One is True – The Other is False
~ Dr Craig Childress
This is the standard mental health response to all forms of child abuse. This is the standard mental health response to physical child abuse. This is the standard mental health response to sexual child abuse. This is the standard mental health response to psychological child abuse. Diagnosis guides treatment.
Pathogenic parenting that is creating significant developmental pathology in the child (diagnostic indicator 1), personality disorder pathology in the child (diagnostic indicator 2), and delusional-psychiatric pathology in the child (diagnostic indicator 3) in order to meet the emotional and psychological needs of the parent represents a DSM-5 diagnosis of V995.51 Child Psychological Abuse, Confirmed.
An attachment-based model of “parental alienation” (AB-PA) provides an immediate solution to “parental alienation” right now, today. Diagnosis guides treatment.
So why are any “parental alienation” experts still holding on to the false and failed Gardnerian PAS model for the pathology? Beats me.
There is no scientifically or rationally based reason to hold on to the failed and false Gardnerian PAS model for the pathology. It makes no sense whatsoever.
You will know which model the mental health professional is using by the diagnostic indicators they use to define the pathology; the eight diagnostic indicators of Gardnerian PAS, or the three diagnostic indicators of attachment-based “parental alienation” (AB-PA)
So let me propose this challenge to any “parental alienation” expert who still uses the eight Gardnerian symptoms to define the pathology:
I propose that we have an online debate regarding the respective models. We can jointly set up a WordPress blog and each of us can then post our opening position. We can then take turns posting blogs and commenting on the other’s blog posts, creating a documented record of the discussion.
My position is that the continued use of the Gardnerian PAS model delays the solution to “parental alienation,” and that the sooner we stop using the Gardnerian PAS model and the sooner we switch to an attachment-based model (AB-PA), the sooner we will have the solution; as soon as today, right this instant.
My position is that we need to put a bullet in the brain of Gardnerian PAS because Gardnerian PAS needs to die as an active definition of the pathology.
Disagree? Let’s debate. WordPress. I’m ready. This is an open challenge to any “parental alienation” expert who is continuing to use the Gardnerian PAS model. Email me with the heading – “Debate Challenge Accepted” – and we can set up the joint WordPress blog.
Craig Childress, Psy.D.
Clinical Psychologist, PSY 18857
Over the years I have been most inspired by the work of Omar and David Inguanzo from their group Children’s Rights and would call o all like mined folk to join us and make the break through 3000th member by this Easter!
Along with other campaigners such as Donald Tenn, David Carlin, Anthony Lemons, Second Class Citizen.org and many more who know the massive challenges that still lie ahead through out the USA. Here in the UK there seems a modest groundswell towards reform and feel I would like to see this hope extended to other associated fighting for justice in Family Courts and reforming child welfare organisations to start acting as they are expected to !
Along with everyone throughout the USA I would call on those in Canada, UK, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, Greece…….and beyond to use this group as an umbrella organisation to promote our causes generate information not only among ourselves but that can be lobbied through the media , local and national press and radio ,and onto our reluctant political masters!