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

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Partner appointed as head of residential conveyancing for England

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

Specialist firm enhances corporate healthcare practice with partner appointment

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll