Authors' Note: The research reported in this Commentary was made possible by a grant to the first author from the Amini Foundation for the Study of Affects.
REJOINDER TO GARDNER'S “COMMENTARY ON KELLY AND JOHNSTON'S ‘THE ALIENATED CHILD: A REFORMULATION OF PARENTAL ALIENATION SYNDROME’”
Version of Record online: 15 MAR 2005
Family Court Review
Volume 42, Issue 4, pages 622–628, October 2004
How to Cite
Johnston, J. R. and Kelly, J. B. (2004), REJOINDER TO GARDNER'S “COMMENTARY ON KELLY AND JOHNSTON'S ‘THE ALIENATED CHILD: A REFORMULATION OF PARENTAL ALIENATION SYNDROME’”. Family Court Review, 42: 622–628. doi: 10.1111/j.174-1617.2004.tb01328.x
- Issue online: 15 MAR 2005
- Version of Record online: 15 MAR 2005
- high-conflict divorce;
- child custody;
- parental alienation syndrome
In this reply to Richard Gardner, we outline our points of disagreement with his formulation of parental alienation syndrome (PAS), showing that his focus on the alienating parent as the primary cause of children's negative attitudes and rejecting behavior toward the other parent is overly simplistic and not supported by findings from recent empirical research. It follows that we strongly object to Gardner's recommendations for legal and mental health interventions with alienated children as well as the use of the term PAS when referring to this problem.