IPV/PA Information

What is PA or IPV

Parental Alienation and what is it?

Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) is the unhealthy coalition between a narcissistic parent and his or her children against the targeted, non-narcissistic, non-abusive parent. The innocent or targeted parent receives hostility and rejection from his or her children in this system. The psychological health of the children is used as arsenal in the narcissist’s twisted world.

Parental Alienation Syndrome is a family systems pathology involving the triangulation of children into the abusive, narcissistic parental relationship. In the case of PAS the cross-generational coalition exists between the narcissist and the child or children, and is a covert type of narcissistic abuse. In typical family systems therapy there would most likely be cooperation with the offending parent to break the coalition with the child and stand united with the other parent. With a narcissist this will not happen. Narcissists have limited insight so they will be unwilling or unable to see their unhealthy union, believing it to be occurring because he or she happens to be the superior parent, deserving of loyalty, deeming the innocent parent as “bad.” In addition to this, narcissists are unwilling to collaborate on anything; even in therapy. Going to therapy with a narcissistic partner will usually backfire on the targeted partner.

The symptoms of PAS are: (1) The children sit in judgment of the targeted parent’s adequacy and competency as a parent. (2) The narcissistic parent covertly encourages, empowers, and rewards the children for this behavior. (3) The narcissistic parent feigns innocence in this process. (4) The children believe they are acting independently (that is, they believe they are not being influenced by the alienating parent.)

The system is created as the alienating parent rewards the children when they say hostile or angry things about the targeted parent by encouraging and displaying “understanding” for the children’s negative feelings, when what should really be occurring is the children should be taught to respect the other parent. In essence, the children are gaining acceptance from the narcissistic parent as they complain about the target parent.

For instance, suppose the targeted parent tells the child to do a chore and the child resists as is so often the case with children being told to do something they don’t want to do. Now, suppose the child goes to the narcissist and complains about the “mean” other parent. The narcissist will then sympathize with the child, encouraging him or her to feel victimized by the “outrageous” expectations of the targeted parent, and will excuse the child from having to do the chore. Thus, the child is getting sucked into the web of PAS. The targeted parent is outraged, bewildered, hurt, and betrayed. The child has been covertly empowered to disrespect the one parent who is actually trying to develop a decent human being. The narcissist sits back, effortlessly creating the destructive coalition with his or her child.

In essence, the children are empowered to disobey, disrespect, and disregard the non-narcissistic parent. On the surface, the children feel and believe they are benefiting and winning, but in reality they are playing a sordid part in the narcissist’s perverse mind games. There are some detrimental effects to the children because of this:

Children’s sense of value is diminished because they believe the targeted parent is unworthy of being identified with. If the children have any interests or traits similar to the rejected parent then the children will be forced to reject those aspects of themselves as well.
A child’s character is damaged as he or she is covertly rewarded to be disrespectful, entitled, rude, judgmental, condescending, ungrateful, parentified, and hateful.
The children develop a toxic-bond to the alienating parent, as he or she manipulates them into fearing a lack of acceptance from him or her.

Be Proactive

If you are a victim of PAS, here are some suggestions for you to try to help turn things around:

Be proactive; do not believe this problem will just go away on its own. It will most likely get worse.
Realize that there is not much you can do about the alienating parent. You can only change yourself. Take a good look at your own behaviors and modify where necessary.
Be a strong parent. Do not roll over easily no matter how angry your children may be with you.
Find ways to attach with your children every day. Even if they don’t want you to. Call them, text them, talk to them, touch them; do whatever you can to connect to your children.
Be solid. Be direct. Be firm. Be consistent. Be stable. Even if you don’t feel those things, act as if you do.
If at all possible, find a good therapist who understands PAS and bring yourself and your children to see him/her.
Use strategies akin to those used when people leave a cult; in essence, PAS is a form of brainwashing.
Take very good care of yourself. Do things that are good for you and bring you joy.
Do not grovel, beg, or allow your children to see that you are threatened by their behavior. Stand strong.
If the narcissist encourages your children to disobey you, hold your ground and make sure your children do what you request; starting with “no disrespectful behavior in the home.” Period.
Develop some catch phrases to use with your children that you can say in moments when things are particularly difficult for you to handle.
Use humor. Be enjoyable to be around.
Be smarter than the narcissist.
Be determined and refuse to let the abuser destroy the relationship between you and your children.
Educate yourself. Never stop reading and arming yourself with knowledge. In addition to this, educate your children.
Join a support group so you can get help as you deal with this battle for your children.

PA according to the APA & Family Law

IPV in Family Court

DSM-5 & ICD-10:

Recommendation to the Family Courts:

View Printable PDF Version

If you need support as you read through this Issue, please reach out.

The Misuse of Parental Alienation in Family Court Proceedings with Allegations of Intimate Partner Violence

Part 2 – Impacts on Survivors and Children

This Issue is the second in a two-part series that examines the potential misuse of parental alienation (PA) claims with intimate partner violence (IPV) in family court proceedings in Canada. It examines the impacts of PA claims on mothers and children* and offers considerations to better support them. We recognize that a partner (e.g., female, male, nonbinary) within any type of intimate relationship (e.g., same sex, heterosexual) can be a victim of IPV and can be accused of alienation. However, we focus on mothers harmed by father figures in both Issues as they face a greater likelihood of serious injury and death from IPV and are most often accused of alienation in their efforts to protect children.[1]

If you need support as you read through this Issue, please reach out.

Click here to read Part 1: Understanding the Issue. It provides an overview of PA, how its use has evolved in the family court system, and the implications of PA claims in child custody cases involving IPV for mothers and children.

*We use the term ‘children’ in this Issue to refer to children and youth under the age of 18.

Concerns about the Misuse of PA

After separation, the ideal situation is for children to have ongoing positive relationships with both parents and to be protected from continuing conflict between parents. Children do not benefit when one parent attempts to prevent or undermine a child’s relationship with the other parent, often referred to as “alienating” behaviours that can vary in severity. Courts do not tolerate these actions either. However, when a parent is concerned about their child’s safety due to a history of child maltreatment or IPV, their attempts to protect their children can be mislabeled as “parental alienation.” Rather than focus on the impacts of the abuse and violence that has occurred in the past or continues in the present, court professionals (e.g., judges, lawyers, and mental health professionals) turn their attention to mothers who are accused of engaging in “alienating” behaviours.

Family and domestic violence experts are concerned with the misuse of parental alienation for a number of reasons, including:

• There is a lack of support for parental alienation theory in scientific evidence[2];

• There are multiple, contributing factors that may explain why children refuse contact with a parent post-separation (e.g., developmental preference for one parent over the other, sibling relationships, violence in the home)[3];

• It diverts attention away from abuse allegations and other evidence pertinent to the best interests of the child[4];

- For instance, Sheehy & Boyd (2020) found that of 90 cases involving IPV & PA, IPV was deemed irrelevant to children’s best interests in 40% of cases.

• There is a significant gender bias associated with PA theory[5]

- For instance, Sheehy & Boyd (2020) found that of 90 cases involving IPV & PA, women declared alienators suffered negative changes to their custody at a rate of 48% compared to fathers declared alienators who suffered consequences at a rate of 31%.

• It ignores the realities of IPV, specifically, coercive control post-separation and long-term impacts of abuse and trauma on survivors and children; and

- For instance, Sheehy & Boyd (2020) found that of 90 cases involving IPV & PA, finding of IPV is “neutralized” or dismissed in 23% of cases.

- For instance, Neilson (2018) found in a review of 142 cases involving IPV & PA that 2.8% of cases were considered for expert examination, such as by a domestic or family violence expert.

• There is an increase in allegations of PA in the Canadian family court system and its misuse can endanger survivors and their children.[6]

Lack of Intersectionality in PA Research

Much of the research on PA provides little demographic information about parties involved and there is little literature on how PA claims in IPV cases impact women and children of different identities and who face intersecting systems of oppression. This gap in research is critical to address since marginalized individuals often face challenges in the family law system that contribute to “reinforcing rather than alleviating [people’s] vulnerability.”[7]

Impacts of IPV on Survivors and Children

There is extensive literature on the negative physical and health outcomes for survivors of IPV. For adult survivors, experiencing IPV has been linked to outcomes including physical health conditions (e.g., chronic pain, migraines, and gastrointestinal problems), as well as low self-esteem, depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), self-harm, and suicidality.[8]

IPV also has significant impacts on children. Even if children have not witnessed a violent incident in their home, they are usually aware of the violence that exists. They may hear the sounds of violence and/or experience its aftermath in the form of damaged objects, injuries to a parent, a parent’s fear, or the tension between parents. Children interpret, predict, assess their roles in causing the violence, worry about what will happen, and engage in problem solving.

Adverse outcomes of childhood exposure to IPV include an increased risk of psychological, social, emotional and behavioural problems, including mood and anxiety problems, traumatic stress, substance use, and school-related difficulties.[9] When this exposure is ongoing (e.g., across developmental stages), there can be a cumulative effect which increases the emotional, physical, and social toll on children.[10] Current research also tells us that the influence of abuse can persist long after the violence, or exposure to violence, has stopped. For instance, exposure to IPV as a child or youth increases the probability that boys will cause harm to their future intimate partners and that girls will experience IPV later in life.[11]

Read these two reports from the Learning Network to learn more:

Links between the Maltreatment of Girls and Later Victimization or Use of Violence

The Role of Trauma in Children Involved in Custody Cases with PA & IPV

Children benefit from maximum contact with both parents unless this contact exposes children to high levels of stress (e.g., parental conflict or violence in the home).[12] Domestic and family violence experts are concerned that application of parental alienation theories can undermine children’s access to the factors that can support their resilience following trauma such as parental warmth, positive parenting, and warm, safe, and stable bonds with non-abusive caregivers.[13]

In addition, recent research points to the failure of courts to recognize or consider the lasting effects of trauma on survivors and children in cases involving IPV and PA.[14] Judges may dismiss the continuing fear of a child or their protective parent in the absence of recent violent incidents and view it as “irrational, manipulative, or at minimum, had no basis.”[15] The science tells us otherwise: children’s fears associated with toxic levels of stress in the home can result in potentially long-term developmental harm to children.[16] At the same time, the effects of IPV on adult survivors do not cease when the violence ceases. Rather, IPV can produce long-term psychological trauma and fear responses in adults, as well as children.[17]

Thus, the role of trauma should be considered in any strained parent-child relationship and a comprehensive assessment is needed to determine a range of factors that may contribute to these relationships.[18] This screening should precede any intervention and treatment and should be required in all cases. Screening should also be completed for each member of the family where parent-child contact problems are suspected or found.

Read this report to learn more:

What You Don’t Know Can Hurt You: The importance of family violence screening tools for family law practitioners by Luke’s Place

Implications of PA Allegations for Survivors and Children

Parental alienation claims in child custody cases involving allegations of IPV can have detrimental impacts on survivors and children and can jeopardize their safety and well-being. For instance:

• Women and children may be silenced so that evidence of violence and of negative parenting is not presented.[19]• Survivors who are accused of, or threatened to be accused of PA, do not feel believed, protected, or supported through family court and child protection proceedings. This can further exacerbate experiences of helplessness, stress, and anger.[20]• There may be an imposition of equal time, joint custody presumptions, or equal shared parenting responsibility in unsafe conditions.• Little attention paid to scrutiny of child risk and safety factors in family violence cases.• Re-traumatization of children and survivors during court-mandated contact or visits. Interventions that may recommend a change of custody to a supposed “rejected” parent, or prolonged temporary custody with the parent a child fears during reunification programs. Both interventions result in a separation of children from the parent they associate with providing emotional and physical security.

Reunification Therapy/ We do not recommend this at all!

In extreme cases, judges may remove the children from the custody of the parent accused of alienating if they give the claims of PA more weight than the claims of IPV by the other parent. In these cases, judges may order the children to attend a reunification program against their will to treat their rejection of a parent. There is no evidence that these programs work as an involuntary program and they may do more harm than good.[21]

The Struggle to be Heard

In family court cases involving IPV and PA, there is considerable onus placed on the survivor to prove a history of violence while playing the role of a “perfect victim”. Often times, survivors lack the financial and emotional resources to prove that violence occurred. Although police, child protection workers, doctors, and other professionals can testify about their knowledge of the violence, it is important to note that many women do not report IPV or seek help for many reasons including: shame; lack of appropriate services; lack of secure, safe, accessible, and affordable housing; concern for safety of children; economic instability; and immigration status. In many family court proceedings involving allegations of IPV, the absence of an independent source of evidence can lead to a “credibility contest” between the parents.[22] For some women, this means a constant struggle to be believed. For instance, Black women who are often seen as “tough, strong, and psychologically dominant” face the additional hurdle of overcoming negative stereotypes in order to be perceived as an ideal victim: “sweet, blameless, scared, and helpless.”[23] Indigenous and racialized women also face systemic discrimination and racism, and are often not taken “seriously” with allegations of violence.[24]

Access to justice is also a significant problem for many survivors. For instance, over half of family court litigants can’t afford lawyers or enough legal representation for complex cases.[25] Family court proceedings for survivors with legal representation is already overwhelming and daunting. For those who are “un-represented”, it can be particularly exhausting since such cases often take longer to adjudicate and require more court resources.[26] In addition, survivors may sometimes have to face their former partners, who have chosen to “self-represent” by choice in order to use the court proceedings to continue to terrify and harass them.

Read this report to learn more:

Why Can’t Everyone Just Get Along? How BC’s Family Law System Puts Survivors in Danger by Rise Women’s Legal Centre

Ensuring Children’s Safety

When child maltreatment is alleged, child safety is the first priority followed by child stability and wellbeing.[27] In situations of partner abuse, survivor safety is the overarching priority, and children’s safety is inextricably linked to the safety of adult victims, usually their mothers.[28] These same safety standards should be applied in cases of marital/relationship dissolution involving IPV and/or child maltreatment.

An in-depth assessment of the violence is required in order to develop an appropriate parenting plan that recognizes the violence and the impact on adult survivors and children exposed to violence.[29] Potential ongoing impacts of abuse on survivors and children should always be considerations in parenting plans. The abuse may have ended but its impacts often continue because of the severity, duration, and nature of the violence and trauma experienced, and for reasons that include the following factors:

• IPV does not always end with separation of partners.

- In most cases, the incidence and risk of violence decreases once partners separate. However, in a small proportion of cases, especially abusive relationships, the intensity and lethality of IPV may escalate after the survivor leaves the relationship. Children may continue to experience the emotional harms of exposure to this violence.[30]

• Perpetrators of IPV are more likely to be abusive as parents.

- Those who demonstrate abuse and coercive control of their intimate partners may behave similarly with their children. Children whose mothers have experienced IPV by their male partners are more likely to be directly abused.[31]

• Individuals who exhibit patterns of abuse with their partners and who use physical force to resolve conflicts are negative role models for children.

- Exposure to IPV creates an emotional and psychological threat to children’s wellbeing, security, and safety. In addition to this exposure, there may be harmful role modeling even after parental separation, whether or not parents mistreat their children directly. Children may continue to be exposed to abuse and poor modeling in the abusive parent’s subsequent intimate relationships.

• Abusive ex-partners are likely to undermine the survivor’s parenting role.

- Abusive ex-partners are likely to attempt to alienate the children from the other parent’s affection, disrupt family plans, and undermine parental authority by explicitly instructing the children to not listen or obey.

- Abusive ex-spouses may also use family court litigations as a new way to continue their coercive controlling behavior and to harass their former partner.[32]

• Children may be killed in the context of IPV and ongoing custody disputes.

- Although child homicides are relatively rare events, findings from various international death review processes (e.g., Canada, U.S., Europe, Australia, and New Zealand) have revealed that many of these deaths appear predictable and preventable with hindsight. For instance, some professionals and agencies overlook warning signs that may suggest direct harm to children, even in cases where the dangers to adult survivors are clear.[33]

- Close coordination and communication among family and criminal courts and professionals is critical to ensure children are included in safety planning for adult survivors.[34]

1. Providing Mandatory Training and Education on Family Violence

Mental health and social service professionals must be qualified to identify patterns of abuse as well as the risks of post-separation violence. As they provide a range of support to courts, these professionals must have training in IPV, child maltreatment, child development, and trauma. Such professional education opportunities must also be extended to judges, lawyers, and all court-related professionals.

Most importantly, in situations of marital/relationship breakdown, allegations of IPV need to be addressed before issues of custody and visitation can be determined. Professionals involved in child-custody decision-making (e.g., parenting coordinators) need special training to recognize, understand, and properly evaluate evidence of IPV and/or child maltreatment and claims of alienation. This comprehensive training could lead to a decrease in widely held misconceptions surrounding “high-conflict” cases involving allegations of IPV and ensure that they are truly acting in the best interests of the child or children involved.[35] Proper screening for abuse and trauma is essential to prevent children from continued exposure to violence and to promote safety for survivors and risk management and accountability with partners who use abusive behaviors.

2. Creating Trauma- and Violence-Informed Courts

The term alienation has been used for decades to blame IPV victims for being protective of children in the face of abuse. The misuse of this label needs to end and be replaced with a trauma- and violence- informed approach to avoid re-traumatizing mothers and children who have experienced IPV and are involved in custody and divorce litigation. Such approaches will ensure that court professionals are aware of and understand the potential impacts of current and past trauma and violence on parties in court proceedings, minimize harm and enhance safety, respect boundaries, provide culturally appropriate responses, and use language and behaviours that encourage agency and resilience.

3. Developing and Utilizing a Structured Framework and Tools to Screen and Assess the Impact of IPV for Parenting Decisions

Judges and court-related professionals, such as custody evaluators, have to consider multiple sources of information and factors to develop a parenting plan that promotes safety for survivors and children. The Battered Women’s Justice Project in the United States has developed excellent tools that outline how to identify IPV in order to promote safe and informed disclosures of abuse. A key step is defining the nature and context of the abuse and who is doing what to whom, why and to what effect. The second step is to evaluate the implications of the abuse. The third step is taking informed action by accounting for abuse. The last stage of the framework focuses on making informed decisions and taking informed actions that fully account for the nature, context and implications of abuse. The framework is intended to directly address the underlying conditions that would otherwise allow the abuse – and its implications – to persist long after the family court case is officially closed.

4. Improving Coordination Between Agencies Involved in Multiple Legal Processes

It is important to consider that for parents involved in “high-conflict” separations and who are survivors of IPV, the lack of coordination between agencies, professionals, and court proceedings can be overwhelming and time-consuming. Parents and children may need to navigate multiple legal processes (e.g., child protection, criminal, family, immigration), recount their stories numerous times, and receive conflicting orders and outcomes from different proceedings.[36] Consider a potential scenario where “there is an acquittal of the alleged abuser in the criminal proceedings, a finding that the children are in need of protection resulting from exposure to violence in the child protection proceedings, and an order for joint custody in the family proceedings.”[37] There is clearly a need to improve communication and coordination among agencies, professionals, and judges in criminal and family law proceedings to ensure the safety and well-being of survivors and children as well as risk management and accountability with perpetrators.

The Learning Network & Centre for Research & Education on Violence Against Women & Children

Linda Baker, Learning DirectorDianne Lalonde, Research AssociateRobert Nonomura, Research AssociateJassamine Tabibi, Research Associate

Suggested Citation

Tabibi, J., Jaffe, P., & Baker, L. (2021). Misuse of Parental Alienation in Family Court Proceedings Involving Allegations of Intimate Partner Violence – Part 2: Impacts on Survivors and Children. Learning Network Issue 34. London, Ontario: Centre for Research & Education on Violence Against Women & Children. ISBN # 978-1-988412-47-4

[1] Meier, J. S. (2009). A historical perspective on parental alienation syndrome and parental alienation. Journal of Child Custody, 6(3-4), 232-257. https://doi.org/10.1080/15379410903084681

[2] Milchman, M. S., Geffner, R., & Meier, J. S. (2020). Ideology and rhetoric replace science and reason in some parental alienation literature and advocacy: A critique. Family Court Review, 58(2), 340-361. https://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12476

[3] Fidler, B. J., & Bala, N. (2020). Concepts, Controversies and Conundrums Of “Alienation:” Lessons Learned In A Decade And Reflections On Challenges Ahead. Family Court Review, 58(2), p. 579. https://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12488

[4] 352 Concerned Family Law Academics, Family Violence Experts, Family Violence Research Institutes, Child Development and Child Abuse Experts, Children’s Rights Networks and Associations and 764 concerned individuals. (2019). Collective Memo of Concern to: World Health Organization RE: Inclusion of “Parental Alienation” as a “Caregiver-child relationship problem” Code QE52.0 in the International Classification of Diseases 11th Revision (ICD-11). Available at http://www.learningtoendabuse.ca/docs/WHO-September-24-2019.pdf

[5] Neilson, L. (2018). Parental alienation empirical analysis: Child best interests or parental rights? Vancouver: The FREDA Centre for Research on Violence Against Women and Children. Available at https://www.fredacentre.com/report-parental-alienation-empirical-analysis-neilson-2018/ ; Sheehy, E., & Boyd, S.B. (2020). Penalizing women’s fear: intimate partner violence and parental alienation in Canadian child custody cases. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 42(1), 80–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/09649069.2020.1701 940

(2018). Parental alienation empirical analysis: Child best interests or parental rights?

Available at https://www.fredacentre.com/report-parental-alienation-empirical-analysis-neilson-2018/ ; Zaccour, S. (2018).litigation. Cahiers de droit, 59(4), 1073-1111. https://doi. org/10.7202/1055264ar ; Lapierre, S., & Coté, I. (2016). Abused women and the threat of parental alienation: Shelter workers’ perspectives. Children and Youth Services Review, 65, 120-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2016.03.022 ;

[7] Treloar, R. (2018). High-conflict divorce involving children: parents’ meaning-making and agency. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 40(3), p. 343. https://doi.org/10.1080/09649069.2018.1493652

[8] Macy, R.J., Ferron, J., & Crosby, C. (2009). Partner violence and survivors’ chronic health problems: informing social work practice. Social Work, 54(1), 29-43. https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/54.1.29 ; DeJonghe, E.S., Bogat, G.A., Levendosky, A.A., von Eye, A. (2008). Women survivors of intimate partner violence and post-traumatic stress disorder: Prediction and prevention. Symposium: Violence Against Children and Women, 54(4), 394-300. Available at https://www.jpgmonline.com/article.asp?issn=0022-3859;year=2008;volume=54;issue=4;spage=294;epage=300;aulast=DeJonghe ; Garcia-Moreno, C., & Pallitto, C. (2013). Global and regional estimate of violence against women: prevalence and health effects of intimate partner violence and non-partner sexual violence. World Health Organization. Available at https://books.google.ca/books? https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013476

[9] Osofsky, J.D. (2003). Prevalence of children’s exposure to domestic violence and child maltreatment: Implications for prevention and intervention. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review. 6, 161–70. Available at https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1024958332093 ; Levendosky, A.A., Bogat G.A., & Martinez – Torteya, C. (2013). PTSD symptoms in young children exposed to intimate partner violence. Violence Against Women, 19(2), 187-201. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801213476458

[10] Graham-Bermann, S., & Perkins, S. (2010). Effects of early exposure and lifetime exposure to intimate partner violence (IPV) on child adjustment. Violence and Victims, 25(4), 427–439. https://doi.org/10.1891/0886-6708.25.4.427; Schnurr, M. P., & Lohman, B. J. (2013). Longitudinal impact of toddlers’ exposure to domestic violence. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment, & Trauma, 22(9), 1015–1031. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926771.2013.834019

[11] Abramsky, T., Watts, C.H., Garcia-Moreno, C., Devries, K., Kiss, L., et al. (2011). What factors are associated with recent intimate partner violence? Findings from the WHO multi-country study on women’s health and domestic violence. BioMed Central Public Health, 11(109), 1-17. Available at https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2458-11-109 ; Etherington, Nicole A. & Baker, Linda L. (2017). Links between the Maltreatment of Girls and Later Victimization or Use of Violence. London, Ontario: Centre for Research & Education on Violence Against Women & Children. ISBN 978-1-988412-02-3. Available at http://www.vawlearningnetwork.ca/our-work/reports/report_2017_2.html ; Etherington, Nicole A. & Baker, Linda L. (2016). The Link between Boys’ Victimization and Adult Perpetration of Intimate Partner Violence: Opportunities for Prevention across the Life Course. London, Ontario: Centre for Research & Education on Violence Against Women & Children. ISBN 978-0-9688655-4-5. http://www.vawlearningnetwork.ca/our-work/reports/report_2016_4.html

[12] Neilson, L. (1999). Spousal Abuse, Children and the Courts: The Case for Social Rather than Legal Change. Canadian Journal of Law and Society, 12(1), 101-146. Available at https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/cjls12&id=105&collection=journals&index=

[13] Martinez- Torteya, C., Bogat, G.A., Von Eye, A., Levendosky, A.A. (2009). Resilience Among Children Exposed to Domestic Violence: The Role of Risk and Protective Factors. Child Development, 80(2), 562-577. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01279.x ; Graham – Bermann, S., Gruber, G., Howell, K.H., & Girz, L. (2009). Factors discriminating among profiles of resilience and psychopathology in children exposed to intimate partner violence (IPV). Child Abuse & Neglect, 33(9), 648-660. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2009.01.002

[16] Center on the Developing Child. (n.d.). Toxic Stress. Available at https://developingchild.harvard.edu/science/key-concepts/toxic-stress/

[17] Ponic, P., Varcoe, C., & Smutylo, T. (2016). Trauma‐ (and violence‐) informed approaches to supporting victims of violence: policy and practice considerations. Victims of Crime Research Digest No. 9. Ottawa, ON: Department of Justice. Available at https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/cj-jp/victim/rd9-rr9/p2.html ; Herman, J. (2015). Trauma and recovery: The aftermath of violence—from domestic abuse to political terror. Basic Books.

[18] Deutsch, R., Drozd, L., & Ajoku, C. (2020). Trauma-Informed Interventions in Parent-Child Contact Cases. Family Court Review, 58(2), 470-487. https://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12483

Assessment

Without a proper assessment there cannot be a proper diagnosis, therefore, there cannot be a proper treatment plan. Failure to do so are APA violations 2.01, 3.04, and 9.01.

V Codes (DSM-5) & Z Codes (ICD-10)

Relational Problems V61.20 (Z62.820)

Parent-Child Relational Problem V61.8 (Z62.891)

Sibling Relational Problem V61.8 (Z62.29)

Upbringing Away From Parents V61.29 (Z62.898)

Child Affected by Parental Relationship Distress V61.10 (Z63.0)

Relationship Distress With Spouse or Intimate Partner V61.03 (Z63.5)

Disruption of Family by Separation or Divorce V61.8 (Z63.8)

High Expressed Emotion Level Within Family V62.82 (Z63.4)

Uncomplicated Bereavement Educational and Occupational Problems V62.3 (Z55.9) Academic or Educational Problem V62.21 (Z56.82)

Problem Related to Current Military Deployment Status V62.29 (Z56.9)

Social Exclusion or Rejection V62.4 (Z60.5)

Target of (Perceived) Adverse Discrimination or Persecution V62.9 (Z60.9)

Unspecified Problem Related to Social Environment Crime and Legal System Problems Related to Crime or Interaction With the Legal System V62.89 (Z65.4)

Victim of Crime V62.5 (Z65.0)

Conviction in Civil or Criminal Proceedings Without Imprisonment V62.5 (Z65.1) Imprisonment or Other Incarceration V62.5 (Z65.2)

Problems Related to Release From Prison V62.5 (Z65.3)

Problems Related to Other Legal Circumstances Other Health Service Encounters Other Health Service Encounters for Counseling and Medical Advice V65.49 (Z70.9) Discord With Social Service Provider, Including Probation Officer, Case Manager, or Social Services Worker V62.89 (Z65.4)

Victim of Terrorism or Torture V62.22 (Z65.5) Exposure to Disaster, War, or Other Hostilities V62.89 (Z65.8)

Other Personal History of Psychological Trauma V15.59 (Z91.5)

Personal History of Self-Harm V62.22 (Z91.82)

Personal History of Military Deployment V15.89 (Z91.89)

Other Personal Risk Factors V69.9 (Z72.9)

Problem Related to Lifestyle V71.01 (Z72.811)

Adult Antisocial Behavior V71.02 (Z72.810)

Child or Adolescent Antisocial Behavior V63.9 (Z75.3)

Unavailability or Inaccessibility of Health Care Facilities V63.8 (Z75.4)

Borderline Intellectual Functioning Abuse and Neglect Abuse and Neglect 995.54 (T74.12XA)

Child Physical Abuse, Confirmed 995.54 (T76.12XA)

Child Physical Abuse, Suspected V61.21 (Z69.010)

Encounter for mental health services for victim of child abuse by parent V61.21 (Z69.020)

Encounter for mental health services for victim of nonparental child abuse V15.41 (Z62.810)

Personal history (past history) of physical abuse in childhood V61.22 (Z69.011) Encounter for mental health services for perpetrator of parental child abuse V62.83 (Z69.021)

Encounter for mental health services for perpetrator of nonparental child abuse V61.21 (Z69.010)

Encounter for mental health services for victim of child sexual abuse by parent V61.21 (Z69.020)

Encounter for mental health services for victim of nonparental child sexual abuse V15.41 (Z62.810)

Encounter for mental health services for perpetrator of parental child neglect V62.83 (Z69.021)

Encounter for mental health services for perpetrator of nonparental child neglect 995.51 (T74.32XA)

Child Psychological Abuse, Confirmed 995.51 (T76.32XA)

Child Psychological Abuse, Suspected V61.21 (Z69.010)

Encounter for mental health services for victim of child psychological abuse by parent V61.21 (Z69.020)

Encounter for mental health services for victim of nonparental child psychological abuse V15.42 (Z62.811)

Personal history (past history) of psychological abuse in childhood V61.22 (Z69.011) Encounter for mental health services for perpetrator of parental child psychological abuse V62.83 (Z69.021)

Encounter for mental health services for perpetrator of nonparental child psychological abuse 995.81 (T74.11XA)

APA's Code of Ethics & The 5 Ethical Principles

Mental Health

A clear association between IPV and increased risk to develop posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) has been documented. Domestic violence is a traumatic experience that affects more than 10 million American men and women every year. Because it often takes place behind closed doors, it is easy to overlook or explain away.

Abuse can take many forms, ranging from physical and emotional abuse, sexual assault, financial control, and psychological actions or threats meant to harm or influence an intimate partner. It can happen at any age and affects people of all sexual orientations, ethnicities, religions, sexes and socioeconomic backgrounds.

Abuse victims may experience a wide range of physical and mental health symptoms resulting from domestic abuse trauma, including depression, suicidal tendencies, panic attacks, substance abuse disorders, and sexual and reproductive health issues.

PTSD: Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and it is referred to as a psychological diagnosis made after an individual’s experiences a traumatic event. Due to the nature of trauma, symptoms may not start showing immediately after the traumatic event, but rather several months after. This is usually caused by denial, as most survivors of traumatic events often suppress the event all together in an attempt to get back to a place of normalcy. Once the denial starts to wear off this is when symptoms start to manifest themselves.

According to Anxiety and Depression Association of America, it is reported that about 6 in every 10 men in the U.S. will suffer from a minimum of one trauma in their lifetime that may cause serious PTSD. It is also reported that 5 in every 10 women will experience the same. Not every traumatic event leads to PTSD, however, 80% of trauma survivors will experience some if not all symptoms of PTSD.

Domestic Violence and PTSD

One of the lesser acknowledged outcomes of domestic violence is post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), a psychiatric disorder in which a person has difficulty recovering after experiencing or witnessing a terrifying event. It can result from any traumatic event, whether a war or serious accident, but domestic violence is an often under-recognized cause.

Symptoms of PTSD are sometimes difficult to establish, as there is considerable overlap between PTSD and other mental health conditions. However, symptoms are normally defined by three overarching categories:

Avoidance: Avoiding reminders or “triggers” of the traumatic event, such as people, places, thoughts or events
Arousal and reactivity: Sudden inexplicable anger, outbursts, difficulty being reached emotionally, feeling numb, trouble sleeping and startling easily
Reliving the event: Being confronted by the emotional trauma of the event suddenly and without an obvious reason, resulting in emotional outbursts, chills, heart palpitations, extreme anxiety and other symptoms

Left untreated, PTSD can cause long-term mental health effects, including anger management issues, severe depression and intense loneliness. Additionally, untreated PTSD can increase the likelihood of developing several life-threatening conditions including Type 2 diabetes, heart disease, high blood pressure and substance abuse disorders.

What PTSD From Domestic Violence Looks Like

PTSD can develop in anyone experiencing a major life-threatening event, and this includes domestic violence, which exposes the victim to varying degrees of fear, vulnerability and helplessness. The fear experienced from a traumatic event can become overwhelming but is often not dealt with immediately, due to the abuser living in close quarters or being in the victim’s life regularly.

“The likelihood of PTSD increases after a domestic abuse event, though its effects can be mitigated through seeking emotional support,” says Dr. Mary Wynn Hill, a board-certified psychiatrist and medical director of the Beaufort Memorial Mental Health Unit. “However, this is not always possible, as it requires trusted family and friends who are willing to listen and potentially intervene.”

Other risk factors that increase the likelihood of a domestic violence victim developing PTSD include sustaining a physical injury, feeling helpless, lack of supportive community, having to deal with additional stressors before and after the event, and having a history of mental illness or addiction.

Treatment for PTSD

Treating PTSD in domestic abuse victims can be complicated, and there is no one-size-fits-all treatment. A mental health professional can devise a treatment plan to address specific symptoms.

“If the abuse victim is still partnered with the abuser, it is unlikely that PTSD treatment will be highly effective,” says Dr. Hill, who sees patients at Beaufort Memorial Sea Island Psychiatry. “Both domestic violence and PTSD must be addressed at the same time. Victims who feel trapped in their relationships or are hesitant to seek treatment due to ongoing threats of violence may find it increasingly difficult to receive or benefit from proper treatment.”

Additionally, abuse victims often experience more than one mental health problem, such as depression, addiction or suicidal thoughts, making it more difficult to define PTSD as a significant contributing factor.

When PTSD is properly diagnosed, it can be treated successfully.

“Treatment often involves cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), which can help victims manage the trauma of their experience,” Dr. Hill says. “There are many different types of CBT that can help people who have experienced domestic violence. Depending on the person, we can focus on therapies that help them feel safe, regulate their emotions, become more assertive, manage grief and the life transitions that may come with leaving an abuser, and dealing with depression and anxiety.”

Self-care when experiencing PTSD remains critically important. In addition to medication and psychotherapy treatment, there are simple lifestyle changes you can make to improve your chance of recovery:

Engage in regular exercise to help reduce stress.
Confide with a trusted friend or loved one
Communicate what may trigger your symptoms

Above all, go easy on yourself. Symptoms may improve gradually, not immediately, so don’t get discouraged.

If you or someone you love is experiencing domestic violence, call the National Domestic Violence Hotline at 1-800-799-SAFE (7233).

Children's Rights

Children's rights are the human rights of children with particular attention to the rights of special protection and care afforded to minors. The 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child defines a child as "any human being below the age of eighteen years, unless under the law applicable to the child, majority is attained earlier." Children's rights includes their right to association with both parents, human identity as well as the basic needs for physical protection, food, universal state-paid education, health care, and criminal laws appropriate for the age and development of the child, equal protection of the child's civil rights, and freedom from discrimination on the basis of the child's race, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, religion, disability, color, ethnicity, or other characteristics. Interpretations of children's rights range from allowing children the capacity for autonomous action to the enforcement of children being physically, mentally and emotionally free from abuse, though what constitutes "abuse" is a matter of debate. Other definitions include the rights to care and nurturing. There are no definitions of other terms used to describe young people such as "adolescents", "teenagers", or "youth" in international law, but the children's rights movement is considered distinct from the youth rights movement. The field of children's rights spans the fields of law, politics, religion, and morality.

FAQs & Statistics

Wendy Archer, officer and North Texas chapter manager of Parental Alienation Awareness Organization USA (PAAO USA)

Many experts call parental alienation “the worst form of child abuse.”
Alienated children and young adults often struggle with severe depression and thoughts of suicide. Sadly, many alienated children attempt suicide because of the unbearable pain and heartbreak they suffer.
Children understand that they are half of each parent. To make a child hate the other parent is to make a child feel that half of him is not worthy of love.
Alienating parents will often claim emphatically that a child or young adult “doesn’t want a relationship with the other parent,” but formerly alienated children have confirmed that this is not true.

Parental Alienation, IPV, Family Court & Juvenile Court Advocacy