Few things are more painful for a parent than hearing a child say, “I don’t want to see Mom,” or “I don’t want to go to Dad’s house.”
In a divorce, adults understandably want an explanation. One parent may immediately conclude that the other is engaging in parental alienation. The other may insist the child has legitimate reasons for pulling away.
But there is a problem with jumping too quickly to either conclusion.
A child’s rejection of a parent tells us what is happening. It does not necessarily tell us why.
Psychologist Dana Baerger recently explored this distinction in an excellent discussion of parental alienation and parent-child estrangement. Her central point is one we see regularly in family law: parental alienating behaviors are real, but so are damaged parent-child relationships. And sometimes both things are happening at the same time.
A parent can undermine the other parent by sharing inappropriate information about the divorce, criticizing them, interfering with contact, or making a child feel guilty for loving them. Those behaviors can cause real harm.
But the rejected parent also has to be willing to look in the mirror. Years of frightening anger, excessive criticism, emotional unavailability, rigidity or an inability to repair hurt can damage a relationship with a child even when the behavior does not meet the legal definition of abuse.
That is why one of the most important questions in a custody case is often:
What was this relationship like before the divorce?
If a child enjoyed a strong relationship with Dad for twelve years and suddenly refuses to see him shortly after the separation, that deserves investigation. But if the relationship was troubled for years before anyone called a lawyer, that history matters too.
And here is the really difficult possibility: two things can be true at the same time.
Dad may have contributed to the deterioration of his relationship with his daughter, while Mom is now making that relationship worse. A child’s legitimate frustration with a parent can be exploited by the other parent. Conversely, inappropriate behavior by one parent doesn’t automatically explain every concern the child expresses about the other. Research and professional guidance recommend examining competing explanations rather than immediately attaching a label.
For divorcing parents, there is a larger lesson.
Your job isn’t to win your child to your side.
Your job is to raise a healthy adult.
That is the central mission behind Robertson + Easterling’s new Parenting Playbook: Your Game Plan for Raising Healthy Children Through Divorce. We encourage parents to think beyond today’s custody dispute and consider the family relationships their children will carry into adulthood. Children generally benefit from being surrounded by people who love them and from maintaining meaningful connections to both sides of their family whenever those relationships are healthy and safe.
Divorce changes a family. It doesn’t have to destroy one.
Sometimes protecting a child means confronting harmful behavior by the other parent. Sometimes it means confronting our own. And sometimes it requires enough patience and humility to keep more than one explanation on the table until we understand what is really happening.
The goal isn’t simply getting through the custody case. The goal is raising healthy adults.
