Parental Alienation

Content Warning: The following article includes references to domestic violence and intimate partner violence which may be uncomfortable or upsetting for some readers. If you are in need of support, you can find several resources here. If you’re in immediate danger, call 911.

The terms “parental alienation” and “parental alienation syndrome” are becoming increasingly common in family law litigation. As a controversial issue in family law, it is important to understand what these terms mean and how they might arise.

Parental Alienation Syndrome

Originally coined by child psychiatrist Richard Gardner in the 1980s, parental alienation syndrome refers to when a child has been programmed by one parent to vilify another to an extent that the child internalizes this vilification, continuing in their own mind to develop a severely negative image of that parent.

Parental Alienation in Family Law Courts

The term parental alienation has developed from Gardner’s “parental alienation syndrome” and has since been used in the context of divorce and separation to describe a severe breakdown in the relationship between the child and one of the parents. At its core, parental alienation is the refusal of a child to have a relationship with one parent without justification or reason; it may occur due to the impact of the parental relationship breaking down, or because of deliberate actions on part of the other parent. It is often characterized by significant differences in the child’s expressed feelings of hatred towards the alienated parent as compared to evidence of the actual relationship between the child and the alienated parent.

Parental alienation is different than estrangement. While alienation is said to occur with little to no reason or justification, estrangement refers to when a child refuses to have a relationship with a parent because of that parent’s behaviour. In matters of estrangement, there is said to be a logical and rational reason for the child’s rejection of the parent.

Alienation is a serious allegation, the merits of which can be very difficult to assess. According to the British Columbia Court of Appeal in Williamson v. Williamson, 2016 BCCA 87, alienation should be proven by strong, admissible expert evidence before making orders, particularly those orders which may be extreme or draconian remedies.

Court Responses to Parental Alienation

 A finding that one parent has alienated another does not pre-determine any particular remedy. The remedy must be carefully crafted with a view to the best interests of the child, both short and long term. In the case of N.R.G. v. G.R.G., 2015 BCSC 1062, Mr. Justice Kent described potential court responses to a finding of parental alienation as follows:

·         Detailed case management and parental conduct orders with cost consequences for non-compliance;

·         Judicial exhortation urging compliance and emphasizing the emotional harm caused to the children (generally only effective in less severe cases of alienation);

·         Court-ordered therapeutic intervention where appropriate, while recognizing “force-marching” a child to reunification may in some cases be unrealistic and harmful;

·         Ordering supervised access/parenting time to allay any child anxiety and possibly pave the way for further strategies to achieve positive relationships;

·         Suspension of child or spousal support as a sanction to enforce more engagement with the other parent;

·         Transferring custody from the alienating parent to the rejected parent where expert testimony establishes the long-term benefits will outweigh any short-term emotional trauma to the child;

·         Terminating access by/parenting time of the alienated parent when the alienation is so entrenched that the “cure is worse than the illness”, recognizing that children do sometimes resume a relationship with a rejected non-custodial parent after a long period without contact, albeit perhaps only in later years.

 The age of the child may also be relevant, in that the available measures to counteract the impact of parental alienation will become limited as a child becomes a teenager.

 In the case of Williams, the chambers judge had changed custody, guardianship and parental rights to access to the children, and cut off contact with one parent, without relying on proper expert evidence nor making any finding of alienation. The Honourable Madam Justice Stromberg-Stein of the Court of Appeal held that such extreme orders required not only admissible expert evidence as proof of parental alienation, but also a careful consideration of other alternative remedies, given the severity of the orders made.

Criticisms and Concerns About Parental Alienation

Alongside the rise in claims of parental alienation in family law cases, many feminist activists and researchers alike have expressed concern at the concept. At the forefront of these concerns is the potential for findings of parental alienation to undermine survivors of domestic violence and put children at risk.

Parental alienation is widely criticized for its gendered nature, in that most claims of parental alienation are made by fathers against mothers. The trend of parental alienation accusations becoming increasingly common in Canadian courts adds complexity to legal cases, creating further difficulty for survivors of domestic violence, particularly women, to navigate proceedings and find safety for both them and their children. This is particularly true for minority women, who face additional barriers to accessing justice.

A 2023 United Nations report to the Human Rights Council raised concerns about parental alienation as an unfounded and unscientific “pseudo concept” that continues to find purchase in family law courts around the world. Noting the “deeply embedded gender bias” present in these concepts, the report suggests that findings of parental alienation which have not given sufficient weight to the views of the child or have dismissed a history of domestic violence will leave women and children vulnerable to continued suffering.

A coalition of 250 feminist organizations across Canada, including the National Association of Women and the Law (NAWL), is urging the government to ban parental alienation accusations in legal disputes, highlighting the potential for these allegations to be used as a tool to silence parents and children who report domestic violence. In their open letter to several senior members of government, the coalition notes that parental alienation accusations are primarily made against women, with victims of intimate partner violence being particularly at risk. And in cases where both intimate partner violence by the father and parental alienation by the mother have been alleged, judges consider intimate partner violence as relevant to the child's best interests only 10% of the time. The coalition has urged the government to undertake legislative reform that would prevent allegations of parental alienation to be made in family law disputes.

Despite this controversy, the concept of parental alienation continues to be recognized by BC courts. If you would like to learn more or wish to engage our support as you navigate a family law dispute, please contact our team of Vancouver family lawyers for a consultation.

Want to learn more? Please contact our team of Vancouver family lawyers for a consultation.