Can we force a “spontaneous” renewal of relationship?

Systemic therapy of parental alienation

In this article we will describe a state of the art therapeutic approach to treating families with moderate level parental alienation. As experts in parental alienation, throughout the north of Israel where we practice, courts are sending us families for treatment. Up until last year, the results we have achieved with these families were mediocre. Over the past year, we have changed our approach and started working in a more aggressive, provocative, and creative line of co- therapy. Our results improved markedly and have become excellent. Of the ten cases we had had this past year, in eight of them the kids had resumed contact with the rejected parent within two or three weeks of therapy. That is to say, resumed contact of their own free will, without being charged to do so. On the surface it seemed like a spontaneous renewal of the relationship. In fact, this spontaneous renewal was an instance of what is called in the literature “second order change”, which means a change that is the result of transformation on a higher level of the system. In this article we will describe how we achieved this transformation.

Levels of severity in parental alienation:

Most of the common approaches to treating parental alienation make a distinction between three levels of alienation: low, moderate, and severe. But the conceptualization of these levels varies from approach to approach. In most cases, the distinction is based on the behavior of the child. A common distinction will qualify a low level of severity if the child meets with the rejected parent, but does so showing his reluctance. In a moderate level we will see children who refuse to meet with the rejected parent, yet still regard him politely. In a severe level of parental alienation we will see children who not only refuse to see the rejected parent, but also treat him violently, while slandering him and his extended family.

Since our approach to therapy is family-systemic, our conceptualization is slightly different from that of other common approaches. We observe the behavior of the parents, not the children. From this point of view we regard the distinct levels of severity as follows:

1. Low level: parental alienation is the result of courtroom struggles between the divorced parents regarding custody and alimony.
2. Moderate level: parental alienation is the result of the use of the child, made by the alienating parent, in order to avenge against or disgrace the target parent, and in so doing, satisfy the pathological psychic needs of the alienating parent.   
3. Severe level: parental alienation is the result of the alienating parent having a serious personality disorder, accompanied by misinterpretation of reality.

We find that in low levels of alienation one can, often, use common-practice methods such as family or individual therapy, mediation, and\or parental coordination.  In higher levels of severity, the common, and seemingly the only effective practice, is transferring custody, with or without some kind of camp or therapeutic retreat. But for families suffering from moderate levels of alienation we have not found effective or satisfactory solutions in the professional literature or in the field.

Before we begin to describe the model, it is important for us to clarify that cases of moderate level parental alienation are in fact very hard to tackle and their treatment is very counter-intuitive.  In such cases, traditional approaches to both individual as well as family therapy never work. In this article we will try to describe what techniques do work with these complex families, as well as the necessary characteristics and proper stance required of the therapist who chooses to engage such families.

Foundations of the approach:

The following are our fundamental postulations regarding parental alienation, as some of them appear in our article “Eight Stages of Producing Parental Alienation”:

1. Parental alienation is a move in a “dirty game” between the divorced parents. It is a move initiated by the alienating parent as a response to the divorce which he sees as a move against him, made by the alienated parent.
2. Parental alienation is not the problem. It is the obvious solution for the alienating parent to utilize.
3. Alienation is a solution for one or more of the following problems:
   1. A response, punishment, or revenge against the other parent for “winning” by “daring” to cheat, leave, or divorce.
   1. Justification for the alienating parents’ choice to cheat, leave, or divorce, by slandering the other parent, and having the child do so too.
   1. Satisfying, through the child, an emotional need stemming from the space that appeared when the other parent left, a space that the alienating parent cannot and will not fill on his own
4. The rejected parent doesn’t really have any actual difficulty in their parenting. Before the alienation he functioned “good enough”. The problems that arose in parenting are merely symptoms of the couples’ unresolved conflict and the pathological attempts made by the alienating parent to “solve” them by using the child.
5. In light of this, there is no need for any parental counseling or training in parental skills. Dealing with “improving” the relationship between the alienated parent and the child derails the therapy from the real problem, prolongs it unnecessarily, and in fact, creates a new and redundant problem.   
6. Indeed there is no need to engage in trying to improve the parents’ team-work. The problem is not in their relationship as parents, but rather in their relationship as an ex-couple.

The therapeutic approach we are here proposing stems from the understanding of second-order cybernetics. We observe the entire system and realize that the “problem” is not the problem at all, and that the solution lies not where everyone is searching, but elsewhere.

This realization liberates the therapists and gives them the opportunity to deal with the source of the problem: working on the couples’ unresolved conflict and uncovering the real reasons that motivate the alienations.

Necessary conditions for the success of therapy:

What divorced couple would agree to cooperate in “couples therapy” that uncovers the couples’ deep unresolved conflict? Neither one of the ex-lovers has the need nor the will to attend to these matters. The rejected parent doesn’t want to deal with them because he mostly wants to finally end the connection with the alienating parent, and he is hoping that through therapy he may do so (not have to deal the old relationship). And the alienating parent definitely does not wish his true motives to be uncovered, being thus disarmed entirely.

In order to engage in the real problem that requires therapy, we need the court to force the couple, more specifically the alienating parent, to attend therapy. This usually happens by threatening with sanctions and loss of custody.

And so, the approach we are here presenting is authoritarian, backed by threats of sanctions by the court. It is not possible to engage in this kind of therapy, or any other effective approach to alienation, without the courts’ full support.  

In addition, to aid us in working with more authority, and to help us stay out of any potential coalitions and losing our center during our sessions, we chose to work in a co-therapy. We find that working with these families is complex, hard, produces anxiety, and even secondary traumatization. We found that co-therapy is a good remedy for these maladies. Working in co-therapy keeps us energized and creative during the session and after. Additionally, we chose to have our sessions be an hour and a half long (sometimes even three hours) so we may produce results each session. One hour is not enough for us to reach the results we aspire to.

The stages of treatment:

First session: this session is dedicated to gathering information. Here we create a detailed genogram for both ex-partners. We are mostly interested in matters such as: support or lack of support of the extended family, detachments from family of origin, pattern repetition, triangles, coalitions, and the like. Having completed the personal genogram, we go on to gather information regarding the couples early days: what they liked in each other, what were they attracted to, who wanted who more, etc. From there we turn to the actual relationship: having kids, the difficulties that had arisen over the years, and the trouble that led to the divorce.

Between sessions: at the end of the first sessions, we ask the couple to send us all the documented information they have. We ask for reports from courtroom sessions, social workers, medical information, school, and psychologists. We ask for photos, videos, and even screen-shots of Whatsapp message exchanges (they always have those). In order to establish a realistic picture of the situation, and to determine whether we are looking at parental alienation or refusal of contact that is grounded in actual bad parenting (estrangement) , we need photos and videos that may illustrate what kind of parents they were before and after the trouble began to overwhelm them.

In addition to this discrimination, we wish to fully and deeply understand the couples’ conflict. In this way, our approach to therapy with alienation families, is essentially different from other, more traditional approaches in family and couples’ therapy. As opposed to the traditional approaches, we do not try to facilitate “harmony” between the couple. On the contrary. We wish to see the conflict on the surface. And for that reason we insist to receive all the “shit” both partners had collected on each other. We use this material to more deeply understand the conflict and the couples’ motives, as well as to raise the level of anxiety in the room.

For the most part, this gives us heaps of information. We have learnt to go over this material rather rapidly, quickly sifting through the more relevant from the less. We dedicate three or four hours to reading this material prior to the second session.

Second session: having gathered a great deal of information from the first session, as well as our study of the documented material, we now begin to conjecture about what the main unresolved conflict is between the couple, what their motives are in hurting each other, and also regarding the way the child was incited against the rejected parent. The question that bothers our mind is “Why is it so important for the alienating parent to hurt the rejected parent?” And we seek for a systemic explanation for this question.  In other words, we do not settle for a psychiatric diagnosis. Indeed, a severe personality disorder is almost always part of the picture. But we do not see it as the cause for alienation. The cause for the alienation is the motive. Or rather, motives – of both parents. They both have a strong motivation to hurt the other, and our role is to uncover these motives.

Notice we are not occupied with uncovering emotions. There are no catchphrases spoken in our sessions about having empathy for each-others “difficult” feelings. We found that engaging emotional content is ineffective, and in fact only complicates the treatment unnecessarily and prolongs it. Nor do we attend to beliefs or cognitive conceptions. We are interested only in motives. Once we figure out these motives, we redefine the problem. A definition that is meant to be acceptable to both parents.

Redefining the problem:

The paradigm, or conscious conception the alienating parent has of the problem is this: the rejected parents is hurting the child and I am the only one who can save him from the horrible trauma he is experiencing with the target (rejected) parent. I am not alienating my child against the other parent. I am merely protecting him from the parent.

The alienating parent does not admit to himself that he is inciting or pushing the child to alienate and reject the target parent. And he wouldn’t even consider admitting to himself that he is doing so to hurt the other parent.

The paradigm, or conscious conception the target parent has of the problem is this: the alienating parent wants to hurt me by using the child. I have no part in this. I have never hurt the alienating parent and I don’t deserve to be punished.

In other words, the target parent is well aware of the alienating parents’ motives and intention. But he is ignoring and denying, even to himself, that he has more than a hand in the situation. He is not willing to admit that he too was a partner in the precarious dance the couple shared (it is here important to emphasize that we do not see the rejected parent in any way as responsible for the alienation itself. The alienation is the sole responsibility of the alienating parent. We do see the rejected parent as part of the reason for the marital conflict that led to the alienation).

In light of this understanding, we design a new definition wherein we validate and understand the emotions and needs of the alienating parent and acknowledge his suffering (if indeed there was any) at the hands of the target parent. But at the same time, we confront, and even lay into him for making a sickening use of his children in order to satisfy his hunger for revenge.

At the same time we validate and accentuate the positive aspects of the target parents’ parenting, while confronting him with his problematic treatment of the alienating parent.

Both parents feel validated and attacked at the same time.

Here is an example: two parents in their late thirties. They have two children. A twelve-year-old girl, and a ten-year-old boy. The mother had had periods of drug abuse, at which time the kids stayed with their father, who was a more mature and functioning parent. Having, supposedly, stopped using drugs, the mother had asked for full custody to be transferred to her. But this request was denied. The alienation started when the mother had allowed the children to stay at her house, living with no boundaries or chores: she did not require them to do homework or go to school, she let them go to bed late, and went shopping with them whenever they wanted. At the same time, she listened to, believed, and even encouraged the kids to keep telling her “horror” stories of what goes on at their fathers’ house. The kids told her that the father is violent towards them. That he punishes them, that he doesn’t make good food, and that it’s boring there. The mother decided that the kids were being “traumatized” and allowed them both to stay at her house permanently, without visiting their father. This situation persisted for six months when they came to us for therapy

Throughout our initial sessions we observed the fathers’ evident contempt towards his ex. He shared with us that the mother had “slept” with “the whole town” when she was younger, that she used drugs, got into unwanted pregnancies, and went through several rehabilitation programs. The manner in which he dispensed these descriptions was very degrading towards the mother.

Over the course of therapy we had asked the father why he seems to display a complete lack of compassion towards his ex-wife. We asked him, confrontationally, how he expects her to cooperate with him when all he does in her presence is disrespect her and treat her like garbage. As provocation we said that we can definitely understand the mother, who had finally found a way to “get back” at him by taking the kids under her wing and encouraging them to deface him.

We empathized with the mother for the terrible contempt she had experienced from her ex over the years and added that we realize the she found the ultimate way to get back at him, by having the kids align with her. The mother had kept with her story, that she was complying with her childrens’ adamant requests, only because she heard how much they were suffering with him. But we held fast and insisted to redefine the alienation as a very successful solution to the problem of the disrespect she was experiencing.

Throughout the session the mother did not amend to our explanation. But having left the session, we saw her walking over to her car while crying. We realized that what we said did in fact touch her, even though she didn’t let it out.

In the following session something happened that is nothing short of a miracle. The mother told us and her ex that she had thought things over and that she realized that she did, in fact, use the kids against their father. She told him she was sorry and said that she realizes that he has many very good qualities, and that actually, he does a better job parenting than her. She said that from now on she is willing to cooperate with him in their parenting.

The children had, spontaneously, visited the father that same week. And custody arrangements went back to being balanced.

This example is, of course, one of our more successful ones. Not every treatment ends with the alienating parent repenting and asking the forgiveness of the rejected one. And yet, as we have already mentioned, by way of this method, of uncovering the conflict and motives of both parents, nearly all cases have effective results bringing about spontaneous effects in the children.

As you may have noticed, we do not engage in educating or instructing the parents. We do not try to facilitate better communication or common language between the parents. We pay no mind to their parenting at all. We are dealing with their respective hidden motives and their unresolved conflict. Uncovering this material leads to spontaneous renewal of contact.

Next stage of therapy:

The problems between the parents do not end once the conflict and motives are uncovered. The childrens’ issues, too, are very much alive and kicking when resuming contact with the target parent. In fact, many of the difficulties only then begin to surface.

We encourage this process. We would like to have as many problems as possible, between the kids and the parents and between the parents themselves, to be uncovered during treatment, so that we may deal with them. We also encourage the parents to put in writing the on-going issues they have in the Whatsapp group we started for all of us. We hardly regard what they write during the week. But make use of it in our next sessions.

The next sessions vary in composition according to the needs as they arise, some with both parents, and some with the whole family, including the kids. During these sessions we ask the parents and the kids to raise any difficulty that came up over the past week. But, as opposed to facilitation, coordination, or instruction, we do not attempt to help the family resolve any of these issues. Rather, we seek to bring the difficulties to the surface in order to learn more from them about the different psychic motivations of the parents and of the children.

We uncover these motives, regard them with reflective questions, provocations, humor, drama, role-play, and slapstick in order to have the couple see themselves in a new light. A spectacle that is not always pleasant for them to observe. We use techniques that make the parents feel guilt, shame, and anxiety – techniques which actually block them from using their previously commonplace problematic behaviors. 

Ending therapy

An average case would take us three months of intensive therapy after which we taper down to less frequent sessions, until we get to the point when we meet the family every other month. When we see that both parents have completely abandoned the practice of conveying messages through their kids, and are able to speak with each other respectfully, that’s when we end therapy.

Throughout the therapeutic process, we constantly report our progress or lack of progress to the court. Indeed, we require and ask for the courts’ assistance, in the form of clear injunctions, financial sanctioning, and threat of custody change, in order to force the couple to keep attending our sessions, even if they do not wish to.

In most cases, after an initial period of resistance, the couple starts to like to come to our sessions. They are glad to come because we treat them with respect, because our therapy is creative and humoristic, and because they experience a sense of great relief in the tension in their lives, since their children are no longer part of the perverse triangle, and both parents have more time to themselves.

In most cases, our goal would be to create a systematically balanced sharing of the childrens’ time and, needless to say, cooperation between the parents. We would name this state of affairs, a success. And yet, if and when our therapy does not succeed, and the alienation persists, we advise the court to transfer custody, either temporarily and experimentally, or permanently, to the rejected parent. Often we recommend going to a camp or therapeutic retreat for a few days to facilitate the transformation. In severe cases of alienation, when the alienating parent refuses to cooperate in any way, changing custody is a necessary evil.

Leads for future research:

Our sample is very small. We hope to treat as many families who suffer from alienation as possible over the next few years, in order to make our model more accurate. In particular, we are interested in who it may serve, and who would not benefit from it. A clearer diagnosis of potential patients could save time and allow the therapist to refer to the best possible approach in the initial sessions rather than later.