header-logo header-logo

Parental alienation as a label

21 June 2024 / Jane Chanot
Issue: 8076 / Categories: Features , Family , Child law , Divorce
printer mail-detail
177930
Jane Chanot warns of the dangers of unexplored assumptions in contact cases
  • Considers why parental alienation has become a label that is too quickly applied or used as a default position.
  • Addresses the possibility that the parental alienation label will mask possible welfare issues.
  • Discusses the importance of applying for psychological assessments to assess parental alienation claims and avoid unfair labelling.

While we are all familiar with the term ‘parental alienation’, there’s a question mark as to whether it is properly understood or has just become a label that the legal community is erroneously applying—or is sometimes too quick to apply.

Background

The term parental alienation originated in the US and steadily replaced the term commonly used in the UK, ‘implacable hostility’, in itself a severe description of a possible situation between parents where contact is proving almost impossible to negotiate. Parental alienation does not have a clinical basis any more than another frequently bandied label in the family courts, ‘narcissistic behaviour’, which has become the ‘in’ phrase for coercive control.

While

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Red Lion Chambers—Maurice MacSweeney

Red Lion Chambers—Maurice MacSweeney

Set creates new client and business development role amid growth

Kingsley Napley—Tim Lowles

Kingsley Napley—Tim Lowles

Sports disputes practice launchedwith partner appointment

mfg Solicitors—Tom Evans

mfg Solicitors—Tom Evans

Tax and succession planning offering expands with returning partner

NEWS
The rank of King’s Counsel (KC) has been awarded to 96 barristers, and no solicitors, in the latest silk round
Neurotechnology is poised to transform contract law—and unsettle it. Writing in NLJ this week, Harry Lambert, barrister at Outer Temple Chambers and founder of the Centre for Neurotechnology & Law, and Dr Michelle Sharpe, barrister at the Victorian Bar, explore how brain–computer interfaces could both prove and undermine consent
Comparators remain the fault line of discrimination law. In this week's NLJ, Anjali Malik, partner at Bellevue Law, and Mukhtiar Singh, barrister at Doughty Street Chambers, review a bumper year of appellate guidance clarifying how tribunals should approach ‘actual’ and ‘evidential’ comparators. A new six-stage framework stresses a simple starting point: identify the treatment first
In cross-border divorces, domicile can decide everything. In NLJ this week, Jennifer Headon, legal director and head of international family, Isobel Inkley, solicitor, and Fiona Collins, trainee solicitor, all at Birketts LLP, unpack a Court of Appeal ruling that re-centres nuance in jurisdiction disputes. The court held that once a domicile of choice is established, the burden lies on the party asserting its loss
Early determination is no longer a novelty in arbitration. In NLJ this week, Gustavo Moser, arbitration specialist lawyer at Lexis+, charts the global embrace of summary disposal powers, now embedded in the Arbitration Act 1996 and mirrored worldwide. Tribunals may swiftly dismiss claims with ‘no real prospect of succeeding’, but only if fairness is preserved
back-to-top-scroll