There have been significant advances in understandings and practice related parent–child contact problems (PCCPs), with a growing consensus about some issues and continuing controversy about others. It is widely acknowledged that PCCP cases are most fruitfully understood from a multi-factorial perspective. While some cases may be totally the “fault” of one parent (a parent perpetrating violence or abuse, or a parent exhibiting alienating behavior), in many situations both parents bear some responsibility: focusing on a single cause is rarely helpful. Most professionals and researchers agree that the challenge in practice is to distinguish between false positives and false negatives for both alienation (or unjustified rejection) and realistic estrangement (justified rejection). There is continuing controversy over whether the concept of “alienation” should be used, especially in court proceedings, and a related disagreement about the extent to which family courts are now failing to respond adequately to cases of intimate partner violence (IPV) or child abuse when alienation is also raised. Continuing education, intentional exploration of alternative hypotheses, and active perspective-taking will contribute to effective professional involvement. Increased parent education and prevention can play an important role, although for the more severe PCCP cases the family courts system will continue to play a critical role. While more research must be done, given the complexity of issues, conclusive findings are unlikely in the near future. Legislators and family justice professionals must make decisions based on a thorough analysis of each family’s circumstances in the context of our present knowledge, taking account of the limits of the law. They will often face the conundrum of making decisions in the face of uncertainty.

中文翻译：

---

“异化”的概念、争议和难题：十年的经验教训和对未来挑战的反思

在理解和实践相关的亲子接触问题 (PCCPs) 方面取得了重大进展，对一些问题的共识越来越多，而对其他问题的争议仍在继续。人们普遍承认，从多因素角度对 PCCP 案例的理解最为有效。虽然有些情况可能完全是父母一方的“过错”（施暴或虐待的父母，或表现出疏远行为的父母），但在许多情况下，父母双方都负有一定的责任：专注于单一原因很少有帮助。大多数专业人士和研究人员都同意，实践中的挑战是区分疏远（或不合理拒绝）和现实疏远（合理拒绝）的误报和漏报。关于是否应该使用“异化”的概念一直存在争议，尤其是在法庭诉讼中，以及关于家庭法院现在未能对亲密伴侣暴力 (IPV) 或虐待儿童案件作出充分回应的程度的相关分歧当异化也被提出。继续教育、对替代假设的有意探索和积极的观点采择将有助于有效的专业参与。加强家长教育和预防可以发挥重要作用，尽管对于更严重的 PCCP 案件，家庭法院系统将继续发挥关键作用。虽然必须进行更多研究，但鉴于问题的复杂性，在不久的将来不太可能得出结论性的结果。立法者和家庭司法专业人士必须根据我们目前的知识对每个家庭的情况进行彻底分析，并考虑到法律的限制，从而做出决定。他们经常会面临在不确定的情况下做出决定的难题。