‘Parental Alienation’ as a Form of Emotional Abuse: Should English Law Recognise it as a Form of Coercive Control?
Author: Izuchukwu Nzeukwu – Anglia Ruskin University
INTRODUCTION
In recent years, parental alienation has emerged as a contentious issue in family law, often at the heart of high-conflict custody disputes. Described as the manipulation of a child by one parent to reject the other, parental alienation can inflict severe emotional harm on both the alienated parent and the child, disrupting the fundamental parent-child bond. (1) According to a 2023 Children and Family Courts Advisory and Support Service (CAFCASS) report, allegations of parental alienation feature in over 30% of contentious child arrangement cases, (2) yet English law lacks a clear framework to address this phenomenon effectively. (3) While behaviours linked to parental alienation bear striking similarities to coercive control—such as manipulation, isolation, and fear (4)—its ambiguous definition and evidentiary challenges leave courts grappling with how to adjudicate such claims fairly. (5) The Serious Crimes Act 2015 (6) recognises coercive control as a criminal offence, (7) as reinforced by the Domestic Abuse Act 2021. (8) Still, its scope does not explicitly extend to alienating behaviours in family disputes, leaving a significant gap in legal protections. (9) This essay argues that parental alienation should be recognised as a form of coercive control under English family law, but doing so requires addressing the term’s definitional ambiguity, the burden of proof, the practical challenges of implementation and recognising that reform is essential not only to safeguard children from psychological harm but also to promote justice and fairness in the family courts.
THE LEGAL LANDSCAPE
English family law prioritises the welfare of children above all else, as enshrined in the Children Act 1989. (10) Section 1(1) of the Act establishes the paramountcy principle, requiring courts to prioritise the child’s best interests when resolving disputes over parental responsibility and child arrangements. (11) Emotional harm is explicitly recognised as a factor in determining a child’s welfare under Section 31(2)(a), (12) yet the Act does not explicitly define or address behaviours associated with parental alienation. Consequently, the judiciary often struggles to evaluate whether allegations of alienation meet the threshold for emotional harm, leaving significant room for subjective interpretation as evident in Re A and B (Children: Parental Alienation) (No. 5). (13)
The Domestic Abuse Act 2021 (14) provides a more modern approach to addressing non-physical abuse by criminalising coercive and controlling behaviours in intimate or family relationships (15), additionally enshrined in section 76 of the Serious Crimes Act 2015. (16) While this legislation represents progress in recognising emotional manipulation as a form of harm, its provisions focus primarily on adult relationships and fail to account for alienating behaviours that manifest between parents and children during custody disputes. This gap in statutory protections underscores the limitations of existing legal frameworks in addressing parental alienation.
Judicial engagement with parental alienation has largely developed primarily through case law. In Re S (Parental Alienation: Cult) (17), the Court of Appeal identified severe alienating behaviours where a child had been manipulated to reject their father due to the mother’s undue influence. The court emphasised that ‘alienation’ could constitute emotional harm under the Children Act 1989, (18) but outcomes remain inconsistent due to the absence of a statutory definition as evident in a more recent case: Re L (A Child). (19) Critics argue that the term ‘parental alienation’ itself is too ambiguous, encompassing a spectrum of behaviours ranging from intentional manipulation to more subtle forms of estrangement that may arise unintentionally. (20) This lack of clarity risks overgeneralisation and misuse, as alienation claims could be weaponised in custody disputes, particularly where legitimate concerns about abuse or neglect are present. (21)
Furthermore, the Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020 marks a significant shift in English family law by removing the fault-based grounds for divorce and encouraging the minimisation of conflict. (22) This legislation reflects a broader policy objective of reducing litigation in family disputes. (23) However, introducing parental alienation claims into the courts may appear at odds with this goal, as such allegations often lead to protracted, adversarial proceedings. Reconciling these conflicting priorities—minimising litigation while addressing the psychological harm caused by alienation— presents a significant challenge for policymakers. The question remains whether parental alienation should be formally incorporated into existing legislation or whether its regulation risks creating more problems than it resolves.
PARENTAL ALIENATION AS COERCIVE CONTROL
The dynamics of parental alienation bear striking similarities to coercive control, as recognised under the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 (24) as well as the Serious Crimes Act. (25) Coercive control involves patterns of behaviour that manipulate, isolate, and dominate, often leaving victims emotionally dependent and psychologically harmed. (26) Psychological studies have demonstrated that alienating parents use similar tactics, including isolating the child from the other parent, fostering fear or distrust, and manipulating the child’s perception of reality. (27) These behaviours result in long-term emotional harm to the child, such as identity confusion, anxiety, and depression, while simultaneously inflicting psychological distress on the alienated parent. (28) Scholars like Dr Jennifer Harman argue that parental alienation represents a form of family-based coercive control, as it subverts the autonomy of both the child and the targeted parent. (29) This theoretical link strengthens the case for its recognition as a form of emotional abuse under English law, particularly given the judiciary’s growing awareness of the psychological consequences of coercive behaviours.
Other jurisdictions provide valuable insights into how parental alienation might be addressed within a legal framework. In Brazil, for example, parental alienation is explicitly recognised under the Parental Alienation Act 2010, which defines it as interference in the child’s ‘psychological formation’ that undermines their relationship with one parent. (30) The legislation provides specific examples of alienating behaviours, such as unfounded accusations against the targeted parent or obstructing contact. (31) Similarly, in Canada, courts have taken a proactive stance in cases involving alienation, often appointing parenting coordinators or mandating reunification therapy to mitigate harm. (32) Australia, through its Family Law Act 1975, has focused on shared parenting as a means to reduce alienation, promoting equal involvement of both parents post-separation. (33) These approaches underscore the importance of statutory clarity and proactive interventions, which English law currently lacks. Incorporating lessons from these jurisdictions could provide a roadmap for reform, ensuring that alienating behaviours are recognised and addressed without exacerbating family conflict.
The case for criminalising parental alienation under English law rests on its alignment with the principles of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021. (34) Clear definitions of alienating behaviours, akin to Brazil’s statutory approach, would be essential to avoid overreach or misuse of the term. Criminalisation could act as a deterrent, discouraging manipulative behaviours during custody disputes and signalling that such actions constitute serious harm. (35) However, criminalisation must be coupled with safeguards to ensure that genuine alienation claims are substantiated by robust evidence. (36) Without clear definitions and evidentiary standards, there is a risk that courts could become entangled in protracted and contentious litigation. (37) Nonetheless, recognising parental alienation as a form of coercive control would reflect the evolving understanding of psychological abuse in family law, protecting children and parents from its damaging effects. (38)
Despite growing recognition of parental alienation, its status as a legal concept remains highly contentious. Critics argue that the term lacks a precise definition, making it vulnerable to subjective interpretation and potential misuse in family courts. (39) Some experts, such as Joan Meier, caution that parental alienation claims are frequently invoked in custody disputes, sometimes to discredit allegations of domestic abuse. (40) This concern is particularly relevant in cases where a parent, often the mother, raises concerns about coercive control or physical abuse, only to face counterclaims of alienation. (41) The absence of a universally accepted definition as well as a statutory definition exacerbates these issues, as behaviours labelled as alienation can range from overt psychological manipulation to natural estrangement due to pre-existing parental conflict. (42) If English law were to incorporate parental alienation as a formal legal concept, it would need to ensure that it is not used to override legitimate concerns about safeguarding and child welfare. (43)
A significant challenge in addressing parental alienation within the legal system is the evidentiary burden required to prove it. Unlike physical abuse, which can be corroborated by medical reports or witness testimony, alienation is often difficult to quantify. Courts must rely on expert assessments, psychological evaluations, and patterns of behaviour over time to determine whether a child’s rejection of a parent is the result of manipulation or a genuine response to that parent’s behaviour. (44) However, expert testimony in family cases is not always consistent, and judges may struggle to distinguish between justified estrangement and deliberate alienation. (45) This evidentiary uncertainty creates the risk of inconsistent rulings, where courts may either fail to protect a genuinely alienated parent or, conversely, force a child to maintain contact with an abusive parent. (46) Without clear legal indicators, allegations of parental alienation can devolve into “he said, she said” disputes, making it challenging for courts to reach fair and decisive outcomes.
Given these evidentiary difficulties, establishing tangible criteria for proving parental alienation is essential. One approach is to adopt a structured framework similar to Brazil’s Parental Alienation Act 2010, which provides a list of specific alienating behaviours, such as persistent denigration of the other parent, obstruction of communication, and false allegations of abuse without evidence. (47) Courts could also rely on a pattern-based assessment, where multiple factors—such as sudden changes in the child’s behaviour, refusal of contact without clear justification, and corroborated expert evaluations—are required before an alienation claim is upheld (12). (48) Additionally, judicial training on recognising the psychological indicators of alienation could help ensure more consistent application of the law. (49)
Finally, the risk of tit-for-tat litigation presents a significant challenge. If parental alienation claims become too easily admissible, they could be weaponised by high-conflict parents seeking to prolong custody battles. (50) To prevent this, courts should prioritise early intervention measures, such as mediation and family therapy, before escalating cases to adversarial proceedings. (51) A court-appointed child welfare expert could also be tasked with assessing the family dynamics before a case reaches litigation. (52) By promoting non-litigious resolutions while maintaining clear legal safeguards, English family law can strike a balance between recognising parental alienation and preventing its misuse in custody disputes.
PROPOSALS FOR REFORM
To address the complexities of parental alienation in English law, legislative reform is necessary to provide clearer definitions and structured legal responses. One approach is to amend the Children Act 1989 to explicitly recognise alienating behaviours as a form of emotional harm under Section 31(2)(a), (53) ensuring that courts consistently consider these behaviours when determining child arrangements. Similarly, expanding the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 (54) as well as the Serious Crimes Act 2015 (55) to include parental alienation under coercive control provisions would align it with the legal recognition of psychological abuse in intimate relationships. Amendments to the Family Law Act 1996 (56) and the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 (57) could further reinforce protections by introducing statutory guidelines for identifying and addressing alienation in family court proceedings. These reforms would provide a clear legal framework, reducing ambiguity and ensuring a more consistent judicial approach. (58)
In addition to legislative amendments, judicial guidelines should be developed to establish standardised assessments for parental alienation claims. Courts could adopt a multi-factor test, requiring evidence of persistent denigration, unjustified rejection of a parent, and corroborated expert evaluations before a finding of alienation is made. Judicial training programmes should also be introduced to improve the ability of judges to distinguish between legitimate alienation and justified estrangement. Additionally, Lord Justice McFarlane has emphasised the need for judicial awareness of coercive control and its impact on children, reinforcing the necessity for specialised training in alienation cases. (59)
Given the adversarial nature of parental alienation disputes, mediation and therapy should be prioritised as first-line interventions before litigation. (60) Court-mandated family therapy could help restore parent-child relationships while reducing prolonged legal battles. (61) Additionally, technology could play a crucial role in simplifying alienation cases by using AI-assisted analysis of communication patterns between parents and children, as well as digital record-keeping to track behavioural changes over time. By integrating legal, psychological, and technological reforms, English family law can more effectively address parental alienation while minimising conflict and safeguarding child welfare.
CONCLUSION
Parental alienation closely mirrors coercive control, employing manipulation, isolation, and psychological abuse to sever the bond between a child and a parent. Given its severe emotional impact, this essay has argued that English law should formally recognise parental alienation as a form of emotional abuse, integrating it into existing legal frameworks. Addressing parental alienation is not just a legal necessity but a societal imperative. Failure to act leaves children vulnerable to lasting psychological harm and perpetuates unfair custody outcomes. However, legal reform must strike a balance—protecting alienated parents while preventing the misuse of allegations in family disputes. Mediation, judicial training, and technological innovations can help modernise the legal approach while reducing adversarial litigation. Policymakers and the judiciary must take urgent steps to align family law with contemporary psychological understanding, ensuring that children’s best interests remain at the heart of legal decision-making.
Footnotes
(1) Jennifer J Harman, Edward Kruk, Denise A Hines, and Dolores Albarracín, ‘Parental Alienating Behaviours: An Unacknowledged Form of Family Violence’ (2018) 144(12) Psychology Bulletin 1275.
(2) ‘DVA130 – Evidence on Domestic Abuse’ (UK Parliament) accessed 25 January 2025.
(3) Meland Eivind, Furuholmen Dag and Jahanlu David, ‘Parental Alienation – A Valid Experience?’ (2024) 52 Scandinavian Journal of Public Health 598.
(4) Jennifer J Harman, William Bernet, and Joseph Harman, ‘Parental Alienation: The Blossoming of a Field of Study’ (2019) 28(4) Current Directions in Psychological Science: A Journal of the American Psychological Society 212.
(5) Lord Justice McFarlane, ‘Speech by Lord Justice McFarlane: Families Need Fathers Conference 2018’ (Families Need Fathers Conference, London, June 2018).
(6) Serious Crimes Act 2015.
(7) Serious Crimes Act 2015, s 76.
(8) Domestic Abuse Act 2021, s 1(3)(c).
(9) Adrienne Barnett, ‘A Genealogy of Hostility: Parental Alienation in England Wales’ (2020) 42(1) The Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law 18.
(10) Children Act 1989.
(11) Children Act 1989, s 1(1).
(12) Children Act 1989, s 31(2)(a).
(13) Re A and B (Children: Parental Alienation) (No. 5) [2023] EWHC 1864 (Fam).
(14) Domestic Abuse Act 2021.
(15) Domestic Abuse Act 2021, s 1(3)(c).
(16) Serious Crimes Act 2015, s 76.
(17) Re S (Parental Alienation: Cult) [2020] EWCA Civ 568.
(18) Children Act 1989, s 31(2)(a),
(19) Re L (A Child) [2023] 1 WLR 1234.
(20) Nigel Lowe, Gillian Douglas, Emma Hitchings, and Rachel Taylor, Bromley’s Family Law (12th edn, Oxford University Press 2021) 466.
(21) Adrienne Barnett, (n 9).
(22) Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020, s 1.
(23) Megan Griffin, ‘Children Arrangements and No-Fault Divorce’ (Vardags, 6 April 2022) accessed 26 January 2025.
(24) Domestic Abuse Act 2021, s 1(3)(c).
(25) Serious Crime Act 2015, s 76.
(26) Evan Stark, Coercive Control: How Men Entrap Women in Personal Life (2nd edn, Oxford University Press 2024) 205.
(27) Jennifer Harman and Zeynep Biringen, ‘Parents Acting Badly: Parental Alienation in the Context of HighConflict Divorces’ (2016) 5 The Oxford Handbook of Evolutionary Perspectives on Violence, Homicide, and War 257.
(28) Richard A Warshak, ‘Parental Alienation: Overview, Management, Intervention, and Practice Tips’ (2015) 28(1) Journal of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers 181, 188.
(29) Jennifer J Harman and others (n 1).
(30) Parental Alienation Act 2010 (Brazil), 12.318/2010, art 2.
(31) Mauro Paulino and Ana Almeida, ‘Parental Alienation: Legal and Psychological Perspectives’ (2018) 12 International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family 98.
(32) Nicholas Bala and Suzanne Hunt, ‘Parental Alienation: Canadian Court Cases 1989–2008’ (2010) 48 Family Court Review 164.
(33) Family Law Act 1975 (Australia), s 60CC (2).
(34) Evan Stark, ‘Coercive Control as a Framework for Responding to Male Partner Abuse in the UK’ (2012) 21 Child and Family Law Quarterly 83.
(35) Andrew Schepard, ‘Reforming the Law of Parental Alienation: A Legislative Perspective’ (2021) 45 Family Law Quarterly 98.
(36) Re L (A Child) [2023] 1 WLR 1234.
(37) Gillian Douglas and Nigel Lowe, Bromley’s Family Law (11th edn, Oxford University Press 2021) 472.
(38) Emma Katz, ‘Coercive Control: Reflections on Gendered Power and Parental Alienation’ (2021) 43 Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law 54.
(39) Joan S Meier, ‘Denial of Family Violence in Court: An Empirical Analysis and Path Forward for Family Law’ (2020) 110 Georgetown Law Journal 835.
(40) Joan S Meier and Sean Dickson, ‘Mapping Gender: Shedding Empirical Light on Family Courts’ Treatment of Cases Involving Abuse and Alienation’ (2017) 35 Journal of Law & Inequality 311.
(41) Emma Katz, Anna Nikupeteri, and Merja Laitinen, ‘When Coercive Control Continues to Harm Children: Post-Separation Fathering, Stalking, and Domestic Violence’ (2020) 29(4) Child Abuse Review 310.
(42) Nicholas Bala, Suzanne Hunt, and Carolyn McCarney (n 32).
(43) Re H-B (Contact) [2015] EWCA Civ 389, [2015] 2 FLR 1171 per Lord Justice McFarlane.
(44) Lord Justice McFarlane, ‘Speech by Lord Justice McFarlane: Families Need Fathers Conference 2018’ (Families Need Fathers Conference, London, June 2018).
(45) Re S (Parental Alienation: Cult) [2020] EWCA Civ 568 per Lord Justice Peter Jackson.
(46) Re L (A Child) [2023] 1 WLR 1234.
(47) Parental Alienation Act 2010 (Brazil), 12.318/2010, art 2.
(48) Mauro Paulino and Ana Almeida (n 31).
(49) Andrew Schepard (n 35).
(50) Gillian Douglas and Nigel Lowe (n 37) 472.
(51) Kathleen M. Reay (2015), ‘Family reflections: A promising therapeutic program designed to treat severely alienated children and their family system’ (2015) 43(2) American Journal of Family Therapy 43(2) 197.
(52) Richard A Warshak, ‘Reclaiming Parent–Child Relationships: Outcomes of Family Bridges with Alienated Children’ (2018) (60)8 Journal of Divorce and Remarriage 645.
(53) Children Act 1989, s 31(2)(a).
(54) Domestic Abuse Act 2021, s 1(3)(c).
(55) Serious Crimes Act 2015, s 76(1).
(56) Family Law Act 1996.
(57) Children and Young Persons Act 1933.
(58) Gillian Douglas and Nigel Lowe (n 37) 475.
(59) Lord Justice McFarlane, ‘Speech by Lord Justice McFarlane: Families Need Fathers Conference 2018’ (Families Need Fathers Conference, London, June 2018).
(60) Andrew Schepard (n 35).
(61) Nicholas Bala, Suzanne Hunt, and Carolyn McCarney (n 32).
Bibliography
Table of Cases
• Re S (Parental Alienation: Cult) [2020] EWCA Civ 568
• Re A and B (Children: Parental Alienation) (No. 5) [2023] EWHC 1864 (Fam)
• Re L (A Child) [2023] 1 WLR 1234
• Re H-B (Contact) [2015] EWCA Civ 389, [2015] 2 FLR 1171
Table of Legislation
Domestic Statutes
• Children Act 1989
• Children and Young Persons Act 1933
• Domestic Abuse Act 2021
• Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020
• Family Law Act 1996
• Serious Crimes Act 2015
International Legislation
• Family Law Act 1975 (Australia), s 60CC(2)
• Parental Alienation Act 2010 (Brazil), 12.318/2010, art 2
Table of Secondary Sources
Articles
• Barnett A, ‘A Genealogy of Hostility: Parental Alienation in England Wales’ (2020) 42(1) Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law 18
• Bala N, Hunt S and McCarney C, ‘Parental Alienation: Canadian Court Cases 1989–2008’ (2010) 48 Family Court Review 164
• Harman JJ, Kruk E and Hines DA, ‘Parental Alienating Behaviours: An Unacknowledged Form of Family Violence’ (2018) 144(12) Psychology Bulletin 1275
• Harman JJ, Bernet W and Harman J, ‘Parental Alienation: The Blossoming of a Field of Study’ (2019) 28(4) Current Directions in Psychological Science 212
• Harman JJ and Biringen Z, ‘Parents Acting Badly: Parental Alienation in the Context of High-Conflict Divorces’ (2016) 5 Oxford Handbook of Evolutionary Perspectives on Violence, Homicide, and War 257
• Katz E, ‘Coercive Control: Reflections on Gendered Power and Parental Alienation’ (2021) 43 Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law 54
• Katz E, Nikupeteri A and Laitinen M, ‘When Coercive Control Continues to Harm Children: Post-Separation Fathering, Stalking, and Domestic Violence’ (2020) 29(4) Child Abuse Review 310
• Meier JS, ‘Denial of Family Violence in Court: An Empirical Analysis and Path Forward for Family Law’ (2020) 110 Georgetown Law Journal 835
• Meier JS and Dickson S, ‘Mapping Gender: Shedding Empirical Light on Family Courts’ Treatment of Cases Involving Abuse and Alienation’ (2017) 35 Journal of Law & Inequality 311 • Meland E, Furuholmen D and Jahanlu D, ‘Parental Alienation – A Valid Experience?’ (2024) 52 Scandinavian Journal of Public Health 598
• Paulino M and Almeida A, ‘Parental Alienation: Legal and Psychological Perspectives’ (2018) 12 International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family 98
• Reay KM, ‘Family Reflections: A Promising Therapeutic Program Designed to Treat Severely Alienated Children and Their Family System’ (2015) 43(2) American Journal of Family Therapy 197
• Schepard A, ‘Reforming the Law of Parental Alienation: A Legislative Perspective’ (2021) 45 Family Law Quarterly 98
• Stark E, ‘Coercive Control as a Framework for Responding to Male Partner Abuse in the UK’ (2012) 21 Child and Family Law Quarterly 83
• Warshak RA, ‘Parental Alienation: Overview, Management, Intervention, and Practice Tips’ (2015) 28(1) Journal of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers 181, 188
• Warshak RA, ‘Reclaiming Parent–Child Relationships: Outcomes of Family Bridges with Alienated Children’ (2018) 60(8) Journal of Divorce and Remarriage 645
Conference Papers
• McFarlane LJ, ‘Speech by Lord Justice McFarlane: Families Need Fathers Conference 2018’ (Families Need Fathers Conference, London, June 2018).
Books
• Douglas G and Lowe N, Bromley’s Family Law (11th edn, Oxford University Press 2021) 472.
• Lowe N, Douglas G, Hitchings E and Taylor R, Bromley’s Family Law (12th edn, Oxford University Press 2021) 466.
• Stark E, Coercive Control: How Men Entrap Women in Personal Life (2nd edn, Oxford University Press 2024).
Websites
• ‘DVA130 – Evidence on Domestic Abuse’ (UK Parliament) https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/93135/html/ accessed 25 January 2025.
• Griffin M, ‘Children Arrangements and No-Fault Divorce’ (Vardags, 6 April 2022) https://vardags.com/family-law/child-arrangements-and-no-fault-divorce accessed 26 January 2025.
