Hero

Videos

Slideshows

Articles

Podcasts

Poll

An excellent article has recently been published on the scientific underpinnings of our understanding of parental alienation.

 Parental alienation as a mental condition is indeed founded on scientific research. In addition, there is a wealth of accumulated clinical knowledge of parental alienation in real-life, high-conflict cases. In this article, my goal is to discuss lessons learned from my experiences as an expert in alienation cases.

To provide context, I have been involved in at least 100 parental alienation cases over the years. I have been court-appointed to evaluate both parents in some of these cases. In others, I have been retained by a targeted or rejected parent to serve as an expert advocate on their behalf. Currently, I am retained in cases in 10 states and in Canada and England.

As a clinician, I can tell you that parental alienation is real, toxic, and potentially life changing. Of course, there are varying degrees of parental alienation, ranging from mild to moderate to severe.

 Mild to moderate alienation means the child is partially rejecting the targeted parent. In severe alienation, the parent is being totally rejected.

Estrangement is very different from alienation.

 Estrangement means the child is rejecting the targeted parent due to a legitimate concern about that parent, such as substance abuse or physical altercations or major mental illness. It is important for a mental health expert not to confuse estrangement with parental alienation. They are totally different situations and conditions.

We know that children who are immersed in the middle of a high-conflict separation, divorce, or postdivorce are at much higher risk for psychiatric symptoms, such as anxiety, depression, behavior problems, substance abuse, and more. This is true for children in childhood and later in adulthood.

 This is exactly what I have encountered clinically in my work.

Parental alienation manifests itself in a wide variety of behaviors, maneuvers, and strategies by the offending parent aimed at having the child reject the other parent. Bad-mouthing, interfering with visitation time, interfering with phone calls, cutting off family members, and false allegations of abuse are a few of the common alienating behaviors. A list of 17 frequent alienating strategies has been described in the literature.

False allegations of abuse are weapons that alienating parents use to gain leverage in their court proceedings. Filing criminal charges intensifies the weaponization even more. Such false allegations are hard to disprove, and offending parents use that fact to their advantage. Fortunately, investigations by child protective services often produce a “not indicated” or “unsubstantiated” finding, which helps to show the falseness of the allegations. Here is an important rule of thumb: multiple false allegations of abuse during a divorce proceeding are a huge red flag for parental alienation.

Attorneys involved in parental alienation cases often make the situations worse, not better.

 Winning is their top priority. The alienating parent’s attorney often turns a blind eye or even encourages the destructive behavior to “win” their case. The child’s attorney—the GAL—often has no mental health training and takes what the child says at face value, thus enabling the parental alienation. The rejected parent’s attorney may understand the dynamics but their hands are tied by the roadblocks imposed by the alienating parent’s attorney and the GAL. Passivity and defeatism may set in. Thus, it is often true that the attorneys in parental alienation cases do little to uncover and correct the pathological dynamic.

We know there is a certain treatment template that works in parental alienation cases.

 The alienating parent needs individual therapy that focuses exclusively on ceasing the alienating behavior. At the same time, the alienated child and the rejected parent must have reunification therapy to repair their relationship. If the child’s alienation is severe—meaning total rejection of the parent—the child must be removed from contact with the alienating parent, at least for a while, so that reunification therapy can take hold and be sustained.

Treatment of parental alienation can be successful if all involved in the case—attorneys, mediators, coordinators, experts, and judges—support the template offered above. Parental alienation in a child can be corrected. It is not a hopeless situation. But roadblocks to treatment must be recognized and combated.

Mental health experts are an invaluable asset in parental alienation cases, especially if the expert is knowledgeable and experienced in such dynamics. In my opinion, all high-conflict divorces that involve child custody matters should have a mental health expert in some capacity. Without an expert, these cases can become convoluted, twisted, and confusing very quickly.

As William Bernet, MD, and I have written, winning in a parental alienation case is much different than in all other family-law cases.

 Winning should be defined in terms of exposing and correcting parental alienation in the child. The correction of parental alienation is in the child’s best interest in each and every case. Ignoring it or accepting it as fait accompli is both ethically and professionally unacceptable and harms the child in the short-term and long-term.

Steven Miller, MD, recently passed away. He was an important contributor to our understanding of parental alienation cases.

 He wrote about the counterintuitive nature of parental alienation. The counterintuitive features of parental alienation are at the core of all diagnostic and treatment problems in these cases.

It is unacceptable for a physically or sexually abusive parent to falsely claim that they are the victim of parental alienation. That is a ruse that cannot be condoned or enabled. Parental alienation as an entity is not intended to cover up or hide physical or sexual abuse in a family.

Parental alienation is a diagnosable and treatable mental condition. Detractors who say otherwise are misguided and wrong. The condition is supported by both scientific research and clinical experience. Those of us who work in cases of parental alienation can attest to its toxicity, its confusing presentation, and its ability to be corrected under the right circumstances.

is a clinical and forensic psychologist in private practice in Birmingham, Alabama.He is also clinical associate professor in the department of psychology at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. Dr Blotcky can be reached at alanblotcky@att.net.

1. Harman JJ, Warshak RA, Lorandos D, Florian MJ. 

Developmental psychology and the scientific status of parental alienation.

2. Koszyk PA, Bernet W. Treatment and prevention of parental alienation. 

https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/treatment-and-prevention-parental-alienation

The Five-Factor Model for the diagnosis of parental alienation.

The impact of parental alienating behaviours on the mental health of adults alienated in childhood.

Surviving Parental Alienation. A Journey of Hope and Healing

6. Blotcky AD. False allegations of abuse during divorce: the role of alienating beliefs. 

https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/false-allegations-of-abuse-during-divorce-the-role-of-alienating-beliefs

7. Blotcky AD, Bernet W. Winning parental alienation cases: a roadmap for family lawyers. 

. January 12, 2022. Accessed July 25, 2022. 

https://familylawyermagazine.com/articles/winning-parental-alienation-cases/

A roadmap for the treatment of parental alienation.

9. Miller SG. Clinical reasoning and decision-making in cases of child alignment: diagnostic and therapeutic issues. In: Baker AJL, Sauber SR, eds. 

Working With Alienated Children and Families: A Clinical Guidebook

. Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group; 2014:8-47.

Parental alienation: a mental condition is indeed founded on scientific research. 

Lessons Learned From Parental Alienation Cases

Adversarial child custody battles are fertile ground for the lodging of false allegations of abuse. All too often, 1 parent will make a false allegation of abuse against the other parent as a way of gaining leverage in a court proceeding. In fact, it is an intentional and purposeful attempt by the accusing parent to throw the other parent under the bus and thereby gain all power in their custody dispute. As such, false allegations of abuse are a weapon of destruction in a family.

False allegations of abuse become more disruptive and weaponized if they turn into criminal charges. They then become a sinister plan by the accusing parent to totally sever the child’s relationship with the “dangerous” parent by sending that parent to prison. That is the extent to which some parents will go to extricate themselves from an ex-spouse or ex-partner. But they do not understand or care that they are causing great harm to their children by removing 1 of their parents under false pretense.

False allegations of abuse can be difficult to uncover, expose, and prove. There is a natural tendency for attorneys, judges, mediators, mental health professionals, and laypeople to believe a parent’s or a child’s allegations. After all, why would a parent or a child lie? Why would a story of abuse be fabricated? The answer is clear: Because a false allegation of abuse can sabotage the other parent’s position in the legal proceeding. The weaponization of false allegations can be successful. Sometimes, the false allegations win out and the targeted parent suffers the catastrophic repercussions.

The best way to fight a false allegation of abuse is through documentation and the development of a detailed timeline. A timeline can show the sequence of events and behaviors that demonstrate the high likelihood that an allegation of abuse is false. When—and under what circumstance—an allegation is made can expose its falseness. Multiple allegations during a custody proceeding is a huge red flag for fabrication. In essence, the timing and sequence of events can explain the emergence of a false allegation of abuse.

False allegations of abuse often appear in parental alienation cases. They are 1 of the tactics or strategies used by an alienating parent. I have been involved in hundreds of parental alienation cases, and a high percentage of them have included false allegations of abuse as a weaponized maneuver by the alienating parent. Many times, false allegations and parental alienation go hand in hand.

The weaponization of false allegations cannot be condoned and thus empowered. It is one of the biggest mistakes made in child custody cases. If condoned, incorrect and harmful custody decisions can result in court. Custody of a child can be incorrectly awarded to a parent who has fabricated allegations in a conniving and pernicious way. Such a parent is not a healthy custodial figure. This can have disastrous consequences for the child, both in the short-term and long-term.

“Teddy” is a 12-year-old boy whose parents, “Mike” and “Mary,” went through a hotly contested divorce. Mike and Mary had been married for 16 years before their marriage fell apart due to financial pressures and Mike’s extramarital affair. During the divorce proceeding, Mary accused Mike of physically abusing Teddy. Shortly thereafter, Mary was given temporary custody of Teddy because Mike was perceived as abusive.

Initially, Mary’s attorney, the guardian ad litem, the judge, and the mediator believed that Mike was an abusive parent. Mike was ordered to have supervised visits with Teddy in a public setting. He was also ordered to have anger management classes, a psychological evaluation, and random drug screens for 6 months.

A timeline of events showed that Mary’s allegation against Mike was lodged 6 days after Mike filed for primary custody of his son. Over their long marriage, Mike had never shown a hint of being aggressive or assaultive. Mike’s psychological evaluation came back normal. He voluntarily took a polygraph exam, which showed truthfulness with no deception.

As a mental health expert who was retained by Mike, I presented this timeline as part of my court testimony. I was convinced that the allegation of abuse against him was false.

Ultimately, after many months of acrimony and continuances, Mike was awarded joint physical custody of Teddy. The falseness of Mary’s allegation was believed and accepted. She was trying to gain leverage in the custody battle by portraying her estranged husband as dangerous and unworthy of custodial time.

Not all cases of false allegations of abuse end successfully. Many times, the false allegations remain potent because they cannot be dispelled completely. In other words, the allegations remain weaponized.

False allegations of abuse must not be tolerated in custody proceedings. Such allegations would stop if the accusing parent faced swift and firm negative consequences for their destructive ploy, such as loss of custody, loss of parenting time, a large fine, or others.

All allegations of abuse must be taken seriously. But during divorce proceedings involving child custody matters, false allegations of abuse can be a major damaging ploy by one parent. They can twist a case into a knot that cannot be easily untied. Yet, a knowledgeable and experienced mental health expert is in a unique position to uncover and expose the falseness of an allegation of abuse.

If believed or left to gain steam, a false allegation of abuse can defeat a parent and set the stage for psychological damage in the child. Falseness must always be combated. The truth must prevail if the child’s ultimate wellbeing is a top priority.

is a clinical and forensic psychologist in private practice in Birmingham, Alabama. He is also clinical associate professor in the department of psychology at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. Dr Blotcky can be reached at alanblotcky@att.net.

How can one parent weaponize allegations of abuse and how can it damage a child’s mental health? 

The Weaponization of False Allegations of Abuse

As a clinical and forensic psychologist, I am often court-appointed or privately retained to conduct psychological/custody evaluations in high-conflict divorce cases. My evaluations in these cases usually take at least 6 months or more to complete. Why? Because longitudinal evaluations are the best way to detect, uncover, and describe complicated family dynamics. Family dynamics can be largely or entirely missed in a one-shot, cross-sectional evaluation. Inaccurate or wrong findings, conclusions, and recommendations can be the unfortunate consequence. A child’s well-being and best interest can be lost if the evaluation is completed too fast with too few information/data points over time.

I have had many cases where important family dynamics did not reveal themselves initially in individual interviews and psychological testing. The goal of any psychological/custody evaluation is to determine the impact of parental and family influences on a child and to make recommendations based on those findings.

 Anything short of that is a missed opportunity and will be unhelpful in a legal proceeding.

Uncovering family dynamics is especially fraught in high-conflict divorces that are, by definition, contentious, adversarial, and prone to obfuscation and falsehoods.

 The surest way to see family dynamics clearly is to experience them in real-time as part of the evaluation process. In essence, the evaluator becomes a watchful spectator of the interactions and maneuvers of the various family members over an extended period of time.

Cross-sectional evaluations usually take 3 or 4 sessions per adult and 2 or 3 sessions per child. They include interviews, psychological testing, review of collateral information, and review of mental health records. Such evaluations can be accomplished in short order, like 2 months. But, all too often, these evaluations are not sufficient to uncover vital family dynamics. They often lack depth and breadth because they are based on limited information collected over a short period of time.

My longitudinal evaluations take at least 6 months and always include the filling in of a timeline of events and behaviors as they are occurring in real time.

 Information for the timeline is collected through many interviews, phone contacts, emails, and text messages. Both parents and children can provide valuable data for the timeline. At the end, a comprehensive picture of the family and its dynamics can be described extensively in vivid color and with texture.

Longitudinal evaluations are especially helpful in suspected cases of parental alienation.

 Since alienating or offending parents never admit to their damaging behavior, it behooves the mental health expert to follow the family over many months to see the sequence of events and behaviors as they unfold in real time. A timeline can be established that reveals the ebb and flow of harmful family maneuvers and behaviors.

Longitudinal evaluations also make sense when false allegations of abuse are a part of the case. In my experience, multiple false allegations during a divorce proceeding are a huge red flag for parental alienation.

 If the evaluation process extends for many months, these false allegations can mount up, clearly showing their role in the alienating process. And “not indicated” or “not substantiated” reports by child protective agencies can mount up as well during the evaluation period.

In court, longitudinal evaluations are robust and compelling. They provide many more data points to be considered in the overall assessment and depiction of the family. It is far easier to describe parental alienation in detail if a longitudinal approach has been taken in the evaluation process. Also, it lends itself to gripping courtroom testimony.

The American Psychological Association has published a report regarding the important features of a child custody evaluation.

 Ethical considerations are always paramount. What is missing in their model is an emphasis on a longitudinal evaluation rather than a cross-sectional one. Perhaps this feature should be added to the American Psychological Association’s model of custody evaluations.

By definition, longitudinal evaluations are much more time-consuming than one-shot assessments. But time should not be the guiding factor in mental health evaluations in high-conflict custody cases. Getting it right is far more important for the child. Taking as much time as needed should be the mantra of a highly helpful evaluation.

Treatment recommendations can be more accurate and specific when a longitudinal approach is taken in the evaluation. Treatment should always follow from diagnosis, and a comprehensive evaluation can set the stage for ongoing interventions that will be both effective and efficient.

In my experience, attorneys and judges make better decisions about custody arrangements when they are provided longitudinal information. Judges seem moved by timelines, documentation, and real-time examples.

There is 1 additional advantage to a longitudinal approach. Sometimes, the evaluation process itself can lead to significant awareness, changes, and resolution. The evaluation itself can be an intervention. In mild cases of parental alienation, for example, the evaluation process can convince the alienating parent to cease his or her damaging behavior, thereby resolving the crisis at hand.

One final note: In some cases of divorce, when parental alienation is not suspected and false allegations of abuse are not present, a one-time, cross-sectional evaluation does make sense. Simpler cases can indeed call for simpler evaluations.

In summary, parental alienation cases need longitudinal evaluations in order to detect and describe the damaging alienating behavior. These cases can be complicated and confusing at the beginning, but the evaluation process can tease out the prominent problematic dynamics in the family. A one-time, cross-sectional assessment can miss powerful and conclusive information in a case.

Assessing for alienation in child custody and access evaluations.

2. Bernet W. Children of high-conflict divorce face many challenges. 

https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/children-high-conflict-divorce-face-many-challenges

3. Blotcky AD. Timelines are a critical tool in cases of false allegations of abuse and parental alienation. 

https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/timelines-are-a-critical-tool-in-cases-of-false-allegations-of-abuse-and-parental-alienation

Parental alienation: the blossoming of a field of study.

Current Directions in Psychological Science

5. Blotcky AD. Child abuse allegations: sorting out lies versus truths. 

https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/child-abuse-allegations-lies-versus-truths

Guidelines for child custody evaluations in family law proceedings

Here’s why longitudinal evaluations in high-conflict divorce cases are critical. 

The Benefits of Longitudinal Evaluations in Parental Alienation Cases

Parental alienation is a pathological phenomenon in high-conflict divorces where 1 parent sabotages a 

child’s relationship with the other parent

. If the offending parent is successful in their mission, the child totally rejects the targeted parent; this would be severe alienation. Mild and moderate alienation involve partial rejection of a parent.



What an alienating parent does not realize is that a child is harmed tremendously by the total or partial loss of a parent. Short-term and long-term negative consequences have been found as a result of a child’s alienation.

 In its severest form, parental alienation is child psychological abuse, as listed in DSM-5.

There are many roadblocks in the diagnosis and treatment of parental alienation.

 An offending parent will vigorously deny being an alienator and confuse others by proclaiming that they are the victim. The alienated child will be strongly allied with the favored parent and claim that they alone have rejected the other parent without coaching or other influence. The alienated child’s attorney—the guardian ad litem (GAL)—often has no mental health training and will accept what the child says at face value, thereby reinforcing the alienation process. The alienating parent’s attorney will unabashedly encourage the alienating behavior because it is a “winning” strategy from a legal viewpoint. Most judges have little understanding of 

and are often swayed by the combined voices of the GAL and the alienating parent’s attorney.

These are a few of the major roadblocks in parental alienation cases. These roadblocks are real and potentially catastrophic to a case. They can interfere with accurate diagnosis, the implementation of appropriate treatment, and ultimate legal decisions that are in the child’s best interest. These roadblocks can turn a case upside-down so that the alienation is missed or dismissed—or, worse yet, that the wrong parent is identified as the alienator and the child is placed, or remains, in the care of an abusive parent.

But these roadblocks can be overcome. 

 cases can be accurately diagnosed, and appropriate treatment can ensue. Here is what needs to happen:

First, the targeted or rejected parent needs to make sure that a forceful attorney and an experienced mental health expert are on the team. Both professionals are critical to success. Neither can win the case alone. The mental health professional must have a strong understanding of the specific family dynamics associated with parental alienation. Without this knowledge base, the mental health professional will be susceptible to making serious errors in the case. This must be avoided by choosing the correct expert.

Second, documentation and a timeline of events and behaviors can be extremely compelling evidence in a parental alienation case. The documentation and timeline can be used by the attorney and mental health expert, especially in the courtroom. Judges pay attention to such evidence.

Third, 

 of abuse must be confronted head-on so that they do not become entrenched and intractable in the case. Often, these allegations are used as weapons by the alienating parent.

 Multiple allegations of abuse during a legal proceeding are a huge red flag for fabrication.

Fourth, specific interventions must be proposed, usually by the mental health expert and the rejected parent’s attorney. Here are the necessary interventions: The alienating parent must have individual therapy, the alienating parent’s attorney must make it clear that the damaging behavior must cease, and the alienated child and rejected parent must have reunification therapy. This is the treatment template in all parental alienation cases.

 All of these interventions must take place. Reunification therapy will fail if the alienating parent’s destructive behavior is not stopped.

Fifth, in severe cases of alienation where there is total rejection of a parent, removal of the child from the alienating parent for some period of time is considered both essential and mandatory. Research and clinical experience show that such removal can be accomplished with excellent results.



Sixth, nothing can sidetrack and undermine a parental alienation case more than enabling attorneys. Their unhelpful roles in the situation must be confronted. The alienating parent’s attorney and the GAL must be informed and guided by the mental health expert’s knowledge, experience, and understanding of the research and clinical literature.

Seventh, custody decisions must be based on accurate, comprehensive information about a family’s real dynamics. Parental alienation must not be overlooked, minimized, or dismissed. It is the goal of the mental health expert and the rejected parent’s attorney to present the true narrative of the alienation process in the family. At times, their voices must be strong and loud.

Eighth, the rejected parent must remain hopeful, determined, and proactive at every step along the way. Defeatism cannot creep in. Passivity is counterproductive. The rejected parent’s passion and love of the child must be the energizing force in uncovering and resolving the parental alienation pathology.

In sum, parental alienation cases can be managed effectively. It requires an experienced and assertive mental health expert, open and thoughtful attorneys, and a truly interested judge. These steps can lead to success. Overcoming parental alienation is within grasp.



is a clinical and forensic psychologist in private practice in Birmingham, Alabama. Dr Blotcky can be reached at

Roadmap for the treatment of parental alienation.

2. Koszyk PM, Bernet W. Treatment and prevention of parental alienation. Psychiatric Times. March 12, 2020. 

3. Blotcky AD, Bernet W. A silent epidemic: Parental alienation in a child is on par with physical and sexual abuse. 

https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/a-silent-epidemic-parental-alienation

4. Blotcky AD, Bernet W. Winning parental alienation cases: A roadmap for family lawyers. 

5. Blotcky AD. False allegations of abuse can be a strategy in child custody litigation. 

https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/false-allegations-of-abuse-can-be-a-strategy-in-child-custody-litigation

In cases of parental alienation, these 8 steps should happen. 

Overcoming Parental Alienation

Cases involving false allegations of abuse and parental alienation call for detailed documentation by the targeted or rejected parent. The purpose of a timeline is to list (1) major events, (2) court filings, (3) verbal and behavioral actions, and (4) external investigations. By plotting out a timeline, one can visualize a sequence of events and behaviors over time—even years. This timeline method is especially useful for parents, mental health experts, and attorneys.

Parental alienation during and after divorce is an all-too-frequent phenomenon. It is where one parent intentionally coerces and manipulates a child to reject his or her other parent.

 Parental alienation is usually a secretive and insidious process that is denied by the offending parent. To be sure, the parent almost never admits to their disruptive and damaging behavior.

False allegations of abuse are often lodged by an alienating parent to sabotage the targeted parent’s relationship with their child. False allegations are a ramping up of the alienating mission of the offending parent. Sometimes, there are multiple allegations of abuse in attempt to throw the other parent under the bus. Offending parents frequently believe that multiple allegations are the best way to sink the targeted parent once and for all.

Compelling evidence of false allegations of abuse and parental alienation can be detected when examining a timeline of events and actions. The sequence of events and actions usually tells the story. For example, we know there are certain major events that are likely to trigger the onset of the process of alienation by 1 parent, such as filing for divorce, filing for full custody, having a close relationship with the child, starting a new romantic relationship, getting remarried, and many others. Alienating behaviors often appear in response to these triggers.

As we know, alienating behavior can take many forms, ranging from bad-mouthing and interfering with parenting time to children calling a parent by his or her first name. Seventeen different behaviors have been described in the literature.

 All alienating behaviors, when detected, can be placed on a timeline and a pattern can be seen.

As Stephen Miller has described, mental health clinicians, attorneys, and judges are prone to make faulty attribution decisions in cases of false allegations and parental alienation.

 This is because the offending parent is often cool, composed, and convincing in demeanor during the divorce proceeding. In contrast, the rejected parent is often anxious, agitated, and angry because they are being rejected by the child. On the surface, then, the offending parent is often successful at convincing attorneys, judges, and others that his or her narrative is correct. This results in a fundamental attribution error—a major mistake that can have catastrophic consequences in the decision-making in a case. This makes a detailed timeline of events and behaviors even more crucial for the targeted parent.

Timelines can be introduced in testimony in court. They can be displayed on a big-screen TV so that all parties and the judge can view them. Mental health experts and others can testify about the timelines and their implications. Timelines are an excellent way to present documentation in a child custody matter. Displaying them in court usually captures the judge’s or jury’s attention. It is the perfect method for combining visual and auditory modalities in a presentation.

Mental health experts play a vital role in cases of false allegations of abuse and parental alienation. Compelling evidence and opinions need to be presented in an understandable yet forceful manner. Timelines fit that bill.

is a clinical and forensic psychologist in private practice in Birmingham, Alabama. He can be reached at alanblotcky@att.net.

1. Blotcky AD. False allegations of abuse during divorce: the role of alienating beliefs. 

2. Blotcky AD. False allegations of abuse can be a strategy in child custody litigation. 

Surviving Parental Alienation: A Journey of Hope and Healing

4. Miller SG. Clinical reasoning and decision making in cases of child alignment: diagnostic and therapeutic issues. In: Baker AJL, Sauber SR, eds. 

Working With Alienated Children and Families: A Clinical Guidebook.

Timelines can assist mental health experts in cases of false allegations of abuse. 

Timelines are a Critical Tool in Cases of False Allegations of Abuse and Parental Alienation 

The recent jail escape of inmate Casey White, with the help of the Alabama corrections officer Vicki White, not biologically related to each other, caught the attention of society and triggered my own experience while working part-time in a medium security Wisconsin prison.

Casey White was facing prior murder charges and Vicki White was due to receive an employee of the year award. It was reported that they were having some sort of personal relationship for a couple of years. After 11 days on the run, they were caught and Vicki White apparently committed suicide, while Casey White was taken back into custody.

Over 10 years ago in the prison I served part-time, a nurse that I worked with apparently fell in love with a prisoner and was caught assisting him in various ways, including sexually. She was arrested at her house during a staff holiday party, while he was sent to a more secure prison.

Attempts to explain these happenings are fascinating, but difficult because of their rarity. One possible explanation is that this one is a variation of Stockholm syndrome.

A criminologist and psychiatrist named it after a 1973 bank robbery in Sweden. During the 6-day standoff with police, many of the captive employees counterintuitively became so sympathetic toward the robbers, that after being freed, many refused to testify against them and raised money for their release. There have been many notable repetitions of this scenario since, including that in 1974 Patty Hearst became sympathetic to her captors, the Symbionese Liberation Army. Interestingly, and connected to an environment of incarceration, the Stanford prison research project on students led by the psychologist Philip Zimbardo clearly showed the tendency to identify with and obey an authority figure, even in a known pretend situation.1

Positive feelings toward abusers seem to be a survival and coping skill. It is almost like the mind trickily turned the trauma into togetherness.

Though noted first in a hostage situation, a similar psychological process often occurs in other more common situations where the victims are at risk from those in authority. These situations include various types of abuse, including sexual, physical, emotional, and training, human sex trafficking, and cults. In this jail escape, it is actually not clear who was in fact the psychological authority figure and who the victim. Treatment can involve psychotherapy, but the key is prevention, which essentially consists of realizing when one might be put into abusive danger by someone in authority, or to try to get out as early as possible.

is an award-winning psychiatrist who has specialized in the cultural and ethical aspects of psychiatry. A prolific writer and speaker, he received the one-time designation of Hero of Public Psychiatry from the Assembly of the American Psychiatric Association in 2002. He is an advocate for mental health issues relate to climate instability, burnout, Islamophobia, and anti-Semitism for a better world. He serves on the Editorial Board of

The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil

Positive feelings toward abusers: a survival and coping skill?

Stockholm Syndrome and the Jail Escape

The National Commission on Correctional Health Care (NCCHC) Virtual Spring Conference on Correctional Health Care will offer educational sessions on medical care, substance abuse disorder treatment, suicide prevention, and other critical mental health topics. The conferences will be held in Atlanta on April 9-12 and virtually on May 4-5.

The Spring Conference features 50 competitively selected educational sessions for health care professionals working in jails, prisons, and juvenile detention facilities. The Virtual Spring Conference includes  highlights from the live conference as well as online-only exclusive sessions. Topics of special interest to psychiatrists include sessions on medication-assisted treatment for opioid use disorder, fetal alcohol spectrum disorders, mental health standards of care, consent laws for juveniles, traumatic brain injury, and how correctional officers can support 

“Mental health and substance abuse treatment are critical topis for correctional health professionals. Our Spring programs will help every professional get needed education, no matter where they are located,” said NCCHC CEO Deborah Ross, CCHP. Ross notes that “while many want to attend in person, staffing levels and budgets are very tight in some locations.”

For more information or to register, visit 

Mental health and medical care are the focus of the upcoming NCCHC in-person and virtual conferences on correctional health care.



Correctional Health Care Conferences Focus on Mental and Medical Health Care

False allegations of abuse are often made during contentious child custody cases. One parent believes that he or she will gain leverage in the case by lodging an allegation of abuse against the other parent. More often than not, the allegation of abuse is a tactic used to alienate the child from the targeted parent. In other words, it is part of parental alienation. A number of steps can be taken by the targeted parent to beat the false allegation of abuse. The following are suggestions to share with patients, as appropriate.

Collect as much documentation as possible to disprove the allegation, including emails, text messages, recordings, pictures, legal filings, investigations, and more. Documentation is compelling to a judge because it is tangible and understandable.

Develop a timeline that shows the sequence of events leading up to the false allegation. What has triggered it? What legal advantage is the person trying to achieve by lodging a false allegation now? A timeline can often uncover the motivation for a false allegation of abuse, and can be presented in court.

Hire an attorney who is proactive, aggressive, and experienced in cases of false allegations and parental alienation. Research and then interview several attorneys before making a decision. An excellent attorney can help win a case; a poor or inexperienced attorney can help lose it.

Hire a mental health expert who can address false allegations, parental alienation, and the particular facts in a case. An expert is invaluable in putting together the narrative and presenting it during testimony in court. A forensic psychologist or a forensic psychiatrist is best equipped to help.

Stay calm and collected and do not say or do things that make you look angry, defensive, deceitful, or guilty.

Do not waiver in your resolve to defeat the false allegation of abuse. A combination of persistence and patience is needed. The legal process can be slow.

As the case progresses, expect further false allegations, especially if the first allegation did not get much traction. It is common for the perpetrator of a false allegation to lodge more of them over time.

Be proactive and assertive in discussing the false allegation with the child’s attorney. That attorney needs to understand fully that the allegation is false.

Typically, a false allegation of abuse leads the offending parent to get the child involved in therapy with a therapist who is sympathetic to that parent’s narrative. If possible, talk with the child’s therapist to set the record straight about the falseness of the allegation.

Gather as much information as possible on the offending parent and his or her motivation in lodging a false allegation. Subpoena relevant records.

In most cases, the false allegation of abuse is part of a parental alienation process. The intent is to disrupt the child’s relationship with the targeted parent, and the false allegation is being used to carry out that mission. The goal is to throw the targeted parent under the bus so that his or her relationship with the child is curtailed or severed. As such, parental alienation may be the core problem in the case.

To be sure, a false allegation of abuse by a parent should be met with negative consequences in court. Loss of primary custody, limited parenting time, supervised visits, court ordered therapy, and/or a financial fine are just a few of the possible consequences. If consequences are imposed, false allegations would stop.

These steps are important in beating a false allegation of abuse. These steps can be compelling and successful. The targeted parent must be proactive, aggressive, and determined in forming their team, collecting documentation, and firmly presenting the truth.

 is a clinical and forensic psychologist in private practice in Birmingham, Alabama. His specialty is false allegations of abuse and parental alienation. He is also clinical associate professor in the department of psychology at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. He can be reached at 

Here’s a step-by-step guide of how to beat false allegations of child abuse. 

Guiding Patients: Beating False Allegations of Abuse in Child Custody Cases 

Nothing is more adversarial and contentious than a child custody battle during a divorce proceeding. A sad example of this is when 1 parent lodges a false allegation of abuse against the other parent in an attempt to win custody of their child. Such parents believe that an allegation of abuse will give them a leg up in the custody litigation.

Making a false allegation of abuse is often a strategy or tactic. It is a cynical yet powerful move. It is an attempt to alienate the child from the targeted parent by undermining or even ending their relationship. To be sure, alienation of a child from a parent is considered a form of psychological abuse.

I have handled hundreds of child custody cases. A sizable number of these cases have involved false allegations of abuse as a strategy or tactic. Professionals involved in child custody cases—attorneys, guardians ad litem, mediators, parent coordinators, judges, and mental health experts—are often perplexed and confused by a false allegation of abuse. Rather than handling the situation effectively and efficiently, such professionals often make matters worse by overreacting or underreacting.

A false allegation of abuse in a child custody matter must be handled correctly. Careful documentation of the falseness of the allegation is critical. Beyond that, adding a mental health expert to the litigation team becomes imperative. This expert must be knowledgeable, experienced, and proactive in his or her approach to the case. A false allegation of abuse must be taken seriously. Otherwise, a lackadaisical approach may imply that the allegation is true or partially true.

False allegations of abuse can be simple or complicated or even bizarre. If the parent is determined to wreak havoc, a criminal charge against the targeted parent might be pursued. Child protective agencies are almost always contacted by the offending parent.

False allegations of abuse in custody matters are an all-too-common phenomenon. They must be handled firmly and decisively by the targeted parent and his or her litigation team. A mental health expert can add much wisdom, energy, and knowledge to the navigation of such a case.

To see more on false allegations, read “

False Allegations of Abuse During Divorce: The Role of Alienating Beliefs

 is a clinical and forensic psychologist in private practice in Birmingham, Alabama. His specialty is false allegations of abuse and parental alienation. He can be reached at 

Child custody battles can get contentious. Here’s how to handle false allegations. 

False Allegations of Abuse Can Be a Strategy in Child Custody Litigation

(This is the final part of a 3-part series. The first 2 pieces discussed undue influence models as well as research assessing a new proposed framework—Ed.)

Does the Behavior, Information, Thought, and Emotional (BITE) Model of Authoritarian Control, a new framework for evaluating undue influence, offer a statistically valid new construct called authoritarian control? The 4 components have statistically shown that the BITE model of behavior, information, thought, and emotional control boils down to nearly 1 factor: authoritarian control.

 requires mention of concerns that arose from Theodor W. Adorno’s original Authoritarian Personality study with its f-scale of authoritarianism.

 Adorno used psychoanalytic groundwork and focused on individual personality. The BITE model does not look at a person’s susceptibility, although this is an important focus within the Social Influence Model (SIM) proposed by Alan W. Scheflin, JD. The BITE model offers a way to evaluate the social-psychological and behavioral forces exerted on individuals to recruit them and retain their membership.

Furthermore, there was criticism that the Adorno research was aimed at individuals who were politically right-of-center and not politically left-of-center. The Influence Continuum and BITE models posit that there can be authoritarian control in any kind of relationship or political orientation—right, left, religious, psychotherapy, or multi-level marketing (MLM)—as long as the group relies on using these components as policy.

The BITE model of authoritarian control is primarily a social psychological, behavioral construct that offers a unique way to analyze healthy and unhealthy influence. Out of 1044 participants, 79.32% belonged to the United States, and 20.68% belonged to other countries like Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, Spain, and so forth.

The majority of participants—67%—were female, and 32% were male. Similarly, most participants were educated and employed; 41% went to college, and 30% had a master’s or a doctoral degree. Seventy percent of participants had either full-time or part-time employment, while approximately 30% of the population was unemployed, retired, or disabled. The white/Caucasian population was the majority in answering the survey with a total of 90%; approximately 2% were Black/African Americans and 5% of multiple ethnicities. Ninety-nine percent of people were comfortable answering the survey in the English language.

A large percentage of individuals—around 60%—were born or raised in a high-control organization. Most respondents belonged to the Jehovah’s Witnesses, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, Mormonism, Scientology, People of Praise, Humanism/Atheism, Christianity, and MLM groups. Although MLM groups have BITE model issues, fringe members would not likely experience high control. However, a percentage of individuals become consumed and then will invest most of their time and money in recruiting and indoctrination seminars, audiotapes, and books. In Part 2 of this series, demographics like the Boy Scouts, Christianity, and atheists were discussed, although none of which have either the pyramid structure or concerning BITE model criteria.

Although the BITE model has served people for more than 30 years in their exit of controlling relationships and groups, the study presented in this series is the first quantitative study that offers a scientific basis, which might prove useful for examining undue influence in judicial settings. Interestingly, most respondents were raised in only 2 groups: the Mormons or the Jehovah’s Witnesses. Because our sample was a convenience sample, the generalizability of the results is limited.

Controversial groups like authoritarian cults are challenging to study due to the nature of the authoritarian control. Members are either kept away from objective researchers or are coached in responding to questions. Former members often do not fully appreciate they left an authoritarian group, as even though they have exited—by running away, by being kicked out, or through intervention counseling—they still carry the indoctrination.

The BITE model and the Influence Continuum have a more than 30-year history of helping individuals worldwide realize that they were not in a healthy relationship or group. Using the BITE model of authoritarian control in conjunction with Scheflin’s Social Influence Model (SIM), expert witnesses can deliver a detailed, easy-to-understand analysis of social influence to judges and juries, and the court can overcome the slippery slope objection. The authoritarian control construct can be utilized on a case-by-case basis, and hopefully help establish a new legal precedent. The SIM framework offers this structure, which can be applied relative to many different cases. Of course, the jury or judge will decide if there was exploitation by an influencer over an influencee.

Schein’s model is used to describe the phenomenon of political or cult thought reform, coercive persuasion, or brainwashing. All the concepts and problematic behaviors are fundamentally anchored within the BITE and Influence Continuum models. Additionally, the California law regarding undue influence as it applied to the elderly was discussed and aligns with the authoritarian control BITE model. The federal trafficking law criteria fit the BITE model, and the UK laws against coercive control include the construct of the BITE model.

Undue Influence for the Elderly, California Law. 

California probate law considers undue influence focused on the elderly to be a violation of their human rights. In 2010, a thorough research report on undue influence was prepared for the Borchard Foundation Center for Law and Aging.

 The project director, Mary Joy Quinn, RN, MA, wrote “Defining Undue Influence” in 

Evaluating a new framework for evaluating undue influence and its implications for elder abuse and human trafficking cases.

Forensic Psychiatry