Parental alienation syndrome
Parental alienation syndrome (PAS) is currently the subject of much debate. Since its emergence, there have been fierce advocates of its existence as opposed to other voices calling for its elimination in divorce proceedings, even referring to it as institutional abuse. Does this syndrome really exist or is it being used unwisely in our judicial system?
Although the origin of the term goes back years, this debate is back on everyone's lips. The current government is trying to eliminate the use of this phenomenon, which is sometimes used by judges (among other factors) to decide custody between parents and discern visiting arrangements. More specifically, the Organic Law on the Comprehensive Protection of Children and Adolescents against Violence seeks to include the prohibition of the aforementioned syndrome in divorce proceedings (1). However, the amendment does not define the criteria, nor does it address this phenomenon in all its dimensions.
The key issue, and the main argument for its elimination, occurs in cases where there is violence or abuse. Some battered women have had to have encounters with the father of their children, as the children had "symptoms" compatible with SAP, which poses a clear danger to the physical and psychological integrity of mothers and children.
The following is a review of what studies and professionals in the sector have to say about this figure that is generating so much controversy.
The term was coined by Richard Gardner, professor of child psychiatry at Columbia University, in 1985. The term Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) appeared in the article "Recent Trends in Divorce and Custody Litigation" where he defines it as follows:
"...is a childhood disorder that arises almost exclusively in the post-divorce in the context of custody or guardianship disputes. Its primary manifestation is the unwarranted denigration campaign waged by the child against a parent. This results from a combination of programming (brainwashing) on behalf of the other parent, on the one hand, and the child's own contributions to the defamation of the alienated parent, on the other hand".
Drawing on the experience of custody proceedings in US courts, Gardner claimed that in many proceedings children were "brainwashed" into hatred and resentment of one of the parties. In these studies, he pointed to the tendency for the mother to be the alienating parent and the father to be the alienated parent, with the implications this can have. Although years later he was less bold in his theories (lowering the ratio to 50/50), this syndrome is usually associated with the female gender.
In diagnostic terms, there is also some controversy. In the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, APA) it has not yet been included, although there are several categories with diagnostic descriptions very close to the traditional definitions of the syndrome. In ICD-10 (International Classification of Diseases, WHO) something similar happens.
The fact that it is not included in both manuals is not an exclusive indication since these diagnostic manuals are constantly evolving and changing, adapting to current reality and research. In other words, just as the DSM is not able to include all existing psychological disorders and problems, it has also included on some occasions some that were not.
In Spain, in 2008, the General Council of Psychology of Spain issued a communiqué in which they set out the consensus among researchers and psychologists considering it to be a cognitive, behavioural and emotional disorder, but they advise a permanent revision in the case of using its "diagnosis".
The Spanish Association of Neuropsychiatry (AEN) issued a statement in 2010 against the clinical and legal use of SAP, in which it considered that the attempt to include SAP as a psychiatric disorder constitutes "a serious attempt to medicalise what is a power struggle for the custody of a child and an oversimplification of the complex dynamics of family interaction".
In general terms, it should be noted that in the process of divorce there are various pressures and emotions that surface both in the parties involved and in the children, if there are any. We should not forget that it is a difficult process in which the cooperation of both parties is not always present, even more so if there have been previous complaints. Even if the process is carried out in a peaceful and consensual manner, there are emotionally painful moments, which are difficult for most people to manage.
Leaving aside the phenomenon of SAP, it is clear that children suffer from this process and the consequences can be seen in different spheres of their lives (school performance, aggressiveness, isolation, etc.). In other words, the fact that a minor suffers certain alterations is not an indication that she is suffering manipulation or pressure from her parents.
This diversity of opinion is not only found in clinical and academic circles, but also in jurisprudence. Although it has not been recognised, numerous judgments are based on it and cite it in court cases.
In academia, there are strong advocates of SAP. One of the main voices is José Manuel Aguilar, a clinical and forensic psychologist who wrote a book in 2004 that explains the process of how SAP is produced. It is based on his experience in the courts, where he was able to observe the strategies of parents and the consequences on the children, often resulting in hatred and rejection of the other party.
Other authors support these theories and even treat it as a form of child abuse (Tejedor, 2013).
At the empirical level, not much research has been carried out, and the research that has been done has methodological limitations. Although the term is not included in legislation, judges refer to SAP in their judicial decisions. In a study that analysed this fact, they found that SAP or AP was accredited in 17.2% of the decisions, motivating the presence of expert reports in 89.7% (Tejero, 2013). The woman was in most cases the alienating party (65.5%).
In another investigation on the subject, in this case with professionals and families, it was found that SAP appeared in 10% of the cases (Cartié, 2005).
The arguments against are very clear. In addition to the lack of empirical support, in cases where there are possible situations of violence or abuse, the accused is allowed to become the victim, and the mother becomes the culprit. Also, the admission of SAP is often gender-biased.
On many occasions, there is manipulation of one (or even both) parents, but we also see that this term can be abused, making them victims and influencing the judge's decision. Advocates of this idea argue that it is used on occasions where one parent has a low chance of obtaining custody.
While it is true that, in cases of gender violence, admitting that SAP is taking place can cover up a very dangerous situation, generating doubts in the testimony of the woman or the child. Therefore, in cases of violence or other types of harm that include a justified reason that generates this rejection, it would not be possible to speak of SAP in any case (Paz, 2007).
Recently, the press echoed the case of Irene Costumero, a mother who was deprived of custody of her daughter on the grounds of SAP, and with a complaint of gender violence against her ex-husband, who was acquitted (2). Using cases such as these, many people and feminist associations argue that SAP feeds the myth of false denunciation.
We can see that there are a number of indicators that give us clues about the state of the child, who may be the victim of pressure and attempts at manipulation. However, the lack of empirical evidence suggests that the so-called SAP is not as described by its advocates. As Professor Enrique Echeburúa points out: "it may not be a clinical syndrome, but it is a fact that it happens and we need to pay attention to it".
More research is needed on this issue; looking the other way will not solve the problem. The origin of the term goes back years, society has evolved and so must the approach. To deny that there are parental influences on children in divorce proceedings would be unwise and misses the main premise in these cases: the best interests of the child. At the same time, the fear that many mothers have is justified: that SAP can be used in gender-based violence proceedings, when all seems to be lost for the aggressor.
Similarly, hindering the child's right to maintain emotional ties with both parents and family members equally is a form of emotional abuse. Now, although it is true that women are currently the ones who are more often given custody, this should not be a reason to blame mothers for being the cause of manipulation towards children.
Thus, we cannot fall into reductionism: one good or aligning parent and one bad or aligned parent. In fact, it has been evaluated on several occasions how this dynamic affects the family nucleus, finding that on many occasions both spouses carry out manipulative behaviours with their children, culminating in the rejection of one of them (Santana, 2016).
The work of a professional expert in psychological and legal matters is essential to evaluate both parents and the situation, assisting the judge in these proceedings. In the absence of a solid scientific basis, we cannot ignore the danger of judicial decisions being based on this "syndrome".
At this point, the importance of the criminological/psychological report comes into play, which will try to evaluate the situation, the relationship of both parents and the current state of the child within the framework of a judicial procedure.
Jesús Cervera: Psychologist and Criminologist. Criminology Department of https://www.sec2crime.com/blog/
- -Público. (2021). Los grupos cerrarán la próxima semana un acuerdo sobre la ley de infancia que propone prohibir el Síndrome de Alienación Parental. https://www.publico.es/politica/ley-rhodes-grupos-cerraran-proxima-semana-acuerdo-ley-infancia-propone-prohibir-sindrome-alienacion-parental.html
- -Público. (2020). La ONU pide explicaciones a España por aplicar el Síndrome de Alienación Parental a Irune Costumero. https://www.publico.es/sociedad/onu-pide-explicaciones-espana-aplicar.html
- - Cartié, M., Mora, R. C., Domínguez, R., Gamero, M., & García, C. (2005). Análisis descriptivo de las características asociadas al síndrome de alienación parental (SAP). Psicopatología clínica legal y forense.
- - Escudero, A., Gonzalez, D., Méndez, R., Naredo, C., Pleguezuelos, E., Vaccaro, S., & Pérez Del Campo, A. M. (2010). Informe del grupo de trabajo de investigación sobre el llamado síndrome de alienación parental. Madrid: Ministerio de Sanidad, Política Social e Igualdad.
- -Jaenes, M. (2021, 24 febrero). La ONU pide explicaciones a España por el llamado «síndrome de alienación parental»: "Es tortura instituc. LaSexta. https://www.lasexta.com/noticias/sociedad/la-onu-pide-explicaciones-a-espana-por-el-llamado-sindrome-de-alienacion-parental-es-tortura-institucional_202102246036684dec8b8d00010db5dd.html
- -Santana Ramos, H. (2016). Separaciones y divorcios: Una revisión y redefinición del Síndrome de Alienación Parental.
- -Tejero-Acevedo, R., & González-Trijueque, D. (2013). El fenómeno denominado Alienación Parental (AP) y sus implicaciones forenses en la jurisdicción civil en España. Revista Iberoamericana de Diagnóstico y Evaluación-e Avaliação Psicológica, 2(36), 183-208.