The Application of the Polyvagal Theory to High Conflict Co‐Parenting Cases

Abstract

Families, litigants, lawyers, advisors embroiled in cases of complex divorce with child contact issues, manage many stressors at once. Participants involved with these types of cases are often exhausted and burned-out from the long-term battles of prolonged litigation. The inability to problem-solve or even communicate effectively reflects the chaos and traumatic stress of the experience and can be seen as a hallmark of this population. When people are consistently stressed, there is a breakdown of communication skills that can create an immunity to receiving help from any direction. Often all parties involved appear to be both hyper-alert to potential threat, and hyper-reactive to one another: no one feels safe. Stephen Porges' Polyvagal Theory is premised on the idea that neuroception plays a key role in the nervous system's ability to assess danger in the environment. Neuroception is a neurophysiological response that does not involve cognitive processing. When cognitive processing is not involved, the result may lead to misinterpretation of, and an inability to accurately assess situations: executive functioning including rational thinking and communication skills are lost to physiological response. Rather than evaluating families and individuals involved in the aforementioned complex divorce cases through the lens of pathology, Polyvagal Theory explains their behavior as an adaptive stress reaction. Utilizing Polyvagal Theory offers a promising path to treatment with these families and diminishing the poor communication and the heightened emotion, assisting practitioners in understanding the impact of neurobiological response in managing stress and trauma. Applying Polyvagal Theory to court involved populations can help both litigants and practitioners recognize the role of the autonomic nervous system, providing the opportunity to understand, to self-regulate, and to improve communication and decision making. Key Points for the Family Court Community:Separation and divorce. The impact of Parent/Child contact problems in high-conflict divorce and separation. The impact of high conflict co-parenting cases on family law and mental health professionals. Interventions: Current practice Polyvagal theory. Polyvagal informed therapy. Effects of polyvagal approach and self regulation. Managing physiological response from a cognitive perspective. Clinical setting and polyvagal theory. Family therapy and polyvagal theory. Experiential framework and polyvagal theory. *Equine assisted therapy, polyvagal perspectives and alternatives. Processing chaos and grief. Other opportunities for making connection. Implementation for professionals.

Effective communication with participants in court hearings: using polyvagal theory in the courtroom

“…In this case, vocal tone is an important signal of safety (Sammler et al, 2015). Tone can also play a significant role in activating an individual’s fight‐or‐flight response (Bailey et al, 2020). In conversation, a confrontational, condescending, or accusatory voice can cause an individual to recall uncomfortable experiences and activate feelings of fear, insecurity, and defensiveness (Dana, 2020; Gray, 2017; van der Kolk, 2015).…”

Using the Range of Research Evidence to Help Inform Clinical Decision Making and Treatment for Family Court‐Involved Children and Families

“…However, they also noted limitations in their methodology (e.g., no randomized controlled studies, small sample sizes, and none or very minimal quantitative data available to analyze) of their evaluations of these programs. Additionally, Bailey et al (2020) use evidence informed approaches in their work with children and families of divorce at the Transitioning Families Therapeutic Reunification program; however, to date, they have not established rigorous research methods to evaluate their program due to the factors noted above. This is not to imply that what MHPs in the family law community have been doing is not effective, but rather that, too often, there is not a mechanism in place or platform in the family law community for MHPs to systematically validate the effectiveness of their clinical interventions and treatment.…”

“…Many specialists in child custody cases use mental health interventions and treatment approaches that fall in this category. For instance, the Child Centered Conjoint Family Therapy (CCCT), Multi‐modal Family Intervention (MMFI), Transitioning Families Therapeutic Reunification Model, Blended Sequential Intervention Model, and the aforementioned Charting Overnights Decisions for Infants and Toddlers (CODIT) are examples of evidence‐informed, family‐focused mental health treatment interventions, programs, or tools tailored to address or meet the needs of children and families involved in child custody cases (Bailey et al, 2020; Greenberg et al, 2012; McIntosh et al, 2014; Polak et al, 2020; Walters & Friedlander, 2010), in that they draw upon well‐established research findings to create integrated interventions for children and families. Each integrated treatment plan has not been subjected to empirical research, but the components of the treatment plan frequently are validated.…”

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

“…Both critics and proponents of the use of alienation for understanding and responding to PCCP cases have recognized the limitations of the existing research generally, and specifically on intervention outcomes (Saini et al, ). Proponents of the use of alienation have become increasingly aware of the complexity and nuance in many PCCP cases, including cases where there may be uncertainty and cases with elements of both realistic estrangement and alienation, that is, contributions by both parents and the many other factors, to a complex, dynamic situation (Bailey et al, ; Deutsch et al, ; Drozd et al, ; Fidler, Deutsch, & Polak, ; Walters & Friedlander, ). Associated with this more nuanced analysis is an increased sensitivity to the role of chronic stress, and in some instances an objective event trauma or a long‐standing relational trauma, that may have been experienced by the children, as well as by one or both parents historically or more recently.…”

“…During the last 10 years there has been a proliferation of publications‐ books, peer and non‐peer reviewed journal articles, chapters in edited books‐ and conference presentations and other trainings, discussing and critiquing various therapeutic models, interventions and educational programs, and to a lesser extent research on intervention outcomes (see for example, Baker & Sauber, ; Bailey, Dana, Bailey, & Davis, ; Dallam & Silberg, ; Drozd, Saini, & Vellucci‐Cook, ; Fidler, et al ; Polak, ; Fidler, Ward, & Deutsch, ; Faust, ; Greenberg, Schnider, & Jackson, ; Judge & Deutsch, ; Mercer, , ; Polak & Moran, ; Polak et al, ; Saini et al, , ; Saini, ; Templer, Matthewson, Haines, & Cox, ; Walters & Friedlander, ; Warshak, , , ).…”