Full version: Opponents of recognizing Parental Alienation have been making a lot of headway in the media recently. Last month Dr. Phil did an hour long special called “Crisis in Family Court”. The view put forward both by Dr. Phil and his various guests was that mothers were losing custody of their children to abusive fathers, and that the courts were favoring fathers even when there is strong evidence that they are violent or have sexually abused their children. The show featured Kathleen Russell of the well-funded mothers’ family court advocacy group The Center for Judicial Excellence.
As we pointed out in Report: Did Dr. Phil Unwittingly Promote False Accusations on Recent ‘Family Court Crisis” Show? (4/26/10), the case Russell took to Dr. Phil was portrayed very inaccurately–the mother had made repeated sexual abuse allegations against the father, the girl had been medically examined for possible child sexual abuse on five separate occasions, and not one of the examinations substantiated any of the charges.
As we also noted, NOW recently criticized Fathers & Families over Our Campaign to Ask DSM to Include Parental Alienation in Upcoming Edition and warned of an alleged crisis in family court because of Parental Alienation.
Now the St. Petersburg Times has come out with a piece expressing unwarranted skepticism about Parental Alienation. We suggest you comment on the piece here and also write a Letter to the Editor of the St. Petersburg Times by clicking here.
The issue is also being debated on Drudge Retort here–we suggest you join the debate.