Parental alienation vs coercive control: Controversial issues and current research

Abstract

Family court judges should make decisions per the best interests of the child standard (Child Welfare Information Gateway, 2020). High conflict custody cases make this complicated, especially when reunification services are requested. In the middle of contentious proceedings, judges oftentimes receive conflicting information from parents. Judges and family law professionals can be lead astray, relying on unproven constructs and instruments not meeting the criteria of reliability and validity. Some victimized children have been mandated into reunification programs that are neither evidence-based nor trauma informed, causing them further harm (Chester, 2022). This two-volume special issue on Parental Alienation and Family Reunification provides courts with critical background in child development, dynamics present in violent families, and how to evaluate the testimony of experts to ensure it values children’s views and follows evidence-based practice.

Keywords:

• best interests of the child
• child custody
• high conflict divorces
• trauma-informed decision making

Acknowledgments

In collaboration with the National Partnership to End Interpersonal Violence Across the Lifespan (NPEIV).

Disclosure statement

The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of the paper.

Correction Statement

This article has been republished with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Pearl Berman

Pearl S. Berman is associated with Psychology Department, Indiana University of Pennsylvania College of Health and Human Services, Indiana, PA.

Ethan Weisinger

Ethan M. Weisinger is associated with Bay Area Family Law Center, Inc., Walnut Creek, CA.