Parental alienation syndrome:
The lost parents’ perspective

 This qualitative study examines alienated parents’ perceptions of their own experience of Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS). The participants were five fathers and one mother.  The data were collected via semi-structured, open-ended interview questionnaires. A qualitative analysis of the data was performed for each participant in an attempt to answer the following questions: (1) Are there characteristics (e.g., number of children, number of marriages, etc.) common to alienated families? (2) Are there common themes or issues among the conflicts between couples that contribute to marriage dissolution?  (3) From the lost parent’s perspective, are there commonalities in the underlying causes of the alienation? (4) Are there common themes in the participants’ experience of the alienation process? (5) Given the opportunity what are some things that the lost parents perceive they might do differently? The findings are discussed and the limitations of the present study are given.

Dr. Richard A. Gardner, a forensic and child psychiatrist, has conducted evaluations regarding the custody of children following divorce (Rand, 1997).  Through his case work he observed that many divorcing families shared common characteristics which he labelled as Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS). PAS was defined as a syndrome where one parent (usually the custodial parent) alienates the child or children from the other parent.  PAS includes the alienating parent engaging the child in a series of conscious and subconscious techniques like brainwashing in an attempt to denigrate the other parent. Further, the child also contributes to the denigration of the allegedly hated parent (Cartwright, 1993; Gardner, 1992).  The general pattern of characteristics PAS children display during and after the divorce have been described by Gardner (1992) as follows:

(1) Campaign of denigration: PAS children denigrate the "lost" parent completely, particularly in the presence of the alienating parent.  The children express a profuse hatred for the lost parent.  Initially, the children may denigrate each parent in the presence of the other.  Eventually they learn that the denigration of the non-custodial or alienated parent is beneficial within the custodial home (Cartwright, 1993; Gardner, 1992).  Subsequently, the child rejects the lost parent completely.

(2) The children's unfounded rationalizations:  The children base their denigration on rationalizations that are weak or frivolous, e.g. "she snores in her sleep". Statements such as these are often made with a complete lack of ambivalence by the children.  The alienating parent, as well, does not question such statements as the bases for denigration and further uses the children’s statements as evidence of the lost parent’s inadequacy (Cartwright, 1993; Gardner, 1992).

(3) Dichotomization of the parents: The alienating parent is perceived by the child as encompassing only positive qualities and as such the children attempt to express themselves as  "perfect little photocopies" (Goldwater, 1991 p. 126) of the alienating parent. On the other hand, the lost parent is believed to encompass only negative qualities.  This negative attitude is generalized to events that the children and lost parent have shared.  Even events that the children once enjoyed are now remembered as being forced, not enjoyed, or never even remembered (Cartwright, 1993; Gardner, 1992).

(4)  The independent thinker phenomenon: The children present the decision  to reject the parent as their own.  The alienating parent reinforces this contention by making such statements as "I can't force her to see her dad, if she does not want to".  Further, the claim that the decision to reject the parent was the child's own is made suspect by the child's use of language and phrases that are developmentally inappropriate and indicative of the alienating parent's influence (Cartwright, 1993; Gardner, 1992).

(5) Automatic love of the alienating parent: the children automatically and reflexively support the alienating parent.  This automatic love may be a consequence of the belief that the alienating parent is an ideal or perfect person or that the children perceive that parent as weak and in need of support and defending (Cartwright, 1993; Gardner, 1992).
(6) Absence of guilt: The children do not express any feelings of guilt about the circumstances surrounding the relationship with the lost parent.  There is a lack of gratitude for any gifts, favours, etc..  This lack of guilt cannot be attributed solely to cognitive immaturity but is related to the brainwashing done by the alienating parent (Cartwright, 1993; Gardner, 1992).

(7)  Borrowed scenarios:  The children use language and expressions that are clearly not their own.  The quality with which they express their beliefs appears to be coached and rehearsed, and the only source of the borrowed scenarios appears to be the alienating parent (Cartwright, 1993; Gardner, 1992). For instance, a five year old borrows the alienating mother’s words and say "Daddy’s new girlfriend is a whore!" (Cartwright, 1993, p. 207).

(8)  Generalization of animosity:  The lost parent's extended family is also included in the animosity. These individuals are also perceived as encompassing negative qualities or inappropriate actions since they are associated with the lost parent. For instance, any attempt by the extended family to counter the denigration of the lost parent is viewed by the children as an attack on their beliefs that they must defend (Cartwright, 1993; Gardner, 1992).

Further, Cartwright (1993) postulated that often allegations of abuse associated with PAS may be virtual.  Virtual allegations refer to cases where the abuse is simply suggested in order to cast aspersions the lost parent’s character without the alienating parent having to fabricate real incidents of alleged abuse.  For example, in one case, the mother hinted at an allegation of sexual abuse by accusing the father of renting a videotape containing pornography for the child.   The mother reported in court that the child was disappointed with the movie because it was "suggestive, erotic, and pornographic".  The movie, a Hollywood comedy starring Chevy Chase, was chosen by the child at a family video store.  The judge proceeded to interview the child extensively and, disagreeing with the mother, found that the child was not disappointed in the movie because it was pornographic but rather because it was not funny. Virtual allegations are subtle and, as a result, difficult to prove or disprove.  Therefore, Cartwright (1993) postulates that as lawyers and judges become more aware of PAS and become more skilled at detecting it,  the incidence of virtual allegations will increase.

As in most disorders, the severity of  PAS can range from mild to severe.  As a result, Gardner (1991, conference) has described three levels in the continuum of severity of the syndrome as mild, moderate, and severe.  Using these anchor points, Gardner (1992) described the characteristics of the alienating parent and the child.

In a Severe level of PAS, the alienating parent demonstrates paranoid thoughts that may be limited to the lost parent or may generalize to other circumstances.  Prior to the divorce, however, the alienating parent may not have demonstrated any paranoia. Another characteristic includes the alienating parent’s obsession with preventing the lost parent from having or exercising any visitation rights.  The alienating parent will use any means necessary to ensure this goal.  Further, alienating parents project their own negative qualities onto the lost parents, reinforcing their own paranoia and portraying themselves as victims.  As a result of this paranoia, alienating parents do not respond with appeals to logic or reason, or even to confrontations with reality.   Those who do not support the alienating parents’ beliefs, whether they are mental health professionals, lawyers, etc.,  are believed either to be against them or to be paid by the lost parent.  The children in severe cases of PAS share the alienating parent’s paranoia about the lost parent.  They will refuse to visit the lost parent and often demonstrate panic and hostility that renders visits impossible.  Further, if visitation does occur, once they are in the lost parent’s home they may run away, become paralyzed with fear, or become destructive to the extent that they must be removed from the home.

The Moderate level of PAS includes alienating parents who exhibit more rage than paranoid tendencies.  They are able to make some distinction between a child’s preposterous allegations and those which may have some validity.  However, as in severe cases, an alienating parent in a moderate case of PAS will also undertake a campaign of denigration against the lost parent and will tend to prevent the lost parent’s exercise of visitation rights. Prior to the divorce, the moderate alienating parent is more likely to have been a  good child rearer.  The children of moderate PAS tend to be less persistent with their campaigns of denigration, and are more likely to abandon them in the presence of the lost parents, especially after long periods of time.  In this type of case campaigns of denigration by younger children in the presence of their lost parents can only be sustained with the help of older siblings who function as surrogate parents during visitation. The alienated children’s primary motives for maintaining campaigns of denigration are to maintain "healthy" psychological bonds with the alienating parents.

The Mild level of PAS, the parents have generally healthy psychological bonds with their children.  They respond to logic and reason in that they recognize that the alienation of the non-custodial parent is not beneficial for the children.  Therefore, the alienating  parent will be willing to take a conciliatory approach towards  the lost parent’s requests. Gardner (1992) also notes that mild cases of PAS require considerably less therapy than the more severe cases.  Further, the children may become healthier when the intervention simply requires the child to remain in the presence of the lost parent over time.

Cartwright (1993) noted that the time that is spent alienating the child may be an indicator of the degree to which the child is alienated; the longer the alienation, the more alienated the child.  Further, the excessive alienation may  "build up" or increase the risk of mental illness in the child.  As a result, the sooner the children are removed from the alienating situation, the healthier it is for the lost parent and the PAS children. It is, therefore, important to gain a better understanding of parental alienation, its development, and its termination, because of the devastating consequences of PAS to the family members who experience it.

 Alienator or Alienating Parent.  The terms "alienator" and "alienating parent" are  used to designate the parent who influences the child or children to turn against  the other parent.

Lost or Hated or Absent Parent.  The lost (and usually non-custodial) parent is the one who is the target of the alienator.

 Conflict.  This term signifies opposing ideas and beliefs that members of the  family experience in the form of arguments that may or may not become violent.

 Alienation: This term signifies any actions, whether physical or psychological,  that lead to the negative perception of a parent.  Specifically, the term alienation  refers to tactics utilized in order to induce PAS. 

A review of the literature concerning the development of parental alienation in families requires a review of the main theories surrounding the development of PAS.  The main postulates include: (a) heightened levels of conflict, (b) divorce, (c) the contributions or influence of the legal system, and (d) a combination of various other factors that may contribute to the development of PAS.

HIGH CONFLICT SITUATIONS

As the dissolution of a marriage proceeds and court proceedings begin regarding the custody of the children, there is likely to be increasing conflict among the divorcing parents.  It is believed that this conflict propels and heightens the occurrence of PAS.  Family conflict may contribute to many difficulties that the individual family members encounter - such as problems in social development, emotional stability, and cognitive skills.  These difficulties may instigate long-term consequences that may persist long after the finalization of the divorce (Kurdek, 1981). Further, when the conflict occurring in a family (whether divorced or intact) is ongoing and heightened, the individual family members have been found to express feelings of  lowered self-esteem, increased anxiety, and diminished self control  (Slater & Haber, 1984).  Particularly at risk are the children.  There are reports that adolescents have a greater risk of developing adjustment problems whether the family goes through divorce or remains intact (Hoffman, 1971). Therefore, the level of family conflict is an important dimension which can alter the family structure and affects children’s well-being (Demo & Acock, 1988).
PAS is a syndrome that is usually associated with a heightened level of conflict.  Further, the children in PAS families are present not only in the conflictual situation (in this case the denigration of one parent) but often contribute additional conflict to the situation.  These conflicts tend to occur in conjunction with long custody proceedings. Johnston, Gonzalez, and Campbell (1987) examined the behaviour of children from separated and/or divorced families who were subjected to "entrenched" parental conflict regarding their custody.  These researchers assessed 56 children between the ages of four and twelve during custody disputes and 2.5 years later.  The assessment consisted of three measures: (1) parental conflict as measured by the Straus Conflict Tactics Scale; (2) Clinical rating scales that were completed by each family’s counsellor; and (3) the Achenbach Child Behaviour Checklist which measured the children’s adjustment on four scales: Depression, Withdrawn/Uncommunicative, Somatic Complaints, and Aggression, as well as overall problem behaviour. Johnston and her colleagues (1987) found that at the time of the custody disputes, overall behaviour problems and aggression could be predicted by (a) the extent to which children became involved in the custody dispute and (b) the occurrence and extent of role reversal between the child and parent. Specifically, aggression between parents, both physical and verbal, was found to be a significant predictor of overall behavioural problems two years later. Moreover, involving the child in the custody dispute was a more important  predictor of overall behaviour problems when it was the father who involved the child rather than the mother.  If both parents involved the child in the disputes, then the child was more likely to have a tendency to display more withdrawn and uncommunicative behaviours two years after the dispute. Finally, overall behavioural problems and depression were also predicted by the role reversal between father and child. These findings are related to the development of parental alienation in that PAS children who are exposed to heightened levels of conflict in combination with the denigration of one parent by the other.  As a means of coping with the heightened levels of stress, PAS children may copy the alienating parent’s behaviour primarily by denigrating the lost parent. In doing so, they reduce some stress by believing that one parent is bad while the other is good. Subsequently, they focus on pleasing the alienating parent who is usually the custodial parent. Therefore, they ensure their survival in the alienating home by supporting the alienating parent’s beliefs.  Children who do not adapt in this way may feel they run the risk of also being rejected by the alienating parent and losing that parent’s love.

DIVORCE

The effect of divorce itself on the family can be devastating. What was once decided amongst the parents is now decided by third parties like lawyers and judges (Girdner, 1985).  Further, access to the children by each parent changes. Where before everyone lived together and parents and children had the freedom to interact whenever they wished, divorce dictates they must now abide by rules set by others. The most common effect of divorce is that the child remains primarily with one parent while the other parent becomes a "visitor" who is only allowed to see the child on certain occasions.  In theory, this "visitor" is allowed to have parental authority, that is to engage in the decision making process regarding the children (e.g., what school they should attend) (Turkat, 1994).  However, divorce often occurs because the parents can no longer make decisions together. Consequently, the visiting parent does not always have the visitation that he or she should have and may be unable to participate in the decision making process for important issues in their children’s lives. One time significant parents can become unwanted visitors for their children. The Children’s Rights Council in 1994 reported that an estimated six million children in the U.S. were victims of interfered visitation by their custodial parents. Arditti (1992) found that as high as 50% of fathers (usually the non-custodial parents) reported that their visitation with their children had been interfered with by their ex-wives.  Further, as many as 40% of custodial mothers admitted denying their ex-husbands their right to visitation as a means of punishing them (Kressel, 1985).  In PAS families, the interference with child visitation is but one of the symptoms, though the most  important.  It is believed that the goal of the alienating parent is to not only interfere in the lost parent’s visits, but to eliminate both the visits, and the visiting parent as well from the child’s life. Gardner (1992) postulated that PAS is of a serious nature that may be provoked by a serious emotional issue, such as custody. Consequently, Cartwright (1993)  noted that PAS may also be provoked by other serious and emotional issues such as property divisions or finances.

CONTRIBUTIONS OF THE  LEGAL SYSTEM

According to Gardner (1992), the legal system contributes to the occurrence of PAS.  In his book, The Parental Alienation Syndrome: A Guide for Mental Health Professionals, Gardner devotes two chapters to the history of the legal system and its impact on the occurrence of PAS. He postulates that parental alienation began to occur when courts began replacing the "tender-years" presumption with that of the "best-interests-of-the-child" presumption. The "tender-years" presumption stipulates that certain psychological benefits exist for children who remain with the mother, therefore custody was usually awarded to the mother. In the 1970s the courts began to favour the "best-interests-of-the-child" presumption, a less sexist position. With this presumption, the courts attempted to award custody to the parent who the best custodian for the child regardless of the parent’s gender. Gardner believes that this change in the legal system exacerbated mothers’ fears that they might lose custody of their children to the fathers. Moreover, for mothers to strengthen their cases they needed to denigrate the fathers, engendering the beginnings of PAS. Gardner supports this notion by reporting that in 90% of his PAS cases, it was the mother who was the alienating parent (Gardner, 1991, conference). Further changes in the legal system during the 1970s and 1980s, according to Gardner, contributed to the occurrence of PAS. Specific was the adoption in many jurisdictions of the notion of joint custody. Ideally in joint custody, both parents are to contribute equally to the upbringing of the children instead of one parent being the custodian and the other the "visitor". For joint custody to be granted it must be established that both parents can communicate with each other and can  participate in the upbringing of the child. However, when joint custody is granted, the parents are often placed back in the same situation that led them to seek a divorce initially: the inability to communicate and make decisions together. Although some couples can do so successfully, Gardner notes that this situation presents the opportunity for the children to be used as weapons in parental conflicts that may arise.

Gardner developed several other related notions concerning the development of PAS and the contributions of the legal system are simply a part of this influence on PAS development. Unfortunately, the only statistics that Gardner provided were those that demonstrated that mothers were usually the alienators without detailing the procedure by which he attained these results.

 Cartwright (1993) noted that the involvement of lawyers and the prolonged involvement of the court contributes not only to the occurrence of PAS but also to the increase in the severity of PAS.  Clawar and Rivlin (1991) conducted a twelve year study regarding the parental programming of children "to influence the outcome of disputes"  which was commissioned by the American Bar Association Section of Family Law.  They found that 80% of divorcing parents practiced parental programming to varying degrees  and 20% of whom did so at least once a day.  Further, Rand (1997) postulated  that many allegations of either sexual or physical abuse may be an alienating technique.  These allegations are powerful factors in the courts’ decisions for custody and therefore an invaluable tool to the alienators. Cartwright noted that the court requires adequate time to assess each case in order to determine the best interests of the child. However, he    cautioned that once identified as a PAS case, then the court needs to make speedy judgements in order to stop the alienation process immediately.  Unfortunately,  the usual procedure of court postponements and continuances permit the PAS process to continue. Further, Goldwater (1991) had postulated that the longer the children are in the alienating custodial situation, the "further they will drift away from their non-custodial parent" (p.130). Cartwright also noted that forceful judgement is required to counter the force of alienation.  Specifically, clear and forceful judgements are believed to deter possible alienating parents from even beginning the alienation process as they may immediately lose custody of their children.  This is only possible if the judge is aware of PAS as a syndrome and if it has been clearly identified in each case.  A second consequence of a clear and forceful judgement against the alienating parent is that such judgements can stop existing alienating processes from continuing.

 Support for the notion that the court can counter the occurrence of PAS has been found in a study conducted by Dunne and Hedrick (1994).  These researchers are two of the very few who conducted research specifically on PAS. In a qualitative study they interviewed sixteen families who exhibited a specified set of characteristics that met Gardner's (1992) criteria for PAS. The findings suggested that various family characteristics, such as the degree of PAS severity, were not indicators of the degree or effect of alienation on the family.  Further, they found that the only effective intervention to counter alienation was a court implemented custody change that resulted in the children being removed from the alienating home.  The various types of therapy demonstrated no improvement in any of the families that had undergone therapy; in two of these cases the alienation actually became worse. It appears that the legal system is the most effective mean of terminating the process of alienation, reflecting the strong influence exerted by the legal system on the occurrence of PAS.

  Girdner (1985), in an ethnographic study, examined the structure of custody litigation and the strategies used by parents who were contesting the custody of their children. She immersed herself in the legal culture for eighteen months. By observing court proceedings regarding custody she examined the relationships between the legal and the familial processes within the context of those proceedings. She found that the final custody arrangements were usually made with respect to the economic issues of the divorce. Specifically, her findings suggested that the factors which influenced custody agreements included: (a) the negotiating style of the attorneys involved; (b) the dynamics  of bargaining in the legal system; and (c) at which stage of the emotional process of divorce in which the clients were.

COMBINED FACTORS

A number of factors influence the occurrence of  PAS.  The family unit does not function in isolation. Individual characteristics of family members may also play a role on the occurrence of PAS. A study conducted by Calabrese, Miller, and Dooley (1987) examined the characteristics of 49 parents and their children from two fourth grade classes. These researchers assessed the parents’ alienation of their children using the Dean Alienation Scale that provides an overall measure of alienation through examining the following dimensions: Isolation, Powerlessness, and Normalesness. They also assessed the children’s school achievement by examining their percentiles, as well as the children’s attitudes toward school.  However, these researchers found that the best predictors of alienation was unrelated to the children’s academic attitudes or performance, but rather to the characteristics of the individuals involved. Specifically, they reported that high levels of alienation were found to be associated with unemployed, single mothers, whose child was female and the child had only a few perceived friends. While these findings appear to support Gardner’s contention that the alienator is usually the mother, they provide little support for Gardner’s theory that the introduction of the "best-interests-of-the-child" presumption contributed to this phenomenon.

Lund (1995) examined factors that contributed to the development of parental alienation.  She assessed families in terms of (a) developmental factors in the child, (b) parenting styles, and (c) level of stress experienced by the child.  She postulated that contributing factors in the occurrence of PAS included the following: (1) Separation difficulties that are developmentally inappropriate.  Specifically, PAS could be related to the occurrence of pre-schooler’s separation problems that may normally occur but are heightened by the stress occurring within a separated home. (2) The child exhibiting oppositional behaviour. With older children in adolescence and preadolescence the development of oppositional behaviour may be manifested as a rejection of the lost parent  in a family with conflicts. (3) The deterioration of the non-custodial parental skills.  The alienated parent usually displays a distant, rigid, and sometimes authoritarian style of parenting, whereas the alienating parent is indulgent and clinging.  The children can then more easily reject the harsher parent and defend the more indulgent one. (4) Conflicts occurring during the divorce. According to Lund (1995),  these may prompt the child to seek means of escaping the stress related to such conflict.  Therefore, the child may denigrate the lost parent as a justification of the alienating parent’s actions.

SUMMARY

 Relatively few research studies have been conducted specifically on PAS.  The literature examined in this section pertained primarily to several articles that described parental alienation, however the majority were not empirical studies. The literature suggests that several factors may contribute to the occurrence of PAS. The heightened levels of conflict that are often associated with the dissolution of a marriage have been shown to have several short- and long-term effects on family members (Demo & Acock, 1988; Hoffman, 1971; Kurdek 1981).  Johnston et al., 1987 found that involving the children in the disputes tended to result in the children displaying behavioural problems (e.g., withdrawing  and not communicating). PAS is one area in which heightened levels of conflict are believed to play a large role in the lives of the family members.  Therefore, it is postulated that the heightened conflict levels may be an important factor in the occurrence of PAS.  Divorce is a difficult time for all family members.  With divorce comes a stressful restructuring where one parent, who was once involved in the child’s life, may suddenly become an unwanted visitor (Turkat, 1994).  This is difficult for those involved and there are indicators that these visiting parents (usually the fathers) encounter difficulties with their visits.  For instance, Arditi (1992) found that as many as 50% of fathers reported an interference in their visitation rights; similarly, Kressel (1985) found that 40% of mothers admitted to attempting to interfere in the father’s visitation.  Some circumstance or factor that occurs in the process of divorce may result in the rejection of one parent by the other.  If this occurs, it is postulated that PAS may follow.  The circumstances that lead to the rejection of a parent are as yet to be determined.  There may be high levels of conflict or stress involved in the dissolution of the marriage and thus further research is necessary to examine the degree to which these factors are important in the occurrence of PAS.
 With the initiation of a divorce, the legal proceedings involved may pertain not only to  the divorce but to custody agreements as well.  Most of the literature on PAS suggests that various aspects of the legal system have contributed to the occurrence of PAS (Gardner, 1992) and has even heightened the severity of PAS (Cartwright,1993). Moreover, Dune and Hedrick (1994) found that the legal system can play an important role in the termination of PAS. Specifically, a court ordered change in custody was found to be the most effective intervention that resulted in the termination of  PAS with time.  As Calabrese et al., (1987), and Lund (1995) found, many factors from individual characteristics to stress on the children have been linked to the occurrence of alienation.  The number of possible factors that instigate PAS are legion, therefore, there is a need to examine PAS qualitatively to gain better comprehension.  A better understanding of how PAS occurs may be helpful in learning how to treat and perhaps prevent PAS.

  This chapter describes the objectives, the sampling technique, the instrumentation for the data collection, as well as the interview protocols. It concludes with a description of the data analyses.

RESEARCH  QUESTION

 The findings discussed in the literature review pertain mainly to studies on divorce rather than on Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS).  The purpose of the present study is to examine qualitatively six cases of parental alienation in order to gain a better understanding of its development. Specifically, the focus of the present study is to gain an understanding of factors that result in an intact family becoming an alienated one.  With such information it is believed that possible indicators of PAS development can be determined.  The following questions are posed:
1.  Are there characteristics (e.g., number of children, number of marriages, etc.) common  to alienated families?
2.  Are there common themes or issues among the conflicts within couples that contribute to marriage dissolution?
3.  Are there common themes in the participants’ experience of the alienation process?
4.  Given the opportunity,  what are some things that the lost parents perceive they might do differently?
 

 PARTICIPANTS

 As this is a qualitative study of cases, the sampling procedure was criterion-based.  To be included in the sample, the families had to meet a number of criteria, bases, or standards constituting a criterion-based sample (Yin, 1984). All of the participants included in the study met the following criteria:
· they were formerly part of a family unit which included at least one child;
· they had divorced or were in the process of divorcing;
· they identified themselves as having experienced or were experiencing alienation from their ex-spouse.
The participants studied were five fathers and one mother. The fact that the majority of the participants were male is consistent with Gardner’s (1992) findings suggesting that the alienators are more frequently mothers. Two of the participants resided in different areas in the province of Quebec.  The remaining participants were residents of various states in the United States.  These participants were recruited with flyers, e-mails and letters sent by the investigator (See Appendix A).  Letters of consent and self-addressed envelopes were sent to those participants who responded via telephone or e-mail indicating that they were willing to participate in the research (See Appendix B).  Finally, all of the participants were telephoned by the investigator once consent was received and appointments were made with the participants to be interviewed.

TOOLS OF INQUIRY

 The data were collected through a semi-structured, open-ended, tape-recorded telephone interview questionnaires.  The interview method was chosen as a means of achieving a more holistic understanding of the alienating situation.

 The interview questionnaire was divided into four parts.  The first consisted of ascertaining the current status and characteristics of the family, and establishing rapport to enable the participants to feel comfortable discussing the situation with the researcher.  The remaining sections related to the dissolution of the marriage, factors related to the alienation, and a retrospective reflection on the alienation.  The content of the interview items were based on previous studies and current theories related to the development of PAS.  Questions were designed to determine whether there were any common themes that occurred throughout different individuals' experiences of alienation.  It was hoped that answers to such questions might shed light on possible indicators of the instigation, continuance, and termination of PAS. The actual interview questions are presented in Appendix C.

INTERVIEW APPROACH

Context of Interviews:
 Each participant was interviewed separately by the researcher. Because of the different locations of the participants across the continent the interviews were conducted over the telephone and tape-recorded.  Before each interview, the researcher reminded each participant that they would be tape recorded and that they were free to decline to answer any question or discontinue the interview at any time.  Field notes were taken during the course of the interview to record emerging and unexpected dimensions.  Each interview lasted a maximum of  one-and-one-half hours.  All the interviews were conducted in the months of June and July 1997 in one block of time, except one which was continued the following day.  Rapport was established with each participant with the initial telephone call when appointments were made and again prior to the beginning of the interview session.

ANALYSIS OF THE DATA

 The tape recorded data were transcribed.  Within the transcriptions all "…" represented pauses in the conversations, "uhms" and "uhs" were also included in the transcriptions. See Appendix B for a sample page of the transcribed data.  The data were then reviewed to determine possible commonalities among the cases. Seven general commonalities emerged that formed classifications of information which were then  labelled to reflect the issues identified.  These classifications and their related issues were labelled as follows: (1) Family Data including family constellation and relocation (2) Dissolution of the Marriage including cause of marital dissolution and current relationship with ex-spouse (3) Relationship with the PAS children including: frequency of visitation/contact, and current relationship with PAS children (4) Alienation and Alienating Techniques including: alienators’ attitudes and behaviours, other’s contributions, causes of PAS, and control/power issues (5) Issues related to the classification of experiences with professionals including legal and psychological services (6) Current perceptions including: looking back, the impact of PAS, causes of PAS, and Termination/Looking to the future and (7) Miscellaneous. Following the formation of these classifications, the data were reinspected to determine whether they related to these classifications.  A third reading of the data was performed to ensure that the data were classified appropriately.  Once the data were categorized, the contents of each classification were summarized with the inclusion of relevant quotes that reflected participants’ responses.  For instance, a quote pertaining to the issue of the participant’s frequency of visitation with his child would be as follows:  "So right now, it’s about once a month. Uhmm, about three years ago…it was once or twice a week, and since then…so I can see him [his son] about once a month."

The results of the analysis are presented in the next chapter.

This chapter presents the results of the data analysis described in Chapter 3.

Family Data

 For the determination of indicators of PAS, the study of family data was an important area to examine first as there may have been some characteristics relevant in the occurrence of PAS.

(a) Family Constellation: Information about participants’ family characteristics such as marital status, number of marriages, length of alienating marriage, and number of  PAS and non-PAS children were included.  The information gathered pertaining to the family constellation was attained primarily through probing with the questions developed by the researcher which were part of the questionnaire shown in Appendix C.

Results:  Three of the six participants had remarried after the alienating marriage and another participant reported that he was living with a partner. Of the remaining participants, one was continuing legal proceedings and the other, the only female participant, had remained unmarried since the divorce.  The length of the alienating marriages ranged between three and thirteen years.

 Four of the six participants each had one child (two of whom were girls) from the PAS marriage, one participant had two children of PAS (two boys) and another had three children (two of whom were boys).  Four of the six participants had no other children outside of the PAS marriage (one participant was living with his partner’s children) and two participants had two children outside their PAS marriage. However, the lost parents tended to have had only one child from the PAS marriage and tended to have remarried after the PAS marriage ended.  See Table 1 for a summary of the results. These results suggest a lack of common family characteristics inherent in PAS families.
Table 1
Summary of the participants’ family constellations:

Participants Marital Status Total Number of Marriages  Length of PAS marriage (in years) Number of PAS children Number of non-PAS children
1 Married 2         3 1 2
2 Married 2       13 3 0
3 Divorced 1         9 2 0
4 Married 2         8 1 2
5 Divorced 1         9 1 0
6 Cohabitant 2         5 1 1

(b) Relocation:  Information for this area was not probed.  The participants related this information primarily when discussing either alienating techniques or the marital dissolution.  Specifically, the data gathered pertained to any of the participants’ references to his or her own, or the child’s (with the alienator) change of home(s), whether to a different home, town, city, state or province, or country.

Results:  The number of relocations per alienated family varied.  The participants reported that they or their children (of the PAS marriage) had relocated between one and ten times. The father who reported that his ex-spouse and the PAS child relocated approximately ten times, had done so in the same city and simply relocated to ten different houses.  Three of these participants reported at least one relocation of the alienator to another city or town.  Only one parent attributed his ex-spouses’ repeated relocation to other cities as an alienation technique to prevent him from seeing his child.  The remaining participants did not indicate whether or not their ex-spouses with the PAS children had relocated since the divorce. Only one alienated father indicated that he had relocated after the alienating marriage and he reported doing so in order to remain in close contact with his daughter who was being relocated by the alienating mother. The lost parents tended to report the relocation of the alienator with the PAS child or children after the marriage with little or no indication of their own relocation. Further, the nature and the reasons behind the relocations were not given. This information was not probed further as this was not an intended area of study. Thus the results suggest that the alienators’ change of home may not be a salient characteristic of PAS families.  The overall results from the family data suggest that family characteristics such as number of PAS children, number of marriages, and the alienators’ relocations were weak indicators of PAS.

Dissolution of the Marriage

 Another area indicative of the underlying reasons for the occurrence of PAS concerns the dissolution of the marriage.  By broadening the examination of  PAS into this area the issues of conflicts may be addressed, as well as indicators of the relationship between the alienator and the lost parent.

(a) Cause of marital dissolution:  Primarily via the researcher’s questioning, data were gathered that pertained to any issues and conflicts that occurred within the marriage that the participants perceived as resulting in negative consequences for the marriage (i.e., leading to the dissolution of their marriage).

Results:  Participants reported various reasons for the dissolution of the marriage.  Those participants (four of the six) who initiated the divorce reported a breakdown in the relationship between themselves and their spouses for various reasons. A participant reported that his friends urged him to initiate the divorce due to the way his wife at the time treated him.  He noted that she became physically violent at times:

She ripped my shirt off my back. On one occasion she took the flower pot and almost threw it on the lid of the car when I was backing up...She would just get in this rage when I would leave.
The remaining two participants reported that they were unaware that their wives wanted divorces and they were in disbelief when the divorce proceedings began. One participant described how he found out his wife had left him: her mother informed him of the impending divorce: "X decided to divorce you, that’s the only way she can be happy is if she divorces you and...you just have to live with it, that’s how it is."  In his own words, the participant explained "...she apparently decided to...divorce me and I didn’t know." These results suggest that marital conflicts and their intensity are weak predictors in the occurrence of PAS as participants either reported no conflicts that led to the dissolution of the marriage or, if conflicts did occur, a variety of issues were reported as resulting in conflicts.

(b) Current relationship with ex-spouse:  The researcher had probed the participants to describe their current relationship with their ex-spouses. The issues relating to this topic presented in the data pertained to the verbal and physical interactions between the participants and the ex-spouses in the alienating situation.

Results:  The participants reported that they currently engaged in little or no communication with their ex-spouses (the alienators).  Three of the six participants stated that they had no contact with the alienator for one to three years. As one participant explained his current relationship with is ex-wife: "...there’s not too much to the relationship.  I haven’t talked to her for about three or four years."   Two of the remaining three participants reported that they had some communication, however this communication was often limited to e-mail or to requesting to speak with the children over the phone.  Those participants who reported having had some limited contact with the alienators described their relationships as tense. One participant explained her relationship with her ex-spouse as "very tense and... unpredictable at times." There was one exception, a participant described his relationship with his ex-spouse as a relationship that they were "working on".  Previously their relationship was strained, however a change in their relationship occurred when, recently, his ex-spouse was diagnosed with a terminal illness. The results suggest that the participants’ experienced either an on-going strained or chronic lack of relationship between themselves and their ex-spouses (the alienator).

 Overall, the findings indicated that related to the dissolution of the marriage, the conflicts between the participants and their ex-spouses were of varying issues and intensity.  Specifically, the nature and intensity of the conflicts appeared to be weak indicators of the occurrence of PAS. The results also suggest, however, that after the dissolution of the marriage and the occurrence of PAS, the relationship between the alienator and the lost parent was virtually strained or non-existent.
 

Relationship with the PAS children

 The importance of studying PAS is evident in its effects on the children and their relationship with their lost parents.  Examining the frequency of visitation and the lost parents’ relationship with their children may provide insight as to the impact of PAS on the children and their relationships with their lost parents.

(a) Frequency of visitation/contact: The researcher probed the participants for information pertaining to the amount of contact between the participant and his or her child (or children).  Contact was defined as any interaction between individuals whether by conventional mail, e-mail, telephone, or physical ("face to face") contact.

Results:  All of the participants reported that the mother had primary custody of the children at the time of divorce or separation. Visitation for the fathers was approximately every second weekend, with the exception of one father who was allowed visitation five days a week for five hours per day. Since the finalization of the divorce or the implementation of the custody agreement, all of the alienated parents had their visitation drastically reduced, including the alienated mother who initially had primary custody. Upon asking her how often she sees her children, if at all, her response was "none." Most of the alienated parents had not seen their children via a court implemented visitation for up to four years.  Those parents who continued to have visitation had less frequent visits than when they were first divorced or separated (e.g., instead of every second weekend, a father reported that his visitation had been reduced to once a month). For instance, one father described his reduction in visitation as follows: "...about three years ago...it [visitation] was once or twice a week, and since then....I can see him about once a month."  Overall, the results suggest that a change in the frequency of visitation and custody arrangement occurs with these PAS families.  The change of visitation and custody arrangement tends to be as follows:  At the onset of the divorce, fathers received regular visitation schedules and the mothers (including the alienated mother in the present study) were given primary custody.  After the legal proceedings and the onset of PAS there was a significant decrease in the frequency of the visitation schedule with all the alienated parents, including the alienated mother who had been given primary custody at the onset of the divorce. Although this result may be attributed to having primarily male participants in the study who tended to have visitation rather than custody, nonetheless, the frequency of the visitation was drastically reduced after the proceedings for all of the participants.  Further, it remains uncertain as to the cause of the change in the visitation frequency.  This change may be due to the legal proceedings or to PAS itself or a third unknown factor.  If such a change were due to PAS however, it would be indicative of the success of the alienators in having the lost parents removed from the children’s lives.

(b) Current relationship with PAS children: Again, the researcher probed the participants for data pertaining to the type of physical, verbal, and emotional contact between the participant and the children.

Results:  Three of the participants reported having little or no relationship with their alienated children. The alienated mother reported that although she had very little contact with her children she still felt "connected" with them.  She continued to attempt to be present during important children’s events such as soccer, baseball games and graduations despite various obstacles (e.g., not being told of such events and being "scolded" by the alienator for going). The fathers who had little contact with their children reported that they attempted to maintain contact by writing letters and cards as well as sending various types of gifts (e.g., toys) to their children. Regardless of whether their children responded to their communication attempts, these fathers hoped that their children understood that by these gestures they were demonstrating their affections to their children. One father described his attempts as follows: "...I write every week. I try to send him [his son] something every week. It can be a postcard, it can be a toy... "

 Only two alienated fathers reported having a close relationship with their alienated children.  One of these fathers described his case as a mild form of PAS and attributed his closeness to his daughter to her young age and that he continued to maintain daily telephone contact with her.  In his words:

I’ve always been very close with my daughter...very, very close...I don’t think they [the divorce/custody proceedings] had anything [to do with it], she was too young. She was only two years old.

 The other lost parent reported a close relationship with his two younger children, while his relationship with his oldest daughter remained somewhat strained.  This participant’s close relationship with his younger children may be attributed to a milder form of PAS with his younger children than with his daughter and to his relationship with his ex-spouse who was diagnosed with a terminal illness and with whom he is currently re-establishing some communication. Thus, the results confirm that most PAS children and their lost parents did indeed have a strained relationship. However, the severity of PAS was a weak indicator of the extent of such a strain.

 Overall, the results pertaining to the issues of the lost parents’ relationships with their PAS children are as follows: First, the results suggest a decrease in the frequency of visitation for the lost parent which may or may not have been due to PAS.  Specifically, participants reported that custody was routinely given to the mother at the onset of the divorce, regardless of who became the alienator and who became the lost parent with the onset of PAS. Further, all fathers had a consistent visitation schedule where all had visitation every two weeks with the exception of one father who visited every day. With the onset of alienation, the alienator received custody and the lost parents had their visitations drastically reduced either to absolutely no visitation or no contact, to visitation of approximately once a month. Of interest is that the only lost female parent who initially had primary custody of the children had absolutely no visitation schedule by the time of the interview.  Second, as there was a reduction of other contacts with their children, the lost parents described a limited relationship with their children, often writing to them without reply.  The only exceptions to these findings were two fathers who related that their ability to maintain a relatively stable relationship with their children was a function of the mild severity of the PAS in their cases.  Therefore as expected, the findings mildly suggest indications that the less severe the PAS the better the chance of having a good relationship with their children.

Alienation and alienating techniques

As there is little research on this subject, a more detailed examination of alienation and associated alienating techniques is necessary in gaining a better understanding of its impact.

(a) Alienators’ attitude and behaviours:  Data pertained to all references to the alienators’ behaviours and actions that resulted in any negative consequences for the participant or the alienated child or children. Some of the data gathered for this issue was either probed by the researcher or was spontaneously reported by the participants throughout the interview,

Results:  The results suggest that the alienators denigrated the lost parents by implying that the lost parents were not good people.  For instance, one father accidentally overheard the alienator inform the children that she had hired an attorney to prevent them from having to visit with their father. The alienator did not allow the child to continue a healthy relationship with the lost parent. Another parent reported that whenever his child went back to the alienator’s home after a visit with him, the child would be questioned  or "debriefed" about everything that happened there.  A way the alienators exercised their power, as described by a father, included attempts offering the children alternate choices (e.g. shopping) to visiting with the father.  The results suggest that all of the participants perceived a general "sabotage" of their relationships with their children by the alienators.  The lost parents reported that they perceived their relationship with their children as being "eroded" often by not being informed of a child’s activities (e.g., soccer game schedule) that the lost parent may have wished to attend. Whether the alienator used mild "alienating techniques"- for instance whenever the lost parent called, the alienator would call the children to the telephone by saying in an "angry voice" "Its your father!" - or more drastic means by making accusations of physical and sexual abuse, the effect was that all the lost parents perceived that they were denied or deterred access to their children.

(b) Other’s contributions:  Data gathered for this group pertained to all references to any individual, with the exception of the ex-spouse, who engaged in any alienating techniques (i.e., that were perceived by the participants as attempts at alienating the lost parent from the PAS child).  Some of the responses were due to the researcher’s questioning but the primary source for the data was due to the participants’ spontaneous descriptions of the alienating circumstances involving others.

Results:  In five of the six cases the children of the PAS families were described as "spies" for the alienator.  These children reported back to the alienator anything that the lost parent said that the child did not like.  This reporting would often result in arguments between the alienator and the lost parent.  The female participant in the study reported that her children would copy all of her personal papers and bills for their father.  Further, her children would report to him whenever she had a date. The results also indicate that gifts given to the children by the lost parent would often "disappear" or be broken by the children.  In the two cases where there was more than one PAS child, the results indicated that the children were "turned against each other" where in one case they would spy on each other and in the other case the oldest child would engage in alienating the younger children (e.g., enticing the younger children to abandon their visit with their father in order to go to "Sea World" with her and her mother).  In one of the cases the maternal grandparents continued the alienation when the alienator (the mother) had discontinued all contact with the father and the grandparents were placed in the position of monitoring the child’s visits with his father.  In another case the lost parent’s ex-brothers-in-law and ex-mother-in-law also contributed to the alienation by denigrating the father in front of the children (e.g., saying "I am really sorry you have a father like that").  These results suggest that the children acted as the secondary alienator (i.e., the second alienator after the parent)  and they would do so primarily by being spies for the alienating parent and by continually rejecting the lost parent via various means (e.g., breaking toys).  Grandparents and other extended family members also appeared to play an important role by contributing to the alienation as secondary alienators, provided that they were close to the alienator. The findings suggest that the closer the alienator’s family members, the greater their tendency to alienate as well. These findings raise the question as to why close family members contribute to the alienation.  For instance, are some of the alienating parent’s family characteristics indicative of their engagement in alienation or is it something about the alienation itself that engages other family members to contribute to the alienation or is it simply that these family members take sides? Researchers have yet to address this issue and future research will be important in answering this question.

(c)  Cause of PAS:  Data gathered here pertained to any causes or factors that the participants perceived to be linked to the development or occurrence of the alienation. Some of the data collected on this issue resulted from direct probing by the researcher, and some resulted from the participants descriptions of their circumstances.

Results:  All of the participants believed that the motive behind the alienation was triggered by hate, anger, or a sense of seeking revenge towards them by the alienator or some combination of these. One father reported his belief that the cause of the alienation was "Hate...Hate towards me" and another participant perceived: "She hates my guts and she says it...And she’s trying to get back at me as well."  Another motive suggested in the findings was that the participants perceived the alienation as a means by which the alienators could succeed in severing the participants’ relationships with their children. One participant noted that the alienator may have made accusations of abuse as a means of explaining the reason behind the divorce.  He described his belief as follows: "This gives her an excuse for leaving a bad guy and why the marriage broke up, and therefore it’s not her fault."  The findings suggest that the participants perceived the underlying cause of the alienation as the hatred toward the lost parents, anger, or revenge, or some combination of these.

(d) Control/power: All data gathered pertained to references to situations where the participant perceived that an individual’s actions or behaviours led to another individual’s behavioural change or constraint.  Moreover, the data were spontaneously generated by the participants rather than elicited by the researcher.

Results:  The results suggest that the participants had lost some power over their relationship with their PAS children. The alienators were often described by the participants as using the child or other means to attempt to produce a desired outcome in the lost parent or the child.  An example of an alienator using the child is as follows: an alienator locked her child in a dark closet, to be found "yelling and screaming" by the lost parent, in order to make the lost parent give her some papers.

 Feelings of powerlessness were also apparent in the findings as the participants reported feeling constrained as to the way in which they had to behave in the presence of their children.  They reported a need to control their behaviour while in the presence of their children for fear of losing their visitation privileges or experiencing other legal consequences when the child reported to the alienator what the lost parent had done.  As one father described his feelings:

So I think she [his daughter] has a lot more power than I do, you know.  She has the power to just terminate the relationship at any time.  I mean, if at any time she would say ‘Well Dad, I don't feel like seeing you any more.’  Well, her mother's ...she says, you know, ‘whatever your daughter wants, you know...that's the law type of thing’.
There is a sense of loss of parental role in the life of their children that has been attributed to the alienation.  The lost parents cannot exert any of his or her parental responsibilities over their children.  For instance, one lost parent reported how he could not discipline his child (e.g., send the child to her room) when the child behaved inappropriately, or she might end the visit the alienator would become angry at him for having disciplined his daughter as he once would normally have done.

 Participants who did not have any contact with their children also reported a sense of being controlled or constrained in their behaviour. For instance, one father believed that he had to monitor the frequency with which he sent cards or packages to his child for fear of being charged with "harassment" if he did so too frequently.  Further, two of the participants reported a sense of the children being controlled by the alienator. These children had to behave in a certain manner while with the alienated parent to avoid negative consequences by the alienator. For instance, one participant reported that an unscheduled visit to his child (in order to bring her a gift) resulted in the alienator yelling at the child for speaking to him.  There was a sense of powerless reported by all the participants forcing them to behave in a certain manner to avoid legal or other consequences.  As one father reported, once divorce occurs then "the courts really have the say over what happens to the kids, not you" [the parent].  These findings suggest that the lost parents perceived themselves as powerless with their children and to have lost their traditional parental roles whether or not they had visitation with their children.

 Overall, the findings confirmed that the alienators used denigrating techniques (e.g., implying that the lost parents were not good people) and provided ultimata to children and spouses to further the alienation that was motivated by hate, anger, revenge or some combination of these three. Others were enlisted to contribute to the alienation. Children,  in particular, were seen as spies to relay information to the alienator and, as such, may be considered  secondary alienators.  Second, extended family members such as in-laws who shared close relationships with the alienators contributed to the alienation as well.  Moreover, the lost parents felt powerless as a result of the alienating situation.  The children in particular were perceived as controlling the lost parents