In contrast, Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) was concocted by Richard Gardner, based on no research, only his...
Posted by Denounce discredited parental alienation theory on Tuesday, September 8, 2015
 |
"For those who are concerned about Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS), two immeasurably significant points can be interpreted from the Scientific American article regarding the DSM-5." ~ Linda J. Gottlieb Kase, LMFT, LCSW-R is owner and founder of End Parental Alienation
|
Dr. Bill Bernet, lead a group of interested professionals in encouraging the DSM 5 editing group to include Parental Alienation Disorder. The new DSM was published on May 18, 2013 and is the reference book for psychiatrists, psychologists and other mental health providers Here is Dr. Bernet's unedited analysis of the result.
Finally, DSM-5 was published today. The DSM-5 Task Force told us 2 or 3 years ago that they did not want parental alienation to be a separate diagnosis in DSM-5, but they thought that parental alienation could be considered an example of other diagnoses that are in DSM-5.
The actual words "parental alienation" are not in DSM-5, but there are several diagnoses that can be used in these cases. I would say the "spirit" of parental alienation is in DSM-5, even if the words are not.
Parent-child relational problem now has a discussion in DSM-5, not just a label. The discussion explains that cognitive problems in parent-child relational problem "may include negative attributions of the other's intentions, hostility toward or scapegoating of the other, and unwarranted feelings of estrangement." That is a pretty good description of a child's view of the alienated parent, although it is an unfortunate use of the word "estrangement."
Child psychological abuse is a new diagnosis in DSM-5. It is defined as "nonaccidental verbal or symbolic acts by a child's parent or caregiver that result, or have reasonable potential to result, in significant psychological harm to the child." In many instances, the behavior of the alienating parent constitutes child psychological abuse.
Child affected by parental relationship distress is another new diagnosis in DSM-5. It should be used "when the focus of clinical attention if the negative effects of parental relationship discord (e.g., high levels of conflict, distress, or disparagement) on a child in the family, including effects on the child's mental or other physical disorders." That is also a good description of how parental alienation comes about.
Factitious disorder imposed on another is the DSM-5 terminology for factitious disorder by proxy or Munchausen disorder by proxy. Its definition is "falsification of physical or psychological signs or symptoms, or induction of injury or disease, in another, associated with identified deception." In some cases, that would describe the behavior of the alienating parent.
Delusional symptoms in partner of individual with delusional disorder is the DSM-5 terminology for shared psychotic disorder or folie a deux. The definition is: "In the context of a relationship, the delusional material from the dominant partner provides content for delusional belief by the individual who may not otherwise entirely meet criteria for delusional disorder."
In discussing this topic, I would say that the concept of parental alienation is clearly in DSM-5, although the actual words are not. This is a great improvement over DSM-IV-TR, especially with the addition of the new diagnoses, child psychological abuse and child affected by parental relationship distress.
Dr. Bernet is currently working with PAAO to present a webinar on this subject in the next 2 - 3 weeks. We will notify you of the details shortly.
 |
This beautiful animation above was created especially for Bubbles of Love Day on behalf of Kids Aiding the PAAO (KAPAAO).
Thank you to the very talented Bronwyn Coveney, from the United kingdom for volunteering her time and talent on behalf of children around the world. Bronwyn is the original visual creator of the PAAO and KAPAAO's, Mascot Panda Abuzz.
|
Memories of a Monster: A closer look at Parental Alienation
Using a storyline from an episode of Desperate Housewives, "Always in Control" (S08-Ep7), Joe Barrow walks us through the insidious brainwashing of a young daughter, Penny, by her mother, Lynette. When Lynette's ex-husband (Penny's father) begins dating a new woman and a relationship begins to flourish between the new girlfriend and their daughter, Penny, the mother is determined to drive a wedge between the loving relationship of her daughter has with her ex-husband, and the new girlfriend. Using a child as a pawn always has tragic consequences. The Parental Alienation tactics used and the manipulation by the mother mirrors the nightmarish reality that hundreds of thousands of parents and grandparents live through today. If you are dealing with this tragedy this mini -documentary will hit you, perhaps, too close to home. Watch in HD. Desperate Housewives is the property of Cherry Productions (Touchstone Television (2004-2007), ABC Studios (2007-2012), and DISNEY. No copyright infringement intended. This video may contain copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are using this video to help raise awareness of Parental Alienation as a form of psychological child abuse. This video is not-for-profit use and for informational and educational purposes only and constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law.We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of social issues of parental alienation as a form of emotional and psychological child abuse. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
Posted by Joe Barrow on Wednesday, July 1, 2015
Linda Gottleib discussing Parental Alienation - Families in Transition
Firstly: In the movie, High Anxiety, anxiety-neurotic psychiatrist, Mel Brooks, practices at the Institute for the Very, Very, Very, Very, Very, Very Nervous, and no one seems to have an issue with an anxiety-neurotic psychiatrist.
But more seriously, there is always a kernel of truth in all fiction. In the professional opinion of this family therapist, it is a despicable common practice to use the alleged (and I will shortly explain why I use the word “alleged”) diagnoses of depression and/or anxiety of targeted parents as an excuse to minimize or sever their relationships with their children or to base a decision regarding custody on this. Furthermore, it is as if such diagnoses are interpreted to be equivalent to pedophilia, characterlogical disorders, socio-pathology, or any other Axis II diagnoses, which are untreatable. As convoluted as the system is, the alienator most often has an Axis II diagnosis, which is where narcissistic personality disorder is diagnosed. Anxiety and depression, should they truly exist, are treatable Axis I diagnoses.
Now comes Ferris Jabr’s article in Scientific American, Field Tests for Revised Psychiatric Guide Reveal Reliability Problems for 2 Major Diagnoses. Jabr documents that the extensively diagnosed, “alleged” disorders of anxiety and depression do not garner nearly enough consistent scientific support for these diagnoses to rise to the level of a syndrome/disease. Wow, imagine that! To quote Jabr:
"The APA uses a statistic called kappa to measure the reliability of different diagnoses. The higher the value of kappa, the more reliable the diagnosis, with 1.0 representing perfect reliability. The APA considers a diagnosis with a kappa of .08 or higher miraculously reliable; 0.6 to 0.8 is excellent; 0.4 to 0.6 is good; 0.2 to 0.4 “could be accepted” and anything below 0.2 is unacceptably unreliable." ~ Ferris Jabr
I emphasize here the words “could be accepted.” Would anyone in their right mind, not to be facetious here, undergo a risky surgery on a diagnosis expressed as “you COULD have x disease?”
So given the frequency of the diagnoses of anxiety and depression and given the frequent remedy of prescribing heavy-duty psychotropic medications which have severe side effects, one would think that anxiety and depression each had a kappa score of at least .6 and preferably higher. Well, surprise, surprise! Depression has a score of only .03, and anxiety has a score of only point 0.2.
So what does this mean to all of you targeted/alienated parents whose alleged diagnoses of depression and/or anxiety are being used against you in custody battles for your children? It means that you most likely DO NOT HAVE a disease! This is not to say you do not have the symptoms of depression and anxiety. According to this family therapist, whose mentor was the world-renowned, highly respected child psychiatrist, Salvador Minuchin, it means that your symptoms (not disease) are situationally caused and maintained. Who could dispute that, having your relationship with your child minimized, undermined, if not severed, would not cause you to have such symptoms? Traumatic circumstances, and usually physical and sexual abuse, have occurred in every case of every patient whom I treated for the “alleged” diagnosis of bipolar disorder! Scratch the surface for anyone exhibiting the symptoms of anxiety and depression, and I can virtually guarantee a situational explanation of humiliation, abuse, deprecation, and/or some form of trauma. The point made in this article is supported by the information in a previous post I made of a 60 minute documentary regarding Harvard researcher, Irving Kirsch, who discovered that placebos are equally effective as antidepressants in the treatment of mild to moderate depression, which account for most cases of depression.
So now you have the counter argument for your attorney and which must be made if you are accused of having one or both of these mythical diseases. Make sure you download and print the link to the Scientific American article for your records. You may also wish to buttress your argument that you do not have a disease by garnering support from Dr. Minuchin. His book, Family Therapy Techniques is the easiest way to excerpt his professional opinion that symptoms are maintained by unhealthy relationships and trauma rather than being indicative of an intra-psychic disease.
Secondly: Let us return to the kappa statistic, which measures the reliability of a diagnosis. PAS-aware professionals----therapists, forensic evaluators, family coaches, and matrimonial attorneys----as well as anyone who has been victimized by the PAS, can readily diagnose for the PAS based on the presence of Gardner’s eight characteristic symptoms. When one of the eight symptoms is present, the others tend to be present as well; and taken together, they cannot represent any other syndrome, as do so many symptoms of other syndromes. PAS children so incredibly resemble each other that their behaviors, expressions, feelings, and opinions are predictable to the PAS-aware professional and to the targeted/alienated parent. This is why Gardner stated that the PAS is readily diagnosable for anyone who is not blinded----blinded by prejudice, bias, pecuniary interests, indifference, laziness, rescue fantasy, or for any other reason.
I am absolutely convinced that the PAS would garner a kappa score of 1.0!
This is what everyone must write about to the DSM-5 task force: that the PAS unquestionably has enough scientific support worldwide and scientific documentation dating back to the family therapists of the 1950s to attain a kappa score that approaches 1.0. If the PAS is not accepted into the DSM-5, then factors other than scientific support must be influencing the task force.
Once again, the psychiatrists on the DSM-5 task force to whom you should write a letter are:
Darrel A. Regier, M. D.
Director, APA Division of Research
American Psychiatric Association
1000 Wilson Blvd., Suite 1825
Arlington, VA 22209-3901
Daniel S. Pine, M. D.
Chief, Section on Development and Affective Neuroscience
National Institutes of Mental Health
15K North Drive, MSC–2670
Bethesda, MD 20892–2670
Linda J. Gottlieb Kase, LMFT, LCSW-R is owner and founder of End Parental Alienation.
PARENTAL ALIENATION & DSM-5
Action Alert:
Parental Alienation Still
Under Consideration for DSM-5
July 12th, 2011 by Glenn
Sacks, MA, Executive Director. Fathers and Families
Short version: The DSM-5
Task Force has extended until July 15 the time for comments from the public. We
urge you to comment by clicking here. We suggest you refer to “Parental
Alienation Relational Problem” (PARP) or “Parental Alienation” and that you
keep your comments brief and to the point
Full version: A coalition
of mental health experts led by psychiatrist William Bernet has been at the
forefront of an effort to add Parental Alienation Disorder to the fifth edition
of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM 5), the
American Psychiatric Association’s “bible” of diagnoses.
Fathers and Families wants
to ensure that the DSM-5 Task Force is aware of the scope and severity of
Parental Alienation. To this end, in 2009 and 2010 we asked our supporters to
write the Task Force to urge them to consider including Parental Alienation
Disorder in DSM-5. The response was enthusiastic–Dr. Darrel Regier, Vice Chair
of the DSM-5 Task Force, told the Associated Press, “We’ve gotten an enormous
amount of mail–more than [on] any other issue.”
Recently there have been
rumors that the DSM-5 Task Force has already decided not to include Parental
Alienation Disorder in DSM 5. Dr. Bernet recently checked these statements with
members of the DSM-5 leadership, and found that they are not accurate.
According to Dr. Bernet,
the DSM-5 Task Force is still considering the option of adding “parental
alienation relational problem” (PARP), and perhaps other possibilities.
The DSM-5 Task Force has
extended until July 15 the time for comments from the public. We urge you to
comment by clicking here. We suggest you refer to “Parental Alienation
Relational Problem” (PARP) or “Parental Alienation,” and that you keep your
comments brief and to the point.
Source / Fuente:
http://www.fathersandfamilies.org/?p=17308
APPENDIX. The deniers are
not wasting time!
INSTRUCTIONS: After
clicking to enter the DSM 5 page, you'll see that there continues to appear on
"Parental Alienation Disorder." You must register on that page for
comment. After registering you will be sent to another page. I have not seen
there anything about "Parental Alienation" or "Parental
Alienation Relational Problem" (PARP), alluded to in the "Action
Alert" I posted. On page where you are from the DSM 5, put the cursor on
"Proposed revisions" (above) and click on "Proposed Conditions
by Outside Sources". Now you are on the page first, but with the ability
to post your comment.
TRADUCCIÓN AL ESPAÑOL:
Alerta de Acción: La Alienación Parental aún está en estudio para el DSM-5,
sus comentarios son necesarios
12 de julio 2011 por Glenn Sacks, MA, Director Ejecutivo de Fathers and
Families
Versión corta: El Grupo de Trabajo del DSM-5 ha extendido hasta el 15 de
julio el plazo para comentarios del público. Le instamos a que haga un
comentario haciendo clic aquí. Le sugerimos que consulte la sección “Parental
Alienation Relational Problem” (PARP) or “Parental Alienation” y que haga sus
comentarios breves y al grano.
Versión completa: Una coalición de expertos en salud mental dirigida por el
psiquiatra William Bernet ha estado a la vanguardia de un esfuerzo para añadir
Trastorno de Alienación Parental ("Parental Alienation Disorder") a
la quinta edición del Manual Diagnóstico y Estadístico de los Trastornos
Mentales (DSM 5), la "biblia" de diagnósticos de la Asociación
Americana de Psiquiatría.
[La organización] Padres y Familias quiere asegurarse de que el Grupo de
Trabajo del DSM-5 es consciente del alcance y la gravedad de Alienación
Parental. Con este fin, en 2009 y 2010 le pedimos que nos apoyara para escribir
el Grupo de Trabajo para instarlos a considerar la inclusión de Trastorno de Alienación
Parental ("Parental Alienation Disorder") en el DSM-5. La respuesta
fue entusiasta: el Dr. Darrel Regier, vicepresidente del Grupo de Trabajo del
DSM-5, dijo a la Associated Press: "Hemos recibido una enorme cantidad de
correo, más que para cualquier otro tema."
Recientemente ha habido rumores de que el Grupo de Trabajo del DSM-5 ha
decidido no incluir Trastorno de Alienación Parental ("Parental Alienation
Disorder") en el DSM 5. El Dr. Bernet recientemente ha contrastado estas
afirmaciones con la dirección de los miembros del DSM-5, y encontró que no son
exactas.
Según el Dr. Bernet, el Grupo de Trabajo del DSM-5 aún está considerando la
opción de añadir Problema Relacional de Alienación Parental (“Parental
Alienation Relational Problem”) (PARP), y tal vez otras posibilidades.
El Grupo de Trabajo del DSM-5 ha extendido hasta el 15 de julio el plazo
para comentarios del público. Le instamos a que haga un comentario haciendo
clic aquí. Le sugerimos que consulte la sección “Parental Alienation Relational
Problem” (PARP) or “Parental Alienation”, y que haga sus comentarios breves y
al grano.
ANEXO. Las negacionistas no están perdiendo el tiempo!
INSTRUCCIONES: Después de hacer click para entrar en la página del DSM 5,
verás que allí continúa apareciendo el "Parental Alienation Disorder".
Debes registrarte en esa página para hacer comentarios. Tras registrarte serás
remitido a otra página. No he visto en ella nada relativo a la "Parental
Alienation" ni al "Parental Alienation Relational Problem"
(PARP) al que se alude en la "Alerta de Acción" que he posteado. En
la página del DSM 5 donde estás, pon el cursor sobre "Proposed
revisions" (arriba), y pincha en "Conditions Proposed by Outside
Sources". Ahora estarás en la página del principio pero con la posibilidad
de enviar tu comentario.
Audio institucional de nuestra organización:
¿Que pedimos a las autoridades?
Nuestra lucha se centra el derecho de los niños a un vínculo sano con sus dos padres y toda su familia luego de un divorcio o separación.
- ¡NO MAS NIÑOS REHENES DEL DIVORCIO!
Spoken by the guy who we normally associate with silent films, this speech will fill your heart and give you goosebumps.
I really don’t feel like there’s must commentary needed for this one. After a week of bickering and crazy happening all over the place, we need to all listen to this and remember what we have to remember through all of this.
This video, to me personally, is what I feel like life is really about. It’s a love affair with humanity, and an effort to make a better world for everyone tomorrow. My favorite quotes (can I just pick the whole video as my favorite quote?) are:
We want to live by each other’s happiness, not by each other’s misery. We don’t want to hate and despise one another. And this world has room for everyone and the good earth is rich and can provide for everyone. The way of life can be free and beautiful. But we have lost the way.
The airplane and the radio have brought us closer together. The very nature of these inventions cries out for the goodness in men, cries out for universal brotherhood and the unity of us all.
For those who can hear me I say, do not despair. The misery that is now upon us is but the passing of greed. The bitterness of men who fear the way of human progress, the hate of men will pass, and dictators die. And the power they took from the people will return to the people. And so long as men die, liberty will never perish.
Yes, it is idealistic, but it’s still important. It’s not about who’s right the most. It’s about how we help, learn, and love each other.
Pardon me while I go cry.
CUSTODIA PATERNA - *
Audio institucional de nuestra organización:
¿Que pedimos a las autoridades?
Nuestra lucha se centra el derecho de los niños a un vínculo sano con sus dos padres y toda su familia luego de un divorcio o separación.
- ¡NO MAS NIÑOS REHENES DEL DIVORCIO!
They mistake it or misunderstand it, because they are part of the system that helps create it. If they would only pluck...
Posted by Bob Saunders on Sunday, July 26, 2015
Posted by David Mortimer on Sunday, July 28, 2013
Posted by David Inguanzo on Thursday, July 9, 2015
UPDATE FROM DR. BILL BERNETAs Dr. Bill Bernet previously reported, the DSM-5 leadership said a long time ago that...
Posted by Jill Egizii on Saturday, January 26, 2013
Posted by David Inguanzo on Thursday, July 16, 2015
Dr. Daniel Pine, chairman of the DSM Child and Adolescent Disorders Work Group, said at the Child & Adolescent...
Posted by Mike Jeffries on Friday, November 5, 2010
HOW DID CHILDREN OF DIVORCE GET STUCK WITH THE VISITATION PLAN THAT AFFORDS THEM ACCESS TO THEIR NON-RESIDENTIAL PARENT ONLY ONE NIGHT DURING THE WEEK AND EVERY OTHER WEEK-END?
ReplyDeleteWhat is the research that supports such a schedule? Where is the data that confirms that such a plan is in the best interest of the child?
Well, reader, you can spend your time from now until eternity researching the literature and YOU WILL NOT DISCOVER ANY SUPPORTING DATA for the typical visitation arrangement with the non-residential parent! The reality is that this arrangement is based solely on custom. And just like the short story, "The Lottery," in which the prizewinner is stoned to death, the message is that deeds and judgments are frequently arrived at based on nothing more than habit, fantasy, prejudice, and yes, on "junk science."
This family therapist upholds the importance of both parents playing an active and substantial role in their children's lives----especially in situations when the parents are apart. In order to support the goal for each parent to provide a meaningfully and considerable involvement in the lives of their children, I affirm that the resolution to custody requires an arrangement for joint legal custody and physical custody that maximizes the time with the non-residential----with the optimal arrangement being 50-50, whenever practical. It is my professional opinion that the customary visitation arrangement for non-residential parents to visit every other weekend and one night during the week is not sufficient to maintain a consequential relationship with their children. Although I have heard matrimonial attorneys, children's attorneys, and judges assert that the child needs the consistency of the same residence, I deem this assumption to be nonsense. I cannot be convinced that the consistency with one's bed trumps consistency with a parent!
Should the reader question how such an arrangement can be judiciously implemented which maximizes the child's time---even in a 50-50 arrangement----with the non-residential parent, I direct the reader to the book, Mom's House, Dads House, by the Isolina Ricci, PhD.
Indeed, the research that we do have supports the serious consequences to children when the father, who is generally the non-residential parent, does not play a meaningful role in lives of his children. The book, Fatherneed, (2000) by Dr. Kyle Pruitt, summarizes the research at Yale University about the importance of fathers to their children. And another post on this page summarizes an extensive list of other research.
Children of divorce or separation of their parents previously had each parent 100% of the time and obviously cannot have the same arrangement subsequent to their parents' separation. But it makes no sense to this family therapist that the result of parental separation is that the child is accorded only 20% time with one parent and 80% with the other. What rational person could possibly justify this?
PRO SE RIGHTS:
ReplyDeleteSims v. Aherns, 271 SW 720 (1925) ~ "The practice of law is an occupation of common right."
Brotherhood of Trainmen v. Virginia ex rel. Virginia State Bar, 377 U.S. 1; v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335; Argersinger v. Hamlin, Sheriff 407 U.S. 425 ~ Litigants can be assisted by unlicensed laymen during judicial proceedings.
Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41 at 48 (1957) ~ "Following the simple guide of rule 8(f) that all pleadings shall be so construed as to do substantial justice"... "The federal rules reject the approach that pleading is a game of skill in which one misstep by counsel may be decisive to the outcome and accept the principle that the purpose of pleading is to facilitate a proper decision on the merits." The court also cited Rule 8(f) FRCP, which holds that all pleadings shall be construed to do substantial justice.
Davis v. Wechler, 263 U.S. 22, 24; Stromberb v. California, 283 U.S. 359; NAACP v. Alabama, 375 U.S. 449 ~ "The assertion of federal rights, when plainly and reasonably made, are not to be defeated under the name of local practice."
Elmore v. McCammon (1986) 640 F. Supp. 905 ~ "... the right to file a lawsuit pro se is one of the most important rights under the constitution and laws."
Federal Rules of Civil Procedures, Rule 17, 28 USCA "Next Friend" ~ A next friend is a person who represents someone who is unable to tend to his or her own interest.
Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972) ~ "Allegations such as those asserted by petitioner, however inartfully pleaded, are sufficient"... "which we hold to less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers."
Jenkins v. McKeithen, 395 U.S. 411, 421 (1959); Picking v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 151 Fed 2nd 240; Pucket v. Cox, 456 2nd 233 ~ Pro se pleadings are to be considered without regard to technicality; pro se litigants' pleadings are not to be held to the same high standards of perfection as lawyers.
Maty v. Grasselli Chemical Co., 303 U.S. 197 (1938) ~ "Pleadings are intended to serve as a means of arriving at fair and just settlements of controversies between litigants. They should not raise barriers which prevent the achievement of that end. Proper pleading is important, but its importance consists in its effectiveness as a means to accomplish the end of a just judgment."
NAACP v. Button, 371 U.S. 415); United Mineworkers of America v. Gibbs, 383 U.S. 715; and Johnson v. Avery, 89 S. Ct. 747 (1969) ~ Members of groups who are competent nonlawyers can assist other members of the group achieve the goals of the group in court without being charged with "unauthorized practice of law."
Picking v. Pennsylvania Railway, 151 F.2d. 240, Third Circuit Court of Appeals ~ The plaintiff's civil rights pleading was 150 pages and described by a federal judge as "inept". Nevertheless, it was held "Where a plaintiff pleads pro se in a suit for protection of civil rights, the Court should endeavor to construe Plaintiff's Pleadings without regard to technicalities."
Puckett v. Cox, 456 F. 2d 233 (1972) (6th Cir. USCA) ~ It was held that a pro se complaint requires a less stringent reading than one drafted by a lawyer per Justice Black in Conley v. Gibson (see case listed above, Pro Se Rights Section).
Roadway Express v. Pipe, 447 U.S. 752 at 757 (1982) ~ "Due to sloth, inattention or desire to seize tactical advantage, lawyers have long engaged in dilatory practices... the glacial pace of much litigation breeds frustration with the Federal Courts and ultimately, disrespect for the law."
Sherar v. Cullen, 481 F. 2d 946 (1973) ~ "There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of his exercise of Constitutional Rights."
Schware v. Board of Examiners, United State Reports 353 U.S. pages 238, 239. ~ "The practice of law cannot be licensed by any state/State."