The pain of the parent in the rejected position: psychological, physiological and preventable

Written by:

The horror of being rejected by a child in circumstances where you have done nothing to cause it, is called ‘fear without solution‘ in attachment terms. It is the result of being placed into a situation that you have no control over, cannot resolve and are blamed for. In this respect, parents in the rejected position, who have any kind of inner child wounds from their own childhood, will be triggered into the same kind of disorganised attachment responses seen in their rejecting child. Any professional working with rejecting children who are hyper aligned to a caregiver who is seen to be causing the child to display disorganised attachments, should be aware that they will likely see similar behaviours in the parent who is being rejected. To fail to do so is to cause iatrogenic harm, in which an already seriously abused parent, is re-traumatised by the treatment they receive.

Let’s be clear, this is a family attachment trauma, it is readily understood through an attachment lens and it really is time we started to talk, at depth, about what this means. Because the evidence in clinical terms, is staring us right in the face. Children who are said to be alienated are suffering from disorganised attachment due to fear without solution, which is caused by being in a double bind and parents in the rejected position are suffering from the same. And both child and parent in the rejected position, display signs of reactive psychological splitting due to the pressures placed upon them from an abusive parent and the consequences for that, which are seen in clinical practice years down the line are serious.

“The only clear connections between infant attachment and adult psychopathology are between disorganized attachment and dissociative symptoms in adolescence and early adulthood (Dozier et al. 2008a). (Shemmings & Shemmings 2011, p.62)

When I first wrote about induced psychological splitting being at the very heart of this attachment trauma, I was told I should not focus on it and I was mocked for writing about it. Some parents, likely prompted by this, wrote and told me that they certainly did not suffer from dissociative splitting and yet…and yet…some seven years later, when the work we have been doing at the Family Separation Clinic demonstrates over and over again, that psychological splitting is at the very core of this attachment trauma, the evidence is clear. When we work with children in stage two of the journey of the alienated child they demonstrate dissociative splitting and when we work with them ten years later they demonstrate the impact of that. When we work with parents in the rejected position they demonstrate the same kind of splitting and when we look at the attachment trauma literature, the explanation for what we are seeing is right there in front of us.

Epistemic Mistrust

Epistemic mistrust refers to a loss of trust in the reliability or benevolence of others as sources of knowledge. When a person has epistemic mistrust, they find it difficult to take in new information from others, even when it could be helpful. This form of mistrust is not simply about doubting facts; it is about a deep relational wound, a disruption in the expectation that other people can be safe guides to reality.

In healthy development, a child learns through epistemic trust: trusting that caregivers’ communications are both true and meant for their benefit. When attachment trauma, rejection, or inconsistency occurs, this natural openness can collapse. The individual then learns to treat social knowledge as dangerous, they may defensively dismiss, distort, or reject what others say.

In family systems affected by alienation or relational trauma, both children and parents can develop epistemic mistrust. A child may mistrust one parent’s communications due to psychological pressure from the other, while a rejected parent may come to mistrust professionals or even their own perceptions after repeated invalidation.

Therapeutic work to restore epistemic trust must therefore focus on relationship before information: building a secure, attuned, and non-judgmental connection in which the client can once again feel safe to receive, test, and integrate new meanings. This process involves mentalisation, repair of ruptures, and relational consistency, through which the client gradually re-learns that other minds can be safe, and that truth can emerge in dialogue.

It is time that alienation of children in divorce and separation is seen through the lens which will bring resolution to the fearful states seen in children and parents in the rejected position. The knowledge base is there, the skill sets are clear and the evidence shows repeatedly that it brings healthy outcomes for those who have suffered abuse during divorce and separation.

Preventing psycho-pathology from being transmitted through the generations is what this work is all about. At the Family Separation Clinic that is what we are focused on every working day of our lives.

The pain of the parent in the rejected position is psychological, physiological but it is most of all preventable and that is what matters the most.


News from the Family Separation Clinic

Social work training pathway

Our social work training pathway will shortly be available online in modular format. Designed to help social workers to understand this family attachment trauma and how to build structural interventions to enable therapeutic work to be effective, this training is based upon the work done with several Local Authorities in England over the past five years. For more information email office@familyseparationclinic.co.uk

Supervision

We provide supervision to professionals who have trained with us.

Unfortunately we cannot supervise case work where the practitioner has not trained with us as these families requires depth knowledge of attachment trauma as it relates to the particular dynamics seen in these families.

Our next professionals training will be available in 2026 in central Europe.

Case Management

We provide case management services for families affected by these dynamics, including guidance on structural intervention and how to utilise the court system to protect children. Email office@familyseparationclinic for information about our case management services.

4 responses to “The pain of the parent in the rejected position: psychological, physiological and preventable”

  1. Serena

    Once again nail on the head – thank you for setting this out and rooting this in attachment science.

    Social workers however do not validate Parents in the Rejected Position, they blame and vilify them out of ignorance and lack of training, adding to the trauma, when they should be supporting them to unlock the blocked care. They are biassed and cannot comprehend that an abusive parent can cause their child to totally reject the other parent. Surely no parent can be so heinous, inhuman and barbaric? Surely that rejected parent did something to deserve this? Total and utter ignorance.

    I thought grooming was something the authorities understood. But no. 

    What has saved me from serious trauma in my epistemic mistrust is to educate myself about the psychology and stand by my motto “I know my reality”. My other motto is “expect nothing” while I try and stay calm, strong and ever hopeful.

    After the first overt display of alienation in my child over 5 years ago, after an early childhood of drip-fed coercion 10 years previously, the authorities, appearing initially to understand, and seeking parental consent for some support for my child, didn’t (of course) get the consent they required from the father (they got mine because I then naively had trust in authority). So they said they had no option than to shut the case down! Shut it down. They were even threatened by the father directly themselves, but were blind to his harm and the risks ahead.

    So I have come to think that my worst and early display of reactive splitting (while still unacceptable for my child) only a few weeks later was perhaps a subconscious attempt to demonstrate to the authorities how serious the harm and risks were and to try and signal for help. It worked to some extent and we ended up in court and the rest is history: but after around 20 hearings since then including public care proceedings, my child is now in care due to the continued systemic failure of the authorities and a total rejection by my child whom I haven’t seen for 3 years. I am unlikely to see my child ever again because my child’s false narrative, as originally coerced by the father, has been further entrenched by the ignorant authorities, who have therefore been complicit in enabling the rejection and abuse. You couldn’t make it up. How dare they play God with my child through such ignorance. How dare they.

    So my epistemic mistrust remains, I’m afraid, but I’ve boxed it up as a way of coping and try and bite my lip. But I am angry inside. I can forgive the father as he is broken, but I cannot forgive the authorities who have a duty of care. 

    So I ask – what on earth happened to ‘child protection’? Never mind the crime of coercive control. Nothing as far as I can see. Nothing at all. Injustice doesn’t begin to describe our pain and loss. 

    Your pathway sounds like essential reading for all authorities. No child or rejected parent should ever have to go through what we have experienced.

    Thanks for all your help Karen – I don’t know where I would be without it.

    Like

    1. Chantelle

      100% agree.
      Too many people take things at face value and see it in black and white.
      People’s reactions are exactly like alienation because they need a hero and a villain. There can be no grey areas.
      At the start of the family court journey you fully believe social services, Cafcass, teachers, the judge etc will see what is going on. There’s sometimes glimmers of somebody ‘getting it.
      It seems to boil down to that if the child/children are going to school and are having their basic needs met there’s no need to rock the boat.
      What makes it worse is, if the children are doing well at school and on the surface appear happy and fine, so nobody believes there is a problem.
      I truly believe no child is genuinely happy when they’ve had to reject a parent, and quite often the whole side of that family.
      I’ve seen similar “everything is fine” behaviour in a child whose dad died a year ago. She can’t possibly be fine?

      Like

  2. kay

    We always have the capacity to harm those we love but I wonder what you think the age is at which a child and parents might be deemed to be having an intimate rather than an abusive conversation. Over many centuries it was common practise for there to be complicity and mutual support between generations. Different generations of, say, women bemoaned their relationship problems in each other’s company. Children will have heard it, learned from it, or misunderstood it, been upset by it. Elders gave younger folk advice, for whatever that was worth. What seems to be supposed here is that parents should preserve a distant approach to emotional/life experience sharing. I think the lesser value given these days to generational roles, a sort of evening out of generations, may have a role in this . I admit I am someone who told my child aged 16 that her father had been unfaithful when she was a baby. She had started having relationships and I suppose I felt I was opening a communication door. At the time though I think I felt it was a mistake. There isn’t much I can do about it now, but the efforts we make to try to sidestep the errors of our own childhoods sometimes trip us up.

    Like

    1. karenwoodall

      The only thing I would say here Kay is that a child doesn’t need to know about the deficiencies of a parent in the years when they were too young to be aware of it. What purpose does it serve to tell a child things that happened in the parental couple relationship, other than to burden the child with the responsibility for something – avoiding your mistakes or creating a coalition which comforts you because it means she might avoid a relationship with someone like her father? Both are boundary violations which create anxiety and mistrust between parent and child – between you and her as well as her and her father. Yes elders give advice but they do so in a healthy way when they do not triangulate their children into the parental couple relationship. It may have been and may still be, normalised behaviour but it causes harm. Our children must make their own mistakes and learn from them, to try and make them learn from ours is to overshadow their life with our unlived life. I am sure that your daughter would understand if, at some point, you found it possible to say to her that you understand now that sharing that information wasn’t helpful to her. You might even find that the space which opens up allows a greater mutual respect between the generations. You can read more about all of this in the book ‘it didn’t start with you’ by Mark Wolynn if you are minded to. Kind Regards Karen

      Like

Leave a comment