. At this point using syndromes which are not appropriately researched or acknowledged by the profession is below the standard of care. Among the syndromes which are controversial and which should not be represented as accepted in the therapist community are Child Sexual Abuse Accommodation Syndrome, Parental Alienation Syndrome, [Wiederholt v. Fischer 169 WIS 2d 524, 45 N.W. 2d 442 (1992)], False Memory Syndrome, and Malicious Mother Syndrome. http://www.kspope.com/ethics/malpractice.php
Richard gardner is the inventor of parental alienation
Comparison of Gardner 's Views with Those of NAMBLA
The North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) is a political, civil rights and educational organization that advocates sex between adult males and male children. Mary De Young (1989), associate professor of sociology at Grand Valley State University , outlined the arguments used by NAMBLA to justify, normalize, and/or rationalize sex between adults and children. NAMBLA members were found to utilize four major strategies: denial of injury; condemnation of the condemners; appeal to higher loyalties; and denial of the victim. Although literature by NAMBLA is not cited by Gardner , similar strategies are mirrored throughout his writings (See Figure 1).
Did n.a.m.b.l.a cite Richard Gardner parental alienation inventor in their reading list? I think yes " from 1993-2015" warning we do not support clicking on these links https://sites.google.com/site/parentalalienationinventor/home/did-n-a-m-b-a-cite-richard-gardner/didnamblaciterichardgardnerparentalalienationinventorintheirreadinglistithinkyes
Implications of the Kinsey Reports on Child Custody Cases
How Junk Sex Science Created a Paradigm Shift in Society, Legislation and the Judiciary
By Judith A. Reisman, Ph.D.
See section "State Legislation"
"Texas: A Case Study
Many women have testified under oath regarding the forced removal of their children based on the scientifically inept theory of Parental Alienation Syndrome promulgated by Kinseyan-adherent Richard Gardner and his disciples. This suggests that few judges have read the following excerpt from the report of the Attorney General's Task Force on Family Violence.
Judges should treat incest and molestation as serious criminal offenses.... Incarceration, whether in hospitals, treatment centers or prisons, is absolutely essential to the protection of the nation's children. The only true protection for children from a pedophile is incapacitation of the offender."25
2012 Division 56 of the American Psychological Association
TRAUMA PSYCHOLOGY NEWSLETTER Our Children Are At Risk and Their Health Is Endangered:
What Are Their Legal Rights, How Do We Hold the Courts Accountable to Protect Them, and What Can Psychologists Do?
Toby Kleinman, JD starts on page 6 Excerpts page 7 5th paragraph left side
"Made-up syndromes and other theories of conjecture such as PAS and estrangement are often used
as though they were relevant to determining whether or not a child has been abused. These self-identified
experts fail to testify that the best way to determine abuse is through an interview with the child; neither
do they testify that accepted practice does not require an interview with the accused parent. Despite the fact
that there is no scientific evidence for PAS, these experts present alienation and/or estrangement as though they were alternative hypotheses to the actual occurrence of abuse. There is no science to show that either alienation of a child from a parent or estrangement between the two is even relevant to the issue of abuse. It is well settled that interview and examination of children themselves are the best determinants for whether or not abuse has occurred—indeed, it is not even necessary to evaluate the named offending parent. But psychologists who raise these alternatives often disparage the child’s own voice and the accuracy of a child’s report of abuse. "
Reason 15 National District Attorneys Association
NATIONAL CENTER FOR PROSECUTION OF CHILD ABUSE
Volume 16, Number 6, 2003 Parental Alienation Syndrome: What Professionals Need to Know Part 1 of 2
By Erika Rivera Ragland 1 & Hope Fields2
Excerpts section" Other Weaknesses: Lack of Peer Review and Recognition by DSM-IV"
Dr. Gardner mostly self-published and thus did not generally subject his theory to the peer review process.17 Moreover, PAS is not recognized by any professional associations,18 including the American Psychiatric Association. PAS is also not included within the DSM-IV.
It is also worth noting that Dr. Gardner often expressed disdain for child abuse professionals, labeling them “validators,” theorizing that greed and desire for increased business prompted some sexual abuse allegations, and speculating that parents and professionals alike made some false allegations because “all of us have some pedophilia within us.”19 http://www.ndaa.org/ncpca_update_v16_no6.html
National District Attorneys Association
NATIONAL CENTER FOR PROSECUTION OF CHILD ABUSE
Volume 16, Number 7, 2003 Parental Alienation Syndrome: What Professionals Need to Know Part 2 of 2
By Hope Fields1 & Erika Rivera Ragland2
Excerpts see section Conclusion
"PAS is an unproven theory that can threaten the integrity of the criminal justice system and the safety of abused children. Prosecutors should educate themselves about PAS and be prepared to argue against its admission in court. In cases where PAS testimony is admitted, it is a prosecutor’s responsibility to educate the judge and jury about the shortfalls of this theory. As more criminal courts refuse to admit PAS evidence, more protection will be afforded to victims of sexual abuse in our court system."http://www.ndaa.org/ncpca_update_v16_no7.html
Criminal Rewards: The Impact of Parent Alienation Syndrome on Families Andraé L. Brown
Excerpts section "Call to Advocacy page 395
If you are not familiar with families who are involved in PAS cases, you may not believe
that these types of egregious acts occur. While listening to the stories of women and children,
I have felt overwhelmed and dumbfounded because the deck seems to be stacked
against truth and justice. Ironically, the horrific abuses that occur in the marital relationship
are comparable to the systematic oppression that is sanctioned by the state through the family
courts after divorce. The legal system and its officers create kangaroo courts in which
civil liberties and human rights are arbitrarily violated (Waller, Waller, & Shin, 2001).
There is no oversight and accountability for judges, lawyers, and mental health professionals
who collude with the batterers and abusers.
The need for a nationwide policy that bans PAS from family courts is long overdue. In
2006, the National Organization of Women moved toward this goal by denouncing PAS and
resolving that any professional whose mission involves the protection of the rights of
women and children denounce its use as unethical, unconstitutional, and dangerous. Social
workers and other social justice advocates who are compelled to take action should, therefore,
educate themselves about the perils of PAS and validate the experiences of, and create
safe spaces, for victims of this oppression to speak their truth. Furthermore, there must
be a concerted effort to challenge the agents of the family courts and mental health professionals
to stop perpetuating the abuse and violence against women and children. This is a
call for advocacy and social change. Silence by social workers and other change agents
maintains the status quo and emboldens the proponents of PAS. The abuse demonstrated in
the Baldwin–Basinger case only scratches the surface of what happens in the lives of families
of all ethnic and socioeconomic levels across the United States. Outcry, critique, and
debate must be linked to accountability, empowerment, and action to achieve social justice.
To be clear, PAS is not a legitimate diagnosis and should not be admitted into the courts.
Overwhelmingly, it is used against mothers to raise suspicions of their psychosis and unfitness
as parents. Users of this strategy do not seek custody for the safety and welfare of children.
Instead, their sole mission is to create a legal shield of protection and silence and an
unobstructed pathway to continue their abuses of power. When PAS is used as a legal strategy
in divorce cases, families are negatively affected; the women are demonized, and the
children are at a grave risk of further abuse."http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/docs/Brown_PAS_impact.pdf
THE “FRIENDLY PARENT” CONCEPT: A FLAWED FACTOR FOR CHILD CUSTODY Margaret K. Dore∗
Excerpts page 47 section B. DOMESTIC VIOLENCE “Domestic violence victims, . . . for the safety of the children and themselves, take active steps to minimize contact and relationships with the abuser.”43 By doing so, these protective parents are more likely to be labeled “unfriendly” so that custody will be awarded to the abusive parent.44 Family law attorney, Richard Ducote, describes this practical effect of the friendly parent concept: The generalization is frightening, but like all broad statements there are many exceptions: After twenty years in family law courtrooms throughout the country, I confidently say that no woman, despite very abundant evidence that her child has been sexually molested by her ex-husband or that she has been repeatedly pummeled by the violent father of her child, can safely walk into any family court in the country and not face a grave risk of losing custody to the abuser for the sole reason that she dared to present the evidence to the judge and ask that the child be protected.45"http://www.thelizlibrary.org/liz/Dore-friendly-parent.pdf
The Evidentiary Admissibility of Parental Alienation Syndrome: Science, Law, and Policy Jennifer Hoult
affiliation not provided to SSRN Children's Legal Rights Journal, Vol. 26, No. 1, 2006
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.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 61
Keywords: Parental alienation syndrome, child abuse, alienation, custody, psychological syndrome, scientific evidence
2009 A Historical Perspective on Parental Alienation Syndrome and Parental Alienation Joan S. Meier excerpts page 238 last paragraph-239 "Proposed Remedies for PAS. Gardner’s ‘‘remedies’’ for ‘‘severe PAS’’ are draconian and extreme and include total cut-off of the child’s contact with the mother, as well as, ‘‘de-programming’’ the child through a concerted
brainwashing effort to change the child’s beliefs that they have been abused (Bruch, 2001; Gardner 1992a). Even putting aside the ‘‘tyrannical’’ quality of such proposals (Johnston & Kelly, 2004a), they can be more traumatic than the ills they purport to cure. In more than one case children subjected to
these procedures have become suicidal—and in some cases died—in reaction to court orders to live with the father they believed abused them (Bruch; Hoult, 2006). In other cases, courts have ordered children into jail and juvenile homes as part of the ‘‘threat therapy’’ Gardner recommended, which is a stock in trade of strict alienation psychologists (Hoult; Johnston & Kelly, 2004a). In one such case: A judge ordered a frail 9 year old boy seized by three police officers and placed in a juvenile detention facility when he refused to get into his 238 J. S. Meier Downloaded By: [Leslie M. Drozd, Ph.D.] At: 20:37 20 August 2009 father’s car for a scheduled visitation. The son of the father’s girlfriend
had sexually abused the boy, and he had also witnessed the father’s violence against his mother. After three days of abuse by the other boys in the detention facility, the boy agreed to cooperate with the court order. The judge concluded that his ‘‘treatment’’ for parental alienation had worked (Stark, 2007a).
2009 A Historical Perspective on Parental Alienation Syndrome and Parental Alienation Joan S. Meier
The Danger of Pedophilia Preying on America’s Innocent Chris Reeveshttp://www.truthmagazine.com/archives/volume44/V44020307.htm
excerpts " Psychiatry and Psychology Experts. Pedophiles looking to find some “expert” to condone their behavior as “normal” will often turn to the institutions of psychiatry and psychology. For example, many pedophiles refer to a 1998 article by the American Psychological Association (APA) claiming that sex between adults and children can actually be positive for “willing” children. The same article proposes that we drop the terms “child abuse,” “molestation,” “victims” and “adult-child sex” when discussing this issue. This article was later modified by the APA, but many pedophiles continue to appeal to it to promote their actions. One psychologist, Dr. Michael Werthmeimer (member of the APA), believes that pedophilia is not harmful to the child. Dr. Richard Gardner, a child psychiatrist at Columbia University, believes that all forms of deviant sexual behavior should be acceptable, including adult-child sex, sex with the dead, sex with animals, and even sex with defecation. Of course, pedophiles make it a point to interview and quote from “experts” like Werthmeimer and Gardner.11" The Danger of Pedophilia Preying on America’s Innocent Chris Reeveshttp://www.truthmagazine.com/archives/volume44/V44020307.htm
Overview of Dr. Richard Gardner's Opinions on Pedophilia and Child Sexual Abuse http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/1/pas/RAG.html
Richard A. Gardner, M.D., is the creator of the creator and main proponent for Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) theory. Prior to his suicide, Gardner was an unpaid part-time clinical professor of child psychiatry at the College of Physicians and Surgeons at Columbia University . He made his money mainly as a forensic expert.
PAS was developed by Dr Richard Gardner in 1985 based on his personal observations and work as an expert witness, often on behalf of fathers accused of molesting their children. Gardner asserted that PAS is very common and he saw manifestations of this syndrome in over 90% of the custody conflicts he evaluated--even when abuse allegations are not raised (Gardner, 1987, p. 67).1 Gardner (September 6, 1993) claimed that PAS is "a disorder of children, arising almost exclusively in child-custody disputes, in which one parent (usually the mother) programs the child to hate the other parent (usually the father)."2
Gardner 's theory of PAS has had a profound effect on how the court systems in our country handle allegations of child sexual abuse, especially during divorce. Gardner has authored more than 250 books and articles with advice directed towards mental health professionals, the legal community, divorcing adults and their children. Gardner 's private publishing company, Creative Therapeutics, published his many books, cassettes, and videotapes.3 Information available on Gardner 's website indicates that he has been certified to testify as an expert in approximately 400 cases, both criminal and civil, in more than 25 states.4 Gardner 's work continues to serve as a basis for decisions affecting the welfare of children in courtrooms across the nation. He is considered a leading authority in family courts and has even been described as the "guru" of child custody evaluations.4 Because Gardner 's PAS theory is based on his clinical observations--not scientific data--it must be understood in the context of his extreme views concerning women, pedophilia and child sexual abuse." see Gardner on the sexual aggressiveness of children Gardner suggests that children want to have sex with adults and may seduce them. Some children experience " high sexual urges in early infancy. " "There is good reason to believe that most, if not all, children have the capacity to reach orgasm at the time they are born."Gardner, R.A. (1992). True and False Accusations of Child Sex Abuse . Cresskill, NJ: Creative Therapeutics. (p. 15) Children are naturally sexual and may initiate sexual encounters by "seducing" the adult . Gardner, R.A. (1986). Child Custody Litigation: A Guide for Parents and Mental Health Professionals. Cresskill, NJ: Creative Therapeutics (p. 93). If the sexual relationship is discovered, " the child is likely to fabricate so that the adult will be blamed for the initiation ." Gardner, R.A. (1986). Child Custody Litigation: A Guide for Parents and Mental Health Professionals. Cresskill, NJ: Creative Therapeutics (p. 93). "The normal child exhibits a wide variety of sexual fantasies and behaviors, many of which would be labeled as 'sick' or 'perverted' if exhibited by adults" Gardner, R.A. (1991). Sex Abuse Hysteria: Salem Witch Trials Revisited . Cresskill, NJ: Creative Therapeutics. (p. 12) Sex abuse is not necessarily traumatic; the determinant as to whether sexual molestation will be traumatic to the child, is the social attitude toward these encounters. Gardner, R.A. (1992). True and False Accusations of Child Sex Abuse . Cresskill, NJ: Creative Therapeutics. (pp. 670-71)
The Parental Alienation Syndrome:
Is It Scientific?
by Stephanie J. Dallam, RN, MSN, FNP
Dallam, S. J. (1999). Parental Alienation Syndrome: Is it scientific? 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.
Excerpts see section Conclusions
In spite of its many shortcomings, many courts have accepted PAS because it apparently appears to explain a well-recognized phenomenon within custody battles - the often acrimonious fight between parents for their child's affection. However, Daubert demands that scientists conduct competent science before becoming paid experts. Gardner 's PAS theory and his various scales to differentiate true and false claims of child sexual abuse are not informed by science and have been discredited by his peers. Rather than subjecting his theories to scientific review, most of Gardner 's writings are published through his own press or in nonscientific journals. Because Gardner 's theories are based on his clinical observations and not on scientific data, they must be understood in the context of his atypical views concerning pedophilia and child sexual abuse.
Gardner 's theories are based on his assumption that sex between a child and an adult is not inherently harmful, and his belief that there is an epidemic of false sexual abuse allegations being made by vengeful wives during custody disputes. Gardner maintains these beliefs in spite of a wealth of clinical and experimental data which prove otherwise. This is not to imply that such allegations are always accurate, or that parents do not attempt to manipulate their children during adversarial custody litigation. However, Gardner 's theories are not sufficiently scientific to be able to make cause and effect determinations, are biased against women and children, and are flawed by their failure to take into account alternative explanations for the behavior of the parties involved.
Frustration over bitter custody battles should not tempt the legal system to blindly accept unproven theories such as PAS. Reliance on such simplified approaches to the complex problem of alleged abuse in the context of child custody disputes is likely to result in misdiagnosis and a failure to protect children. High conflict divorces take an emotional toll on children, and this toll should not be exacerbated through the use of "junk science" which may wrongly deny children a relationship with the parent who has heretofore been their primary caretaker. In the end, all psychological evidence upon which a child's safety will turn should represent the best that science has to offer, not one man's unsupported opinions and assumptions.
National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges
Family Violence Department http://www.ncjfcj.org/sites/default/files/judicial%20guide_0_0.pdf
Excerpts page 12-13 "C. [§3.3] A Word of Caution about Parental Alienation34
Under relevant evidentiary standards, the court should not accept testimony regarding
parental alienation syndrome, or “PAS.” The theory positing the existence of PAS has been
discredited by the scientific community. 35 In Kumho Tire v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137 (1999),
the Supreme Court ruled that even expert testimony based in the “soft sciences” must meet
the standard set in the Daubert case. 36 Daubert, in which the court re-examined the
standard it had earlier articulated in the Frye 37 case, requires application of a multi-factor
test, including peer review, publication, testability, rate of error, and general acceptance.
PAS does not pass this test. Any testimony that a party to a custody case suffers from the
syndrome or “parental alienation” should therefore be ruled inadmissible and stricken from
the evaluation report under both the standard established in Daubert and the earlier Frye
standard. 38 The discredited “diagnosis” of PAS (or an allegation of “parental alienation”), quite apart
from its scientific invalidity, inappropriately asks the court to assume that the child’s
behaviors and attitudes toward the parent who claims to be “alienated” have no grounding
in reality. It also diverts attention away from the behaviors of the abusive parent, who may
have directly influenced the child’s responses by acting in violent, disrespectful,
intimidating, humiliating, or discrediting ways toward the child or the other parent. The
task for the court is to distinguish between situations in which the child is critical of one
parent because they have been inappropriately manipulated by the other (taking care not to
rely solely on subtle indications), and situations in which the child has his or her own
legitimate grounds for criticism or fear of a parent, which will likely be the case when that
parent has perpetrated domestic violence. Those grounds do not become less legitimate
because the abused parent shares them, and seeks to advocate for the child by voicing his
Navigating Custody & Visitation Evaluations
in Cases with Domestic Violence:
A Judge’s Guide http://www.thelizlibrary.org/liz/NCFCJ-guidebook.pdf
Excerpts page 24 Excerpts Parental Alienation and the Daubert Standard: on Syndromes and Behaviors
In contested custody cases, children may indeed express fear of, be concerned about,
have distaste for, or be angry at one of their parents. Unfortunately, an all too common
practice in such cases is for evaluators to diagnose children who exhibit a very strong
bond and alignment with one parent and, simultaneously, a strong rejection of the other
parent, as suffering from “parental alienation syndrome” or “PAS”.52 Under relevant evidentiary
standards, the court should not accept this testimony.
The theory positing the existence of “PAS” has been discredited by the scientific community.
53 In Kumho Tire v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137 (1999), the Supreme Court ruled that even
expert testimony based in the “soft sciences” must meet the standard set in the Daubert54
case. Daubert, in which the Court re-examined the standard it had earlier articulated in the
Frye55 case, requires application of a multi-factor test, including peer review, publication,
testability, rate of error, and general acceptance. “Parental Alienation Syndrome” does not
pass this test. Any testimony that a party to a custody case suffers from the syndrome or
“parental alienation” should therefore be ruled inadmissible and/or stricken from the
evaluation report under both the standard established in Daubert and the earlier Frye
standard.56
The discredited “diagnosis” of “PAS” (or allegation of “parental alienation”), quite apart
from its scientific invalidity, inappropriately asks the court to assume that the children’s
behaviors and attitudes toward the parent who claims to be “alienated” have no grounding
in reality. It also diverts attention away from the behaviors of the abusive parent, who
may have directly influenced the children’s responses by acting in violent, disrespectful,
intimidating, humiliating and/or discrediting ways toward the children themselves, or the
children’s other parent. The task for the court is to distinguish between situations in which
children are critical of one parent because they have been inappropriately manipulated by
the other (taking care not to rely solely on subtle indications), and situations in which children
have their own legitimate grounds for criticism or fear of a parent, which will likely
be the case when that parent has perpetrated domestic violence. Those grounds do not become less legitimate because the abused parent shares them, and seeks to advocate for
the children by voicing their concerns. http://www.thelizlibrary.org/liz/NCFCJ-guidebook.pdf
Myth 5: Parental alienation syndrome is a common, well-documented phenomenon.
Those who buy into the myth that mothers frequently raise false allegations of abuse may attempt to explain this phenomenon by relying on a legal theory called Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS). Some suggest that the theory is based on science, and that PAS is a well-documented phenomenon .
Although estrangement from one or both parents can occur in children during an acrimonious divorce, Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) lacks a scientific foundation and has never been shown to be a valid explanation of this process. In fact, Dr. Richard Gardner, the theory's creator, developed his theory while working as a paid consultant to men charged with sexually abusing their children. Thus, the syndrome was created as a defense theory to counter a child's allegation of sexual abuse (Dallam, 1999).
Gardner defines PAS as follows:
The parental alienation syndrome (PAS) is a disorder that arises primarily in the context of child custody disputes. Its primary manifestation is the child's campaign of denigration against a parent, a campaign that has no justification. It results from the combination of a programming (brainwashing) parent's indoctrinations and the child's own contributions to the vilification of the target parent . . .
Gardner defines PAS as a psychiatric disorder that arises in the course of child-custody disputes adjudicated in the context of adversarial proceedings. Gardner's theory portrays the child's preferred or protective parent (usually the mother under PAS) as an evil "alienator" who is virtually solely responsible for turning a vulnerable child against their estranged parent (usually the father under PAS). The child is thus viewed as mentally ill and the "alienating' protective parent (for example, a mother that raises concerns about abuse) is viewed as the sole cause of the disorder. When this parent is judged to be in the "severe" category, Dr. Gardner recommended sole custody to the other parent - the parent that the child claims is abusing them. Thus, the main cure for this alleged mental illness is for the child to be placed in greater contact with an alleged abuser while their contact with the protective parent is curtailed or halted altogether.
It should be pointed out that Gardner never submitted his theory to testing and it has never been shown to be a valid syndrome. Despite these shortcomings, PAS has gained traction in the courts as it fits well with court's friendly parent preference. Moreover, some courts have accepted PAS because it apparently appears to explain a well-recognized phenomenon within custody battles - the often acrimonious fight between parents for their child's affection.
Unfortunately, Parental Alienation Syndrome, like the friendly parent concept it is based upon, presents the court with a paradox that seems to undermine rational decision-making when considering the best interests of children. With PAS theory, the concerned custodial parent's steps to obtain professional assistance in diagnosing, treating, and protecting the child, constitute evidence of "alienation." Attorney Richard Ducote (2002) noted:
"One irony of . . . 'PAS' is that the increased existence of valid evidence of true sexual abuse leads Gardner and his devotees to more fervently diagnose 'PAS.' Thus, 'PAS' is the criminal defense attorney's dream, since the greater the proof of the crime, the greater the proof of the defense." http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/1/res/cust_myths.html
Dr. Richard Gardner: A Review of His Theories and Opinions
on Atypical Sexuality, Pedophilia, and Treatment Issues
Reference: Dallam, S. J. (1998). Dr. Richard Gardner: A review of his theories and opinions on atypical sexuality, pedophilia, and treatment issues. Treating Abuse Today, 8(1), 15-23.
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. Despite Gardner 's emphasis on false allegations of sexual abuse, he admits that genuine sexual abuse of children is widespread and that the vast majority ("probably over 95%") of all sex abuse allegations are valid (Gardner, 1991, p. 7, 140). In fact, Gardner (1992, p. 670) considers sexual activities between adults and children to be a universal phenomenon which exist to a significant degree in every culture in the world. Similarly, "intrafamilial pedophilia (that is, incest) is widespread and ... is probably an ancient tradition" (Gardner, 1991, p. 119).
Gardner (1991, p. 118) suggests that Western society's is "excessively moralistic and punitive" toward pedophiles. Gardner maintains that "the Draconian punishments meted out to pedophiles go far beyond what I consider to be the gravity of the crime." The current prohibition of sex between adults and children is an "overreaction" which Gardner traces to the Jews. It is of interest that of all the ancient peoples it may very well be that the Jews were the only ones who were punitive toward pedophiles. Early Christian proscriptions against pedophilia appear to have been derived from the earlier teachings of the Jews, and our present overreaction to pedophilia represents an exaggeration of Judeo-Christian principles and is a significant factor operative in Western society's atypicality with regard to such activities (Gardner, 1992, pp. 46-7). Gardner (1992, p. 15) states: "There is good reason to believe that most, if not all, children have the capacity to reach orgasm at the time they are born." In addition, some children experience "high sexual urges in early infancy" and "the normal [italics in original] child exhibits a wide variety of sexual fantasies and behaviors, many of which would be labeled as `sick' or `perverted' if exhibited by adults" (Gardner, 1991, p. 12). Gardner (1986, p. 93) notes that "the sexually abused child is generally considered to be the victim," though the child may initiate sexual encounters by "seducing" the adult. Gardner (1986, p. 93) suggests that if the sexual relationship is discovered, "the child is likely to fabricate so that the adult will be blamed for the initiation." The view that pedophilia is a sickness and a crime is a reflection of Western society's present position on this subject. As a product of Western culture, Gardner (1992, p. 49) states: "I too have come to believe that sexual activity between an adult and a child is a reprehensible act. However, I do not believe that it is intrinsically so; in other societies and other times it may not be psychologically detrimental." "The determinant as to whether the experience will be traumatic is the social attitude toward these encounters" (Gardner 1992, pp. 670-1) . http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/1/res/dallam/2.html
Parental Alienation Syndrome & Parental Alienation: Research Reviews
By Joan S. Meier 1 http://www.vawnet.org/assoc_files_vawnet/ar_pasupdate.pdf
Excerpts " Gardner's pro-pedophilic beliefs. Gardner's underlying beliefs regarding human sexuality, including adult-child sexual interaction, are so bizarre that it is hard to believe that courts would have adopted his theory if they were aware of what he had published. For instance, his writings express the view that all human sexual paraphilias (deviant behaviors) "serve the purposes of species survival" by "enhanc[ing] the general level of sexual excitation in society" (Gardner, 1992b, p. 20; see also Hoult, 2006). These sexual behaviors include pedophilia, sadism, rape, necrophilia, zoophilia (sex with animals), coprophilia (sex with feces), and other paraphilias (Gardner, 1992b; see also Dallam, 1998; Hoult, 2006). http://www.vawnet.org/assoc_files_vawnet/ar_pasupdate.pdf
Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS)—Pseudoscientific Theory Used Against Survivors in Court—Is Rejected from the DSM-V
Joan Meier, Professor of Clinical Law, George Washington University Law School
In the last year, it was decided that Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) and its offspring (Parental Alienation Disorder) will not be included in the Fifth Edition of the Physicians’ Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-V). This is very good news for victims of abuse.
PAS or parental alienation (PA) was invented as a quasi-scientific theory to refute allegations of abuse by one parent against another in the context of a custody battle. The theory starts from the obvious premise that separating parents are often derogatory about each other to the children. But the theory spins into ideology when it suggests that where children are reluctant to spend time with their noncustodial father, they have been essentially brainwashed by an “alienating” mother. PAS/PA labeling of the mother is routinely used in court to reverse the focus from whether the abuse claims are true, to the assumption that a mother’s abuse claims are themselves a kind of emotional abuse (i.e., “alienation”). PAS/PA thinking thus is used to not only silence a parent who accuses the other of domestic violence or child sexual or physical abuse but also the children’s own feelings and reports, all of which are attributed to the mother’s nefarious or pathological efforts. Sadly, PAS/PA (and similar) labeling has been implicated in the majority of cases where a court has ordered that an abusive parent be given unsupervised access to children.
Had the DSM-V included PAS or PAD it would have added enormous financial incentives to the already existing financial remuneration for the many mental health professionals who evaluate and testify about parental alienation in custody litigation. The decision by an objective committee of psychiatric researchers and clinicians to keep it out of the DSM-V, the “bible” of psychiatric medicine, because it is not scientifically valid lends momentum to existing scientific critiques of PAS/PA/PAD and should make it at least a little harder for these theories to be misused in court.
Department of Justice Report Demands Custody Court Reforms Part II
http://timesupblog.blogspot.
by Barry Goldstein
Read Part I: CLICK HERE
Using Saunders’ Report to Protect Children
Excerpts see section
Legal Representation
Many protective mothers have complained about their attorneys and often have to change attorneys or represent themselves after an attorney drains her resources and undermines the case. The Saunders’ study confirmed the problem as private attorneys were the least likely professionals to have the necessary domestic violence training. We often see abusers and other court attorneys seek to use the fact that the mother has had a series of attorneys to suggest there is something wrong or uncooperative about her when it is actually a reflection of the difficulty in finding an attorney willing to present a strong domestic violence case.
Excerpts see section
Challenging Evaluators
If the evaluator issues a report based on PAS or even alienation, there is strong research in the Saunders’ study to challenge it. We can start by asking the evaluator if he agrees that sex between adults and children is improper. Then ask if there is any research not based on the belief that sex between adults and children can be appropriate (this is what PAS is based on), that “alienating” behavior creates a safety risk. Are you aware the DOJ study found that PAS, including by any other name has no scientific basis? Are you aware PAS was rejected for inclusion in the DSM-V because it has no scientific basis? Are you aware that the Saunders’ study found that evaluators with inadequate training tended to believe the myth that women frequently make false allegations but alienation theories, particularly those used to separate children from their primary attachment figure are based on a belief that most dv and child abuse allegations by mothers are false? Are you aware that evaluators are starting to lose their licenses for using PAS? Do you know if that is because they are in affect creating a diagnosis that does not exist? You can also ask questions comparing the harm of separating a child from their primary attachment figure with the harm of negative statements about the other parent. Ask for any research findings because there is no scientific support for these standard biased practices.
Source checking " concocted Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) -- a legal defense of child molesters -- as the means to conceal a pedophile "ring" operating through family courts" https://sites.google.com/site/parentalalienationinventor/home/source-checking-concocted-parental-alienation-syndrome-pas----a-legal-defense-of-child-molesters----as-the-means-to-conceal-a-pedophile-ring-operating-through-family-courts
COMMENTARY ABOUT THE FEDERALLY FUNDED STUDY TO MEASURE PORN AROUSAL
by Cindy Ross © December 31, 2002 Excerpts
“Another key link between the NIH female sexual arousal study and the 'closet' pedophile agenda, is Michael Lamb of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. Lamb, who heads the Section on Social and Emotional Development, is closely affiliated with the pro-pedophilia "experts" whose materials are used by fathers' group members in their own court cases. Lamb writing's may give the appearance of neutrality, but they are carefully crafted to provide justification for disqualifying evidence of pedophilia. 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. .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. While he is considered the "custody guru" of the fathers' rights movement, his actual agenda is the normalization of sexual paraphilias: See IPT Journal - "A Theory About the Variety of Human Sexual Behavior" (Note that this article is posted at Underwager's website.) “Lamb uses materials developed by Underwager and Gardner in his NIH studies, including in his work with Joan Kelly regarding "parenting time" and "alienation". See "Overnight Parenting Time With Infants". See University of Virginia news story. Kelly is a founding official of CRC. She is also an Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) affiliated "mediator" who teaches PAS to judges and "special masters" (mediators with quasi-judicial authority) and sets up PAS custody switching programs in courts across the country, which (mis)use federal Access to Visitation Enforcement Program funding. Since both McElroy and Lamb both are affiliated with the pedophile psychological movement and the fathers' rights groups that promote sex in the guise of "custody resolution", it is very likely they are also the "instigators" of the female sexual arousal study. This toxic mix of women who want more access to pornography, men who want more cover up theories for child sex abuse and psychologists who specialize in pathologizing mothers' attempts to protect their children, could easily lead to federally funded programs which validate pornography as positive and healthy. This terrible infiltration of sexual deviance into government programs, especially through the Department of Health and Human Services, needs to be thoroughly investigated by Congress. “ https://sites.google.com/site/parentalalienationinventor/home/source-checking-concocted-parental-alienation-syndrome-pas----a-legal-defense-of-child-molesters----as-the-means-to-conceal-a-pedophile-ring-operating-through-family-courts
A LIFE SENTENCE * http://www.consciousbeingalliance.com/2012/05/a-life-sentence-family-courts-sacrificing-mothers-and-children-in-america
U.S. FAMILY COURTS SACRIFICING MOTHERS & CHILDREN
Family Courts Behind an Epidemic of Pedophilia & Judicial Abuse
keith harmon snow
First publication: 01 May 2012
Edits & Revision: 03 May 2012
Edits & Revision: 17 May 2012
( * The article's original title "SCREW THE BITCH" -- based on a book designed to destroy protective mothers -- was unacceptably offensive to the author. Revision on May 17 was to clarify 'Father's Manifesto' vs. 'Father's Rights'.)
A five month investigation reveals an epidemic of violence and corruption facilitated by Family Courts in the United States. Children all over the United States are being taken from their protective mothers and delivered to abusers. Behind this epidemic of judicial abuse are organized networks involved in racketeering and corruption, channeling and disappearing billions of dollars of U.S. taxpayers money every year. Insurance companies are being defrauded by medical and mental health professionals rewarded handsomely for producing quack studies that criminalize loving mothers and protect abusive fathers. With clear evidence of racketeering and corruption, high court judges and insider lawyers use and abuse the Family Courts system to destroy protective mothers and deliver life sentences of suffering to innocent children. Rich, poor, middle-class... No child in America is safe. http://www.consciousbeingalliance.com/2012/05/a-life-sentence-family-courts-sacrificing-mothers-and-children-in-america
