I am in Switzerland on vacation, but woke this morning to an inbox full of emails from distressed mothers and fathers (and some grandparents too) on the topic of (yet another) round of media claims from campaigners involved in women’s rights. This time the subject is a study which claims that mothers are dying and children are being handed to convicted ‘abusers’ because of the label ‘parental alienation’ which is being showcased by Ed Thomas at the BBC. Horror stories make good media – I would like to see the study, the questions and the verification of the claims which are being made by those who make assertions based upon this research.
The BBC in its storyline says that it has been running an investigation into the issue of the Family Courts for some time. Ed Thomas (you can contact him with your story below), says that he has conducted an investigation, citing evidence such as –
One mother, whose child was ordered to live with a convicted child rapist, would no longer eat and drink and “gave up living”, friends say.
I don’t know whether Ed has seen verification of the conviction of the child rapist concerned, perhaps he has, if he has however, he doesn’t say so, relying instead on the say so of friends of the mother concerned, a theme which pretty much runs throughout this piece. This is not evidence and neither are the wider claims within the article. Instead, Like the controversial film ‘Torn Apart‘ this appears to be another study which relies upon the claims made by mothers whose children have been removed from them because of the psychological and emotional harm which they have caused. If it is not, then let us see the evidence of the study, including the evidence that children are being handed to convicted abusers, which is a story I would be interested in reading. Otherwise, this is just the same tactic of attack, allegation and assertion, involving the same players who have for a very long time, been trying to overturn the use of the label ‘parental alienation’ in Court.
The appearance of a barrister well known for her allegiance with this group of campaigners lends an air of gravitas to the reporting and the use of MP Jess Phillips lends another dynamic to the piece. In truth however, this is just another round of the same claims that have been circulating since 2019, led by those who seek to overturn the use of the label ‘parental alienation’ using any means necessary. What the piece fails to recognise, (perhaps because those who participated in it do not understand), is that ‘parental alienation’ as a label, is no longer used in the Family Courts after the President of the Family Division issued guidelines on working with patterns of alienating behaviours rather than the label.
Whilst this campaign is well thought out in that it uses key people in positions of relative power who appear, (at least to some), convincing, if you look deeper, what becomes obvious is that beneath the attacks, assertions and allegations (against rejected parents, as well as anyone who works in child protection the Family Courts), there is an absence of evidence to support the claims being made. What is missing in the report by Ed Thomas for example, is balance, which would set this study in context. The work being done by Government on alienating behaviours, is referenced but it is done so with the same relience upon a lack of the evidence of the allegations being made and the absence of the study itself which is, after all, the basis of the whole piece. Which is what perplexes me the most, that someone who is supposed to be an independent ‘special reporter’ has not done the ground work to understand how these stories arise. As I am in Switzerland currently, I cannot watch the programme Ed has made, perhaps someone else will and will give me some of the context. Does Ed speak to anyone in the Judiciary for example? Does Ed speak to anyone who is doing the work of protecting children in the Family Court? Does Ed produce the evidence to substantiate the claims being made about ‘parental alienation’, or has he simply listened to the stories of those who are unhappy with outcomes in the Family Court and relied upon those to tell a horror story?
The Real Horror Story
Any death relating to divorce and separation is a tragedy but for decades now, mothers and fathers have lost their children due to the impact of a child being triangulated into the breakdown of the adult relationship, mothers and fathers who have been grieving those losses, many of whom have lost their lives in the process, all of whom are disregarded, unreported and frankly, utterly disrespected every time a reporter falls into the same trap of listening to claims made by lobby groups. That reporters are so readily persuaded by these allegations and assertions (seemingly without sight of evidence), leads to what reads like a campaign strategy – ie: attention grabbing headlines with little substance. Had there been any attempt to balance out the reporting with evidence,(at least in the piece that I have seen), this might have produced a reality based piece which would be worthy of reading.
I will be writing to Ed Thomas today, about my work with children who are psychologically and emotionally abused in the Family Courts in the UK to offer him a broader perspective. In doing so I will include testimony from children over the age of 18 with whom I have worked, who are now safe and well and I will be asking him to consider that testimony as reality based evidence which contextualises the claims being made in the study he has reported on. In doing so, I will invite him to look at the wider perspective, of the mothers, fathers and children who have suffered deep harm due to alienating behaviours deployed by the other parent. I will also ask him to think about the way in which he has been triagulated, as so many have before him, by people who attack, allege and assert but fail to provide the concrete evidence to substantiate their strategy. I will also ask Ed to let us see this study in detail, let us see the questions asked and the evidence which supports the headline he uses, which puts inverted commas around the word abuser but nevertheless seeks to replicate the claims made by campaigners.
Outwith provision of this evidence, this is just another round of campaigning by a group of women who have been actively trying to undermine the reality that mothers emotionally and psychologically abuse their children, campaigning which is misleading the public. And as a public service provider, the BBC really needs to know the context behind this piece and the real truth about the scandal of this attack, allege and assert tactic.
You can write to Ed Thomas to tell him your story using the contacts below, I am about to write and tell him mine.
Twitter:@EdThomasNews
Email: Ed.thomas@bbc.co.uk
You can also complain to the BBC about the lack of context, lack of balance and lack of fact checking in the article, including the absence of evidence and the relience on a study which is not open to public scrutiny, here
Karen Woodall - Psychotherapist, Writer, Researcher, Trainer 
Leave a reply to Willow Cancel reply