Dr. Craig Childress: Attachment Based "Parental Alienation" (AB-PA)

The Petition to the APA received 10,000 signatures on its first day.  You breath, and your power pulses.  You are more powerful than you know.  Come together into a single voice. 

Petition to the American Psychological Association 

I will begin my work on formal submission of the Petition to the APA.  In the meantime, continue recruiting allies.  We want to find all of your allies in this battle.  And toward that end I have something for you to do – find and bring your allies.

We want to leverage the Petition to the APA to call forth current allies and educate future allies.  I want you to continue to recruit signatures to the Petition, each signature represents a voice, an ally.  But let’s also identify your organizational allies, beginning with all state psychological associations. 

We are going to identify your current allies and begin recruiting your future allies by asking these organizational entities to formally endorse the Petition to the APA.

The remedies sought by the Petition to the APA are entirely reasonable.  The Petition is simply asking the APA to provide statements affirming the Standards of its own ethics code.  This is an entirely reasonable request. 

Supporting professional knowledge and professional competence is something every professional organization should be able to endorse. 

So then, let’s ask all professional organizations to please formally endorse the Petition to the APA.  Let’s identify your current allies, voices who will stand with you. 

But even if they don’t endorse, simply reading the Petition to the APA will educate them.  That is a very good thing.  We are recruiting them as your future allies.  The world is changing.

Start with your state’s psychological organization (such as the Pennsylvania Psychological Association, the New York Psychological Association, the Oregon Psychological Association, the North Carolina Psychological Association…)

I want you to ask all of your state psychological organizations to formally endorse the Petition to the APA.  Master’s level psychological organizations as well.  Every mental health organization, ask them to formally endorse the Petition to the APA.

Internationally, I would ask the same.  Ask your national and regional psychological organizations in your country to formally endorse the Petition to the APA.  (the British Psychological Association, the Australian Psychological Association, the Canadian Psychological Association, the Nederlands Instituut van Psychologen, the Polish Psychologists’ Association…).  Ask them to endorse the Petition to the APA.

We are identifying your current allies and bringing their voices to yours, and we are educating your future allies.  This is all good.

And let’s not stop at the mental health system.  Let’s seek the endorsement of legal organizations as well.  Let’s ask all of your state bar associations to endorse the Petition to the APA.  Will any of them endorse the Petition?  I don’t know.  Let’s find out.

How about law schools and graduate psychology programs at universities… would any of them formally endorse the Petition to the APA?  I don’t know.  I do know that they won’t endorse the Petition if they’re not asked.

What about all of your state licensing boards?  I doubt that they’ll take an official position on the Petition to the APA, but they will at least know about the issues.  Statement of Concern 4 speaks directly to licensing boards.  We are not only calling for current allies, we are educating future allies.

What about your state legislators… will they introduce legislation to endorse the Petition to the APA?  Maybe not, but at least its an opportunity to educate the office of your state legislator about the trauma to families and the unchecked professional ignorance and incompetence.  Ask for a formal statement from the office of the representative endorsing the Petition to the APA.

What about the media?  Do you think journalists and the media might be interested in the story of the Petition to the APA? 

Parents seeking professional competence from a broken mental health system.  Family’s destroyed by rampant and unchecked professional ignorance and incompetence in professional psychology. 

Parents calling out to the APA for relief, calling for the APA to affirm its  support for their own professional standards guaranteeing parents their foundational right to professional knowledge and professional competence in the assessment, diagnosis, and treatment of their children and families.

Do you think the media might be interested in that story?  I don’t know.  Let’s ask.

The Petition to the APA is on Change.org.  A pdf copy of the Petition to the APA is on my website, right at the top of the Parental Alienation section.  In seeking formal endorsements from organizations, you can link your request to the Petition directly or you can send a pdf of the Petition as part of your request.

I’d suggest writing a cover letter saying something like:

The lives of children and families experiencing attachment-related family pathology surrounding divorce are being destroyed by professional ignorance and incompetence. 

A Petition to the American Psychological Association signed by over X0,000 is gathering voices of support for the APA to affirm its Standards guaranteeing parents the right to professional competence in the assessment, diagnosis, and treatment of their children and families (Standard 2.01a of the APA ethics code).

I am requesting that the xyz organization also add its voice to this call for professional competence by formally endorsing the Petition to the APA regarding standards of professional competence in the assessment, diagnosis, and treatment of attachment-related pathology surrounding divorce.

You will find a copy of the Petition to the APA attached. 

Thank you for your consideration of this request that xyz organization provide a statement of support endorsing the Petition to the APA.

Emails to organizations may be one approach.  I think postal mail is always more powerful.  Even if they don’t formally endorse the Petition, or even if their endorsement takes ages to work its way through their endorsement process, these organizations become educated by simply reading the Petition.  The knowledge will percolate, embed itself, and they will become our future allies. 

Every professional quote in the Petition is a seed of knowledge planted in the mind of the reading mental health professional.  In the fertile soil of an authentic professional mind, each seed of knowledge will grow.  And just look how many seeds of knowledge the Petition contains, each quote is a seed.

All of Article 3 is a valuable seed of knowledge for licensing boards, with Statement of Concern 4 amplifying the message to licensing boards. 

Articles 1 and 2 provide an unraveling of the pathology for legal professionals and CPS social workers, familiarizing them with the vocabulary and concepts; a cross-generational coalition, pathogenic parenting, pathological mourning by a narcissistic/(borderline) parent, the psychological control of the child.

Education requires repeated exposure to familiarize the construct and begin to embed and anchor the information.  Each source of information, the Petition and the booklets – The Narcissistic Parent, the Assessment of Attachment-Related Pathology, the Contingent Visitation Schedule – provides a repetition and slightly varied extension of the information.  Through each source of information the knowledge becomes increasingly anchored and reinforced.

It’s time for all of your allies to join us on the battlefield.  The time is now.  The battle to recover your children, all of your children, is now.  Let’s identify your current allies and bring them to the field to join us, and let’s begin to recruit your future allies. 

For individuals, ask every person you know to sign the petition.  For organizations, ask every organization you can identify to endorse the petition.

Professional psychology associations.  Professional legal associations.  All licensing boards (CPS agencies?).  Media outlets.  Your extended family.  Your friends.  Identify all of your allies and bring them to the field, and begin to recruit your future allies. 

Organizations won’t endorse the Petition if they’re not asked.  No harm in asking:

“Please endorse… attached is the Petition to the APA.  Thank you.”

Craig Childress, Psy.D.
Clinical Psychologist, PSY 18857

I have just posted the Petition to the APA to Change.org.

Petition to the American Psychological Association

I will formally submit this petition to the APA when it has 10,000 signatures.

This is the time for your voice to be heard.  You are the warriors for your children.  You are more powerful than you know.  Become an unstoppable force for change.

Craig Childress, Psy.D.
Clinical Psychologist, PSY 18857

In September, I invited Karen Woodall and the clinical psychologist with whom she works to Certification training in the Bowlby-Minuchin-Beck model of attachment-based “parental alienation” (AB-PA).  A personal invitation for professional collaboration.

An Invitation to Karen Woodall

I extended the invitation to both Karen and her clinical psychologist, because apparently, according to Karen on her blogs, she is not professionally qualified to diagnose personality disorder pathology so she must refer cases of “parental alienation” involving suspected narcissistic or borderline personality disorder pathology of the parent to a clinical psychologist:

From Karen Woodall: “If I suspect a personality disorder is present I will ask our clinical psychologist to evaluate this and on the basis of this outcome we will design and deliver a treatment route, often in a team setting, sometimes headed by our clinical psychologist.”

I find this intriguing, since personality disorder pathology exists on a spectrum (mild, moderate, severe) and is often unrecognized during initial assessment presentations. 

From Beck: “Underdiagnosis constitutes a big problem that results in insufficient treatment.  In many cases we saw, it took years of fruitless attempts to treat these patients before it became clear they were in fact suffering from BPD.” (Beck, et al. 2004 p. 196)

Dr. Childress Comment:  Aaron Beck is one of the preeminent leading figures in professional psychology.

From Cohen: “The perception [of narcissism in a patient] is hampered by the fact that narcissistic individuals may well be intelligent, charming, and sometimes creative people who function effectively in their professional lives and in a range of social situations… While narcissism is recognized as a serious mental disorder, its manifestations may not be immediately recognized as pathological, even by persons in the helping professions, and its implications may remain unattended to.” (Cohen, 1998, p. 197)

So I wonder… at what threshold does Karen refer to her “clinical psychologist to evaluate this”?  Might she be missing cases of parental narcissistic or borderline personality pathology because she is not personally capable or qualified to independently assess and independently diagnose parental personality pathology, and therefore doesn’t make the referral to her clinical psychologist in sub-threshold cases of personality disorder traits or features?  Because in addition to actual personality “disorders” there are also personality “traits” and “features” that don’t meet full diagnostic criteria for a “disorder.”  At what threshold does Karen refer to her clinical psychologist?

If she and her clinical psychologist had attended the AB-PA Certification in November, this could have been a very productive conversation between Karen, myself, and her clinical psychologist at the AB-PA Certification seminar.  After all, I am a clinical psychologist with an expertise in the area of pathogenic parenting by a narcissistic/(borderline) parent.  A lost opportunity for seemingly valuable professional-to-professional dialogue.

In my invitation to Karen and her clinical psychologist back in September, I explicitly offered a professional collaboration in solving the attachment-related pathology of “parental alienation” in the UK.

From An Invitation to Karen Woodall:

“And you know what Karen?  If you have an AB-PA Certified psychologist on staff at your clinic, and if you’re documenting your assessments using the instruments of AB-PA, then you can unleash me on the British mental health system. 

Hmmm, if I’m taking on the incompetent mental health assessment of attachment-related pathology in the British mental health system, it sure would be nice to have an AB-PA Certified psychologist in England who could conduct a proper assessment of AB-PA.  Hmmm, who could that be?  Hey, I know.  There is only one clinical psychologist in all of England who is AB-PA Certified.  Go to that person and you’ll get an exceptionally good diagnostic workup.

Come on Karen.  Personal invitation from Dr. C.  Come to Pasadena with your clinical psychologist in November.  Three days – Advanced Certification in AB-PA for both you and your clinical psychologist.  Then unleash me into your mental health system.”

Crickets.  No response from Karen.  I offer professional collaboration in solving “parental alienation.”  She refuses the offer.

Two weeks ago, I extended another invitation to Karen Woodall to engage in a professional collaboration; a professional level discussion of the pathology on a joint blog:

Invitation to Karen Woodall

Joint Blog: A Conversation Between Karen Woodall & Dr. Childress

This would be an immensely valuable opportunity for a professional-level discussion regarding the nature of the pathology, its assessment, its diagnosis, and its treatment.  This professional-level conversation could advance both the professional-level understanding for the pathology and its definition, and could potentially speed the enactment of a solution to “parental alienation” pathology in Great Britain.

So far, I’ve heard nothing but crickets.  No response from Karen.  She is apparently refusing my offer of a professional-level discussion of the pathology and collaboration in its solution.

What the Bowlby-Minuchin-Beck model of attachment-based “parental alienation” (AB-PA) does is return professional practice to the standard and established constructs and principles of professional psychology.  No “new forms of pathology” proposals that are rejected by establishment psychology and that open us to mental health persons simply making stuff up, whatever they want, that then leads to our current situation of rampant and profound professional ignorance and incompetence.

The Bowlby-Minuchin-Beck model of AB-PA returns professional psychology to standard and established constructs and principles, and doing so immediately provides all targeted parents everywhere with a solution:

The Solution: The Return to Professional Practice

The Solution: The Dominoes

There is not a rational and responsible mental health professional who can possibly argue against a professional reliance on the established constructs and principles of professional psychology to assess, diagnose, and treat pathology – any pathology – all pathology – including attachment-related pathology surrounding divorce.

What the Bowlby-Minuchin-Beck model of AB-PA does is establish a defined standard of practice using the defined and established foundational principles and constructs of professional psychology;

The Attachment System

Personality Disorder Pathology

Family Systems Therapy

Complex Trauma

If Karen Woodall wants to add “new forms of pathology” that she thinks she’s “discovered” to the work of Bowlby and Minuchin and Beck and Haley and van der Kolk and Millon and Kernberg…, fine by me.  Add all the unicorns and mermaids you want.  If you can get your unicorns and mermaids accepted by professional psychology, woo hoo.  I have no problem with that.

But in the meantime, let’s solve the attachment-related pathology of “parental alienation” using the standard and established constructs and principles of professional psychology.

If Karen Woodall wants to argue that the Bowlby-Minuchin-Beck model of AB-PA doesn’t solve all the different variants of the pathology, and that the standard and established constructs and principles from the accumulated wisdom and scientific investigation of professional psychology is inadequate to solve the pathology, and that she alone possesses the wisdom needed to solve the pathology, fine by me.  Make the argument to professional psychology that you’re a new magnificent expert.  I have no problem with that.

But in the meantime, let’s solve what we can – the severe form or “pure case” as you call it – of “parental alienation” surrounding divorce.  Let’s start by solving the most severe form using the standard and established constructs and principles of professional psychology.  There is absolutely zero reason why we should not begin immediately implementing the Bowlby-Minuchin-Beck model of AB-PA to solve the (allegedly) “severe cases” of “parental alienation”.  If we can solve the suffering of these families right now, today – and we can – let’s do it. 

Let’s not waste a minute arguing among ourselves.  If the Bowlby-Minuchin-Beck model of AB-PA immediately solves the most severe cases, lets all of us get on the mountaintops and church steeples and begin to shout about this.  Lets all of us work together to get this change into place as fast as we possibly can.

In truth, the Bowlby-Minuchin-Beck model (i.e., the standard and established constructs and principles of professional psychology) CAN and will solve all the different variants of the pathology as well, I just won’t argue that at this point.  In my view, first things first.  We start with solving the most severe form, develop the system-wide professional knowledge and competence to solve that, and then we expand this knowledge and competence into the variant expressions of parental pathology following divorce.  Step-by-step.

I’m a clinical psychologist.  I know the constructs and principles of professional psychology – Bowlby, Minuchin, Beck, Haley, Fonagy, Stern, Kohut, Winnicott, Tronick, van der Kolk, Ainsworth, Main, Sroufe, Bowen, Satir, Millon, Linehan, Kernberg – we can absolutely solve all the different variants of attachment-related family pathology following divorce by using the standard and established constructs and principles of professional psychology.

But I won’t argue that at this point.  If Karen Woodall thinks she’s discovered “new things” and “new forms of pathology” fine by me.  Let’s just solve the severe cases using the Bowlby-Minuchin-Beck model of AB-PA and end the suffering of these families everywhere – in the United States, in England, in Australia, in the Netherlands, in South Africa, in Japan, everywhere.  Then we can discuss your “hybrid cases,” the different variations of the pathology.

And you know what, Karen?  I’m more than happy to discuss that with you on a professional level:

A Conversation Between Karen Woodall & Dr. Childress

Send me an email and I’ll send you the password for this joint blog and we can begin the professional-level discussion.

But unless you’re willing to engage in a professional level-discussion and join with us in solving the pathology using the standard and established constructs and principles of professional psychology (the Bowlby-Minuchin-Beck model of AB-PA), then you are just using your platform and supposed “expertise” to sow confusion, controversy, discord, and division.  Stop it.  We’re trying to solve this. 

Join with us in creating the solution – using ONLY the standard and established constructs and principles of professional psychology – to which ALL mental health professionals can be held ACCOUNTABLE – thereby establishing a baseline professional standard of practice for all mental health professionals everywhere using standard and established professional domains of knowledge, or else you simply become an obstructionist seeking to promote your own self-interest at the expense of a solution.

My offer for you and your clinical psychologist to become AB-PA Certified in the Bowlby-Minuchin-Beck model of “parental alienation” stands.  If you and your clinical psychologist want to become AB-PA Certified in the spring of 2018, just give me the dates and I’ll book a seminar at a hotel in Long Beach.  My offer to then collaborate on bringing the Bowlby-Minuchin-Beck model of AB-PA to England also stands, as it would to collaborate with any mental health professional anywhere.

My offer for you and I to engage in a professional-level discussion of the pathology so that we can bring professional division to an end using a joint blog  – A Conversation Between Karen Woodall & Dr. Childress – stands.  Send me an email and I’ll send you the password to this blog and we can begin the professional-level dialogue.

But understand this clearly Karen… I will NOT allow you impede the solution available to targeted parents and their children provided by a return of professional psychology to the standard and established constructs and principles of professional psychology.  If you do not want to collaborate in the solution offered by the Bowlby-Minuchin-Beck model of AB-PA, then I suggest you simply stand aside for the next year or so while we solve this – internationally.  Because I will NOT allow you to impede the solution by your sowing of confusion, controversy, discord, and division.

If you are not part of the solution, then you are part of the problem.  The world is changing.  The status quo is not acceptable.  More of the same is not acceptable.

We are returning to the standard and established constructs and principles of professional psychology.  That is a fact.

We are going to establish a ground foundation for a professional standard of practice in the assessment, diagnosis, and treatment of attachment-related pathology surrounding divorce.  That is a fact.

Gardnerian PAS and its eight symptom identifiers are NOT part of the solution.  Gardnerian PAS is dead.  That is a fact.

We are going to solve the attachment-related pathology of “parental alienation” for all children and all families everywhere using the standard and established constructs and principles of professional psychology (as defined through the Bowlby-Minuchin-Beck model of AB-PA) .  That is a fact.

Join us in the solution.  Or stand aside.

Because I will not allow you to simply obstruct the solution for your own self-interest.  Gardnerian PAS is dead.  Let it go.  Embrace the coming change and join us in creating the change.  That is my invitation to you.

Send me an email, I’ll send you the password, and we can begin our professional-level conversation:

A Conversation Between Karen Woodall & Dr. Childress

Craig Childress, Psy.D.
Clinical Psychologist, PSY 18857

---

Beck, A.T., Freeman, A., Davis, D.D., & Associates (2004). Cognitive therapy of personality disorders. (2nd edition). New York: Guilford.

Cohen, O. (1998). Parental narcissism and the disengagement of the non-custodial father after divorce. Clinical Social Work Journal, 26, 195-215

This is a post by Dorcy Pruter to the Facebook group, the Alliance to Solve Parental Alienation.  It is so incredibly rich in wisdom that I want to emphasize her insights and counsel.

A preface; there are a set of brain cells called mirror neurons.   I recommend everyone watch this short PBS show on Mirror Neurons:

PBS: Mirror Neurons

The mirror neuron network is designed to read the intention of other people; what is motivating the other person.  One of the leading researchers in this domain is Daniel Stern:

From Stern: “Our nervous systems are constructed to be captured by the nervous systems of others.  Our intentions are modified or born in a shifting dialogue with the felt intentions of others.  Our feelings are shaped by the intentions, thoughts, and feelings of others.  And our thoughts are cocreated in dialogue, even when it is only with ourselves.  In short, our mental life is cocreated.”  (Stern, 2004, p. 76)

From Stern: “The discovery of mirror neurons has been crucial.  Mirror neurons provide possible neurobiological mechanisms for understanding the following phenomena: reading other people’s states of mind, especially intentions; resonating with another’s emotion; experiencing what someone else is experiencing; and capturing an observed action so that one can imitate it — in short, empathizing with another and establishing intersubjective contact.” (Stern, 2004; p. 78)

From Stern: “The perception of an attributable intention seems to have its own brain localization — a sort of intention-detecting center (Blakemore & Decety, 2001).  For example, the intention-detector brain center is activated if the action, in its context, seems to have an intention.  If the exact same movement is seen, in a different context where no intention can be attributed, the brain center will not activate.” (Stern, 2004; p. 80).

In my clinical psychology work with children and families, I typically describe to parents that the child’s brain is reading the parent’s intention, not just the parent’s behavior.  The most important thing about parenting is NOT what we do, it is the intention that is motivating our actions.  I then work with parents on developing and organizing their underlying intentions from which their actions flow.

This is Dorcy’s wisdom.  Targeted parents – and everyone – would be well served by a commitment to understanding Dorcy’s wisdom and counsel:

---

From Dorcy Pruter:

In some situations the supposedly targeted parent is the pathogenic parent.

Some cases we work on at the Conscious Co-Parenting Institute both parents are pathogenic. Those are the most difficult cases.

Kids love both of their parents and we have an obligation as a society and as humanity to stop judging, labeling and blaming and seek to educate and empower children with the skills they need to be in a healthy relationship with both parents.

When a child is being abused we must first protect the child, we then recover and restore the child to their authentic self, we then recover the pathogenic parents (adult abused children) to their authentic selves.

We don’t throw the parents out. We give them the support and teach them the skills they need to be better parents.

Empathy and compassion is unconditional love in action.

I encourage all parents to take a deep dive into their subconscious mind and discover why they are choosing the experiencing they have chosen as parents unconsciously. The solution to restoring relationships and really creating healthier relationships starts with you always. It is so easy to blame the other, focus on their pathology and faults, however this does not advance your family forward.

You take you wherever you go. It is not about blame it is about 100% responsibility 100% of the time. It is from this empowered place that you can recover your children and the special bond you have with them. Pathogenic parent or not.

Children love their parents, even their pathogenic parents. Once the bond is formed it is never broken. My mother is extremely pathogenic and yet I still love her and have always loved her. I have extreme compassion and empathy for her. I can see her unhealed child and she suffers. Instead of hating her, I love her. This is the same for all humans. Our ability to love unconditionally is how we come into the world. Most have forgotten because of the conditioning that starts early on because our parents are unconscious.

We don’t need more suffering – we need more empathy and compassion.

We love not because of how other people are or act, we love because of who we are.

One last thing, if you are stuck in your victim mindset, you will not be able to recover your children. You must resolve your suffering with compassion for self. It is from this transformational place of healing that you will attract your beloved children back to you.

We must all rise together and not allow each other to suffer with self-pity and blame. When you see someone suffering, don’t sympathize, this is very lower self this holds people stuck. Empathize, this encourages people to rise up, take responsibility and make a change.

I know the “system” is broken, and you are going to have to rise up out of the system and take your power back. It is the belief that keeps getting projected into the world that perpetuates it as truth.

When you change your thoughts, you change your feelings which changes your actions. From a new thought comes a new perspective comes a new action.

This is how it works. This is how it works for EVERYONE. This is how some people reunite and some don’t.

When our clients come to us they are suffering and when they listen and start implementing new thoughts and actions reunification happens.

The moment we go down the mindset path of victim, the system is broken, my ex is alienating, lawyers and judges are unfair, mental health professionals are incompetent and on and on we are telling the universe this is the truth for us and then the universe dishes up more of what you believe you deserve. This is how it works. I have seen it time and time again. The shift in the mindset and the shift in doing the inner work is what makes difference.

We chose to have children mostly from our lower self consciousness and it is now time to rise up and be the Higher Purpose Parents we are being called forward to be.

Authentically targeted parents are the chosen parents, they are the parents with the internal strength and gifts to shift all of humanity. They have forgotten and they are awakening now.

#togetherwerise #endallchildabuse #higherpurposeparents

---

---

Thank you Dorcy, for healing and correcting the dark energy of suffering and victimization.  We start by understanding and organizing our deeper intentions, finding our love, finding our power, healing ourselves.  Then, from this more steady place of light and love, we recover the children who are lost.

Craig Childress, Psy.D.
Clinical Psychologist, PSY 18857

I have had an idea for a while now that I keep trying to push away, and it keeps coming back.  So, I’ve decided to roll it out and see where it leads.  Maybe somewhere, maybe nowhere.

I want to create a resource from the stories of grief and loss borne by so many targeted parents, your stories of love for your children, your stories about the failure of the mental health system, and your stories of the failed court system.  Your stories of pain.

I know these stories far too well, because I’ve heard these stories far too often.  While each story is unique, each story is also the same, over-and-over they replay in families, the loss of children to the pathology of a narcissistic/(borderline) parent.

I want to send your stories to the APA, to child custody evaluators, to media representatives, and to state legislators, so they can hear what I hear; the grief and loss, and the enduring family tragedy of “parental alienation” that occurs surrounding divorce.

To do this, I want to compile your stories into a book that can be sent to the APA, and to custody evaluators, and to state legislators.  I want to say,

“Look.  Look at this, hear these stories.  Look at the lost love, the grief, and the nightmare of the failed mental health system and the failed legal system response to the malignancy of the parental personality pathology surrounding divorce; a child’s love that becomes twisted by the pathology of a narcissistic/(borderline) parent into unrecognizable anger, hostility, and rejection.”

Targeted parents are experiencing a form of complex trauma called “traumatic grief.”

Wikipedia: Complex Trauma

 A therapeutic approach to processing trauma is through journaling about the experience.  Being able to form the trauma experience into the structure of an organized coherent narrative – forming and telling the story – helps to heal the trauma, it helps integrate the incomprehensibility of the trauma experience.  Putting the chaotic emotions of trauma into words helps bring psychological organization to the experience, which then assists in the processing of the complex trauma experience.

But no sooner do I have these thoughts for compiling a book of stories, than sanity grabs ahold of me and says,

“What are you doing?  Are you nuts?  You already have way too much on your plate.  You can’t take on editing a collection of stories from targeted parents regarding their grief and loss, and about the failures of the mental health system and legal system.”

“They’ll send you 10, 20, 30 pages of detailed stories.  You’ll never have time to read them.  The mere attempt to compile these stories would be overwhelming.”

But, in spite of this immensely sage wisdom from my sanity, I’ve come to the conclusion that your stories need to exist, your loss needs to be recognized, your love and heartbreak needs to be heard.

So, I’ve decided to start a book project of compiling stories from targeted parents.  I have absolutely no doubt that each parent can write a full book, each of you on your own, regarding the wild roller coaster ride of tragedy created from your experiences, and many have.  My goal, however, is different.  It is to bring these stories together into a single powerful voice, each story unique, and yet all of them the same.  I want to say with these stories, “Look.  See these people.  Listen to their heartbreak.”

And I also want to give each of you a chance to begin processing your complex trauma – the traumatic grieving created by the failed responses from the mental health system and legal system to the personality pathology of your ex-spouse that has emerged through your child following the divorce.

So, I have decided to request your stories – in a very structured format.  I don’t have time to read pages and pages of each story.  There are too many of you and it is too much.

Bringing organization and structure to your story is part of your brain’s way of making sense of it.  If your experience simply spews forth, it remains disorganized and unprocessed.  I am asking that you structure your stories in a very specific way, and then to send your story to me at an email address I’m going to provide.

The Structure

The STRUCTURE is to tell your story in 11 paragraphs. 

That’s all you get: 11 paragraphs total.  Your entire story in 11 paragraphs.

And here’s how these paragraphs are to be formed:

Paragraphs 1 & 2: Love and Light

In these opening two paragraphs (of 4 sentences each; that’s all you get, four sentences for each paragraph), I want you to describe the love and bonding with your children before the pathology emerged. 

I want you to tell me how wonderful your children are, how much you love them, and the deep love, joy, and bonding that you shared with your children before the tragedy.  Help me to see your beautiful and wonderful children.  Tell me how your son loves peanut butter and bananas and how your daughter was so proud when she scored her soccer goal.  Let me love your children with you.

These are the paragraphs of light and love that will then devolve through paragraphs 3 through 9 into the dark night of the alienation and loss.  There is a flow.  Each story is unique, and each is the same.

Two paragraphs of 4 sentences each for love and light, that’s all you get. 

This two-paragraph limitation is important, both for the processing of trauma and because that’s what the book needs, it’s not simply your story – it’s all of your stories together, each unique and yet each the same.  By each story remaining focused and structured, the love becomes accessible to the reader, the nightmare becomes accessible to the reader, and the tragedy of profound loss and grief becomes accessible to the reader.

Paragraphs 3 – 4 – 5: The Pathology’s Emergence

In three paragraphs of 4 sentences each, tell me about the pathology, how it emerged, how your beautiful children changed, how the pathology of your ex-spouse twisted your children into their anger, hostility, judgement, fearfulness, and rejection.

Tell me what happened to your children.  Tell me of their destruction.

Three paragraphs of 4 sentences each.  All of the pathology in only three paragraphs of 4 sentences each.

Paragraphs 6 & 7:  The Failed Mental Health System

Next, I want to learn about the failure of the mental health system, the failure by therapists and custody evaluators to identify the pathology and stop the pathology, and the collusion by mental health persons with enacting the pathology.

In two paragraphs of 4 sentences each, tell me about how the mental health system failed you, how no one listened, how no one saw, how no one made it stop.

Paragraphs 8 & 9: The Failed Legal System

In two paragraphs of 4 sentences each, tell me about the nightmare of the failed family courts, the financial bankruptcy created by the legal system, the endless delays, and the manipulation of the injustice system by your ex-spouse.  Tell me about the false allegations and imposed separation from your children, tell me about the unwarranted supervised visitation orders, tell me about the injustice system of the family courts.

Two paragraphs of 4 sentences each.  Hard, I know. But two paragraphs of 4 sentences each is all you get.

You can switch the order of Failed Mental Health and Failed Legal System if this order of presentation seems more appropriate to your family, but these two sections always follow the three paragraphs on the Emergence of Pathology.  You can also write less, but just not more than the structure I provide.

Paragraphs 10 & 11:  The Dark Night

In these final two paragraphs of 4 sentences each, share the dark night of your grief and loss.  Your love, your tears, your helplessness, and your grief.

Working with Structure

I understand that the limitations will be hard.  There is so much information, so much to understand in each of your stories.  How can you possibly describe the emergence of pathology in your children in only three paragraphs?  How can you possibly explain the injustice of false allegations and the nightmare of the legal system in only two paragraphs?

But that is the task.  Eleven paragraphs of 4 sentences each.

Here’s my suggestion.  Write six paragraphs on the Emergence of the Pathology.  Don’t send them.  Let them sit for a week.  Then go back and edit the six paragraphs down to four paragraphs.  Let it sit for a week, and then edit them down to three paragraphs.  This will help you in processing the trauma experience.  It will help bring psychological organization to the chaos of the trauma.

Each of your stories will be unique, and each story will be the same.  Your specific individual story may not find its way into the final product.  The universe will weave itself.  Yet your story is in all stories.

Over-and-over this pathology takes its own course in each family, and yet the stories all have the same core, the same pathology, the same failure of the mental health system and legal system.  The power is from bringing your stories together into a single voice that says, “Look.  See this.  We need to stop this.”

When you have your own unique story ready in 11 paragraphs of 4 sentences each, send your story to me at a special Gmail address just for this purpose:

            myalienationstory@gmail.com

I will read your stories.  If I receive enough stories, I will edit and compile them into a book of stories – all unique – yet all variants of the same story – told over-and-over again with new characters in new families.  Stories of your voice, your trauma, your helplessness, your grief and loss; abandoned by the mental health system, abandoned by the legal system.  Your stories.  In eleven paragraphs of 4 sentences each.

If this forms into a book of stories, then in my weaving of the presentation of your stories I will provide commentary on the pathology and the suffering it creates, bringing my professional voice to yours, amplifying and emphasizing your experience.

A book of stories may emerge, or it may not emerge.  This is all to the source of that which leads.  If a book of your stories emerges, what I then want to do is send this book to every Committee of the APA, to every licensing board, and to every state legislator’s office.  I want to say,

“Look.  Hear these parents.  See the sorrow, the tragedy, the pathology; over-and-over again and no one makes it stop.”

Your voices, your stories, together – all unique, and all the same.

That’s my idea that just won’t go away, a book of stories, your stories.  I have the email address to receive your stories (myalienationstory@gmail.com).  Eleven paragraphs of 4 sentences each:

Paragraphs 1-2:  Light and Love

Paragraphs 3-5:  The Pathology Emerges

Paragraphs 6-7:  The Failure of Mental Health

Paragraphs 8-9:  The Failure of the Courts

Paragraphs 10-11:  The Dark Night

If nothing emerges, then the universe did not want to bring a book of stories into existence.  Still, in writing your story, in struggling to fit your story into the structure I laid out, you will be journaling about your complex trauma, bringing “cognitive mediation” to an overwhelming emotional experience. This alone will be a good thing.

If you send me a STRUCTURED story of 11 paragraphs, I will read it.  If you send me an unstructured story or a story longer than 11 paragraphs, I will not read it.  I don’t have time.  I wish I had time, but I don’t have time.  There is too much work still to be done.  With your stories, if you choose to tell me your story, you need to help me.  Structured – 11 paragraphs.

Once you complete your 11 paragraphs and send your story to me, if you then want to write your book, that becomes a “you thing.”  Turn each section into a chapter.  Write your story to full measure.  Just don’t send it to me.  I don’t have time.  I wish I had time.  I don’t.  There’s still too much work to be done.

Eleven paragraphs.  That’s all I have time to read from each of you.  There are so many of you, each story unique, and each story a variant of the same story told over-and-over again because no one is making this stop.

We will make it stop.  We can’t stop what happened to you, but we can stop it from happening to other families, other parents, other children.  Your stories can help make it stop.

But 11 paragraphs of 4 sentences each is all you get to tell your story.

myalienationstory@gmail.com

Craig Childress, Psy.D.
Psychologist, PSY 18857

The world is changing.  The solution to “parental alienation” is coming.

---

There is a saying in early childhood mental health that we need to give a toddler a new food 11 times before the toddler accepts it.  The first ten times, it’s too “new” – nope, won’t try it.  But on the eleventh time it’s no longer a “new” food and the toddler will give it a try.

That’s where we are right now.  We’re introducing a new food (AB-PA) to the “toddlers” of professional psychology and the family courts.

The process that is creating the solution is all within the hands of the universe.  I can feel it on so many levels.  This is not about me.  I simply have a role to play.  My role is to be your resource.  But there are so many of us who each have our roles in bringing the attachment-related pathology of “parental alienation” to an end.  My role is as a resource. 

I’ve provided you with the professional words and constructs that empower you, and that lead professional psychology back onto the established path of professional practice.

Foundations 

I’ve provided you with a booklet that you can give to attorneys, minor’s counsels, and Guardians ad Litem, that explains the pathology of the narcissistic parent surrounding divorce.

The Narcissistic Parent

I’ve provided you with a booklet that describes a structured and standardized six-session assessment protocol that can – and should – be used in all cases of attachment-related pathology surrounding divorce.  This is the assessment protocol that attorneys should seek from the Court.

The Assessment of Attachment-Related Pathology Surrounding Divorce

I’ve provided you with a booklet that describes a Strategic family systems intervention that the Court can order as a remedy when attachment-based “parental alienation” has been identified by the assessment.

The Contingent Visitation Schedule

I’ve provided you with a model for a family court system pilot program that will quickly and efficiently create expertise in professional psychology and knowledge of the pathology in the legal system across broad geographic jurisdictions, a pilot program model that is both flexible and completely replicable.

The Key to Solving High-Conflict Divorce in the Family Courts: Proposal for a Pilot Program in the Family Law Courts

I have provided you with online seminars that describe the pathology.

California Southern University, Master Lecture Series
Parental Alienation: An Attachment-Based Model (7/18/14)

California Sothern University, Master Lecture Series
Treatment of Attachment-Based Parental Alienation (11/21/14)

I have provided you with the diagnostic assessment instruments needed to identify the pathology and monitor the child’s symptoms.

Diagnostic Checklist for Pathogenic Parenting

Parenting Practices Rating Scale

Parent-Child Relationship Rating Scale

By returning us to standard and established constructs and principles of professional psychology, I have activated ethical code Standards to be used in seeking professional competence.

APA Ethics Code Standard 2.01a:  Boundaries of Competence

APA Ethics Code Standard 9.01a:  Bases for Assessment

APA Ethics Code Standard 2.03:  Maintaining Competence

APA Ethics Code Standard 3.04: Avoiding Harm

Professional Competence

I have provided you with a booklet that can be given to mental health professionals which describes the pathology in professional language and reminds them of their ethical obligations for professional competence.

Professional Consultation

You have been provided with legislature testimony that is available online for reference.

Penn. Bipartisan House Children and Youth Committee: Dr. Childress

You have all the resources you need to solve the pathology. 

My role is simply to serve as a resource to you in solving this attachment-related family pathology.  I am not your warrior.  You are the warrior for your children.  I am your weapon.  I am your resource. That is my role.

I’ve accomplished my role.  I have provided you with all the resources you need to solve the pathology, and with the path back to established professional psychology and standards of practice.

The Solution:  The Return to Professional Practice

The Solution:  The Dominoes

This is a trauma pathology.  The attachment trauma is being passed on across generations.  In the current generation, the targeted parent is made to carry the trauma.  The targeted parent is experiencing a form of complex trauma called “traumatic grief.”

Wikipedia:  Complex Trauma

One of the consequences of this traumatic grief is a learned helplessness created by the traumatizing lack of support targeted parents receive from professional psychology and the family courts.  A psychological passivity is created in targeted parents by the traumatizing helplessness inflicted on them by the pathology of “parental alienation.”

Targeted parents must wake up, you must shake off the helplessness that has been forced upon you.  You are more powerful than you know.  But only if you come together and unite your voices in a call for change.  Alone you are powerless.   In 100 you reclaim your voice.  In 1,000 you reclaim your power.  In 10,000 you become an unstoppable force for change.  Become an unstoppable force for change. 

You have all the resources you need.

I am a lone psychologist in Southern California.  I am not your warrior.  I am your weapon.  You are the warrior.  This battle is for your children.  The time is now.  The battle is now.  The solution is at hand.

How long it takes to achieve the solution is up to you.

The pathogen seeks to keep you alone and isolated, fighting your own individual fights.  When you are kept alone and isolated, the pathogen has power.  You must come together and begin to fight for each other.  We cannot solve this in any one family until we solve this for ALL children and all families.

This fight is for each other.

The mental health system is broken.  The legal system is broken.  We must first fix the broken systems.  We start by fixing the broken mental health system, and then we leverage the mental health system to fix the broken legal system.  Step-by-step.

We fix the broken mental health system by banishing professional ignorance and incompetence and REQUIRING professional expertise.  We accomplish this by returning to the standard and established constructs and principles of professional psychology to which ALL mental health professionals can be held ACCOUNTABLE.

We then leverage Standards 2.01a and 9.01a of the APA ethics code to obtain professional competence in the assessment, diagnosis, and treatment of your children and families.

We establish a ground foundation for professional knowledge and expertise needed for a structured and standardized assessment of attachment-related pathology surrounding divorce .

Assessment leads to diagnosis, and diagnosis guides treatment.

Based on the ground foundational principles of professional psychology, we build a standard of practice for the assessment, diagnosis, and treatment of attachment-related pathology surrounding divorce.

I have fulfilled most of my role as your resource.  You have all the resources you need to solve this pathology.  My role as your resource will be shifting.  I am going to turn my attention now to writing for professional journal publication.  This method of change is slow, too slow, so I opted for a faster approach of providing you with all the resources you need first, and once this was accomplished to then turn back to writing for professional journals.

So that is my next focus, writing for professional journals. 

I will also be turning my full attention on recruiting the APA as your ally.  The APA is an excellent professional organization, they are simply asleep.  We need to rouse them from their slumber, awaken them to your pain.  Once they awaken, they will become your allies in solving your deep family tragedies.

I will continue to present seminars in AB-PA.  I am continuing to work with Children4Tomorrow in Houston, Texas to bring a pilot program to the Houston area family courts.

I am willing to speak to state legislature committees on the pathology of “parental alienation” and its solution, as I did recently in Pennsylvania.

I will continue to fulfill my role as your resource in returning professional psychology back to established professional practice, creating the needed professional expertise, and bringing the solution to high-conflict divorce to the family courts.

But I am am not your warrior, I am your weapon.  You are the warrior for your children.  You are more powerful than you know.   Become an unstoppable force for change.

My first recommendation…

Get The Narcissistic Parent, The Assessment of Attachment-Related Pathology, and the Contingent Visitation Schedule  into the hands of every family law attorney, Guardian ad Litem, parenting coordinator, and minor’s counsel.

We are presenting a new food to the toddler.

My second recommendation…

Get The Narcissistic Parent and the AB-PA Key Solution Pilot Program into the hands of your state legislators and congressional representatives, along with the link to my Pennsylvania testimony: Penn. Committee on Youth and Children.

In 2018 we will be turning our attention to the APA.  I will need your voices.  All of your voices.  Ten thousand voices, united in a single call for change, in a single call for professional competence, in a single call to end your suffering.

The APA is a good organization.  We will be respectful and kind.  And we will be relentless – until they are awake and until they take active steps to end your suffering.

I will need your voices to awaken the APA from its slumber.

Craig Childress, Psy.D.
Clinical Psychologist, PSY 18857

I recently received an email request from a family law judge overseas who asked for input on resolving “parental alienation” in the family courts. I thought my email response to this question might be more broadly of interest, so I am providing it here as well.

---

What has traditionally been called “parental alienation” represents an attachment-related pathology.  The attachment system is the brain system that governs all aspects of love and bonding throughout the lifespan, including grief and loss.  A child rejecting a parent following divorce is a problem in the love-and-bonding system of the brain — the attachment system.

The key to solving this attachment-related family pathology is to return to the standard and established constructs and principles of professional psychology.  The problem faced by the family courts is that professional psychology is not providing the court with the necessary level of professional expertise needed to solve the pathology.  The focus of my work is to help professional psychology develop the professional expertise in four areas of professional knowledge needed to successfully resolve the pathology:

The Attachment System
Personality Disorder Pathology
Family Systems Pathology
Complex Trauma Pathology

I recently completed the first AB-PA Certification seminar here in Pasadena, California training mental health professionals in these four domains, and in the assessment, diagnosis, and treatment of attachment-related family pathology.

So the first step is to return to standard and established professional constructs and principles in professional psychology. The next step is to establish a standard of practice for addressing attachment-related pathology surrounding divorce.  This begins with assessment.

Assessment

Assessment leads to diagnosis, and diagnosis guides treatment.

I have a booklet available on Amazon.com:

The Assessment of Attachment-Related Pathology Surrounding Divorce

This booklet describes a six-session assessment of attachment-related pathology.  I am recommending that in all cases of attachment-related pathology surrounding divorce, that courts order this six-session assessment protocol.

The trouble that courts will currently run into is locating a mental health professional who can conduct this structured and standardized assessment protocol.  I describe the assessment protocol in my booklet (The Assessment of Attachment-Related Pathology Surrounding Divorce), I have YouTube videos up that provide a professional-to-professional level description of the assessment process (Professional-to-Professional Conversation with Dr. Childress), and I directly train mental health professionals in this assessment protocol as part of my AB-PA Certification seminars.

This structured assessment protocol is built around two instruments, 1) the Diagnostic Checklist for Pathogenic Parenting which documents the child symptoms resulting from pathogenic parenting by a narcissistic/(borderline) personality parent, and 2) the Parenting Practices Rating Scale that documents the possible problematic parenting of the targeted-rejected parent.  Both of these instruments are available on my website:

Diagnostic Checklist for Pathogenic Parenting

Parenting Practices Rating Scale

The issue of concern is called “pathogenic parenting” (patho=pathology; genic=genesis, creation).  Pathogenic parenting is the creation of significant psychopathology in the child through aberrant and distorted parenting practices.

The attachment system (the brain system for love-and-bonding) never spontaneously dysfunctions.  The attachment system ONLY becomes dysfunctional in response to pathogenic parenting.  So the assessment question becomes, which parent is creating the child’s attachment-related pathology.

Is it pathogenic parenting by an allied narcissistic/(borderline) parent who has formed a cross-generational coalition with the child against the other parent? (the Diagnostic Checklist for Pathogenic Parenting)

Or is it pathogenic parenting by the targeted-rejected parent (child abuse) that is creating the child’s rejection of this parent? (the Parenting Practices Rating Scale).

We begin with assessment.

Assessment leads to diagnosis, and diagnosis guides treatment.

Intervention & Remedy

Now to address the intervention and remedy issues…

We first need to conduct a proper assessment of the attachment-related pathology to identify the source of pathogenic parenting. If the pathogenic parenting is coming from an allied narcissistic/(borderline) personality parent – as documented by the Diagnostic Checklist for Pathogenic Parenting – then we move on to treatment.

The three diagnostic indicators of AB-PA (pathogenic parenting by an allied narcissistic/(borderline) parent) are:

1) Attachment system suppression

2) Narcissistic personality traits in the child’s symptom display

3) An encapsulated persecutory delusion in the child’s symptom display

Pathogenic parenting that is creating significant developmental pathology in the child (diagnostic indicator 1), personality disorder pathology in the child (diagnostic indicator 2), and delusional-psychiatric pathology in the child (diagnostic indicator 3) is a DSM-5 diagnosis of V995.51 Child Psychological Abuse, Confirmed.

Assessment leads to diagnosis, and diagnosis guides treatment.

In all cases of child abuse, physical child abuse, sexual child abuse, and psychological child abuse, the professional standard of practice and “duty to protect” requires the child’s protective separation from the abusive parent.

We then treat the emotional and psychological damage created in the child by the abusive parenting and we recover the normal-range and healthy development of the child.

Once we have recovered the normal-range and healthy development of the child, we then restore the child’s relationship with the formerly abusive parent with sufficient safeguards to ensure that the child abuse does not resume once the child’s relationship with the formerly abusive parent is restored.

This is the standard of practice for ALL cases of child abuse, physical child abuse, sexual child abuse, and psychological child abuse. Diagnosis guides treatment.

In cases of attachment-related pathology surrounding divorce, there MAY be a treatment-oriented approach that does not require a protective separation period. It is a Strategic family systems intervention designed to alter how the child’s induced symptoms confer power within the family. Strategic family systems therapy is one of two primary schools of family therapy (the other being Structural family systems therapy). The principle theorist of Strategic family system therapy is Jay Haley

Wikipedia: Jay Haley

Wikipedia: Strategic Family Systems Therapy

A possible Strategic family systems intervention for attachment-related pathology surrounding divorce is a Contingent Visitation Schedule that makes the child’s visitation with the abusive and pathogenic narcissistic/(borderline) parent contingent upon the child being symptom-free. If the psychologically abusive narcissistic/(borderline) parent creates significant symptoms in the child, then this parent’s time with the child is reduced and the child’s time with the targeted parent is increased. Once the child’s symptoms have been treated and the child’s normal-range and healthy development is restored (the child is symptom-free) then normal-range contact with the pathogenic parenting of the narcissistic/(borderline) parent is restored.

The child’s contact with the narcissistic/(borderline) parent is made contingent on the child remaining symptom-free. It’s like small-scale protective separation periods of a few days or weeks based on the emergence of documented child symptoms and their recovery.

The Contingent Visitation Schedule is a pre-defined and structured approach to potentially addressing the pathogenic parenting of the narcissistic/(borderline) personality parent. I describe the Contingent Visitation Schedule in a booklet available from Amazon.com:

Contingent Visitation Schedule

However, without the Contingent Visitation Schedule the standard-of-practice treatment would be a six to nine month protective separation period from the psychologically abusive parenting of the narcissistic/(borderline) parent based on a confirmed DSM-5 diagnosis of V995.51 Child Psychological Abuse identified in the assessment phase.

A possible treatment alternative is a Strategic family systems intervention of the Contingent Visitation Schedule.

The Contingent Visitation Schedule will require an organizing family therapist to run and implement the Strategic family system intervention, and a current problem that the court is likely to run into is the absence of mental health professionals who are skilled in family systems therapy and who can run a Contingent Visitation Schedule intervention. I describe how to run a Contingent Visitation Schedule in my booklet, and as part of my three-day AB-PA Certification seminars I train mental health professionals in both the six-session assessment protocol for AB-PA (attachment-based “parental alienation”) and in structuring and running a Contingent Visitation Schedule.

My current efforts are directed toward training and Certification of mental health professionals in AB-PA, including how to conduct a six-session assessment protocol and run a Contingent Visitation Schedule. The goal is to provide the courts with the necessary level of professional expertise needed to solve the attachment-related family pathology of “parental alienation” (AB-PA). Until we achieve that goal, however, achieving the solution may remain challenging for the courts.

Pilot Program for the Family Courts:

I am currently working with an organization in Houston, Texas (Children4Tommorrow: Dwilene Lindsey) to create a pilot program for the courts for addressing all cases of attachment-related pathology surrounding divorce. This involves teaming an AB-PA Certified mental health professional with an AB-PA knowledgeable amicus attorney. To establish this AB-PA Key Solution pilot program for the family court, I would conduct a two-day Certification seminar for 15 to 20 mental health professionals in the Houston area and then a one-day AB-PA seminar for 5 to 10 amicus attorneys tailored to explaining the pathology to legal professionals. This would provide the courts in the Houston area with the necessary level of professional knowledge and expertise needed to solve the attachment-related pathology of “parental alienation.”

Then, in all cases of attachment-related pathology surrounding divorce, the court would order a treatment-focused assessment by an AB-PA Certified mental health professional using the structured and standardized six-session assessment protocol. If the pathology of AB-PA is identified by the assessment (attachment-based “parental alienation”), then the court would team a new AB-PA Certified mental health professional with an AB-PA Knowledgeable amicus attorney. This team could then establish and monitor a Contingent Visitation Schedule and guide the family’s stabilization into a successful post-divorce separated family structure of cooperative co-parenting and shared bonds of affection between the child and both parents.

I describe this AB-PA Key Solution pilot program in a booklet available on Amazon.com:

The Key to Solving High Conflict Divorce in the Family Courts: Proposal for a Pilot Program in the Family Law Courts

Brief Intensive Interventions

There are models for brief-intensive interventions that are available that will quickly and gently restore the normal-range functioning of the child’s attachment system. The two primary brief-intensive interventions are:

Family Bridges: Richard Warshak
High Road to Family Reunification: Dorcy Pruter

My understanding is that they use similar approaches. I have not reviewed the Family Bridges protocol but I have reviewed and observed the High Road protocol of Dorcy Pruter, so I can speak directly to the High Road protocol.

The High Road protocol of Dorcy Pruter will gently and effectively restore the child’s normal-range attachment bonding motivations within a matter of days. I have provided the High Road protocol with my endorsement;

Dr. Childress Declaration Regarding the High Road Protocol

Ms. Pruter and I recently presented at the annual convention of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) in Boston where we described specifically how the High Road protocol achieves its success.

I have no financial interests in either the Family Bridges program or the High Road protocol. My understanding is that they use similar approaches. The only differences from my perspective is that I have reviewed the specific protocol for the High Road workshop and I have personally observed it in operation. I therefore know exactly how it works and exactly how it achieves its success.

If a brief-intensive protocol is needed to gently and effectively restore the child’s attachment bonding motivations within a matter of days, these protocols exist. However, they still require a post-intervention protective separation period of between six to nine months from the psychologically abusive narcissistic/(borderline) parent to stabilize the child’s recovery before reintroducing the psychologically abusive parenting of the narcissistic/(borderline) parent.

When the child is reintroduced to the pathogenic parenting of the narcissistic/(borderline) parent, the child’s recovery can be further stabilized by the use of the Contingent Visitation Schedule at that time. The Contingent Visitation Schedule and the High Road protocol are both tools that are available to the Court. The key to the long-term stabilization of the family, however, lay in a significant improvement in the level of professional knowledge and expertise surrounding attachment-related pathology following divorce.

Craig Childress, Psy.D.
Clinical Psychologist, PSY 18857

It’s time for Gardnerian PAS to die.

The solution to “parental alienation” is through a return to standard and established constructs and principles of professional psychology: AB-PA.

Gardnerian PAS offers no solution whatsoever.

For three years – three years – I have repeatedly asked the self-proclaimed Gardnerian PAS “experts” to provide their path to a solution using the Gardnerian PAS model, most recently in August-September of this year.  Their response?… crickets.  Nothing.

The Gardnerian PAS diagnostic model offers no solution whatsoever.  They know it, and I know it.  Now everyone knows it.

So then why do the Gardernian PAS “experts” hold onto a failed diagnostic model of the pathology that offers NO solution whatsoever?

Because they don’t want a solution.

They are enabling allies of the pathogen whose role is to sow discord and division, thereby disabling the mental health response to the pathology.

Past History:  In sowing discord and division with establishment psychology for the past 30 years, the Gardnerian PAS “experts” have allowed the pathology of “parental alienation” to continue unsolved and unabated – for 30 years – and they have created a culture of ignorance and incompetence in professional psychology surrounding high-conflict divorce that invites the profound professional ignorance and incompetence we currently witness.

Current Behavior:  Now that AB-PA is leading us into a solution, the Gardnerian PAS “experts” are trying to hide AB-PA in confusion and obscurity so that professional psychology does not learn that AB-PA even exists to solve the pathology.  They seek to sow confusion by actively co-opting constructs from AB-PA without acknowledgement that these constructs emerge from AB-PA.  This is not about who gets “credit” for what (with AB-PA credit belongs to Bowlby, Minuchin, Beck,…) – it’s about sowing confusion by fusing the constructs of AB-PA onto PAS in order to hide the existence of AB-PA – as if AB-PA is nothing more than Gardnerian PAS.  It is a conscious and premeditated strategy to disable the solution available from AB-PA.

By not joining us in solving “parental alienation” through a return to standard and established constructs and principles of professional psychology (AB-PA), they are now sowing discord and division within the mental health allies of targeted parents, creating two “camps” – the Gardnerian PAS “expert” camp and the Childress AB-PA “camp.”

The Gardernian PAS “experts” sow discord and division – that’s what they do.  First with establishment psychology, and now with AB-PA that seeks to reunite us with establishment psychology.  We can absolutely solve this attachment-related family pathology surrounding divorce ONCE we return to standard and established constructs and principles of professional psychology.  The Gardnerian PAS “experts” are fighting against a return to standard and established constructs and principles – they are fighting against the solution.

One approach to creating this discord and division is by falsely characterizing me as being some sort of “guru” – they use this term – rather than accurately characterizing my efforts as a call to return to the path of established professional constructs and principles – Bowlby, Millon, Minuchin, Beck…

The pathogen deals in falsehood.

In falsely characterizing my work with AB-PA by a personal attack on me as an alleged “guru,” they seek to discredit me and, by association, the truth of AB-PA (the established truth of standard and established constructs and principles of professional psychology) by alleging that I have narcissistic designs.  They don’t attack the substance of AB-PA – because they can’t.  The substance of AB-PA is true.  So they attack me personally in an effort to discredit the truth of what I describe in AB-PA.

This is a classic attack strategy of the pathogen.

The pathogen launched a personal attack on Gardner by claiming he was a “pedophile.”  If Gardner was labeled a “pedophile” then the content of what he said would be discredited.  The personal attack on me by the Gardnerian PAS “experts” that I am some sort of “guru” (Karen Woodall’s “false prophet” characterization) is exactly the same approach, to attack AB-PA by leveling their attack against me personally using the false label of “guru.”  Same exact process.  I know this pathogen.  I see the pathogen clearly.

The truth is that Gardnerian PAS provides NO solution whatsoever.  They know it.  I know it.  Everyone knows it.  All they are doing is sowing discord and division in not joining with us in solving “parental alienation” through a return to the established constructs and principles of professional psychology.

There is absolutely NO rational argument against a return to standard and established constructs and principles of professional psychology, but the Gardnerian PAS “experts” are tying themselves in knots of illogic and irrationality trying – desperately trying – to find a reason NOT to accept AB-PA.

Why?  Because they don’t want to solve this pathology.

The pathogen deals in falsehoods.  For the narcissistic personality, “Truth and reality are whatever I assert them to be.”

If they want to confabulate Gardnerian PAS with AB-PA, they simply assert that they are the same thing just using “different words,” ignoring the fact that words have meaning, so using “different words” results in different meanings.  Saying, “I like pie” is not the same as saying, “the sky is blue” just using “different words.”  Different words = different meaning.  Now Karen Woodall appears to be claiming that AB-PA is nothing new because she thought of it all years ago.  Whatever, Karen.

The Gardnerian PAS “experts” have alleged that it’s Dr. Childress who is being divergent in not “cooperating” with them by not accepting Gardnerian PAS.

The truth:  If I accept Gardnerian PAS then I accept no solution for targeted parents and their children, because Gardnerian PAS provides no solution.  They know it provides no solution.  I know it provides no solution.  They want me to accept no solution because then everything stays exactly as it is.

Look, if they simply tell us the path to a solution using the Gardnerian PAS diagnostic model, I’d be happy to join with them.  Woo hoo.  Yay.  But they don’t offer a solution because they can’t offer a solution.  Gardnerian PAS provides NO solution whatsoever.  They know it.  I know it.  We all know it.

They are even free to add whatever they want to the standard and established constructs and principles of professional psychology described in AB-PA.  They can add all the unicorns, and mermaids, and beautiful dancing pixies they want.  Fine by me.  But we MUST establish a baseline of professional competence – a ground foundation of professional knowledge and professional competence in the established constructs and principles of professional psychology (AB-PA).

I don’t care one whit for how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.  The only thing I care about is solving the pathology of “parental alienation” as quickly as is humanly possible.  If the Gardnerian PAS diagnostic model with its 8 symptom features could solve this, I’d be joining them in a heartbeat.  It can’t.  And it never will.  30 years.  No solution.  Scoreboard.

I’m not the one who isn’t cooperating.  THEY aren’t cooperating.

I’m not the one insisting that AB-PA is the only solution, they are the ones who are rigidly INSISTING that only Gardnerian PAS is allowed to solve the pathology – knowing full well that Gardnerian PAS does not provide a solution.

The pathogen lies.  It deals in falsehoods.  It sows discord and division with its lies, mistruths, and false statements.

AB-PA provides a solution.  That is the truth.  Gardnerian PAS doesn’t.  That is the truth.  If the Gardnerian PAS “experts” disagree, then tell us the solution using Gardnerian PAS… nothing but crickets.  That is the truth.

The pathogen sows discord and division with lies.  In the discord, confusion, and division it sows, the pathogen just makes stuff up.  It can make a series of false statements in 10 seconds that then require three hours to respond to.  Chaos, discord, division.  Hallmarks of the pathogen.

Britian’s Children

Now, let me expose the pathogen in the Gardnerian PAS “experts” more fully.

Recently in England, an organization called Cafcass, who supposedly represents the “voice” of the children in divorce and child custody proceedings, has made a momentous admission, that they have been missing the identification of “parental alienation” in large numbers of the 125,000 cases they assess each year.

The Guardian Article on Cafcass

From the Guardian:  “Cafcass said it had recently realised parental alienation occured in significant numbers of the 125,000 cases it dealt with each year.”

From my relatively superficial understanding of Cafcass, I would agree with their self-assessment.  They have been horrible, and their previous assessments have been directly responsible for the destruction of countless numbers of families and childhoods – lost love and lost childhoods that were irrevocably damaged by the prior ignorant and incompetent assessments and reports produced by Cafcass.

But they have apparently become enlightened by knowledge.  This is outstandingly positive news.

They acknowledge that they have missed identifying prior cases of “parental alienation” and they are adopting a “groundbreaking” protocol of potentially removing children from the “alienating” parent if this parent does not stop alienating the child from the other parent.  Sounds like an extremely positive development to me.

A protective separation of the child in order to release the child from the psychological control and psychological manipulation of the allied narcissistic/(borderline) parent is an exceedingly positive step.  Cafcass will begin taking active steps to protect the child and protect the child’s loving bond to the normal-range parent.

This is outstandingly good news.  The solution is coming.  Change is coming.

Yet Karen Woodall – a staunch Gardnerian PAS “expert” in England – is AGAINST this change.  Let that sink in for a moment.  Karen Woodall opposes separating the child from the psychological manipulation and control of the “alienating” parent.

Karen Woodall argues AGAINST separating the child from the “alienating” parent because she is concerned that separating the child from the psychological manipulation and control of the “alienating” parent might damage the child’s relationship with that parent.

Here’s what Karen Woodall says about protectively separating the child from the pathological psychological control of the narcissistic/(borderline) parent:

From Karen Woodall:  “Treating parental alienation by forcing a child (who has already been forced into losing one parent to keep the other), to lose that parent in order to regain the other, is not the way that any responsible practitioner wishes to treat parental alienation.”

The Battle for Britain’s Alienated Children, 11/22/17 (emphasis added)

Seriously, Karen?  You are more concerned with protecting the child’s pathological relationship with the “alienating” parent than you are with protecting the child’s healthy relationship with the normal-range and loving parent.  Wow.

Notice the manipulative communication she uses in characterizing efforts to protect the child as somehow “forcing” the child to lose a relationship with the manipulative and psychologically controlling “alienating parent.”

No one is “forcing the child” into losing a relationship with a parent.  That is simply not true.  The pathogen lies.

Associated Clinical Sign 1 of the Diagnostic Checklist for Pathogenic Parenting is the use of the  word “forced.”  I have described the origins of this symptom feature:

ACS 1: Use of the Word Forced

The use of the word “forced” is a manipulative communication strategy designed to dis-empower efforts to protect the child.  We are not “forcing” the child to lose a relationship with the narcissistic “alienating” parent – we are PROTECTING the child from the abusive psychological control and manipulation of the child by the “alienating” parent who seeks to destroy the child’s loving bond of shared affection with the other parent.

Every time we encounter this manipulative effort to dis-empower our efforts to protect the child by claiming we are “forcing the child,” we need to immediately correct this characterization with a more accurate and balanced description:

The child is not being “forced,” the child is being given the opportunity to have a loving bond of affection with both parents.

That is the truth.  Karen’s characterization is false.  It is manipulative.  It seeks to undermine and dis-empower efforts to protect the child from the psychological control and manipulation of the “alienating” parent.

When we begin treatment of the induced psychopathology created in the child by the pathogenic parenting of the allied and supposedly “favored” narcissistic “alienating” parent, we DON’T want to turn the child into a “psychological battleground” between the efforts of therapy to restore a normal-range and loving relationship with the targeted parent and the continuing efforts of the narcissistic/(borderline) parent to create and maintain the child’s psychopathology.

We must first protect the child from the psychopathology of the narcissistic/(borderline) parent.

Notice too, the second manipulative communication of Karen Woodall in characterizing professional efforts to protect the child as being “irresponsible” professional practice:

“…is not the way that any responsible practitioner wishes to treat parental alienation.”

I’ve got news for you Karen, I am a responsible practitioner and a protective separation of the child from the psychopathology of the narcissistic/(borderline) “alienating” parent is EXACTLY the treatment for “parental alienation.”  We must first protect the child from the manipulative psychological control of the narcissistic/(borderline) parent.  ONLY when we have first protected the child can we then ask the child to reveal their authentic love for the targeted parent.

We must first protect the child.  In doing so, we must protect the child’s healthy relationship with the normal-range targeted parent.

Once we have restored the child’s healthy and normal-range development, we can then stabilize the family’s transition into a successful separated family structure of shared bonds of affection between the child and both parents.

And Karen… anticipating your response – ANY parent who seeks to destroy the child’s relationship with the other parent following divorce is, by definition, narcissistic.  NO parent who has authentic empathy for the child would ever – ever – seek to destroy that child’s relationship with the other parent.

So, Karen, all your supposed “hybrid cases” of “parental alienation,” ALL of them involve a narcissistic allied parent to some degree.  ANY parent who seeks to destroy the child’s loving bonds of affection with the other parent following divorce is narcissistic – by definition; the absence of authentic empathy for the child involves placing the parent’s own emotional and psychological needs ahead of the child’s healthy development.

Argue with me if you want, Karen, but then look what you’re doing.  You are attempting to minimize the narcissistic pathology of the “alienating” parent in order to argue in FAVOR of keeping the child with the psychologically manipulative and controlling “alienating” parent at the expense of the child’s healthy relationship with the normal-range parent.  Do you really want to be on that side of the argument?

Karen, seriously… we protect the child from the psychological manipulation and psychological control of the narcissistic parent, we restore the child’s normal-range relationship with the targeted parent that has been damaged by the pathogenic parenting of the narcissistic “alienating” parent, and then we restore the child’s relationship with the pathological “alienating” parent with sufficient safeguards to ensure that the psychological abuse of the child does not resume once the pathology of this parent is reintroduced.

And you’re arguing AGAINST that.  Really, Karen?   You actually want to leave the child with the pathological “alienating” parent even though this parent is trying to destroy the child’s healthy bonds of affection with the targeted parent.  Wow.

I want everyone to just sort of let Karen Woodall’s position sink in.  She is arguing that “responsible” treatment is to leave the child with the alienating parent because we wouldn’t want to damage that relationship by removing the child from the manipulative psychological control of that parent.

Wow.

False Allies

Garderian PAS offers no solution whatsoever.

AB-PA provides an immediate solution through a return to standard and established constructs and principles of professional psychology.

There is no rational reason to continue to hold onto a made-up diagnostic model of the pathology that sows discord and division between the mental health allies of targeted parents and establishment psychology.  We must reunite with establishment psychology to solve this pathology.

There is no rational reason to continue to hold onto a made-up diagnostic model that provides no solution and not join with and support a return to standard and established constructs and principles of professional psychology that provides an immediate solution.

By continuing their non-cooperation with the solution available from a return to the standard and established constructs and principles of professional psychology, the Gardnerian PAS “experts” simply sow discord and confusion with no purpose, since the Gardnerian PAS diagnostic model offers NO SOLUTION whatsoever.

So then why do the Gardnerian PAS “experts” continue to hold onto a failed diagnostic model – and why do they seek to protect the child’s pathological relationship with the psychologically manipulative and controlling “alienating parent” at the expense of sacrificing the child’s healthy relationship with the loving and beloved targeted parent?

Because they don’t want a solution, they want to be “experts.”

Extrapolate Karen Woodall’s proposed solution:

Karen Woodall is the bestest expert anywhere, and everyone should come to Karen Woodall’s clinic to be assessed… everyone.  She will then conduct this super-special assessment that only she can do, and then she’ll tell us about what this unique form of pathology is in this family, determined by her for each individual case based on her magnificent expertise in this “new form of pathology.”

Can the rest of clinical psychology solve this?  Absolutely not.  We all need the magnificence of her expertise for each individual case, since the standard and established constructs of professional psychology are insufficient to solve this unique “new form of pathology” without benefit of her magnificent “expertise.”

And she calls me a “guru.”  Uh, can I call projection on that?

The standard and established constructs and principles of professional psychology can absolutely solve this pathology.  Bowlby, and Minuchin, and Haley, and Beck, and Millon,… The standard and established constructs and principles of clinical psychology are fully sufficient to solve this pathology.

The diagnostic model of AB-PA exposes both the pathogen and its allies from beneath their veil of concealment.  AB-PA represents a threat to the pathogen, and the pathogen has called its allies to attack and disable the solution offered by AB-PA by creating discord and division.  Lo and behold, it’s the Gardernian PAS “experts” who have answered the pathogen’s call.  They cannot attack the substance of AB-PA because AB-PA is a true and accurate description of the pathology.  So they instead try a variety of other strategies in an effort to nullify the solution available from AB-PA:

From Karen Woodall:  “Treating parental alienation by forcing a child (who has already been forced into losing one parent to keep the other), to lose that parent in order to regain the other, is not the way that any responsible practitioner wishes to treat parental alienation.”

Karen Woodall is arguing against a protective separation and in favor of keeping the child with the psychologically manipulative and controlling “alienating parent” because she wants to protect the (pathological) relationship with the “alienating parent” even at the expense of the child’s healthy relationship with the targeted parent.

Let that sink in.

There are those who are made uncomfortable by the conflict between Dr. Childress and Karen Woodall, believing that allies of targeted parents should work together toward solving the pathology.  I couldn’t agree more, allies should work together.  The self-proclaimed “experts” in Gardnerian PAS, however, are not our allies, and they are beginning to expose themselves.

Karen Woodall is openly advocating that we sacrifice the child’s healthy relationship with the targeted parent in order to protect the child’s pathological relationship with the “alienating” parent, and to support this assertion she makes false and manipulative characterizations of efforts to protect the child as “forcing” the child to lose a relationship with the “alienating” parent in a convoluted effort to justify her alliance with the pathology of the narcissistic/(borderline) parent.

We never abandon a child to a psychologically abusive parent.

Is “parental alienation” psychological child abuse, Karen?  If so, then why are you abandoning the child to the psychologically abusive “alienating” parent?

You are either advocating that we leave the child with a psychologically abusive parent – or you are saying that “parental alienation” is not child abuse.  Which is it Karen?

I’m sorry if this inter-professional conflict makes people uncomfortable.

I know the pathogen.  I see the pathogen.  And I know the allies of the pathogen.  I will fight for the children, always.  We must first protect the child.

I am a strong advocate that protectively separating the child from the manipulative psychological control and pathogenic parenting of the narcissistic/(borderline) parent is the proper course of action in response to “parental alienation.”

Karen Woodall advocates that we leave the child with the “alienating” parent because she would rather protect the child’s relationship with the psychologically controlling narcissistic parent than protect the child’s healthy relationship with the targeted parent.

I will fight for the children, always.  Even if it makes people uncomfortable.  We must first protect the child.

Craig Childress, Psy.D.
Clinical Psychologist, PSY 18857