Mothers whose children reject them after divorce and separation are classic victims of post separation abuse, they are mothers who, having found the courage to leave a harmful relationship, find that their children are often (quite quickly), found to be in a state of mind in which they profess love and alignment with a father that they may have previously witnessed abusing their mother. This dynamic, which is recognised in the psychoanalytic and contemporary trauma literature as ‘Identification with the Aggressor’ causes children to become terrorised by an unpredictable caregiver and in that process fixated upon regulating that caregiver’s emotional and psychological needs. In a secondary step, which is also recognised in the literature on coercive control, the child begins to mimic the terrorising caregiver in denigrating and dehumanising the mother they are rejecting. This process, which has been psychologically well recognised for almost a hundred years, is why children who are in the care of a controlling parent, will profess profound love for a parent and contemptuous rejection of the other. Alongside this, children may make allegations to underscore their position and persuade those who seek to intervene to step away.
Mothers whose children reject them are often traumatised, first by the harm they have suffered in the relationship with their abusive partner and secondly by the guilt, shame and sadness which occurs when they realise that whilst they may have escaped, their children have not. Looking on at a child’s trauma bond with the father who was their abusive partner, many mothers recognise that if it took them many attempts to leave, it will take their children many more. Mothers in the rejected position are often shamed, blamed, silenced and silent. Their needs are overlooked by many, especially, it seems, those very groups who they should be able to look to for assistance.
The erasure of mothers in the rejected position
Having worked in this field a very long time I am aware of the propensity amongst some campaigners to consider some victims to be the ‘unintended consequences’ of strategies designed to attack policy, practice and legislation in order to achieve their outcomes. Mothers who are rejected by their children due to trauma bonding with an abusive father, appear to be one of those unintended consequences of a campaign which is designed to convince the public that the family courts are a tool of the ‘patriarchy.’ As such, this group of victim mothers find that their needs are ignored, misrepresented, overlooked or simply disbelieved in order to achieve campaign outcomes.
The reason for that it would seem is that these campaigners believe that all children, even those who may be trauma bonded to a frightening or unpredictable father, should be believed without question. It would also seem that child safety means believe all children despite the context, because anyone not doing so is being highly paid.
When I work with some mothers in the rejected position I often do so pro bono. I do so because those mothers have often left abusive relationships taking nothing at all with them other than the clothes they stand up in, leaving their children behind because either they hope that they will follow or they hope that in time the father will allow the children to come to them. When they realise that not only are the children not going to live with them, they are going to reject them, even when they have witnessed their mother being abused by their father, these mothers are horrified, ashamed and self blaming, they are silenced as they are blamed by others and eventually too ashamed to be visible in the outside world. Our work with mothers in this position, which has been ongoing for fifteen years, (despite the endless nonsense written on the internet saying otherwise), provides them with a place of safety and support, a place where their reality is recognised and the behaviours of their children are properly understood within the context in which they arise.
Hearing the voices of victim mothers whose children are trauma bonded to abusive fathers
Child and Mother Relationship Sabotage
When the label Child and Mother Relationship Sabotage, (which was created by academics not clinicians) was introduced, I felt that perhaps this was an attempt to explain why the mother-child bond was sabotaged by abusive fathers. What I have come to understand, through observation however, is that the label does not describe the psychological harm which is caused to children who reject their mothers because of coercive control by an abusive father during divorce and separation, instead the purpose of CAMS seems to be an attempt to show that mothers whose children are removed from them by the family court, are victims of a patriarchal system.
This means that in any situation where a child is rejecting a parent, (be it father OR mother), that rejection has to be considered to be caused by that parent, in order to portray mothers whose children have been removed by the family court as innocent victims of patriarchy. Put another way CAMS relies upon the voice of the child to re-inforce the belief that the family court is a tool of ‘the patriarchy’ and to make it work, victim mothers whose children reject them, must be considered to have caused that rejection. To think otherwise would cause the whole construct to unravel, because if children who are trauma bonded to abusive fathers are recognised as telling lies in order to stay safe in a terrifying world, then children who are trauma bonded to abusive mothers must be accepted as doing the same.
But some children don’t tell the truth in circumstances where they are trauma bonded to an abusive father – here is Lundy Bancroft on that very issue –
Lundy Bancroft – Kids Who Side With The Abuser
Children who reject their mothers when they are seen to be in a corresponding trauma bond with their father and where the father has been seen to have abused their mother and where children may be making false allegations as a way of regulating a frightening father, must have their voices analysed and understood in the context in which they arise. Any allegations of sexual or other form of abuse must be the subject of fact finding to determine whether those allegations are true or whether they are the impact of a child being controlled by an abusive parent they are afraid of. Understanding this is a vital element of providing mothers who have suffered domestic abuse, with the support they need and preventing re-traumatisation in circumstances where there is so much suffering already.
We have supported mothers in the rejected position for over fifteen years now and will continue to do so in a paradigm which is outside of the confines of a belief in the patriarchy but which is rooted in the psychological reality of the lives which are blighted by the continued abuse of their children through trauma bonding with an abusive father.
Coming Soon from the Family Separation Clinic
As part of our Lighthouse Project which is in constant development, the following group will be launched in October 2024. Designed to provide mothers with the specialist help that they need when children align with abusive fathers, this group will include guidance on managing your case in court as well as training in therapeutic parenting with children who are mimicking the behaviours of an abusive caregiver they are aligned to. For more information please keep an eye on our FSC Parenting page https://www.familyseparationclinic.com/parenting/
Karen Woodall - Psychotherapist, Writer, Researcher, Trainer 
Leave a reply to Jennifer Le Boutillier Cancel reply