Karen Woodall – Psychotherapist, Writer, Researcher, Trainer

Alienation of Children in Divorce and Separation: The Hidden Global Child Mental Health Crisis

Written by:

karenwoodall

This week the 53rd session of the United Nations Human Rights Council heard from a special rapporteur on her report entitled Custody cases, violence against women and violence against children. Citing Article 19 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the report refers to the right for the child to be protected from all forms of physical or mental violence, injury, abuse, or maltreatment, including sexual abuse, while in the care of parents.

I contend that far from protecting children from all forms of mental violence and maltreatment in the form of emotional abuse, what the report from this special rapporteur is designed to do, is further the efforts by campaigners, to hide the plight of children who are triangulated into adult matters during divorce and separation. This cross atlantic strategy, which has as its overall goal, the aim of returning the rights of women to have sole control over their children after family separation, is furthered by a narrative which claims that children are being summarily removed from protective innocent mothers and given to abusive fathers. The overall goal of this campaign is to change all legislation governing children of divorce and separation in order to once again fuse the needs of children with the rights of their mothers.

This strategy seeks to re-establish the systemic belief that relationships between fathers and their children are a risk which can only be ameliorated by giving gatekeeping power to mothers. The unintended consequences of the campaign are the mothers whose children reject them due to the influence of abusive fathers, currently these mothers are being repositioned in the narrative, as having been brainwashed by the concept of alienation. We were, for example, informed by the special rapporteur during a ‘side panel’ held on Friday, that there are situations where one parent cuts of contact between a child and their other parent, but rather than using the label ‘parental alienation’ (and all of its derivitives), we must consider this to be coercive control. This clever and well thought out strategy, is designed, I would argue, to deal with the inconvience of those mothers who are rejected by their children and who refuse to be silent about alienation. It is being carried out with great precision.

The foundation stones of the anti alienation campaign, are the testimonies of mothers who are unhappy with family court outcomes. These are being used to ‘evidence’ an argument that mothers who leave relationships because of domestic abuse are being ignored and parental alienation is a trump card played by abusive fathers to further their post separation abuse. A further allegation which has recently appeared, is that normal mothering is pathologised in family court and that therapists like me are using conversion therapy to force alienated children to love their abusive fathers.

Nothing, it would seem, is off limits to achieve campaign aims and claims made( which cannot be verified), include attempts to publicly shame anyone doing this work. Distorted narratives about why children are removed from parents are expressed as being a truth which is hidden from view. What is missing in all of this however, are the real life experiences of children of divorce and separation, who are true victims as well as the objects being utilised in this ongoing meta drama of (s)heroes and villains.

Some background

The struggle to get the issue of emotional and psychological harm of children in divorce and separation recognised is a long and often deeply unpleasant one. Those of you familiar with my work, will know that since 2019 there has been a concerted campaign against the work of the Family Separation Clinic which has featured lurid claims that we conspired with government to bring parental alienation services into the UK. This falsehood and the fabrications which underpin it, has been utilised to do maximum damage to this work (I would argue by putting us under the most psychological pressure possible). This pressure is an ongoing feature of my life. Only recently I opened up my blog to find the following comment waiting for me.

Up yours
04.ferric-best@icloud.com
172.226.0.89		Any comment on the recently published UN recommendations?. The one where they have debunked this absolute junk science you have peddled and profited from by putting children in danger. You should be ashamed of yourself

And a further comment from the same anonymous commentator, unhappy with my response.

Up yours once again
04.ferric-best@icloud.com
172.224.250.157		In reply to karenwoodall.No of course not Karen, as it would go against the junk science you peddle. You keep to your “imagination” and the logical fallacies you peddle. I have a feeling you will be out of a job soon enough.

When I was growing up, anonymous communications of this nature were called ‘poison pen’ letters and were regarded as being something that unwell/angry people with issues did. These days, when those who work to protect children from emotional and psychological harm are regularly being characterised as ‘pedophile sympathisers’, the poison pen element of these comments are mild. And yet this is what we face, daily, for working to raise awareness and protect children from emotional and psychological harm in divorce and separation.

One of the problems we have in trying to raise consciousness of the problems which are experienced by children in divorce and separation, is that the work that we do is not easily understood due to privacy laws in the Family Court. If all judgments were published, The public would recognise that in making decisions to remove children from the care of harmful parents, the family courts are not doing so lightly but in situations where the welfare threshold for serious harm is met. This is the same as when children are being physically and sexually abused and as a society, we don’t passively accept leaving children in those situations. In my view, when the serious and sustained level of emotional and psychological harm to children who become alienated in divorce and separation is properly understood, society will not accept this either. Which is why the publication of all judgments in family court cases all around the world would assist, because when the public can see what is happening, the campaign to hide it will at least be seen for what it is.

A/HRC/53/36: Custody, violence against women and violence against children

The Family Separation Clinic set out concerns about the report of the special rapportuer in a letter to the Chair of the UNHRC 53rd session last week. In it we highlighted that the call for evidence by the special rapporteur, was answered by more than a thousand people/organisations. And yet, since her report was published in April 2023, and despite a promise to publish those submissions, all calls to do so have gone unanswered and ‘facts’ have not been corrected. The lack of transparency in the report, which is furthered by the one sided aim of the side panel held yesterday, confirms that the report of the special rapporteur was always going to arrive at the conclusions it arrived at. In that respect, there is nothing momentous about the events of this week which have simply revealed themselves to be part of the longer term campaign plan. What is concerning however, is that the UNHRC are being so wilfully mislead in the presentation of a distorted narrative.

The campaign to rebrand emotional and psychological harm of children as post separation abuse, says that when children reject parents it is because of coercive control. I think everyone who has ever experienced the problem, understands that coercive control of parents and children lies at the heart of this problem and so this part of the campaign is nothing new. Renaming the problem as post separation coercive control however, leaves the special rapporteur and her campaign groups with one very serious problem and that is this. When you work with children who suffer coercive control to the degree where they align with the controlling parent and reject the other, you can remove the coercive control dynamics and make the children safe, but many even in those circumstances, will continue to profess hatred for the parent they are rejecting. They will also continue to behave exactly as the controlling parent expects them to. That is because this is not just about post separation coercive control, it is also about the children’s attachment maladaptations in the face of that coercive control, maladaptations that cause the child to experience the defence of psychological splitting, despite the removal of control dynamics. That causes children to align with an abuser for far longer than simple interventions can resolve. It causes them to seek to prove their allegiance despite removal, running away, making false allegations, continuing to profess hatred for the parent they are rejecting. I know this because I work with this problem, a problem which is rooted in the attachment system in the mind of the child, which may start out being caused by coercive control dynamics but which is without a doubt not resolved by simply removing them. This is not a problem about contact with a parent, it is a hidden children’s mental health problem and the mothers who are rejected by their children recognise this and understand why the child’s experience must be placed at the heart of this.

The report of the special rapportuer is flawed and she is in my view, simply another in a long line of people in positions of power who have been used to further a campaign to fuse the needs of children with the rights of their mothers so that pathological behaviours and gatekeeping by mothers can be normalised. As someone working with children who align and reject parents daily, I therefore challenge the veracity of the report of the special rapporteur in all of its inaccuracies and omissions, the biggest omission being the harm caused to children in divorce and separation when they become alienated. My concern in doing so, is for the children I have worked with over many years, children whose lives have been blighted by the psychological and emotional harm a parent has caused to them, children whose lived experience has been hidden for far too long.

Children who are alienated from their own authentic sense of self, who are psychologically and emotionally harmed by being triangulated into parental divorce and separation, who are treated as possessions or weapons by their parents, have suffered for decades. Renaming their plight as post separation coercive control won’t change anything for them and if Article 19 on the Convention for the Rights of the Child is to continue to mean anything at all,these children deserve so much more than what was presented to the United Nations on June 22nd 2023.

25 responses to “Alienation of Children in Divorce and Separation: The Hidden Global Child Mental Health Crisis”

  1. Victoria

    Thank you for doing the work you do Karen, being a voice to those who are voiceless and for always keeping the children in mind.

    Like

    Reply
    1. karenwoodall

      Sending my love and support to you Victoria. K

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply
  2. Addy Richardson Goodrose

    Keep up the good work, Karen. Personally, I have both experienced DV by a spouse myself and lived with parental alienation as a child— mostly while my parents were still married. My mother had severe issues. She refused mental health advice and treatment, and instead projected her issues onto my dad in such an obvious way that even doctors advised Dad to leave her. The terror of my childhood was at mother’s hands. My anger at my father stems from him not leaving her, and not protecting us kids, and the psychological backbends he engaged in to justify it all. My mother? Pure evil that only got worse over time. She sexually abused my brother, in front of me and my sister. She beat us, starved us, denied us medical care. Dad tried for us, and acted for us, sometimes, but not enough. She punished him in shocking ways when he did. Later in life, when my mother became my grandmother’s caretaker, she abused her too. A frail, old woman was beaten, degraded, and stolen from by her own daughter. We tried to intervene. Again, mother hid successfully behind cultural norms and stereotypes. Like all abusers, abusive women twist gender norms and standards of behavior to their advantage.

    I do completely understand the perspective of Feminists and the DV victims advocacy groups because I’ve been there. So, I’ve experienced both of these strange worlds first hand. But here’s the thing: Feminists and DV advocates have to open their eyes to the fact that this is a human issue, not just a gender issue. We could make huge progress if we stop dividing the world into male and female, and start approaching it as sorted by character and actions. Yes, historically men have had most of the power and casually and consistently abused that power. As terrible as that was and is, it doesn’t mean that there weren’t ever women who were cruel, troubled people in their own right. It also doesn’t mean that there weren’t and aren’t very good men out there who are excellent, loving fathers who really are better suited as parents than their child’s mother. Even if it were true that all female dysfunction is caused by the influence of some male action (it isn’t), nobody has the right to harm anyone else. The excuse used by some women that their out of control behaviors are justified because of things that have happened to them are just wrong-headed. Regardless of the social dynamics of power, abuse and cruelty at an individual level are a different matter. Too many abusive, cruel women hide behind the traditional systems of male dominated culture to remain unchallenged in carrying out their harms. Too many feminists and DV advocates enable them. Real victims do need help, but hey, feminists— when all you have is a hammer, everything else looks like a nail. It is time to expand your tool box, and your vision.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
    1. karenwoodall

      I am so very sorry to read your story but I am not shocked or surprised becauser it is absolutely my professional experience that women and men can be cruel and abusive to each other and their children. I send you my love and my support. K

      Like

      Reply
  3. clove888

    I work with thousands of cases going through the family courts. I have seen children being forced against others will have to see a parent who abused them because the protective parent was concerned and was saying they should not be forced against their will. Psychologists who use parental alienation do not get to see the pain and torture a child goes through when being forced into a room with a parent they repeatedly say they don’t want to see. Yes, some resident parents can out of spite and anger towards the other parent impose their fear on the child/ren but ripping them from the protective parent to place them with the parent they are refusing to see is even worse abuse. If only you were there to watch that in real-time instead of making reports based on Lowenstein and Gardener’s theories about parental alienation as being a medical condition aka a syndrome. Thousands of children go through several forms of hell first when the other parent abused them then, secondly when they are forced to go into a room with that same parent because of a report done by psychologists such as yourself, and then often forced by the protective parents care and into the care of their abuser or a complete stranger if the decision is care because the child cannot be in the same room as the other parent and work being done to teach the child that the abuse they say they experience didn’t happen at all but is what the previous resident parent made up. This is what happens to these children and heaven only knows what abuses continue after this when the child is made to be in the care of the parent who originally abused the child. Not all parents are alienators. Many are trying to stop further abuse and of course, they are not going to like the parent who did so much harm to the child and usually them also. You have no clue about the damage that you do to these families. Of course, mental health is a problem in young people. when they are forced to have to survive the abuses your reports place them into.

    Like

    Reply
    1. karenwoodall

      Ah but that is the thing Clover, having seen many children in the situation you describe, I see their reovery too.

      you see the issue isn’t that these children are being forced to live with abusers, they are being removed from parents who believe the other parent is abusive when they are not.

      And the family courts do not do that on a whim and they don’t do it on the basis of reports alone either and as I sm not a psychologist, they do not do it on the basis of my reports as you mis-state here.

      I hear your anger and I hear your thought that I have ‘no clue’ about what is happening to these families. I think what you mean is that I have ‘no clue’ about what is happening to the parents from whom the children are removed. Well I do have a clue, more than a clue and I understand that many of them truly believe their narrative but I also understand that that narrative is based upon things which are not true.

      Children being triangulated into adult matters are very much damaged and preventing that damage is what is happening when children are removed. You may not like it, you may not agree with it but that is the reality.

      As other commenters will tell you, this problem of children being harmed by parents who triangulate them into adult matters is very real. It affects children very badly over their lifetime but when that harm is prevented, they recover and recover well with the right therapeutic treatment.

      You may not want to believe that but we will soon have the evidence, from children themselves, independently evaluated to show what happens when the state intervenes in cases of child abuse.

      Children are simply not being given to abusive parents, they are being removed from them and I know you don’t like it but that is the simple truth. And Gardner, Lowenstein and all the others who are long dead and gone have nothing whatsover to do with it.

      Kind Regards

      Karen

      Like

      Reply
      1. clove888

        That isn’t always the case. Children are removed to work on relationships with abusive people over and over again and I for one am very glad this parental alienation labelling has been given less merit than it has over the years. I have seen it many times over. I actually met with Lowenstein myself before he passed away. The man was hellbent on ensuring children were turned against the protective parent because it was clear that they didn’t like the other parent and the child must have been brainwashed into thinking like the other parent. Most of the testing he used was the Rorschach testing to make such life-changing decisions. He also used the same to employ caretakers in his homes and actually employed predators based on his way of testing. I know a lady who was a girl in one of those homes. Her life has been one of hell and she has been unable to have adult relationships as she too was ripped from a protective parent to be forced to see her abuser.
        In my opinion, the family court has made the right decision to work with families where one parent is being pushed out of a child’s life. That work has to be done with all involved rather than ripping children from the one parent they feel safe with. Support for the family as a whole is more important than putting a child through the terrifying ordeal of being forced to see someone they repeatedly say they do not want to. The protective parent feels helpless knowing if they don’t force them against their will they will lose their child. It really is disturbing to experience. Whether two parents are together or apart makes no difference. Sometimes a parent who has anger can be very clever at covering that anger until faced with truths and that can only happen when parents are able to face that mirror and their own failings rather than take a side as if the parent who is not seeing the child is always a victim. That is rarely the case. Parental alienation is a very dangerous “diagnosis.”

        Liked by 1 person

      2. karenwoodall

        I understand this is your experience but it is not mine and so rather than spending the afternoon arguing the point I think we should stop here. I hear this is very personal for you and I don’t want to make it harder. I accept your right to your views but I don’t agree with them as they are not conversant with my professional experience. In addition you are making allegations against a man who is dead and so cannot respond. I didn’t know Dr Lowenstein, I hear some horrible things said about him but I also hear horrible things said about me and I know the work that I do and see the healthy impact it has on the children I work with and so I have to accept that there will always be people who say horrible things about someone.

        I wish you well. K

        Like

      3. David

        Hello but your report makes out fathers are all abusive, some father do love there kids and protect there kids, some mother and grand mothers do this, beyond belief and as 99% of social workers are not trained in parental alienation, your paperwork is so sexist so dumb, some fathers are great fathers and some mother are bad mothers but your report make it seem like all fathers are bad, sort your facts out.How can you call yourself a professional if you’re this sexist against men, sorry if your so sexist you shouldn’t be allow to put out any reports at all!!!

        Like

      4. karenwoodall

        I think you should read some of the writing on my blog David, you are jumping to conclusions

        Like

      5. Addie

        David,
        I hear you on the fact that mothers and grandmothers can be horrible alienators, and many fathers are good, decent parents who not only love their children, but are also abused themselves by the ex/mother. Please please please take the time to read Karen’s blog. Her work actually defends men, seeks to point out that some mothers can be awful, and notes that we shouldn’t be identifying unfit parents by gender, nor making gender assumptions. She is one of the only professionals out there advocating these positions— both across the UK and the U.S. (though she doesn’t work here in the U.S., her research is one of the very few voices here to make these points). She also is the only female researcher I’ve come across who is brave enough to take on feminists and point out the bias in their research (research that only seeks to validate a particular point of view is not valid). If you are an alienated father, you have a reasonable friend in Karen Woodall. If you are an alienated mother, you also get a fair hearing here. Karen Woodall’s voice is one of the very few fully reasonable, responsible, child-centered voices out there in this whole custody issue. Take the time to read her. Then you will understand.
        All the best to you!

        Like

  4. Donna Young

    If a child has been so badly abused and frightened by a parent that they refuse any form of contact then that ought to be a matter for child protection services. Sadly it isn’t. I know because I have been on the receiving end of this for the last decade. My ex husband has coercively controlled my children (as he did me) for many years. I have been down all routes unsuccessfully. As my children were over the age of 13 I was informed that the courts would not intervene. I requested help from the school and social services. Both said it was a civil matter and not their responsibility. I pointed out that if a child is being abused either mentally or physically then it ought to be their responsibility to investigate. (even though I would be the person investigated.) Still they refused. No one was interested. Effectively I have been horrendously abused myself by having my children radicalised against me and my children have lost the love, comfort and protection of a mother. How anyone can defend that is beyond me. It beggars belief that even so called professionals refuse to accept that a child can be coercively controlled into rejecting a parent? If a stranger can groom a child in order to sexually abuse them how is it they don’t understand that a trusted and loved parent can groom a child into hating the other parent? Both myself and my children are doomed. One son is already living a reclusive life with severe mental health difficulties. He is now 30 and has never had a relationship. All those who looked the other way should hang their heads in shame. You devote yourself to such a thankless task Karen. You, like all of those you try so diligently to help deserve so much better.

    Like

    Reply
    1. karenwoodall

      It is awful Donna, truly truly awful, for you and for your children and radicalisation is exactly the word for it. We have to keep raising public consciousness of this terror in families and we will. I send my love and support to you and all those around the world who suffer this and who should never have had to do so. we will keep on going until the harm is recognised and the efforts to hide it are stopped. K

      Like

      Reply
    2. Victoria

      I am experiencing similar Donna, child protection aren’t interested, education aren’t interested, health aren’t interested…all agencies who should be looking out for the wellbeing of children and young people. The courts won’t intervene because of the age of my child. Everyone passes the buck, not their responsibility, no one is interested. It’s abusive on many levels; to the child, the parent left behind, the grandparents now cut out of the child’s life, the sibling left behind who has not only lost their sibling but who has been discarded by the parent who has taken their sibling. The friends who the child has been told to keep at arms reach to make it easier to leave, the once loved passions and interests of the child are now no longer supported and are a distant memory. The lives that have been turned upside down in the process are many.
      I too don’t understand how this behaviour is defended and ignored. In my situation, the new partner of the parent who has taken my child has called the shots and coercively manipulated an extremely vulnerable child and removed them from a stable, loving family. I worry about the future for my child who has been taken and also the impacts on my child who remains with me. Fearful they too may be taken in time.
      I’m sorry you have experienced all that you have Donna. I’m just at the start of this I think, almost 1 year in. It’s truly heartbreaking.

      Like

      Reply
      1. Donna Young

        I lost my children one by one Victoria. I am now back in contact with my eldest but it is fraught with difficulty. My ex husband cast him out for not cutting all contact with me. He stood as an example to his brothers. He has now been taken back. (on probation as he puts it) He is a 32 year old man living on eggshells. I cannot ask him anything regarding my other children. He never mentions them and there is a wall of silence that must not be breached. He says if one word got back to his father, however harmless regarding his brothers, his father would cut him off and he would never see any member of his family again. True. I have had a war raged against my character and he has used my children to confirm his lies. I cannot defend myself because it would mean bringing my eldest son into the war and he would suffer the consequences. I won’t do that. I will never betray his (very shaky) confidence in me so I have to remain quiet and take all the lies and dirt thrown at me in silence. When I lost my youngest at 13 I knew I no longer wanted to go on. My only reason to delay was that I knew my dear boy would take the responsibility for what I chose to do and I couldn’t bear for him to drink from that poisoned challis for the rest of his life. I decided I’d wait until he was older and no longer cared. That time is probably now but fortunately I feel different. Now I’ve decided that as I failed to protect my children through my ignorance the least I can do is stay around incase they ever need me. My ex will always know that I am standing right behind him. I know it sounds overly dramatic but I am the love and the light and the rest I leave to God or the universe. We have to keep going Victoria. We owe it to our children and you never know what the future holds. Stand tall (even when your legs are collapsing under you) and show your strength. Parents that engage in this evil are emotionally weak bully’s. They are ruthless dictators but in the end the truth is that every dictator lives in fear of those they oppress. Be strong and make it clear that come what may you will get stronger not weaker. God bless.

        Like

    3. David

      Some mother do this as well, even when proven it is next to impossible to find help. The needs to be proper expects trained in this.

      Like

      Reply
  5. Bob Rijs

    The only way to protect children is to approach and assess situations from a different angle.

    Given the fact that many actions are reacted unconsciously impulsively and on autopilot, which forms a hostile environment, almost all come from dysfunctional coping mechanisms and that is the implicit memory. When someone is in an unsafe hostile environment, the person is surviving and the implicit memory will develop survival mechanisms and strategies necessary for their own safety, so the implicit memory develops a mental combat attitude, when this is pertinently present it contributes to a hostile environment.

    That same implicit memory goes through a completely different development in safe circumstances, because when parents show an interest in the inner world of a child, the child pauses how it feels, learns to understand itself, and learns to put into words how it feels and what his/her experience is, the implicit memory develops a mentalizing capacity.

    Now it is no longer about the difference between man or woman, mother or father, and is a completely different unimportant subject.

    For example, it is possible to only focus on which implicit memory is optimal for the upbringing and development of a child.

    The implicit memory with a mental combat attitude/state.

    The implicit memory with a mentalizing capacity.

    Which primary caretaker will have to work hard to rewrite/program implicit memory so that another stimulating supportive script is functionally on autopilot present in the implicit memory?

    This is quite easy to test because all you have to do is put pressure on the person because the mental combat attitude will always dominate the situation.

    They are cognitive distortions and defensive hostile patterns of reactive affective aggression & offensive target sabotaging patterns of instrumental proactive predatory aggression and are at the cost of reality testing.

    Minor distorted reality testing

    Major distorting reality testing

    Extremely derailed (delusional/psychotic) reality testing

    The person creates a paradox not only for themselves but for everybody surrounding them must go into this hostile fantasy world where all personal boundaries en human rights have non-existence, and reality testing is not allowed and forbidden in this regime and will be punished.

    Thats create a toxic environment where the only way to live is to survive the inner conflicts of an impulsive individual in his/her implicit memory with a pertinent mental combat attitude/state.

    That is totally different from an implicit memory with a mentalizing capacity, but when this person is in a relationship where the other person creates a regime, walking on eggshells is only the beginning of what will never change in those environments. Because Somebody with a pertinent mental combat attitude/state is and creates its own hostility and has a never-ending cycle of abuse for getting things done, so itis a coping mechanism for them, but ongoing coercive control for everybody who is trapt in those situations.

    The person with an implicit memory with a mentalizing capacity can leave that environment and creates a safe environment on their own because the implicit memory has learned in early youth how to mentalize and that script will always be present.

    Emotional Deadness, The Death Instinct, The Death Drive, The Aggressive Instinct, Coercive Control, and Intimate Terrorism, are all impulsive behavioral patterns that come from a dysfunctional script imprinted in the implicit memory in early youth development so a pertinent mental combat attitude/state is present at all times to defend it’s self.

    And all policies & guidelines and substantiation of the youth care institutes, but also not to forget studies into domestic violence, child abuse, psychological abuse, neglect, the subject of defense mechanisms is deliberately kept away and suppressed everywhere.

    It now seems to be a Sustainable Development Goal of researchers who participate in those studies. The only thing they keep falling back on structurally; they are complex situations.

    In other words, we have been hearing this for 80 years, so we do not have to expect that this will ever change in the next 80 years, so in my opinion (in order to guarantee their own monopoly position) they have an active share in the structural maintenance of domestic violence and child abuse and thus (personal) conflicts of interest.

    It is not mentioned anywhere in the Istanbul Convention.

    The subject of the Primitive Defense Mechanism at the American Psychological Association has also been compartmentalized into small pieces to strategically obscure (pathological behavior) reality and that often accompanies cognitive distortions, dysfunctional reality testing, impulsive self-destructive passive-aggressive behavior with structural aggression, and even sadism.

    Simple Logic Thinking

    In an unsafe environment, people must survive and the implicit memory has to develop survival mechanisms so they can rely on those survival mechanisms for their own safety.

    No matter whether it’s a father or a mother:

    The implicit memory script (that’s programmed in early youth) is supportive or defensive!

    From this angle or point of view, it’s possible for a judge to make a decision in the best interest of the mental-emotional, identity, and personal development of the child and the child’s safety!

    Like

    Reply
    1. karenwoodall

      yes I agree. How to get this into a place where it can be understood and utilised is the project.

      Like

      Reply
      1. Bob Rijs

        The roads here in the Netherlands are blocked by those who want to sustain their self-deceiving (Sustainable Development Goals) narratives of what looks like a worldwide epidemic that makes a safe environment for children who must survive in unbearable situations almost impossible.

        The system needs to clean its ship and rewrite a new functional story that is built into the foundation of the constitution that not only judges can always fall back on (back to basics and connect the dots), but that foundation then the basis from which a new policy is constructed and substantiated.

        For example, one can always automatically fall back on logical thinking in back to basics and connect the dots to visualize and assess a situation.

        Breaking through that so-called Complex Barrier is not a bad development, because it seems that everything is being done to maintain this, but that does not help anyone.

        I can’t get a door open anywhere here, because there are about 5000 high-conflict divorces here every year, so say 100 a week, spread over 5 days it’s 20. but spreading that over 11 provinces is going to be a heavy mess because apparently there is no need to develop here.

        To stimulate development in that area, it is only possible to outsource that part to 1 independent organization that is only involved in that area.

        There is a very large gray and unexposed area that will come into focus in the future.

        This will also benefit social norms and values because they have disappeared like snow in the sun over the years because they seem to have made way for everyone to adapt to the inner conflicts of others, who are automatically never responsible. for the influence, they have on the immediate and indirect environment.

        There is sufficient knowledge and information from the research and the literature on psychoanalysis it is superficially used by policymakers and researchers in this area.

        However, no one can expect a defensive person who conducts research to portray precisely that subject broadly and clearly, which is then avoided in every possible way and that also seems to be reflected in many studies when nothing can be found. on that topic. Most of the time they all seem to be academic graduates in generating frustrations and irritations, obstructing their own development and those of others, and playing stupid.

        That’s why I’ve collected as much data as possible over the years,
        but here in the Netherlands, you can’t get anything done in a socially desirable way.

        Like

  6. Rob

    May I ask clove888 a question?

    I understand you ‘work with thousands of cases going through the family courts’. Therefore I assume your work involves conducting assessments of families etc. If I am correct, could you tell us how often you conduct assessments BEFORE the court performs a fact-finding? Obviously, without a factual foundation, there’s not much an assessment can achieve short of providing an opinion based on personal assumptions and ideologies.

    If however, you work as an IDVA it’s pretty plain you more likely than not view the world through rose-tinted glasses.

    Could I also ask, how often have you worked with neurodiversity and parents on the spectrum? As you know from your abundant experience, it’s very easy to demolish a good enough parent who is on the spectrum as they have difficulty expressing themselves – however, this cannot be in kilter with the paramountcy principle. The question is, however, how do you treat such people? do you make recommendations pursuant to Part 3a to ensure a fair hearing even if you suspect a person might be a perpetrator of DVA.

    I’m heartened you say “That isn’t always the case” and therefore you accept it some parents do turn children against the other parent. So what precisely is the issue you raise? Are you suggesting the situation of children turned against a parent should be ignored? I only ask as I don’t believe any form of abuse is excusable.

    Like

    Reply
  7. Paul

    So, the family courts are encouraging children of abusers to see abusive parents AND genuinely alienated children to miss out on a good healthy parent.

    I only saw the perspective from my own eyes of being alienated for nearly a decade, leading to ill health of the child in the name of control (and family courts, social services, gp’s, CAMHS all assisting), but its actually worse.

    Maybe if I would’ve abused my children I would’ve got to see them? Just to explicitly highlight that is sarcasm.

    Maybe if the family courts acted appropriately we wouldn’t t see any conflict here too. I dont believe for a second that the family courts dont know what they are doing.

    (one child alienated for approaching a decade, repairing slowly in relationship and health, second child triangulated/ promoted above me and any parenting consistently undermined still, but managed to walk on egg shells for decade and maintain seeing her, albeit this has its own issues and needs redress at times).

    Like

    Reply
    1. Rob

      Paul, I think you’re absolutely correct, regarding the courts ‘knowing what they’re doing’ in the UK I believe the problem lays in the way the Children Act was written which gives judges unfettered discretion allowing lazy judges avoiding fact finding at an early stage and rely on the opinions of Cafcass as fact.

      A further problem is that judges are effectively unaccountable for their actions due to the discretion they are afforded. Even they data protection act provides exemptions from disclosure of information would likely provide evidence of malpractice in the name of protecting Judicial independence. The irony is the core principles of judicial independence include transparency, integrity and accountability – one be left wounding what is judicial independence when the legislators undermine its very existence thus diluting the separation of powers.

      A further point is if a good barrister can earn a a few grand few just few hours of work, why on earth would one become a District Judge with a significant pay cut???? Could it be these District Judges are rubbish barristers put out to pasture? It’s worth digging up the history of your judge and looking at historical cases to see what might have ended their days as a well paid barrister.

      Anther point many over look is the principle of the child’s welfare being paramount ONLY applies when the court is determining the question. That only applies to deciding the final decision, not the fact finding or case management. The final decision is of course based on the facts established – think on the point earlier where lazy judges leave it to Cafcass to establish facts and the decision to not follow court rules laid out In Practice Directions.

      I can’t accept judges and barristers and solicitors don’t realise this but none of these address the point because family / child contact litigation is easy money for little effort. This is the work space of lazy and the moraless, where mainstream ideology is king, a soace where if your face doesn’t fit and the allegations become fact without due process. A space where children are thrown under a buses on the daily by those purporting to protect them.

      Like

      Reply
  8. Antonella Baiocchi

    Dear good morning, I’m a psychotherapist and I’m doing the same battle as you in Italy.

    http://www.antonellabaiocchi.it
    http://www.laviolenzanonhasesso.com
    http://www.helpdonnemaltrattanti.it

    email: antonellabaiocchisbt@libero.it

    Like

    Reply
  9. Karo

    The gynocentric lobby pushes the false narrative that fathers are inherently dangerous to their children and use this narrative to step on the human rights of fathers and their children in order to privilege women.

    Like

    Reply
  10. Jill

    Hi Karen, I’m sorry to hear and read the negative feedback you receive. Unfortunately there will always be people that will manipulate systems and may use/accuse alienation to deter away from what maybe going on but we have to acknowledge that alienation does happen both when families are together and more so during separation and that this is another form of abuse, impacting on children’s mental health, emotional well being and will have an impact on development which will go into adulthood in terms of relationships, trust and identity.
    I have experience in a professional context and personal experience. My long term partner has been battling to see his children for 4 years now and looking back alienation was already present when the family were together. Covid has not helped families in this position and has led to situations similar to ours now taking years to go through the court process with little hope of a positive outcome at the end.
    My partner has engaged in the whole process and done everything that has being asked of him. He has has to loan money to pay for ongoing court costs, psychological assessments and more recently family therapy which mum refuses to attend.
    Karen, what are your thoughts, advice around reunification therapy taking place between the child and alienated father if mum isn’t willing to engage? There is a court order stating she should do by the way.
    Carrying on supporting this much needed intervention and changing policy. We must not forget that children are centre in this and that parents cannot and should not put their own emotional needs before that of their children .

    Like

    Reply

Leave a comment

Latest Articles

Previous:
Next: