What the Legal Community Gets Wrong About Parental Alienation

By: Gus Dimopoulos

Precision is a hallmark of litigation. Lawyers carefully choose every argument — and every word — because, in high-stakes civil and criminal cases, outcomes often favor the team that is most prepared, articulate, and persuasive. This is especially true in divorce and custody litigation, a field I’ve specialized in for 25 years.

Yet in a surprising number of custody cases, imprecision is routine — particularly cases involving claims of parental alienation. The term refers to one parent manipulating a child to alienate them from the other parent. It is colored by adult psychology, child psychology, and family dynamics. It is often entwined with other complex issues, and no two cases are exactly alike. Parental alienation is also a deeply misunderstood phenomenon, at least in the courtroom. It’s a topic that psychologists, social scientists, and other academics have been studying for decades – and are still studying, debating, and refining. It’s dense enough to keep the sharpest minds busy and controversial enough to fuel endless debate. But the nuance and depth that exists in academia rarely carries over into the legal realm.

In my time as a family lawyer, I’ve observed that the concept of parental alienation is often oversimplified or misunderstood in legal proceedings. Rather than being addressed as the complex and nuanced issue it is, it can sometimes be used too hastily — either as a blunt accusation, a defensive tactic, or a general buzzword. This oversimplification risks conflating parental alienation with unrelated mental health issues or family dynamics, leading to unintended consequences. When misapplied, it can impact custody outcomes, disrupt children’s development, strain parents’ mental health, and destabilize family relationships.

A more thoughtful, informed approach — grounded in research and tailored to each unique case — can help avoid these pitfalls and ensure fairer, more constructive outcomes for families.

To understand how the term is misused, it is important to understand its long history and complex meaning. The concept of parental alienation was first introduced by child psychiatrist Richard Gardner in 1985. He dubbed the phenomenon “parental alienation syndrome” and he classified it as a mental illness present in children. In the years since, research has evolved significantly. While parental alienation remains a topic of study, parental alienation syndrome has been widely debunked as a scientific concept. The understanding of it has shifted from a mental illness present in children to a behavior present in adults, and Gardner’s initial explanation has been roundly criticized as placing the blame on children and obfuscating abuse. Further, parental alienation syndrome has been rejected from the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders).

Over the decades, various advocacy groups with different worldviews have clashed over the topic, deepening its controversy. These include advocates for women’s and children’s welfare; advocates for more involved father-child relationships; and advocates for increased child agency in custody battles. Dr. Janet Johnson, a sociologist and professor at San Jose University, has made an apt observation about these conflicts: “Three advocacy movements have since pressured the family law system with laudable but competing claims.”

Dr. Johnson’s work has been instrumental in advancing a more nuanced understanding of parental alienation. She advocates a shift from a “single factor” understanding of the behavior to a “multi-factor model.” In other words, acknowledging that a single parent as the sole source of the problem is an overly simplistic explanation. Parental alienation rarely exists as a binary or in a vacuum: It manifests at different levels, is frequently entwined with other family dynamics, and can be attributed to both parents. It can be fueled by negative events within a family, gatekeeping behavior by parents, inadequate parenting, emotional immaturity, and several other factors.

Researchers have also highlighted that there are different levels of severity for parental alienation, from mild to severe — it’s not a one-size-fits-all phenomenon. In mild cases, the child may initially resist spending time with the alienated parent, but eventually warm to them. And mildly alienating parents will generally regret their behavior. At the other end of the spectrum, in severe cases, the child may outright refuse contact with the alienated parent, harboring fear or hatred. In these cases, the alienated parent will be consumed with the idea of destroying the child’s relationship with the other parent.

Each level of parental alienation — and indeed each individual case — requires a unique approach to resolve. Just like Gardner’s parental alienation syndrome, the notion that simply removing one parent from the equation is dated and dangerous. Experts have developed a range of tools and techniques that can be deployed in nuanced ways: psychoeducation, family counseling, behavioral interventions for parents, family therapy, and — in severe cases — modifying custody arrangements. As a lawyer, I can also affirm that the custody battle itself becomes entwined with parental alienation. When parents remove the custody battle from the equation and instead decide to settle out of court, destructive behaviors often diminish or disappear. And just like lawyers often enroll in continuing legal education courses, read law review articles, and study case law, if they believe they are qualified to handle complex custody cases involving claims of alienation, they should make sure to read as much as they can by the experts in the field, including Dr. Amy Baker, Dr. Janet Johnson, and Dr. Richard Warshak, to name a few.

When lawyers and judges approach parental alienation with greater awareness of its complexities and nuances, they can better serve their clients while safeguarding the well-being of the family, especially the children. Misunderstanding this issue risks misdiagnoses, unnecessary family conflict, and irreparable harm to relationships that might otherwise heal.

The legal profession prides itself on its precision, yet parental alienation remains an area where clarity often falls short. By prioritizing evidence-based approaches over emotional assumptions, lawyers and judges can make informed decisions that preserve family relationships and support the best interests of the children involved.

Gus Dimopoulos, Esq. is managing partner of Dimopoulos Law Firm P.C., a matrimonial and family law firm based in New York City and Westchester County, N.Y. that specializes in high-net-worth divorces. For more information, visit www.dimolaw.com.

This article was originally published in Westchester Lawyer in their February 2025 issue and can be viewed here.