We at PsychLaw.net are aware that many alienating parents have demonstrable difficulties in their psychosocial functioning. As long ago as 1985, Benedek and Schetky reported that in high conflict custody cases, overly anxious parents tended to act out their mistrust for their former spouses. They wrote that anxious parents may transmit their anxiety to their child, causing the child to feel that he or she will not be safe visiting the other parent. Writing in 1987, Blush and Ross described cases of PA in which the personality of the alienating parent served as the force driving the alienation. In some of those situations, Blush and Ross described a pattern they termed the “justified vindicator.” They wrote:
In this instance, a hostile, emotionally expansive, and dominant female has directly appealed to “experts” in both the mental health and legal communities. She frequently becomes insistent that formal, punitive legal measures be taken via prosecution before reasonable proofs have been demonstrated. One of the accompanying phenomena with this type of female parent is that she frequently has concurrent criminal action pending with her domestic legal action.
Many researchers explain that alienating parents tend to be rigidly defended and moralistic. These alienators perceive themselves to be flawless, virtuous, and they externalize responsibility onto others. They lack insight into their own behavior and the impact their behavior has on others (Bagby, Nicholson, Buis, Radovanovic, & Fidler, 1999; Bathurst, Gottfried, & Gottfried, 1997; Siegel, 1996). Research literature consistently documents that psychopathology and personality disorders are present in a significant proportion of high-conflict parents litigating over custody or access (Friedman, 2004; Siegel & Langford, 1998). Psychological disturbance – including histrionic, paranoid, borderline, and narcissistic personality disorders or characteristics as well as psychosis, suicidal behavior, and substance abuse – are common among alienating parents (Johnston, Walters, & Olesen, 2005; Rand, 1997a, 1997b; Turkat 1999; Warshak, 2010a).
Two groups of researchers found that the maladaptive personality traits of alienating parents were consistently identified through objective psychological evaluation materials. Concerning the MMPI-2, Siegel and Langford (1998) wrote: “The present study is an attempt to gain understanding of parents who engage in alienating tactics through a statistical examination of their MMPI-2 validity scales.” They tested 16 female subjects who met the criteria for classification as PAS parents; 18 female subjects were considered non-PAS parents. The authors concluded:
The hypothesis was confirmed for K and F scales, indicating that PAS parents are more likely to complete MMPI-2 questions in a defensive manner, striving to appear as flawless as possible. It was concluded that parents who engage in alienating behaviors are more likely than other parents to use the psychological defenses of denial and projection, which are associated with this validity scale pattern.
Gordon, Stoffey, and Bottinelli (2008) examined the MMPI-2 data of 76 cases where PA was found and 82 custody cases (controls) where PA did not operate. They found that mothers and fathers who were alienators had much higher scores on measures of psychological dysfunction; that is, test scores that indicated primitive defenses such as “splitting” and “projective identification.” Two different MMPI-2 indexes were used to measure these primitive defenses: L + K – F and (L + Pa + Sc) – (Hy + Pt). The first index (L + K – F) identifies persistent defensiveness. Elevations on this index would be expected in those cases of parents viewing themselves as an “all good parent” while condemning the former spouse as an “all bad parent.” The second index ([L + Pa + Sc] – [Hy + Pt]) is the Goldberg Index (1965). The Goldberg Index is a regression equation score which is the T score of (Lie + Paranoia + Schizophrenia) – (Hysteria + Psychasthenia). Those high “pathology scores” were much more prevalent in the alienator group; the scores for the target parents were most like the scores of the control parents. Gordon and his colleagues concluded that their overall study strongly supported the definitions Gardner put forward with respect to PAS.
Many authors have described the specific behaviors that an alienating parent might use to induce PA in the child. Gardner (1992) gave many examples of alienating strategies he had observed in conducting child custody evaluations. Gardner said that mothers alienated children against their fathers by: repeatedly vilifying the father with derogatory names; destroying every item in the house that might remind the children of the father’s existence; frequently complaining about how little money the father provided; exaggerating the father’s minor psychological problems; and interfering with the father’s visitation schedule (pp. 83-91). Gardner said that fathers alienated children against their mothers by: failing to encourage the children to spend time with the mother; physically protecting the child from the imagined dangers associated with the mother; concocting a sex-abuse allegation against the mother’s live-in boyfriend; seductive maneuvers, such as frequently cuddling and hugging the children; criticizing the mother for “never working a day in her life”; and developing secret codes with the children that were used in the service of hurting the mother (pp. 107-112).
Bagby, R. M., Nicholson, R. A., Buis, T., Radovanovic, H., & Fidler, B. J. (1999). Defensive responding on the MMPI-2 in family custody and access evaluations. Psychological Assessment, 11, 24-28.
Bathurst, K., Gottfried, A. W., & Gottfried, A. E. (1997). Normative data for the MMPI-2 in child custody litigation. Psychological Assessment, 9, 205-211.
Benedek, E. P., & Schetky, D. H. (1985). Custody and visitation: Problems and perspectives. Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 8(4), 857-873.
Blush, G. J., & Ross, K. L. (1987). Sexual allegations in divorce: The SAID syndrome. Conciliation Courts Review, 25(1), 1-11.
Friedman, M. (2004). The so-called high-conflict couple: A closer look. American Journal of Family Therapy, 32(2), 101-117.
Gardner, R. A. (1992). The parental alienation syndrome: A guide for mental health and legal professionals. Cresskill, NJ: Creative Therapeutics.
Goldberg, L.R. (1965). Diagnosticians vs. diagnostic signs: The diagnosis of psychosis vs neurosis from the MMPI. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 79(9), 1-28.
Gordon, R. M., Stoffey, R., & Bottinelli, J. (2008). MMPI-2 Findings of Primitive Defenses in Alienating Parents. American Journal of Family Therapy, 36(3), 211-228.
Johnston, J. R., Walters, M. G., & Olesen, N. W. (2005). The Psychological Functioning of Alienated Children in Custody Disputing Families: An Exploratory Study. American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 23(3), 39-64.
Rand, D. (1997a). The Spectrum of Parental Alienation Syndrome, Part I. American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 15(3), 23-52.
Rand, D. (1997b). The Spectrum of Parental Alienation Syndrome, Part II. American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 15(4), 39-92.
Siegel, J. (1996). Traditional MMPI-2 Validity Indicators and Initial Presentation in Custody Evaluations. American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 13(3), 55-63.
Siegel, J., & Langford, J. (1998).MMPI-2 Validity Scales and Suspected Parental Alienation Syndrome.American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 16(4), 5-14.
Turkat, I. D. (1999). Divorce-Related Malicious Parent Syndrome.Journal of Family Violence, 14, 95-97.
Warshak, R. A. (2010a). Alienating Audiences from Innovation: The Perils of Polemics, Ideology, and Innuendo. Family Court Review, 48(1), 153-163.