Parental Alienation and Reunification Therapy: An Evidence-Based Review

Written by: Ghia Townsend, MSc. C. Psych. PsyD

Introduction

Parental alienation is a complex and often controversial phenomenon that arises in high-conflict custody disputes, characterized by a child’s unwarranted rejection of one parent, typically following divorce or separation. As awareness of the emotional and developmental consequences of parental alienation has grown, reunification therapy has emerged as a clinical response aimed at repairing damaged parent-child relationships. This article synthesizes findings from peer-reviewed literature published within the last decade, focusing on the most recent contributions, to present a balanced overview of the issues, controversies, and treatment approaches related to parental alienation and reunification therapy.

Understanding Parental Alienation

Parental alienation involves behaviours that influence a child to unjustifiably reject one parent, often through subtle or overt manipulation. These behaviours may include demeaning comments, controlling access to the other parent, or suggesting that the child is unsafe or unloved when spending time with them (Baker & Eichler, 2016). While the motivations behind such actions can vary, they are frequently rooted in unresolved conflict, fear of loss, or difficulties in managing emotional boundaries after a separation or divorce.

Baker and Ben-Ami (2011) describe these dynamics as emotionally harmful because they compel the child to internalize adult disputes and adopt a polarized view of their parents. In many cases, children feel pressured to align with one parent at the cost of rejecting the other, creating loyalty conflicts that impair emotional development. This reality distortion can have long-term consequences, affecting a child’s ability to form balanced perceptions and undermining their self-worth and interpersonal trust.

Differentiating alienation from estrangement is essential. Estrangement arises when a child withdraws from a parent due to a history of actual harm or neglect. By contrast, alienation reflects an externally imposed rejection where no legitimate reason exists. Johnston and Sullivan (2020) stress the importance of accurate, context-sensitive assessment to avoid mislabeling, as inappropriate intervention could further harm the child or disempower a protective parent. Clinical discernment and a nuanced approach are therefore foundational to effective practice.

The Impact on Children and Families

Verhaar et al. (2022) found that adults who had experienced alienation from a parent during childhood often experienced long-term difficulties with emotional regulation, trust, and self-concept. Many reported heightened anxiety, persistent sadness, and strained interpersonal relationships in adulthood. These outcomes suggest that early disruptions in attachment, particularly those shaped by manipulative or coercive dynamics, can compromise a child’s developmental trajectory in profound ways.

Verrocchio et al. (2018) highlight how children subjected to alienation frequently develop rigid, black-and-white thinking patterns. The rejected parent is often perceived as entirely harmful, while the favoured parent is idealized. This type of cognitive distortion, reinforced by an alienating parent’s influence, is developmentally atypical and psychologically harmful. It limits the child’s ability to tolerate ambiguity and undermines their capacity to process complex interpersonal emotions.

The broader family system also suffers in cases of alienation. Siblings may be divided in their allegiances, extended family members are often marginalized, and new partners may be scapegoated or distrusted. Harman, Kruk, and Hines (2024) argue that alienation is not merely a relational breakdown between two individuals but a systemic disruption that affects the entire family structure, functioning, and emotional climate. As such, interventions must be broad in scope and attentive to the multilayered nature of the harm.

Controversies and Challenges in Diagnosis

Meier and Dickson (2021) note that the concept of parental alienation remains contentious within both clinical and legal communities. One of the core challenges is the absence of universally accepted diagnostic criteria, which creates room for subjective interpretation and, at times, misuse. Critics warn that the term “parental alienation” can be weaponized in custody disputes and used to discredit a parent seeking to raise valid concerns about abuse. Without rigorous assessment and nuanced understanding, there is a risk of undermining child safety and misidentifying protective behaviour as alienating.

Harman, Kruk, and Hines (2024) offer a contrasting perspective, arguing that when correctly identified, parental alienation constitutes a severe form of psychological maltreatment and coercive control. They emphasize that minimizing or ignoring these behaviours may allow subtle but damaging emotional abuse to continue unchecked. Their work underscores the need for structured, evidence-based frameworks to support assessment and intervention.

Johnston and Sullivan (2020) advocate for a differentiated model that recognizes the spectrum of alienation-like behaviours and their causes. They propose moving away from binary labels toward a contextualized understanding that considers severity, developmental stage, and family history. Such an approach allows clinicians to distinguish between alienation and estrangement, tailor their recommendations accordingly, and reduce the likelihood of diagnostic error.

Reunification Therapy: Practices and Pitfalls

Matthewson et al. (2023) found that reunification therapy can be effective when it proceeds voluntarily, at a pace that honours the child’s readiness, and in a setting that emphasizes emotional safety. Their research highlights the importance of avoiding coercion and building motivation and insight among all participants. When guided by ethical, child-centred principles, reunification therapy can lead to meaningful relational repair and long-term emotional benefits.

Andreopoulos and Wexler (2022) caution that some court-ordered programs are criticized for employing rigid or punitive strategies that may retraumatize children and undermine trust. Programs that remove children from the favoured parent or demand immediate compliance with the rejected parent can result in further entrenchment of resistance. Such models risk prioritizing behavioural outcomes over relational healing and can inadvertently mimic the coercive dynamics that underlie alienation.

Emerging literature supports a shift toward trauma-informed, developmentally attuned, and highly individualized approaches. Such literature also emphasizes flexible, multi-phase interventions that incorporate psychoeducation, therapeutic alliance-building, and gradual reintroduction of contact (Harman, Warshak, Lorandos, & Florian, 2022, Reay, 2015, & Warshak, 2015). Importantly, these perspectives converge around a central theme: Effective reunification is less about restoring authority and more about repairing relationships in ways that are emotionally sustainable and ethically sound.

Implications for Practice and Policy

Isailă and Hostiuc (2022) point to a persistent disconnect between clinical and legal systems when addressing parental alienation. Professionals may bring different conceptual frameworks, levels of training, and intervention philosophies to a case, sometimes leading to fragmented or contradictory guidance. This reality underscores the need for a coordinated, interdisciplinary response grounded in shared language and evidence-based criteria.

Harman, Warshak, Lorandos, and Florian (2022) recommend proactive, not just reactive, interventions. Proactive interventions include training custody evaluators to recognize patterns of alienation, developing clear guidelines for judicial discretion in alienation cases, and establishing pathways for early referral to therapeutic services. These preventative strategies not only improve outcomes for children but also reduce the adversarial nature of litigation by focusing on functional repair over fault attribution.

Clinicians, for their part, must adopt rigorous assessment methods that account for ecological, developmental, and relational variables because context matters. For example, alienation dynamics in a family with a history of intimate partner violence will look different than those in a family characterized by chronic triangulation or unresolved grief. Practice must remain flexible and ethically grounded, with decisions guided by what best serves the child’s emotional well-being in the short term and across the lifespan.

A Balanced Model for Reunification Therapy

The model proposed at Toronto Psychological Services and Research Centre (TPSRC) reflects the complexities and responsibilities inherent in working with families affected by parental alienation. Our approach is grounded in trauma-informed principles and clinical best practices: TPSRC has structured its model around four interrelated phases: Assessment and Preparation, Psychoeducation, Facilitated Reconnection, and Maintenance and Monitoring. Importantly, current evidence, ethical responsibility, and sensitivity to the lived experiences of all family members guide each phase of the model.

In Phase One, our Reunification Therapy Team thoroughly assesses the family system. The assessment includes individual interviews with each family member, consultation with involved professionals, and a comprehensive review of legal and therapeutic documentation. We aim to distinguish between alienation, estrangement, and complex hybrid cases by carefully examining attachment histories, relational ruptures, and communication patterns. The outcome is a collaborative case formulation that informs a tailored treatment plan rooted in clarity and compassion.

Phase Two introduces psychoeducation for both parents and, when clinically appropriate, the child. We provide foundational knowledge about co-parenting after separation, the psychological impacts of loyalty conflicts, and the child’s need for safety, security, and balanced relationships. This phase also allows us to gently challenge rigid narratives and begin fostering insight into how past dynamics may influence current behaviour. In Phase Three, our team facilitates structured contact between the child and the alienated parent, starting with non-threatening, developmentally appropriate activities. These sessions progress toward deeper emotional work only as the child shows readiness, always within a framework that prioritizes emotional safety and autonomy. Phase Four involves ongoing support, reduced session frequency, and monitoring to sustain relational gains, identify setbacks early, and provide targeted re-intervention if necessary.

What distinguishes our model at TPSRC is its respect for the emotional realities of all involved and its commitment to ethical neutrality. We do not assume fault or malice; instead, we understand that conflict often stems from unresolved pain, fear, grief, and other factors. Our team approaches each case with balanced empathy and clinical rigour, striving to create space where repair is possible, not mandated, but earned through mutual safety, insight, and readiness. In doing so, we not only offer families a process for reunification, but we also offer a meaningful opportunity to heal, grow, and reconnect.

References

Andreopoulos, E., & Wexler, A. (2022). The “solution” to parental alienation: A critique of the turning points and overcoming barriers reunification programs. Journal of Family Trauma, Child Custody & Child Development, 19(3–4), 417–437. https://doi.org/10.1080/26904586.2022.2049462

Baker, A. J. L., & Ben-Ami, N. (2011). To turn a child against a parent is to turn a child against himself: The effects of parental alienation strategies. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 52(7), 472–489. https://doi.org/10.1080/10502556.2011.609424

Baker, A. J. L., & Eichler, A. (2016). The linkage between parental alienation behaviors and child alienation. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 57(7), 475–484. https://doi.org/10.1080/10502556.2016.1220285

Harman, J. J., Kruk, E., & Hines, D. A. (2024). Countering arguments against parental alienation as a form of family violence. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 53(2), 117-146. https://doi.org/10.1080/01926187.2024.2396279

Harman, J. J., Warshak, R. A., Lorandos, D., & Florian, M. J. (2022). Developmental psychology and the scientific status of parental alienation. Developmental Psychology, 58(10), 1887–1911. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0001404

Isailă, O. M., & Hostiuc, S. (2022). Medical-legal and psychosocial considerations on parental alienation as a form of child abuse: a brief review. Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 10(6), Article 1134. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10061134

Johnston, J. R., & Sullivan, M. J. (2020). Parental alienation: In search of common ground for a more differentiated theory. Family Court Review, 58(2), 270–292. https://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12472

Matthewson M. L., Bowring, J., Hickey, J., Ward, S., Diercke, P., Van Niekerk, L., A. (2023). A qualitative exploration of reunification post alienation from the perspective of adult alienated children and targeted parents. Front Psychol, 14, Article 1189840. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1189840

Meier, J. S., & Dickson, S. (2021). Reunification, alienation, or re-traumatization? Let’s start listening to children. Journal of Family Trauma, Child Custody & Child Development, 18(3), 199–219. https://doi.org/10.1080/26904586.2021.1957059

Reay, K. M. (2015). Family Reflections: A promising therapeutic program designed to treat severely alienated children and their family system. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 43(2), 197–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/01926187.2015.1007769

Verhaar, S., Matthewson, M. L., & Bentley, C. (2022). The impact of parental alienating behaviours on the mental health of adults alienated in childhood. Children, 9(4), Article 475. https://doi.org/10.3390/children9040475

Verrocchio, M. C., Baker, A. J. L., & Marchetti, D. (2018). Adult report of childhood exposure to parental alienation at different developmental time periods. Journal of Family Therapy, 40(4), 602–618. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6427.12192

Warshak, R. A. (2015). Parental alienation: Overview, management, intervention, and practice tips. Journal of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, 28(1), 181–248. https://www.aaml.org/wp-content/uploads/MAT107_7.pdf