Powerful piece. I have a dream too... about people who are interested in solving the problems instead of lighting the fires & joining the "Fight Clubs." Where are they Andrew? To those who have tried to deny the existence of Parental Alienation (both within divorce & outside of divorce) I say stories of this horrific type of child abuse can be seen in every generation; it's on popular TV comedy shows ("Everybody Loves Raymond"/Season 8/Episode 13); and in songs & movies (Drew Barrymore's "Irreconcilable Differences" -- and it's been around since Biblical times with the story of "King Solomon's True Mother" -- Two "Parents" - both claiming to be the "True Mother (Parent)" provokes King Solomon to state he will "...cut the baby in half to solve the problem!" And instantaneously the "Real, True Mother (Parent)" sacrifices her own heart INSTEAD of her child's by pleading to King Solomon that she will "give up her baby so it may live instead of die..." Problem solved... by a King... of Hearts... who also had a pretty good brain... Where are all the "Kings" and "Queen Solomon's" in today's world? Again, "He who solves the problem... truly reigns Supreme..."
QUESTION: Would it be possible at all... in any way... to have Judges require "real life observation video cams" within the homes of those parents being accused of child abuse and/or alienation? Like King Solomon's "True Mother" who had to choose from an extreme, no-win choice, why can't there be a way to carefully figure out how to have video cams (as many already do in their homes) to observe behaviors that are potentially dangerous/neglectful/toxic to children? Extreme? Absolutely! An invasion of privacy? Absolutely! But isn't the cost of protecting your child from the traumas of abuse/neglect/alienation worth the "King Solomon's Sacrifice?" Obviously it would need to be carefully set with protective but logical boundaries (no cams in bathrooms for example)... but isn't there a need to do whatever it takes to protect generations of children? And would it be worth the loss of privacy? Extreme!? Yes! But so is a lost lifetime... So is child abuse that can change the trajectory of a child's future life…
I don't think this would solve the issue. Abusers are masters at performative behaviors and alienated kids are very capable of stirring up trouble to make the accused parent look bad.
So very true. Realistically speaking, what are the odds that the PA experts -- (court appointed & those not court appointed) -- might be able to see through any of these fake performance tactics to protect alienated/abused children? What are the odds that even just the "psychological threat" of toxic, bad behaviors being exposed instead of being hidden behind closed doors, could somehow push back on the toxic parent(s) so they would be on their "best fake" behavior? Like you said: Abusers are masters at performative behaviors -- so maybe in some cases it would be "enough" (and sadly... maybe that's the best we can hope for with children who have abusive and/or alienating parent(s))? Or is this just wishful, unrealistic thinking?
It would come down to the development of clear protocols by clinicians so that they can be used in court as a measurable way to discern whether alienation is occurring. However, legal change is a slow process and requires a lot of networking, awareness, and community support.
This is why I prefer to support parents by providing them the tools to take action now, because waiting for legal change is too circumstantial.
Forgive me if I keep recycling this old idea of being pre-emptive with child abuse... To prevent child abuse, toxic-abusive families; divorce, generational traumas, etc., why not require in-depth pre-marital education & screening in order to be granted a marriage license at the state level? What's wrong with the concept of having to "earn a marriage license?" There are "pre-nuptial agreements" but do they really prevent child abuse? You have to "earn & pass" a drivers license "test"... even a fishing license! Wouldn't in-depth pre-marital "screening" help the odds that children might grow up in a healthier (or healthy enough) family household, maybe even preventing some child abuse like PA from happening? Maybe state-level changes to granting "marriage licenses" might be a faster lane to reach lower levels of child abuse? Why not require -- (or maybe initially implement it on a voluntary basis) -- that in order to be granted a marriage license, couples go through an in-depth, intense "Marriage Programs?" The couple might receive everything from written educational materials/books/webinars/etc. on recognizing/preventing child abuse (like PA); domestic abuse; financial protection & education; screening for mental illness, etc. Not everyone is good at being a real life partner... realistically speaking. Why not require both individual and couples therapy & screening in order to set up the marriage they personally want? Most important: why not have the couple go down worksheet checklists of questions/agreements between them, knowing that these issues can and will change in the future? Everything from having children to what they would do if XYZ happened to them, etc. so they can AT THE VERY LEAST speculate and be prepared for "real life in a real marriage?" And maybe even SPECT Brain Scans might help eliminate (at least some) of those without a conscience/aka psychopaths, sociopaths... along with those future parents who are willing to hurt their own children intentionally.... What's wrong with "earning" a Marriage License in order to protect both the couple themselves and esp. their future children? (PS... please do not show this premise to any state bar nor divorce attorneys... lol)
From a legal standpoint, you would have to consider:
1. What would be the standard for this protocol?
2. Who would enforce it?
And then you have to worry about how results could be faked such that a marriage certificate is issued regardless of the protocol.
Additionally, there are countless resources readily available in the form of relationship content, coaching, counseling, etc. I don't think that mandatory trainings would solve the issue because all it does is put the onus on the government to solve this issue.
Rather, I am a believer in radical self-accountability and that we have to lead by example through personal development and extending our empathy to those who are still learning how to build their relational skills.
QUESTION: Would it be possible at all... in any way... to have Judges require "real life observation video cams" within the homes of those parents being accused of child abuse and/or alienation? Like King Solomon's "True Mother" who had to choose from an extreme, no-win choice, why can't there be a way to carefully figure out how to have video cams (as many already do in their homes) to observe behaviors that are potentially dangerous/neglectful/toxic to children? Extreme? Absolutely! An invasion of privacy? Absolutely! But isn't the cost of protecting your child from the traumas of abuse/neglect/alienation worth the "King Solomon's Sacrifice?" Obviously it would need to be carefully set with protective but logical boundaries (no cams in bathrooms for example)... but isn't there a need to do whatever it takes to protect generations of children? And would it be worth the loss of privacy? Extreme!? Yes! But so is a lost lifetime... So is child abuse that can change the trajectory of a child's future life?
I really love this, Andrew! So many good points backed with great examples. It all resonates and is a post that can be read over and over.
Thank you so much Dana!
Powerful piece. I have a dream too... about people who are interested in solving the problems instead of lighting the fires & joining the "Fight Clubs." Where are they Andrew? To those who have tried to deny the existence of Parental Alienation (both within divorce & outside of divorce) I say stories of this horrific type of child abuse can be seen in every generation; it's on popular TV comedy shows ("Everybody Loves Raymond"/Season 8/Episode 13); and in songs & movies (Drew Barrymore's "Irreconcilable Differences" -- and it's been around since Biblical times with the story of "King Solomon's True Mother" -- Two "Parents" - both claiming to be the "True Mother (Parent)" provokes King Solomon to state he will "...cut the baby in half to solve the problem!" And instantaneously the "Real, True Mother (Parent)" sacrifices her own heart INSTEAD of her child's by pleading to King Solomon that she will "give up her baby so it may live instead of die..." Problem solved... by a King... of Hearts... who also had a pretty good brain... Where are all the "Kings" and "Queen Solomon's" in today's world? Again, "He who solves the problem... truly reigns Supreme..."
Well said. Thank you!
QUESTION: Would it be possible at all... in any way... to have Judges require "real life observation video cams" within the homes of those parents being accused of child abuse and/or alienation? Like King Solomon's "True Mother" who had to choose from an extreme, no-win choice, why can't there be a way to carefully figure out how to have video cams (as many already do in their homes) to observe behaviors that are potentially dangerous/neglectful/toxic to children? Extreme? Absolutely! An invasion of privacy? Absolutely! But isn't the cost of protecting your child from the traumas of abuse/neglect/alienation worth the "King Solomon's Sacrifice?" Obviously it would need to be carefully set with protective but logical boundaries (no cams in bathrooms for example)... but isn't there a need to do whatever it takes to protect generations of children? And would it be worth the loss of privacy? Extreme!? Yes! But so is a lost lifetime... So is child abuse that can change the trajectory of a child's future life…
I don't think this would solve the issue. Abusers are masters at performative behaviors and alienated kids are very capable of stirring up trouble to make the accused parent look bad.
So very true. Realistically speaking, what are the odds that the PA experts -- (court appointed & those not court appointed) -- might be able to see through any of these fake performance tactics to protect alienated/abused children? What are the odds that even just the "psychological threat" of toxic, bad behaviors being exposed instead of being hidden behind closed doors, could somehow push back on the toxic parent(s) so they would be on their "best fake" behavior? Like you said: Abusers are masters at performative behaviors -- so maybe in some cases it would be "enough" (and sadly... maybe that's the best we can hope for with children who have abusive and/or alienating parent(s))? Or is this just wishful, unrealistic thinking?
It would come down to the development of clear protocols by clinicians so that they can be used in court as a measurable way to discern whether alienation is occurring. However, legal change is a slow process and requires a lot of networking, awareness, and community support.
This is why I prefer to support parents by providing them the tools to take action now, because waiting for legal change is too circumstantial.
Forgive me if I keep recycling this old idea of being pre-emptive with child abuse... To prevent child abuse, toxic-abusive families; divorce, generational traumas, etc., why not require in-depth pre-marital education & screening in order to be granted a marriage license at the state level? What's wrong with the concept of having to "earn a marriage license?" There are "pre-nuptial agreements" but do they really prevent child abuse? You have to "earn & pass" a drivers license "test"... even a fishing license! Wouldn't in-depth pre-marital "screening" help the odds that children might grow up in a healthier (or healthy enough) family household, maybe even preventing some child abuse like PA from happening? Maybe state-level changes to granting "marriage licenses" might be a faster lane to reach lower levels of child abuse? Why not require -- (or maybe initially implement it on a voluntary basis) -- that in order to be granted a marriage license, couples go through an in-depth, intense "Marriage Programs?" The couple might receive everything from written educational materials/books/webinars/etc. on recognizing/preventing child abuse (like PA); domestic abuse; financial protection & education; screening for mental illness, etc. Not everyone is good at being a real life partner... realistically speaking. Why not require both individual and couples therapy & screening in order to set up the marriage they personally want? Most important: why not have the couple go down worksheet checklists of questions/agreements between them, knowing that these issues can and will change in the future? Everything from having children to what they would do if XYZ happened to them, etc. so they can AT THE VERY LEAST speculate and be prepared for "real life in a real marriage?" And maybe even SPECT Brain Scans might help eliminate (at least some) of those without a conscience/aka psychopaths, sociopaths... along with those future parents who are willing to hurt their own children intentionally.... What's wrong with "earning" a Marriage License in order to protect both the couple themselves and esp. their future children? (PS... please do not show this premise to any state bar nor divorce attorneys... lol)
From a legal standpoint, you would have to consider:
1. What would be the standard for this protocol?
2. Who would enforce it?
And then you have to worry about how results could be faked such that a marriage certificate is issued regardless of the protocol.
Additionally, there are countless resources readily available in the form of relationship content, coaching, counseling, etc. I don't think that mandatory trainings would solve the issue because all it does is put the onus on the government to solve this issue.
Rather, I am a believer in radical self-accountability and that we have to lead by example through personal development and extending our empathy to those who are still learning how to build their relational skills.
QUESTION: Would it be possible at all... in any way... to have Judges require "real life observation video cams" within the homes of those parents being accused of child abuse and/or alienation? Like King Solomon's "True Mother" who had to choose from an extreme, no-win choice, why can't there be a way to carefully figure out how to have video cams (as many already do in their homes) to observe behaviors that are potentially dangerous/neglectful/toxic to children? Extreme? Absolutely! An invasion of privacy? Absolutely! But isn't the cost of protecting your child from the traumas of abuse/neglect/alienation worth the "King Solomon's Sacrifice?" Obviously it would need to be carefully set with protective but logical boundaries (no cams in bathrooms for example)... but isn't there a need to do whatever it takes to protect generations of children? And would it be worth the loss of privacy? Extreme!? Yes! But so is a lost lifetime... So is child abuse that can change the trajectory of a child's future life?