After reviewing 700 cases of family counseling, mediation, and forensic evaluation, Clawar and Rivlin (1991) identified and described the following techniques in the PA context they termed brainwashing: denying and not acknowledging the social existence of the other parent; attacking something about the character, life-style, past, present, or future of the target parent; discussing visitation arrangements with the child, thus pressuring the child to make a choice; failing to inform the other parent of educational, social, and religious functions, thus communicating that the other parent lacks importance; creating or exaggerating differences between themselves and the other parent in front of the children; asking the children to ally their sympathies and support with the alienating parent; making moral judgments regarding the target parent’s values, life-style, friends, etc.; implicitly or explicitly threatening to withdraw affection if the child expresses a desire to be with the other parent; creating the belief that the other parent is not sincere in his or her love for the child; creating the belief that the other parent is unable to properly care for the child; and convincing the child to doubt his or her ability to perceive reality (pp. 15-36).
Amy Baker (2007a) studied adults who said they had been alienated as children from one of their parents. She asked the subjects to describe the strategies that the alienating parent had used to bring about the PA. Baker said that 40% or more of her adult subjects reported the following alienating strategies when they were children: general bad-mouthing of the target parent by the alienating parent; limiting contact with the target parent; anger and withdrawal of love following visitation with the target parent; telling the child the target parent does not love him or her; forcing the child to choose one parent over the other; bad-mouthing specifically to create the impression that the target parent is dangerous; and confiding in the child about adult relationships (p. 64).
Gulotta and Liberatore (2008) in Italy conducted psycholinguistic analyses of the statements of alienated children and the dialogue between the children and the alienating parents. They provided many examples of the subtle and not-so-subtle messages that an alienating parent might communicate to a child.
In some cases, one or both parents make false allegations of physical or sexual abuse in order to prevent the other parent from obtaining custody or access to the children. These cases usually involve several reports to child protection authorities and the police about the alleged abuse. In some cases, both parents make allegations of abuse against each other, but more frequently it is only one parent who makes a false claim of sexual or physical abuse of a child.
Although domestic violence typically includes physical aggression or assault, such as hitting, kicking, shoving, and slapping, it may also involve sexual abuse, emotional abuse, severe neglect, and economic deprivation. Whatever the manifestation of domestic violence, the underlying theme is that the perpetrator controls and dominates his or her victim. In addition to controlling the spouse or domestic partner, the perpetrator of domestic violence often endeavors to control their children also. After the couple separates or divorces, the perpetrator may continue to control the children and alienate them from the former partner as a way to punish him or her.
Peter Jaffe and his colleagues have been most active in pointing out that aspect of PA. Jaffe, Johnston, Crooks, and Bala (2008) wrote:
Abusive ex-partners are likely to attempt to alienate the children from the other parent’s affection (by asserting blame for the dissolution of the family and telling negative stories), sabotage family plans (by continuing criticism or competitive bribes), and undermine parental authority (by explicitly instructing the children not to listen or obey).
Also, Warshak (2010b) described a pattern he observed in families that featured coercive control and domination; i.e., a parent continues harassing and controlling the ex-partner by manipulating the children to turn against the victim parent.
Authors in many countries have explained how a person who induces a child to experience PA is perpetrating child abuse. For example, Gardner (1998) wrote: “Whether such parents are aware of the negative impact on the child, these behaviors of the aligned parent (and his or her supporters) constitute emotional abuse of the child.” Janet Johnston and Joan Kelly (2004) agreed on the issue of alienation as abuse, referring to PA as “an insidious form of emotional abuse of children that can be inflicted by divorced parents.”
A professional organization of child neurologists and psychiatrists in Italy offered:
Psychological abuse includes: acts of rejection, psychological terrorism, exploitation, isolation and removal of the child from the social context…. A further form of psychological abuse may be the alienation of a parent figure by the other parent…in “Parental Alienation Syndrome.” (Società Italiana di Neuropsichiatria dell’Infanzia e dell’Adolescenza, 2007, p. 10)
A psychologist in the Republic of South Africa wrote:
Involvement of mental health professionals who have no insight into PAS may exacerbate matters. The longer the time spent with the alienating parent, the more likely the process of alienation will be consolidated. It is suggested that PAS be recognized as a form of child abuse; accordingly custody may be awarded to the innocent party, with sanctions potentially applied against the alienating party. (Szabo, 2002).
Baker, A. J. L. (2007a). Adult children of parental alienation syndrome: Breaking the ties that bind. New York: W.W. Norton & Co.
Clawar, S. S., & Rivlin, B. V. (1991). Children held hostage: Dealing with programmed and brainwashed children. Washington, DC: American Bar Association Section of Family Law.
Gardner, R. A. (1998). The parental alienation syndrome: A guide for mental health and legal professionals (2nd ed.). Cresskill, NJ: Creative Therapeutics, Inc.
Gulotta, G., Cavedon, A., & Liberatore, M. (2008). La Sindrome di Alienazione Parentale (PAS): Lavaggio del cervello e programmazione dei figli in danno dell’altro genitore. [The Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS): Brainwashing and Programming of Children to the Detriment of the Other Parent] [Italian]. Milan: Giuffrè
Jaffe, P. G., Johnston, J.R., Crooks, C.V. & Bala, N. (2008). Custody disputes involving allegations of domestic violence: Toward a differential approach to parenting plans. Family Court Review 46(3):500-23.
Szabo, C. P. (2002). Parental alienation syndrome.South African Psychiatry Review, 5(3):1.
Warshak, R. A. (2010b). Family Bridges: Using Insights from Social Science to Reconnect Parents and Alienated Children. Family Court Review, 48, 48-80.
they have been teaching how tto make false allegations for so long it has become the norm... huge reading list for woman. the handbooks of choice for lowlifes and their crooked attorneys.
Real Alienation is only "NON EXISTENT" "NOT REAL" "FAKE" for those profiting off the alienating behavior. Those who consistently say it doesn't exist or its a fathers rights issue or pseudo science or its about whatever you can concoct up.... follow the money.
Brainwashing Techniques used by Alienating Parents
“Programming” and “Brainwashing” are two terms used by Dr. Stanley Clawar and Brynne Rivlin [1] to describe the methods and techniques used by alienating parents to manipulate their children into rejecting and/or hating the target parent. According to Clawar & Rivlin (2013), “programming and brainwashing is a process (intentional and unintentional) whereby a parent … attempts to limit, damage, and interfere with the love, contact, and image of the target parent” (p. 9). In their 25-year study of 1000 divorced/separated families commissioned by the American Bar Association, they identified 12 brainwashing techniques used by alienating parents (Clawar & Rivlin, 2013, pp. 31-63);
Denial-of-Existence Technique ~ One of the basic techniques parents use to assault the character of the other parent is to deny or not acknowledge the social existence of the other parent. The manner of denial can vary greatly. One common technique is simply never to talk about the other parent. By excluding any discussion of the other parent or ignoring the topic when raised by the child, the brainwashing parent can send a subtle message to the child that the other parent is not significant. He or she does not exist in our conversation, and therefore, he or she does not, in social terms, exist.
The “Who, Me?” Technique ~ A subtle but powerful technique is to make indirect attacks on the other parent. When questioned about such attacks, the brainwashing parent will say, “Who, me?” The programmer indicates that he or she meant no such thing and that the listener or child was certainly misinterpreting. The list of indirect attacks is infinite, but the basic pattern is that the programmer/brainwasher attacks something about the character, lifestyle, past, present, or future of the target parent.
Middle-Man Technique ~ By speaking to the child about issues that should be first discussed with the other parent, the programmer/brainwasher can compromise and/or damage the child’s relationship with or image of the target parent. For instance, discussing time-schedule arrangements by asking questions such as, “Do you think you would like to have more time with Mom?” often places the child in the middle. The pressure on the child is to make a choice in front of an inquiring parent.
Circumstantial Technique ~ By manipulating, changing, rearranging, and commenting on time, the programming parent tries to gain dominance in the eyes of the children. “Your mother’s always late for delivery and pickup. I wonder if she would be late for her own funeral.” The other parent told her children, “He’s always early for pickup, but late for delivery.” These parents are attacking character by discussing punctuality. Not informing the other parent of school dates, plays, conferences, ceremonies, awards, sporting events, and the like is a way of signifying to the children that the other parent lacks importance.
“I Don’t Know What’s Wrong with Him” Technique ~ Many parents have developed a technique whereby they create and/or exaggerate differences between themselves and the other parent in front of the children. A behavioral pattern is that arguments develop at the time of pickup and delivery of the children. Often the initial phase of the conversation is polite and appropriate. If the conversation goes on beyond a certain point, however, the brainwashing parent might instigate an argument by using a phrase or presenting an idea that he or she consciously or unconsciously knows will incite the other parent.
Ally Technique ~ Attempting to get the children to side with one parent against the other occurs both in and outside of marriage. At the time of separation, divorce, or custody conflict, however, the attempt to ally the children is stronger. An example would be asking the children direct questions such as, “Don’t you think your mother is wrong to try to get all the money she can from us?” Other such questions are “You’re a sensitive child—do you think it’s fair for a father to have all that money? He just bought himself a new car and a house—look at how we have to live.”
Morality Technique ~ Programming behaviors often include moral judgments against the target parent concerning his/her values, lifestyle, choice of friends, successes or failures in life (career, financial, relational), or residential choice. These criticisms are intended to elevate one’s own position in comparison with the target parent, who becomes diminished by this good/bad dichotomy. Criticizing behaviors are often insidious, occurring over a period of time with different degrees of intensity but always powerful. Like the wearing away of a stone constantly assaulted by waves, the child’s perception of the target parent changes from its original, more positive view, finally conforming to the programming parent’s negative opinions and sentiments. In such cases, the effect can become almost irreversible. These children are no longer able to accept both parents as equally good. In successful brainwashing, even if the child is deprogrammed with valid counter-information or has positive experiences with the other parent, the child may rewrite reality or will rationalize, ascribing ulterior motives to the target parent in the service of maintaining the beliefs of the indoctrinating parent.
Threat of Withdrawal-of-Love Technique ~ This is a coercive, powerful, and almost universally successful technique utilized by parents who programme. Here, the children come to fear rejection or loss of love from a parent if they express love or a desire to be with the other parent. It becomes implicitly or explicitly understood that to be loved and accepted, the child must become a cohort and also turn against the other parent.
“I’m the Only One Who Really Loves You” Technique ~ The intent is to create the belief that the target parent or those who are associated with that parent are not sincere in their love and caring for the child. Genuine love, interest, and involvement, by contrast, exist only in the heart of the programmer. The child is led to peer beneath the surface where ulterior motives lurk. The child comes to believe himself/herself a fool for being duped into attributing such positive qualities of love and caring to an obviously clever person who is bent on driving a wedge between the parent (programmer) and child.
“You’re an Endangered Species” Technique ~ One method of instilling distrust, fear, lack of love, or the belief that a parent is unable to care properly for the child is accomplished through a procedure of judgmental, opinionated, and negative commentary and/or physical inspection and interrogation once the child arrives “home” again. Through these techniques, the child comes to interpret anything associated with the target parent as wrong or unsafe and to perceive his or her ongoing existence as being at risk with each contact. If the child is tired from a full weekend in which there were enjoyable activities, the interpretation might be, “Your father always wears you out. What’s wrong with him? Doesn’t he know you have school tomorrow?”
Rewriting-Reality Technique ~ This technique is also referred to as rewriting history or rescripting. Through rewriting reality, the brainwasher attempts to convince a child to doubt his or her ability to perceive reality. A child may observe a scenario unfold from beginning to end, but as the brainwashing parent repetitively goes over the scenario and resists the child’s interpretation, the original and “true” reality is ultimately filtered out and the rewritten script is eventually adopted. The basic reward is parental acceptance and love.
Physical-Survival Technique ~ Although each of these syndromes, administered individually or in combination, works its inexorable effects on children, the use or threat of physical punishment is one of the most potentially injurious acts for children. When a brainwashing parent or other agent resorts to threatening and/or physically punishing a child, it is usually the result of frustration over the child’s noncompliance in adopting the programme
Footnote:
[1] Clawar, S. S., & Rivlin, B. (2013). Children held hostage second edition: Identifying brainwashed children, presenting a case, and crafting solutions. American Bar Association.
Here is a documented case of coaching parental alienation claims. A divorce is filed. One spouse doesn't wish to leave the house. Feels they are entitled or want money out of the assets that just are not there. An appraisal is ordered by opposing counsel without knowledge of the other party. The attorney also moonlightings as a realtor . Has a out of area appraiser do a drive by. Over inflates the price of the house. The appraisal is paid for by work legal benefits. The other party gets 2 appraisals from area appraisers that come in to the house and comes in 30, 000. Lower. The divorcing spouse makes an offer with the inflated appraisal and request discount on child support. The other party declines. The person wishing to by the house begins to claim there is a crumbling foundation ( not true) they are doing you a favor. When that doesn't work a request goes into the court for a garduim ad lithium. From the party who wants the house or cash. As well as discount on the child support. On the same day an agreement is made for gal services . A GaL is conveniently introduced in the hallway of the court house. Upon recommendation and location of gals office. A same day agreement for service is made and entered in the court house. The behavior of the spouse requesting gal services ramps up and a motion is filled to remove them legally from the house. The hearing is cancelled 3x. Once the behavioral spouse including towards the child leaves. The police are not called because they leave willingly. Then tell the court they were forced to leave the house. Kicked out. The behavioral spouse engages openly in dating a neighbor 5 doors down. The child becomes aware through neighborhood children. Child living with the neighbor. The children all grow up together. The neighbors children state it's been going on for years. The neighbor had misrepresented herself as a family friend and the children all played together. The supposed alienated child gets into a fight with that parent. The gaurduim ad lithium request a therapist. Unknowingly the gaurduim ad lithium is the attorney not gal for that neighbors family member. For years prior and during the case. The garduim ad lithiums and therapist insist on reunification. The child in question is 16. Forced to counseling in which the garduim ad lithium engages in the sessions. Which are a disaster. The father continue to claim alienation and the childs relationship with half siblings deterates. They being 18 get dragged into the argument. This situation continues until the child is 18. The behavioral spouse claiming alienation has their legal fees covered by work benefits. The work benefits pay for child legal fees. This is what alienation is called in the state of Connecticut. The bar association didn't see anything wrong here. Neither did the department of public health. So if you are wondering why thousands of women are claiming alienation doesn't exist it's because several cases look just like this
doesn't come close to the false allegations of abuse claims made... alienation of children from one parent wasn't even an issue until pathological individuals and the corrupt attorneys started using the children as pawns for financial gain/child support and custody.
Clean up the cesspool in family court with false abuse, false4 DV cases and you will see a SIGNIFICANT drop in conflict cases, alienation behavior AND CLAIMS.
Everybody needs to be held accountable AND on best behavior becasue the "problem person" will expose themselves.
PA and Brainwashing
Posted on October 12, 2021 by Shawn Wygant
After reviewing 700 cases of family counseling, mediation, and forensic evaluation, Clawar and Rivlin (1991) identified and described the following techniques in the PA context they termed brainwashing: denying and not acknowledging the social existence of the other parent; attacking something about the character, life-style, past, present, or future of the target parent; discussing visitation arrangements with the child, thus pressuring the child to make a choice; failing to inform the other parent of educational, social, and religious functions, thus communicating that the other parent lacks importance; creating or exaggerating differences between themselves and the other parent in front of the children; asking the children to ally their sympathies and support with the alienating parent; making moral judgments regarding the target parent’s values, life-style, friends, etc.; implicitly or explicitly threatening to withdraw affection if the child expresses a desire to be with the other parent; creating the belief that the other parent is not sincere in his or her love for the child; creating the belief that the other parent is unable to properly care for the child; and convincing the child to doubt his or her ability to perceive reality (pp. 15-36).
Amy Baker (2007a) studied adults who said they had been alienated as children from one of their parents. She asked the subjects to describe the strategies that the alienating parent had used to bring about the PA. Baker said that 40% or more of her adult subjects reported the following alienating strategies when they were children: general bad-mouthing of the target parent by the alienating parent; limiting contact with the target parent; anger and withdrawal of love following visitation with the target parent; telling the child the target parent does not love him or her; forcing the child to choose one parent over the other; bad-mouthing specifically to create the impression that the target parent is dangerous; and confiding in the child about adult relationships (p. 64).
Gulotta and Liberatore (2008) in Italy conducted psycholinguistic analyses of the statements of alienated children and the dialogue between the children and the alienating parents. They provided many examples of the subtle and not-so-subtle messages that an alienating parent might communicate to a child.
In some cases, one or both parents make false allegations of physical or sexual abuse in order to prevent the other parent from obtaining custody or access to the children. These cases usually involve several reports to child protection authorities and the police about the alleged abuse. In some cases, both parents make allegations of abuse against each other, but more frequently it is only one parent who makes a false claim of sexual or physical abuse of a child.
Although domestic violence typically includes physical aggression or assault, such as hitting, kicking, shoving, and slapping, it may also involve sexual abuse, emotional abuse, severe neglect, and economic deprivation. Whatever the manifestation of domestic violence, the underlying theme is that the perpetrator controls and dominates his or her victim. In addition to controlling the spouse or domestic partner, the perpetrator of domestic violence often endeavors to control their children also. After the couple separates or divorces, the perpetrator may continue to control the children and alienate them from the former partner as a way to punish him or her.
Peter Jaffe and his colleagues have been most active in pointing out that aspect of PA. Jaffe, Johnston, Crooks, and Bala (2008) wrote:
Abusive ex-partners are likely to attempt to alienate the children from the other parent’s affection (by asserting blame for the dissolution of the family and telling negative stories), sabotage family plans (by continuing criticism or competitive bribes), and undermine parental authority (by explicitly instructing the children not to listen or obey).
Also, Warshak (2010b) described a pattern he observed in families that featured coercive control and domination; i.e., a parent continues harassing and controlling the ex-partner by manipulating the children to turn against the victim parent.
Authors in many countries have explained how a person who induces a child to experience PA is perpetrating child abuse. For example, Gardner (1998) wrote: “Whether such parents are aware of the negative impact on the child, these behaviors of the aligned parent (and his or her supporters) constitute emotional abuse of the child.” Janet Johnston and Joan Kelly (2004) agreed on the issue of alienation as abuse, referring to PA as “an insidious form of emotional abuse of children that can be inflicted by divorced parents.”
A professional organization of child neurologists and psychiatrists in Italy offered:
Psychological abuse includes: acts of rejection, psychological terrorism, exploitation, isolation and removal of the child from the social context…. A further form of psychological abuse may be the alienation of a parent figure by the other parent…in “Parental Alienation Syndrome.” (Società Italiana di Neuropsichiatria dell’Infanzia e dell’Adolescenza, 2007, p. 10)
A psychologist in the Republic of South Africa wrote:
Involvement of mental health professionals who have no insight into PAS may exacerbate matters. The longer the time spent with the alienating parent, the more likely the process of alienation will be consolidated. It is suggested that PAS be recognized as a form of child abuse; accordingly custody may be awarded to the innocent party, with sanctions potentially applied against the alienating party. (Szabo, 2002).
Baker, A. J. L. (2007a). Adult children of parental alienation syndrome: Breaking the ties that bind. New York: W.W. Norton & Co.
Clawar, S. S., & Rivlin, B. V. (1991). Children held hostage: Dealing with programmed and brainwashed children. Washington, DC: American Bar Association Section of Family Law.
Gardner, R. A. (1998). The parental alienation syndrome: A guide for mental health and legal professionals (2nd ed.). Cresskill, NJ: Creative Therapeutics, Inc.
Gulotta, G., Cavedon, A., & Liberatore, M. (2008). La Sindrome di Alienazione Parentale (PAS): Lavaggio del cervello e programmazione dei figli in danno dell’altro genitore. [The Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS): Brainwashing and Programming of Children to the Detriment of the Other Parent] [Italian]. Milan: Giuffrè
Jaffe, P. G., Johnston, J.R., Crooks, C.V. & Bala, N. (2008). Custody disputes involving allegations of domestic violence: Toward a differential approach to parenting plans. Family Court Review 46(3):500-23.
Szabo, C. P. (2002). Parental alienation syndrome.South African Psychiatry Review, 5(3):1.
Warshak, R. A. (2010b). Family Bridges: Using Insights from Social Science to Reconnect Parents and Alienated Children. Family Court Review, 48, 48-80.
People in Connecticut are being coached on industry tactics for parental alienation.
they have been teaching how tto make false allegations for so long it has become the norm... huge reading list for woman. the handbooks of choice for lowlifes and their crooked attorneys.
https://www.amazon.com/How-Destroy-Man-Easy-Step/dp/1440107904
https://archive.org/details/confidential-angela-how-to-destroy-a-man-now
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/38607065-how-to-destroy-a-man-now-damn
https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMkxLjpbn/
Real Alienation is only "NON EXISTENT" "NOT REAL" "FAKE" for those profiting off the alienating behavior. Those who consistently say it doesn't exist or its a fathers rights issue or pseudo science or its about whatever you can concoct up.... follow the money.
Brainwashing Techniques used by Alienating Parents
“Programming” and “Brainwashing” are two terms used by Dr. Stanley Clawar and Brynne Rivlin [1] to describe the methods and techniques used by alienating parents to manipulate their children into rejecting and/or hating the target parent. According to Clawar & Rivlin (2013), “programming and brainwashing is a process (intentional and unintentional) whereby a parent … attempts to limit, damage, and interfere with the love, contact, and image of the target parent” (p. 9). In their 25-year study of 1000 divorced/separated families commissioned by the American Bar Association, they identified 12 brainwashing techniques used by alienating parents (Clawar & Rivlin, 2013, pp. 31-63);
Denial-of-Existence Technique ~ One of the basic techniques parents use to assault the character of the other parent is to deny or not acknowledge the social existence of the other parent. The manner of denial can vary greatly. One common technique is simply never to talk about the other parent. By excluding any discussion of the other parent or ignoring the topic when raised by the child, the brainwashing parent can send a subtle message to the child that the other parent is not significant. He or she does not exist in our conversation, and therefore, he or she does not, in social terms, exist.
The “Who, Me?” Technique ~ A subtle but powerful technique is to make indirect attacks on the other parent. When questioned about such attacks, the brainwashing parent will say, “Who, me?” The programmer indicates that he or she meant no such thing and that the listener or child was certainly misinterpreting. The list of indirect attacks is infinite, but the basic pattern is that the programmer/brainwasher attacks something about the character, lifestyle, past, present, or future of the target parent.
Middle-Man Technique ~ By speaking to the child about issues that should be first discussed with the other parent, the programmer/brainwasher can compromise and/or damage the child’s relationship with or image of the target parent. For instance, discussing time-schedule arrangements by asking questions such as, “Do you think you would like to have more time with Mom?” often places the child in the middle. The pressure on the child is to make a choice in front of an inquiring parent.
Circumstantial Technique ~ By manipulating, changing, rearranging, and commenting on time, the programming parent tries to gain dominance in the eyes of the children. “Your mother’s always late for delivery and pickup. I wonder if she would be late for her own funeral.” The other parent told her children, “He’s always early for pickup, but late for delivery.” These parents are attacking character by discussing punctuality. Not informing the other parent of school dates, plays, conferences, ceremonies, awards, sporting events, and the like is a way of signifying to the children that the other parent lacks importance.
“I Don’t Know What’s Wrong with Him” Technique ~ Many parents have developed a technique whereby they create and/or exaggerate differences between themselves and the other parent in front of the children. A behavioral pattern is that arguments develop at the time of pickup and delivery of the children. Often the initial phase of the conversation is polite and appropriate. If the conversation goes on beyond a certain point, however, the brainwashing parent might instigate an argument by using a phrase or presenting an idea that he or she consciously or unconsciously knows will incite the other parent.
Ally Technique ~ Attempting to get the children to side with one parent against the other occurs both in and outside of marriage. At the time of separation, divorce, or custody conflict, however, the attempt to ally the children is stronger. An example would be asking the children direct questions such as, “Don’t you think your mother is wrong to try to get all the money she can from us?” Other such questions are “You’re a sensitive child—do you think it’s fair for a father to have all that money? He just bought himself a new car and a house—look at how we have to live.”
Morality Technique ~ Programming behaviors often include moral judgments against the target parent concerning his/her values, lifestyle, choice of friends, successes or failures in life (career, financial, relational), or residential choice. These criticisms are intended to elevate one’s own position in comparison with the target parent, who becomes diminished by this good/bad dichotomy. Criticizing behaviors are often insidious, occurring over a period of time with different degrees of intensity but always powerful. Like the wearing away of a stone constantly assaulted by waves, the child’s perception of the target parent changes from its original, more positive view, finally conforming to the programming parent’s negative opinions and sentiments. In such cases, the effect can become almost irreversible. These children are no longer able to accept both parents as equally good. In successful brainwashing, even if the child is deprogrammed with valid counter-information or has positive experiences with the other parent, the child may rewrite reality or will rationalize, ascribing ulterior motives to the target parent in the service of maintaining the beliefs of the indoctrinating parent.
Threat of Withdrawal-of-Love Technique ~ This is a coercive, powerful, and almost universally successful technique utilized by parents who programme. Here, the children come to fear rejection or loss of love from a parent if they express love or a desire to be with the other parent. It becomes implicitly or explicitly understood that to be loved and accepted, the child must become a cohort and also turn against the other parent.
“I’m the Only One Who Really Loves You” Technique ~ The intent is to create the belief that the target parent or those who are associated with that parent are not sincere in their love and caring for the child. Genuine love, interest, and involvement, by contrast, exist only in the heart of the programmer. The child is led to peer beneath the surface where ulterior motives lurk. The child comes to believe himself/herself a fool for being duped into attributing such positive qualities of love and caring to an obviously clever person who is bent on driving a wedge between the parent (programmer) and child.
“You’re an Endangered Species” Technique ~ One method of instilling distrust, fear, lack of love, or the belief that a parent is unable to care properly for the child is accomplished through a procedure of judgmental, opinionated, and negative commentary and/or physical inspection and interrogation once the child arrives “home” again. Through these techniques, the child comes to interpret anything associated with the target parent as wrong or unsafe and to perceive his or her ongoing existence as being at risk with each contact. If the child is tired from a full weekend in which there were enjoyable activities, the interpretation might be, “Your father always wears you out. What’s wrong with him? Doesn’t he know you have school tomorrow?”
Rewriting-Reality Technique ~ This technique is also referred to as rewriting history or rescripting. Through rewriting reality, the brainwasher attempts to convince a child to doubt his or her ability to perceive reality. A child may observe a scenario unfold from beginning to end, but as the brainwashing parent repetitively goes over the scenario and resists the child’s interpretation, the original and “true” reality is ultimately filtered out and the rewritten script is eventually adopted. The basic reward is parental acceptance and love.
Physical-Survival Technique ~ Although each of these syndromes, administered individually or in combination, works its inexorable effects on children, the use or threat of physical punishment is one of the most potentially injurious acts for children. When a brainwashing parent or other agent resorts to threatening and/or physically punishing a child, it is usually the result of frustration over the child’s noncompliance in adopting the programme
Footnote:
[1] Clawar, S. S., & Rivlin, B. (2013). Children held hostage second edition: Identifying brainwashed children, presenting a case, and crafting solutions. American Bar Association.
Here is a documented case of coaching parental alienation claims. A divorce is filed. One spouse doesn't wish to leave the house. Feels they are entitled or want money out of the assets that just are not there. An appraisal is ordered by opposing counsel without knowledge of the other party. The attorney also moonlightings as a realtor . Has a out of area appraiser do a drive by. Over inflates the price of the house. The appraisal is paid for by work legal benefits. The other party gets 2 appraisals from area appraisers that come in to the house and comes in 30, 000. Lower. The divorcing spouse makes an offer with the inflated appraisal and request discount on child support. The other party declines. The person wishing to by the house begins to claim there is a crumbling foundation ( not true) they are doing you a favor. When that doesn't work a request goes into the court for a garduim ad lithium. From the party who wants the house or cash. As well as discount on the child support. On the same day an agreement is made for gal services . A GaL is conveniently introduced in the hallway of the court house. Upon recommendation and location of gals office. A same day agreement for service is made and entered in the court house. The behavior of the spouse requesting gal services ramps up and a motion is filled to remove them legally from the house. The hearing is cancelled 3x. Once the behavioral spouse including towards the child leaves. The police are not called because they leave willingly. Then tell the court they were forced to leave the house. Kicked out. The behavioral spouse engages openly in dating a neighbor 5 doors down. The child becomes aware through neighborhood children. Child living with the neighbor. The children all grow up together. The neighbors children state it's been going on for years. The neighbor had misrepresented herself as a family friend and the children all played together. The supposed alienated child gets into a fight with that parent. The gaurduim ad lithium request a therapist. Unknowingly the gaurduim ad lithium is the attorney not gal for that neighbors family member. For years prior and during the case. The garduim ad lithiums and therapist insist on reunification. The child in question is 16. Forced to counseling in which the garduim ad lithium engages in the sessions. Which are a disaster. The father continue to claim alienation and the childs relationship with half siblings deterates. They being 18 get dragged into the argument. This situation continues until the child is 18. The behavioral spouse claiming alienation has their legal fees covered by work benefits. The work benefits pay for child legal fees. This is what alienation is called in the state of Connecticut. The bar association didn't see anything wrong here. Neither did the department of public health. So if you are wondering why thousands of women are claiming alienation doesn't exist it's because several cases look just like this
doesn't come close to the false allegations of abuse claims made... alienation of children from one parent wasn't even an issue until pathological individuals and the corrupt attorneys started using the children as pawns for financial gain/child support and custody.
Clean up the cesspool in family court with false abuse, false4 DV cases and you will see a SIGNIFICANT drop in conflict cases, alienation behavior AND CLAIMS.
Everybody needs to be held accountable AND on best behavior becasue the "problem person" will expose themselves.
I think it's happening nationwide but the abuse is being ignored