Donate Child Support Calculator
Skip navigation

QLD Psychologists Board tries to hose down acceptance of Parental Alienation

The Australian Newspaper Article 07/04/08

I must say that the site is so informative. I am getting so much insightful information for preparing for my court case. I can see why alignment is a sounder base to use the PAS. Although we acknowledge PAS the FCoA prefers that "proper" terminology from within the FLA is used. PAS is not truly recognised and does not carry the same legal weight. I agree with the others who have said building a case around alignment is far more conductive. I also think the comment by Dads On Air is also extremely relevant, and, a strong foundation for an case in the FCoA.
Fighting a case on an emotional level is basically sabotaging things yourself, to express something exists that you know the court does not recognize is an emotional ploy therefore destructive.

One day P.A.S. or something similar will be recognized and be able to be referred to, perhaps not under the same name.

Some would suggest even the use of Parent Alienation as a term could receive negative reaction in court so it's always best to use the term the court is familiar with even if you recognize the condition as P.A.S. or P.A.

Build your evidence base as much as possible and let that do your talking.

P.A.S. carries no legal weight and in fact may well diminish what you are trying to say with evidence.

In saying this I am one who believes in the existence of the symptoms expressed describing P.A.S. as well as the conditioning to achieve this and Parent Alienation. So close your eye's and click your heals 3 times but when you open them you will be in the same place it won't magically vanish just be careful what term you give it and make sure you have the evidence to back it up.

Then you'll be fine.
thats what i think, the court is not intersted IN a arguement of PAS. logically if the parent is not faciltating the relationship (by doing PAs)they are undermining shared care.

PAS is irreliavnt because the fundenmental principles of the new laws are children have right to spend time with and know both thier parents, children should be protected from abuse and parents are obliged to faciltates the relationship with the other party.

it is better to say they are not encouraging thier obligation of having the child/ren and parent spend time together by doing hostile acts, and building evidence of their attitude towards shared parenting. if it really that a parent is doing things to undermine the relationship in a long term way they are considered to be in vololation of the act.

if you as a parent say that a child is exhibiting PAS what it really does is show you have a bad attitude by self diagnosing a syndrome that the courts dont recognise to blame the other parent. It takes away from you evidience of hostility in a shared parenting relationship.

I think that most courts would be loath to remove custody from a PAS doing parent unless their are significnat circumtances that effects the childs/childrens development. eg parent removes child from school and wont address child being sick.

i think the only implacations of alligment in nornal circumstances are that it discredits a parent in court who believes the other is damaging.

Rarghhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!

Han Solo routine "We're all fine here, thanks. How are you?" *weapons fire* "It was a boring conversation anyway!"
Hi ALL,

The HOT terminology to describe poor parental behaviour is "HOSTILE AGRESSIVE PARENTING" or "HAP".

This is hugely popular term overseas - esp in America - and widely accepted.

HAP is a group of parental behaviours which attempts to Alienate one parent from the child.

Whether or not HAP it results in PAS is irrelevant - because the HAP parent is failing to advance the well-being of the child by not facilitating 'spends-time-with' and that behaviour is risky in that It can retard the Development of the Child.

I think the term Paternal Alienation is better than Parental Alienation.

4MYDAUGHTER
I dont think that the shared care laws have lead to judges in Oz making decisions about time spent with and shared parental responisblity based on real world circumstances where one parent is so hostile that on good outcome could come of the child spending time with them.
its not very often where they have a real world outcome where a hostile parent is discouraged from their behaviours by having less time with the child because other wise they will unilateral decisions for the child.
im waiting to see what another 4 or five years of hostile parents in front of them will do to change the mags decisions about how to deal with really agressive adverserial parents

Rarghhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!

Han Solo routine "We're all fine here, thanks. How are you?" *weapons fire* "It was a boring conversation anyway!"
4mydaughter said
Hi ALL,

The HOT terminology to describe poor parental behaviour is "HOSTILE AGRESSIVE PARENTING" or "HAP".

This is hugely popular term overseas - esp in America - and widely accepted.

HAP is a group of parental behaviours which attempts to Alienate one parent from the child.

Whether or not HAP it results in PAS is irrelevant - because the HAP parent is failing to advance the well-being of the child by not facilitating 'spends-time-with' and that behaviour is risky in that It can retard the Development of the Child.

I think the term Paternal Alienation is better than Parental Alienation.

It is not hot terminology -it has been around for a while. You want to run a HAP or PAS argument go and do it in America. Waste of time and effort in Australia and a waste of space on this forum.

This portal is for helping people get better Court outcomes and that will not happen if you 'alienate' a Judge or Federal Magistrate by referring to unrecognised American grown concepts.


Executive Member of SRL-Resources, the Family Law People on this site (look for the Avatars) Be mindful what you post in public areas. 
All terms that aren't frequented at Australian family courts become academic.

Most are unrecognized by the above as they are not proven theorems over here.

There main benefit to people is to help them understand and combat such unrecognized conditions.

I would be stupid to fight and argue that these conditions exist on the basis of " Because MMMM says it's true and I agree with what he wrote. " It's much better to play the smart game and use the best words for your case and then collate your evidence and establish your case.

The benefit in such catch words is that they can apply in a real world sense to help your children and to help us understand what may be happening.

We emotionally associate the condition because it is what we are experiencing, it can help us emotionally deal with certain aspects of what is happening.

This does not mean we use it in court because that is destructive against what we are trying to establish, it is simply an emotional help tool.

The magistrates is not unsympathetic they simply respond to some words and phrases better than others, so court speak is important.

I personally believe the existence of P.A.S. and H.A.P. and quite a few others of these conditions but the are not a legal tool but they can help emotionally and I have said before if you fight your battle on an emotional level you will sabotage your own case.

To use it in legal preparations is a kiss of death and to be avoided

I think Artemis may have had a valid point prior, a discussions on this becomes too confusing as to it's relevance.

  
Agog said
daughter said
Hi ALL,

The HOT terminology to describe poor parental behaviour is "HOSTILE AGGRESSIVE PARENTING" or "HAP".

This is hugely popular term overseas - esp in America - and widely accepted.

HAP is a group of parental behaviours which attempts to Alienate one parent from the child.

Whether or not HAP it results in PAS is irrelevant - because the HAP parent is failing to advance the wellbeing of the child by not facilitating 'spends-time-with' and that behaviour is risky in that It can retard the Development of the Child.

I think the term Paternal Alienation is better than Parental Alienation.
It is not hot terminology -it has been around for a while. You want to run a HAP or PAS argument go and do it in America. Waste of time and effort in Australia and a waste of space on this forum.

This portal is for helping people get better Court outcomes and that will not happen if you 'alienate' a Judge or Federal Magistrate by referring to unrecognised American grown concepts.


  Am sure the Association of American Psychiatrists would be happy about you comments.

The facts are that American studies form the basis for much of our clinical behavioural models.

Most mental health disorders diagnosed in Australia are indexed using the American sanctioned DSM criteria.

Last edit: by MikeT


4MYDAUGHTER

I cannot re-inforce this strongly enough

Agog said
This portal is for helping people get better Court outcomes and that will not happen if you 'alienate' a Judge or Federal Magistrate by referring to unrecognised American grown concepts.

It is really important to understand what Agog is saying.
The purpose of this site is to educate people to self-represent in court.
Court is its own realm with it's own jargon and accepted modes of expression.

You might want to be the first person to carry the banner of HAP or PAS to make it into
Australian judgements (done before) or present an expert witness (done before also).
The thing is that lobbying for these terms or concepts to gain acceptance is one issue
and presenting your case for a favourable outcome for your child (and you) is another.

What the court does care about is a negative, entrenched attitude to the other parent.
You can provide examples of this and gain much ground. You can contravene when a parent
wrongfully withholds a child/ren from you. These are the things to focus on in this forum.

The best antidote is to get a good result in court and have time with your kids.
Use love and logic to demonstrate that they are being told nonsense.

Junior Executive of SRL-Resources

Executive Member of SRL-Resources, the Family Law People on this site (Look for the Avatars). Be mindful what you post in public areas. 
Artemis said
Agog said
This portal is for helping people get better Court outcomes and that will not happen if you 'alienate' a Judge or Federal Magistrate by referring to unrecognised American grown concepts.
It is really important to understand what Agog is saying.
The purpose of this site is to educate people to self-represent in court.
Court is its own realm with it's own jargon and accepted modes of expression.

You might want to be the first person to carry the banner of HAP or PAS to make it into
Australian judgements (done before) or present an expert witness (done before also).
The thing is that lobbying for these terms or concepts to gain acceptance is one issue
and presenting your case for a favourable outcome for your child (and you) is another.

What the court does care about is a negative, entrenched attitude to the other parent.
You can provide examples of this and gain much ground. You can contravene when a parent
wrongfully withholds a child/ren from you. These are the things to focus on in this forum.

The best antidote is to get a good result in court and have time with your kids.
Use love and logic to demonstrate that they are being told nonsense.
 

Totally understand where agog is coming from.

"Labeling" behaviour or people is counter-productive in a court situation.

HAP - is a 'set of parental behaviours' and 'tendencies'.

SRL's should itemise - with supporting evidence - these behaviours and tendencies in affidavit form and drawn out throught cross-examination.

Allow the court to apply the 'label' or 'descriptive' if necessary - whatever suits them!

SRL's are not experts and cannot provide expert opinion - and should not be applying any clinical terms - disputed or otherwise.

4MYDAUGHTER
At the end of the day 4md it is not accepted in court and this is a reality, so it doesn't matter what a body in America thinks you need to protect your case and get use to the idea the term will gain a very negative reaction form our family court system.

Play a smart game it's too yous benefit.

Let your evidence speak and present it in a way that is acceptable and understandable.

We adapt to the system.

I agree that alignment should be used as it is acceptable terminology. It has been clearly stated that the FCoA does not recognise PAS. I sat in on a trial last week and I have learned that the correct legal terminology is expected as much as practical for a person, but always from a solicitor.

The solicitor said "The child suffered bashing from #########". The Judge stopped and glared at the solicitor in stony silence for several seconds and said " I believe you mean violence or physical abuse and you should know better than to use such layperson terms in my courtroom. Back to court next week to learn more:ninja:
Content deleted.

Wrong forum! to the OP if you want to rave, rant or go off on a tangent there are forums for that - this not one of them.

Last edit: by Sisyphus

1 guest and 0 members have just viewed this.

Recent Tweets