Parent Child Contact Problems Research Articles

Reunification, reconsidered: Presenting an integrative, single-therapist framework for resolving parent-child contact problems.

Providing therapy to families of separation and divorce can be a challenging area of practice for marriage and family therapists, particularly when a child refuses contact with a parent. Several forms of "reunification therapy" designed to overcome resist/refuse dynamics between a child and parent have been proposed, with significant variation across the conceptualization of factors contributing to parent-child contact problems and the resulting treatment models that have been described. In an effort to design an overarching integrative framework for conducting family reunification therapy that is informed by available evidence, a review of the current literature is conducted. Following this review, an integrative single-therapist framework for resolving parent-child contact problems is presented. Over the course of three successive treatment "stages," this framework permits a marriage and family therapist to conduct reunification therapy in an evidence-informed manner along general systemic therapeutic principles while permitting flexibility with respect to the specific interventions selected.

A structured rubric for evaluating the many systemic variables that can contribute to parent–child contact problems (PCCP)

AbstractParent–child contact problems (PCCP) are among the most vexing and intractable matters encountered in contemporary divorce and post‐divorce litigation. These complex and incendiary family dynamics can confound even the most experienced evaluators, investigators, and jurists, fueling opposing confirmational biases, and sparking a destructive tug‐of‐war between the aligned parent's allegations of abuse and the rejected parent's allegations of alienation. This article describes all such either/or binary arguments as misleading, contrary to the science, and harmful to children. Rather than cast alienation and estrangement as mutually exclusive alternatives, the systemically‐informed professional must consider more than a dozen mutually compatible practical exigencies and relationship dynamics which can converge to cause a child to align with one parent and resist or refuse contact with the other. Together, these variables are described as constituting an ecological model of the conflicted family system. A rubric is proposed to standardize evaluation across time, children, families, and jurisdictions, minimize bias, avoid premature closure, facilitate more comprehensive evaluations, optimize the efficacy of associated interventions, and invite more rigorous future research.

Parent‐child contact problems: Family violence and parental alienating behaviors either/or, neither/nor, both/and, one in the same?

AbstractThis article argues that in order to intervene effectively and ethically with children who are manifesting Parent–child contact problems (PCCPs) after parental separation, we begin by being mindful of what is normal about divorce transitions and use developmentally appropriate and culturally sensitive analysis to rule out children's common transitory reactions. It is then important to concurrently assess for both family violence (FV) and severe parental alienating behavior (PAB) on the part of both parents, which can co‐occur in some cases. The article asserts that it is also important to consider common problematic parenting responses that may potentiate the PCCP but not necessarily rise to the level of abuse. FV is defined as a child's direct experience of physical, sexual, or psychological maltreatment and indirect exposure to sibling abuse and/or to intimate partner violence (IPV). PAB is defined as an ongoing pattern of unwarranted negative messages on the part of one parent that conveys that the child's other parent is disinterested, irrelevant, dangerous, and not to be trusted. Any one or all of these factors may contribute to a child's strident negativity and sustained rejection of one parent, these being defining features of a PCCP. This article proposes ethical principles and priorities for decision‐making in these cases, considering the growing social science controversy about assessment and intervention for PCCPs. It concludes with an analysis of recent, contrasting policy approaches to PCCPs (e.g., Kayden's Law and the Joint Statement of the AFCC and NCJFCJ) and their potential impact on family justice system professionals and the families they serve.

July 2023

July 2023

Parent–child contact problems and family intensive interventions: The crisis of adolescent suicidality and the role of social media

AbstractAlthough clinicians, educators and parents have been alarmed by the decline in the mental health of children and adolescents commensurate with the Covid‐19 pandemic, statistics indicate there has been a downward spiral over the last decade. This has been evident in the overall increase in suicide rates for young people. For legal and mental health professionals working in the Family Court system, this has provided unique challenges. Most vulnerable has been those children and adolescents embroiled in high conflict divorces, especially those exhibiting parent child contact problems. This article focuses upon that population exhibiting parent child contact problems, and their treatment, specifically Family Intensive Intervention. Building Family Resilience is an Intensive family treatment program that has had to address this deterioration in child and adolescent mental health and increase in suicidality. The role of social media in both exacerbating and/or ameliorating mental health issues is explored.

One Size Really Does Not Fit All: The Importance of Incorporating Culturally Relevant Adaptations in Reunification Therapy

Reunification therapy is specialized family therapy to address parent–child relational disruption (i.e. child resistance to or refusal of parent contact), typically during or following a high‐conflict divorce or custody dispute. The literature discussing reunification therapy interventions with families involving racial diversity, SES, religiosity, and other socio‐cultural aspects is limited to non‐existent. In the move towards being culturally sensitive to the ever‐present multitude of identities that exist within family systems, professionals are challenged to develop a balanced approach between providing competent practice that is culturally sound and considering empirical evidence. This paper offers suggestions for enhancing evidence‐informed interventions to address parent–child contact problems within diverse populations by incorporating culturally specific interventions to increase parenting skills, reduce parent and child distress, and repair attachments through therapeutic experiences.

Trauma‐Informed Interventions in Parent–Child Contact Cases

Parent–child contact problems may arise in the context of high conflict separation/divorce dynamics between parents. In cases where there are parent–child contact problems and children resist or refuse contact with one of their parents, there may also be incidents of child maltreatment, intimate partner violence, or compromised parenting that can be experienced by a parent or child as traumatic. The circumstances around separation and/or post‐divorce often result in intense stress for families. In this paper we distinguish between the stressful circumstances that may arise as a result of high interparental conflict and pulls for alignment from a parent, and the real or perceived trauma as a factor which contributes to resistance or refusal of a child to have contact with a parent. Interventions to address both trauma responses and the resist‐refuse dynamics are differentiated and discussed. After screening and assessment, the intent is to treat trauma responses with short‐term, evidence‐based therapy, either before or concurrent with co‐parent and family intervention.

Guest Editors' Introduction to the 2020 Special Issue on Parent–Child Contact Problems: Concepts, Controversies & Conundrums

Guest Editors' Introduction to the 2020 Special Issue on Parent–Child Contact Problems: Concepts, Controversies & Conundrums

Concepts, Controversies And Conundrums Of “Alienation:” Lessons Learned In A Decade And Reflections On Challenges Ahead

There have been significant advances in understandings and practice related parent–child contact problems (PCCPs), with a growing consensus about some issues and continuing controversy about others. It is widely acknowledged that PCCP cases are most fruitfully understood from a multi‐factorial perspective. While some cases may be totally the “fault” of one parent (a parent perpetrating violence or abuse, or a parent exhibiting alienating behavior), in many situations both parents bear some responsibility: focusing on a single cause is rarely helpful. Most professionals and researchers agree that the challenge in practice is to distinguish between false positives and false negatives for both alienation (or unjustified rejection) and realistic estrangement (justified rejection). There is continuing controversy over whether the concept of “alienation” should be used, especially in court proceedings, and a related disagreement about the extent to which family courts are now failing to respond adequately to cases of intimate partner violence (IPV) or child abuse when alienation is also raised. Continuing education, intentional exploration of alternative hypotheses, and active perspective‐taking will contribute to effective professional involvement. Increased parent education and prevention can play an important role, although for the more severe PCCP cases the family courts system will continue to play a critical role. While more research must be done, given the complexity of issues, conclusive findings are unlikely in the near future. Legislators and family justice professionals must make decisions based on a thorough analysis of each family's circumstances in the context of our present knowledge, taking account of the limits of the law. They will often face the conundrum of making decisions in the face of uncertainty.

Responding to Severe Parent–Child Rejection Cases Without a Parentectomy: A Blended Sequential Intervention Model and the Role of the Courts

There have been significant developments over the past two decades that have expanded our understanding of the dynamics of parent–child contact problems post‐separation, which have resulted in some changes in judicial processes to respond to these cases. One significant advancement is a more sophisticated differentiation of the nature and severity of contact problems, which better assists legal and mental health professionals to provide more suitable legal and clinical interventions. However, the issue of innovative court processes has received limited attention. The authors describe a subgroup of families within the “severe” category, for whom an expanded intervention model, referred to as a Blended Sequential Intervention is proposed. This approach involves a reversal of care with court mandated therapeutic support for the rejected parent and child, but also involves the favored parent in the therapeutic plan from the outset, and is intended to avoid a permanent “parentectomy” of the child from either parent. The authors discuss how the courts should respond to these cases, and posit that until all therapeutic treatments are exhausted, interim orders should be preferred to final determinations, and judges should maintain oversight. The authors discuss the critical role of judicial leadership in working with lawyers and mental health professionals to manage and address the issues in these high conflict cases.

Mental Health Professionals’ Practice of Reintegration Therapy for Parent–Child Contact Problems Post-separation: A Phenomenological Study

ABSTRACTObjectives: Reintegration therapy (RT) is an evolving therapy that aims to ameliorate parent–child contact problems and alienation post-separation/divorce. This study explored how RT is defined and practiced among experienced mental health professionals and the underlying theory informing practitioners’ understanding of contact problems. Findings were used to generate practice recommendations.Method: A hermeneutic phenomenological design was used based on a purposive sample of 14 clinically experienced mental health professionals from Canada and the United States.Results: Analysis revealed substantial variance among practitioners’ underlying theoretical frameworks which inform clinical practice and service delivery models. Two distinct themes related to the definition of RT and treatment goals emerged signifying some consensus.Implications: Given the variation in models and practice, findings illustrate the need for professionals and researchers to collaborate toward the development of a unified theoretical model and the creation of practice guidelines. This, in turn, will allow for objective assessment and evaluation of its effectiveness.

CHILDREN RESISTING POSTSEPARATION CONTACT WITH A PARENT: CONCEPTS, CONTROVERSIES, AND CONUNDRUMS

This article provides an overview of the key concepts, themes, issues, and possible mental health and legal interventions related to children's postseparation resistance to having contact with one parent. We maintain that the too often strongly gendered polemic on alienation and abuse is polarizing and needs to be replaced with a more nuanced and balanced discussion that recognizes the complexity of the issues so that the needs of children and families can be better met. This article reviews the historical development of the concept of alienation; discusses the causes, dynamics, and differentiation of various types of parent child contact problems; and summarizes the literature on the impact of alienation on children. These are complex cases. A significant portion of the cases in which alienation is alleged are not in fact alienation cases; for those where alienation is present, interventions will vary depending on the degree of the alienation. More severe alienation cases are unlikely to be responsive to therapeutic or psycho‐educational interventions in the absence of either a temporary interruption of contact between the child and the alienating parent or a more permanent custody reversal. We conclude with a summary of recommendations for practice and policy, including the need for early identification and intervention to prevent the development of severe cases, interdisciplinary collaboration and further development and research of interventions.