Sentences with phrase «because alienating parents»

Because alienating parents are socially maladaptive and have no moral conscience, they are called «sociopaths.»

I am reminded of a study by Dr. Baker «Even when targeted parents had the resources to pursue legal action and were fortunate enough to prevail they were not able to take advantage of the rights afforded to them by the courts because alienating parents did not respect the court orders, the attorneys were not interested in or able to force the alienating parent into compliance.

The need for such defenses arises because alienating parents have little or no tolerance for internal conflict or even normal ambivalence.

«These cases should be fast - tracked because alienating parents exploit the ability for the courts to delay things to their benefit.

Because alienating parents can lie and suffer no consequences.

As just one example, a finding from Dr. Amy Baker: «Even when targeted parents had the resources to pursue legal action and were fortunate enough to prevail -LSB-...] they were not able to take advantage of the rights afforded to them by the courts because alienating parents did not respect the court orders, the attorneys were not interested in or able to force the alienating parent into compliance.

Recognizing the mild form of alienating behavior is tricky because the behavior itself is often subtle and because the alienating parent will deny both motivation and acts and often will make sincere statements to her attorneys and the court that reflect a regard for the children's needs for the other parent and a respect for the unique role the other parent has to play in the life and development of the child.

Not exact matches

I hesitate to label myself as such because the label itself can be off - putting to the point of unduly alienating people from what are (if I do say so myself) some damn fine parenting practices.

First of all, that isn't referenced as to source, and even though I may agree anecdotally, I can't risk alienating the parents of the academically compatible children (as a parent of of a HG and PG kiddos) because they are just as frustrated as I am with their child needs getting met as well, and volunteer and advocate with me.

When the child repudiates a parent because of the favoured parent's efforts to poison the parent - child relationship, the child is said to be alienated from the rejected parent.

Because the majority of primary carers happen to be mothers they feature in more cases as the alienating than the alienated parent.

What would be more draconian, infect the child or keep the parent away from the child because they refused to change their alienating ways?

Soon the child forgets how to protect him or herself, and must align with the alienating parent as if life depends on it — because it does.

The alienating parent will «preach» that they have to be ever vigilant to watch out for the other parent because of their angry episodes and outbursts.

While conflicts over timesharing does occur in many cases where a parent can't deliver a child to the other parent for valid reasons more often than not is rather rare because most true alienating parents are savvier than this....

Children of alienators are often unaware of what is happening and naturally side with the alienating parent because of what they have been told or led to believe.

Most divorcing parents tend to alienate somewhat at a low level due to the high emotions involved in a divorce or custody dispute and because of the natural conflict that arises when two parents are separating.

Courts also often side with the alienating parent against the target parent in legal judgements because parental alienation is so difficult to detect.

How alienated parents cope can then be used against them by the other parents (e.g., «your mom / dad doesn't care about you because they did not come to your school concert»).

On the other hand, if you are filing for sole custody because you plan to alienate your child from her other parent and the court picks up on this, it will likely see your actions as an abuse of the custody process and not award you sole custody.

Because the statements of the alienating parent will not give the lawyers or the courts clues that there is alienation in process, it is important to look at the underlying messages that are given directly to the child.

Which you imagine to be so because, ipso facto, it must be there because there are these symptoms which we can identify because there is a campaign of programming by an alienating parent and that's how we differentiate them from otherwise explainable behavior... and we know there's a campaign by an alienating parent because there are these symptoms there... Gee... not exactly comparable to testing for the presence of the pneumococci bacteria, or a defective chromosome.

These cases are very challenging... in part because there are kids being harmed by the alienation and by the pathology directed at them on a daily basis by the alienating parent.

When you do this, you give the alienating parent the «upper hand,» because he or she has provoked you to become the hateful person who they are portraying you to be to the children.

I have generally seen this pattern with males as the alienating parent (perhaps because of the higher prevalence for males to display narcissistic and antisocial personality traits), with mothers then being the recipient of the child's (teenager's) excessive violence and threats (as a vehicle in expressing the father's narcissistic and antisocial violence toward the mother).

To all the parents that have been denegated and alienated keep loving because the damage down to our children is worth fighting to change.

This enables the therapeutic work to be undertaken swiftly because it limits the risk of triangulation in which the alienating parent utilises the doubts and lack of understanding in professionals to continue the children's ability to reject.

Similarly, the PA / PAS distinction is largely a matter of degree, because the intent is always the same, whether the alienating parent tries to push the children away from the targeted parents or pull them in the other direction.

Certainly too, it is impossible to co-parent with the other parent because in these situations, the alienating parent refuses to work amicably.

The alienating parent will often NOT encourage their children to become better than they themselves are — perhaps because they do not care about the child at all.

Aggressive motions to modify visitation or custody, along with motions to enforce the current orders, should also be part of a post-proceeding strategy, because if nothing else, such filings draws attention to the issue and may help convince the alienating parents to change their approaches.

I just recently read «The Unexpected Legacy of Divorce — the 25 year landmark study» the damage being done to our children because of divorce in general is overwhelming and she doesn't even deal with children that are alienated from a parent.

In our case the alienated parent has done this to herself and blame us and is in her own way trying to alienate the kids from us by saying we are doing this to her but our kids don't have to be lied to because they remember the truth.

She argues that this is important because it implies the presence of a personality disorder in the alienating parent.

Parents that alienate refuse to follow court orders and parenting plans — they get away with it because they can.

(4) I am glad you pointed out what all alienated parents complain of» I pleaded to the Judge to hold my ex-husband accountable for denying my Thanksgiving visitation because if he did not go by his word and put my ex-husband in jail, than it will prove to my ex-husband that he could do whatever he wants, whenever he wants, not obey / abide by the new court order becauase the Judge isn't going to repremand him.»

Therefore, alienating parents often intentionally schedule children's activities on the other parent's weekend (e.g., «Susie can not come see you this weekend because she has a Girl Scout event»).

You have to grieve because it is very RARE that these alienated beings reconcile with the alienated parent.

The family court in Shawnee county, KS has some serious issues with reacting impulsively and approving sole custody by default because the other parent was not there... knowing they aren't dead, realizing that 2 notices were sent and returned with «not at this address» so parent was probably only absent because they never received word of this very important, life altering hearing - not because they felt they were above the law as indicated via court records then to seal the final decision, the judge shouldve reviewed any past files taking note of any past complaints / concerns to the court regarding alienating parent doing just that and automatically recommend a continuation and make clear that court was not to move forward until they get a hold of the absent parent and allow them their right to be there... because that would've been 100 % in the best interest of the child.

Children may become alienated from a parent because of physical abuse, with or without sexual abuse.

Gardner (2002) pointed out, «when true parental abuse and / or neglect is present the child's animosity may be justified, and so the parental alienation syndrome diagnosis is not applicable» Johnston (2001) is right that it is «critical to differentiate the alienated child (who persistently refuses and rejects visitation because of unreasonable negative views and feelings) from other children who also resist contact with a parent after separation.

Because children are suggestible, many will eventually succumb to the relentless programming or «brainwashing» by an alienating parent toward a target parent.

What about «us» the parent that is alienated because the adult child is married to someone that wants you out of his life.

You still send the card because the worst thing from the point of view of the people I interviewed, it's the parent who stopped sending the card and stopped reaching out, and then they're alienating parent turns around and the kid and says, «See?