Karen Woodall – Psychotherapist, Writer, Researcher, Trainer

28 Swedish article signers associated with UK High Court case and Swedish custody dispute

Written by:

karenwoodall


I recently received this article from a journalist living and working in Sweden with her concerns about recent events in her country. I felt that it may be of interest to readers of this blog as it provides very useful examples of how a pattern of actions by ideological activists/academics, are seen to be repeated across the world with what appears to be an intent to disrupt due legal process in courts concerned with child protection.

The pattern of action can be defined as the repetition of the false narrative, that the label parental alienation is only ever used as a defence against domestic abuse by fathers who can afford to pay for experts who will support this. It originated in the US and was spread to the UK and Europe via academics and campaigners in 2020. The pattern of actions includes efforts to interrupt work being done in court cases through spreading of false information in the media, production of articles containing repetitive themes from self reports of mothers found to have abused their children and direct interference with live court cases. Gathering signatures to letters, statements and other articles in order to create a greater power base, appears to be one of the mechanisms by which these activists attempt to gain traction through the use of false narratives, it is unknown whether those who sign these, are fully aware of the background to this issue.

Of course, those of you who read this blog regularly or know my work, will be aware that the Family Separation Clinic does not use constructs such as parental alienation or resist/refuse dynamics, but instead, relies upon accepted psychodynamic, child development and trauma theory and practice in its work with children and families. Nevertheless, irrespective of the different models used by practitioners, the intent of this type of campaign is to prevent any and all work which is being done to protect children in these complex circumstances. This is of serious concern, as are the strategies which are being used in different countries to cause harm to the work being done, therefore, I have attached the original article in English by Anna Lytsy for readers information.

28 Swedish signers, 24-07-30 -1Download

5 responses to “28 Swedish article signers associated with UK High Court case and Swedish custody dispute”

  1. mnsmith882

    Hmmmm, it’s as if the naysayers have something to hide perchance?

    Which, if brought into the light, would undermine their entire facade and show them to be something less wholesome or innocent than they perhaps claim?

    So, to protect their house of cards they throw accusations of pseudoscience, yet, behind every accusation is there not a confession?

    Like

    Reply
  2. CARL MACCHIA

    Thank you Karen. Thank you Anna. Thank you Christina. God bless you for your work, and God bless all the children, women and men suffering in these tragedies.

    Carl Macchia
    949.291.0028

    Like

    Reply
  3. katieohhhno

    Thank you for sharing! This work is so important. Often the alienated parent is so afraid to discuss PA because it is not taken seriously (I’m in the states) and then, the very real possibility of being accused of being the alienator for even mentioning the term PA becomes seriously possible. I am a close spectator to an alienated parent and we dare not discuss the alienation in the courts or with a therapist for fear of being accused of just that. It’s a scary and hopeless place to be.

    Please excuse any typos. Sent from my iPhone

    On Sat, Aug 3, 2024 at 10:35 AM Karen Woodall – Psychotherapist, Writer,

    Like

    Reply
  4. Bjorn Cedervall

    I have probably seen most of the articles (calling PA “pseudoscience”) in Swedish media over the past months misrepresenting/denying the PA concept. It is clear that this is a systematic campaign which the purpose of spreading myths (false or misleading information) about parental alienation – some of this information has Swedish authorities (those relevant in custody disputes) as their targets. None of these articles have been through a peer-review process but are “marketed” as telling “the truth” – the science (peer-review publications). The references in these articles are illuminating – an overlap with the worst stuff from the corrupt report from the UN HRC special rapporteur around April 2023 – the special rapporteur obviously doesn’t know anything about PA and/or quality assurance of scientific information).

    I doubt that most of the people signing these articles ever read the papers by people like Amy Baker, Bill Bernet, Jennifer Harman, Demosthenes Lorandos, Mandy Matthewson, Maria Verrocchio and many others involved in empirical PA research. At my website, I have listed 188 peer-review journals which have published articles about PA. At least 52 PA articles have been published in American Journal of Family Therapy alone.

    The book “Parental Alienation: Science and Law (Lorandos & Bernet, Eds., 2020) is never mentioned by these activists. At least around 40 pages in this book deals with the history of the PA concept – the history began around 170 years before Gardner gave it a name. One of the standard myths by Swedish anti-PA activists is that it was Gardner who “invented” the PA concept – but it was there long before him (David Levy around 1941 and Wilhelm Reich 1945 & 1949 are clear precursors of the systematic research that now has been conducted for more than 30 years).

    In summary, I don’t believe that most of those who signed the articles know the status of the PA theory and the science behind it. Regarding the psychologists who signed the articles, it has probably escaped their attention that PA is built on 15-20 established (since more than 50 years back) psychological phenomena and mechanisms. PA can thus be described by these phenomena without mentioning the words “parental alienation”. By denying the PA concept they trash large parts of the empirical and theoretical psychology (oops!).

    PA is a child protection issue – the alienator sabotages the cognitive functions in the child’s brain. Emotional abuse as long campaigns (against a healthy relation between the child and the other parent) leaves lifelong scars in the brain (see works by Charles Nemeroff, Michael Teicher and others).

    Alienators are expert liars and manipulators – they think and act as criminals (Stanton Samenow, 2019).

    Like

    Reply
  5. Melissa Krawczyk

    Thank you again for your continued work on this. PA is a parent’s worst nightmare and the denial of the abuse we and our children have suffered is unimaginable, made worse only by those DV advocates who purport to help women. Instead, we are gaslighted by them again and again by being told children only reject an abusive parent, by denial of the abuse in general, the denial of trauma bonding, and blame on us for not protecting our children. It is grotesque abuse from mental health, legal, and “advocates.”

    Like

    Reply

Leave a comment

Latest Articles

Previous:
Next: