Journal of Divorce and Remarriage最新文献

{"title":"Looking Beyond the Sorting Hat: Deconstructing the “Five Factor Model” of Alienation","authors":"Benjamin D. Garber, Robert A. Simon","doi":"10.1080/10502556.2023.2262359","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10502556.2023.2262359","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACTOne of the most common dilemmas encountered in today’s family courts is the child who is strongly aligned with Parent A and rejects parent B. In the interest of supporting these children’s opportunity to enjoy a healthy relationship with both of their caregivers, one can work to determine which parent is to blame or what combination of parent behavior, relationship dynamics, and practical circumstances result in this outcome. The Five Factor Model (FFM) does the former, promoting a stepwise approach to “diagnosing” parental alienation. This paper demonstrates that for all of its appeal, the FFM is deeply flawed and promotes a binary (good guy/bad guy) approach that readily exacerbates family tensions. We reject the FFM and advocate instead for a balanced conceptualization of the child’s larger relationship ecology. A rubric guiding this ecological approach (Garber, in press 2023) is recommended.Keywords: AlienationResist/Refuse DynamicsFive Factor ModelRubricEcological model Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 The first author has often emphasized that the verb “diagnose” is associated with the medical model of individual pathology and therefore is misleading in this context. The relationship variables at issue are dynamics, not diagnoses, and can only be identified in systems (e.g., family) not within individuals.2 We acknowledge that the proponents of the FFM recognize that there is a larger copntext relevant to understanding resist/refuse dynamics, e.g., “There are several causes of contact refusal, and it is necessary to conduct an evaluation to determine whether the cause in a particular case is PA or some other issue within the child or the family” (Bernet and Greenhill, Citation2022, p. 591), However, the FFM is routinely promulgated (or at least misunderstood) as the singular recipe for identifying the cause of resist/refuse dynamics.3 Note that Baker originally promulgated a Four Factor Model (Baker, Citation2020b). She subsequently inserted the predicate resist/refuse behavioral condition as Factor 1, backing up the original four conditions into positions two through five to create today’s FFM. Note also a Canadian Court’s report that Baker described an alternative FFM as including “(1) evidence that the disfavored parent had an adequate relationship with the child prior to the current contact refusal; (2) evidence of absence of founded abuse or neglect on the part of a disfavored parent; (3) evidence that the favored parent engaged in intentional misrepresentation to professionals; (4) evidence that the favored parent engaged in behaviors consistent with alienation; and (5) evidence that the child exhibited behaviors consistent with alienation” (C.J.J. v. A.J., 2016 BCSC 676 §243; emphasis added).4 The simplicity and appeal of the FFM as evident for example in worksheet format (e.g., Evans, Citation2022) contradicts those proponents who argue that the identification of alie","PeriodicalId":35786,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Divorce and Remarriage","volume":"45 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135695729","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}