Conceptualizing Visitation Resistance and Refusal in the Context of Parental Conflict, Separation, and Divorce

Garber, Benjamin D.

doi:10.1111/j.1744-1617.2007.00173.x

Cited by 16 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Considerable care and caution should be exercised when concluding that alienation is present as it is clear that children who refuse to visit a parent do so for a great variety of reasons (Kelly & Johnston, 2001). Gardner (1998) first outlined the signs for recognizing children who have been alienated, and others (Drozd & Olesen, 2004; Garber, 2007) have since suggested step‐wise processes through which to conclude that alienation is occurring within a family. Once the presence of alienating behavior and its effects have been identified, it is crucial that a determination then be made as to whether there are also elements of enmeshment, estrangement, and/or abuse and neglect.…”

Section: The Nature Of the Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

When a Child Rejects a Parent: Tailoring the Intervention to Fit the Problem

Friedlander¹,

Walters²

2010

Family Court Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: The Nature Of the Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

When a Child Rejects a Parent: Tailoring the Intervention to Fit the Problem

Friedlander¹,

Walters²

2010

Family Court Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One of the arguments used to support the need for children to have ongoing contact is based on studies of children in foster care. This research suggests that children need to know their parents so they develop a sense of belonging which assists in creating their identity and sense of self (Altobeli, 2011;Garber, 2007;. Those opposed to contact argue that the protective parent provides the child with the necessary connection to family and self and that self-identity is not assisted by involvement with a parent who is a perpetrator of violence (Laing, 2010;Ravi & Gill, 2012).…”

Section: Supervised Contact Centre Reportsmentioning

confidence: 96%

Children and Contact in the Context of Parental Separation and Family Violence: A Practice Perspective

Barker

2013

Children Australia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the past seven years, in my role with Anglicare WA, I have had the privilege of listening to many separated parents share their concerns about their children's safety when spending time with the other parent who has been violent towards them. These concerns include, but are not limited to, trying to prove to the court that their children have been victims of family violence and that this risk will continue and possibly escalate during contact visits. The protective parent often reports that the children continue to be sent on contact visits even when the children experience a significant degree of trauma over their time in the care of the offending parent. In some cases the offending parent has a new partner who is also a victim of family violence and the children are exposed to this violence while on contact visits. Despite disclosures from the children, and efforts to keep them safe by reporting to the statutory agencies, I find that many of these children continue to be sent on contact visits. I am frequently told by the protective parent that when they are in court they are informed that a) there is insufficient evidence to warrant the court preventing the child from spending time with the other (violent) parent; and b) the father has the right to a meaningful relationship with his child and therefore contact will be ordered. It seems that priority is given to the parent's right to spend time with the child at the expense of the child's need, and right, to be safe.

show abstract

“…Although some advocates (usually parents rather than professionals or researchers) seem to focus only on “alienation” while other advocates focus on abuse or partner violence as the reason for a child rejecting a parent, the multi‐factorial model initially advanced by Kelly and Johnston in their 2001 article in the Family Court Review is widely accepted. This model has been widely discussed and elaborated (e.g., Drozd, Olesen, & Saini, ; Fidler & Bala, ; Fidler, Bala, & Saini, ; Garber, , ; Harman, Kruk, & Hines, ; Johnston, Walters, & Olesen, ; Polak & Saini, ; Saini, Drozd, & Olesen, ; Saini, Johnston, Fidler, & Bala, , ), and further refined in this Special Issue (Johnston & Sullivan, ). There are many reasons why a child may resist contact with a parent.…”

Section: Multiple Causes Concepts and Differentiation Of Parent–chilmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… This Table relies on previous reviews of the literature (e.g., Baker, ; Baker & Darnall, ; Cartwright, ; Garber, , ; Johnston et al, ; Kelly & Johnston, ). This Table has been adapted from earlier versions, including in Fidler et al, ; Fidler, Bala, & Saini, ; and Fidler & Ward, . …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Concepts, Controversies And Conundrums Of “Alienation:” Lessons Learned In A Decade And Reflections On Challenges Ahead

Fidler¹,

Bala²

2020

Family Court Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There have been significant advances in understandings and practice related parent-child contact problems (PCCPs), with a growing consensus about some issues and continuing controversy about others. It is widely acknowledged that PCCP cases are most fruitfully understood from a multi-factorial perspective. While some cases may be totally the "fault" of one parent (a parent perpetrating violence or abuse, or a parent exhibiting alienating behavior), in many situations both parents bear some responsibility: focusing on a single cause is rarely helpful. Most professionals and researchers agree that the challenge in practice is to distinguish between false positives and false negatives for both alienation (or unjustified rejection) and realistic estrangement (justified rejection). There is continuing controversy over whether the concept of "alienation" should be used, especially in court proceedings, and a related disagreement about the extent to which family courts are now failing to respond adequately to cases of intimate partner violence (IPV) or child abuse when alienation is also raised. Continuing education, intentional exploration of alternative hypotheses, and active perspective-taking will contribute to effective professional involvement. Increased parent education and prevention can play an important role, although for the more severe PCCP cases the family courts system will continue to play a critical role. While more research must be done, given the complexity of issues, conclusive findings are unlikely in the near future. Legislators and family justice professionals must make decisions based on a thorough analysis of each family's circumstances in the context of our present knowledge, taking account of the limits of the law. They will often face the conundrum of making decisions in the face of uncertainty. Key Points For The Family Court Community:There have been significant advances in understandings and practice related to parent-child contact problems (PCCPs), with a growing consensus about some issues and continuing controversy about others.It is widely acknowledged that PCCPs cases are best understood and addressed by relying on a multi-factorial perspective, a family-systems approach and coordinated professional services.Attention to false positives and false negatives for both alienation (unjustified rejection) and for realistic estrangement (justified rejection) is necessary. For either of these types of contact problems and for cases involving elements of both, it may be in the child's best interest to remedy the strained parent-child relationship and for the child to maintain contact with both parents.Legal and mental health professionals involved in decision making, forensic and clinical assessments, and psychoeducational and clinical interventions face challenges in fact finding and correcting for ubiquitous cognitive biases. Continuing education, intentional exploration of alternative hypotheses, and active dialogue with openness to different perspectives will contribute to effective profess...

show abstract

Conceptualizing Visitation Resistance and Refusal in the Context of Parental Conflict, Separation, and Divorce

Cited by 16 publications

References 50 publications

When a Child Rejects a Parent: Tailoring the Intervention to Fit the Problem

When a Child Rejects a Parent: Tailoring the Intervention to Fit the Problem

Children and Contact in the Context of Parental Separation and Family Violence: A Practice Perspective

Concepts, Controversies And Conundrums Of “Alienation:” Lessons Learned In A Decade And Reflections On Challenges Ahead

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About