Abstract Despite widespread rejection of Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS), some custody evaluators use the presence of its components to invalidate abuse allegations and blame the preferred parent. Although PAS supporters claim that the elements of PAS are unique to Parental Alienation (PA) and can, therefore, be used to diagnose it, no scientific study has yet demonstrated this. Reanalysis of Gardner’s data, and our current knowledge of children, indicate that the elements of PAS are not unique to PA. Many PA/PAS advocates approach custody cases assuming that when children reject parents, it is probably the result of a denigration campaign by the preferred parent. Confirmation bias then leads the evaluator to spin, value, and vet information so that it support their expected conclusion. Children’s avoidance of significant visitation with a parent is often driven by a desire to remain with their primary attachment figure, rather than a rejection of the other parent. Forcing visitation and cutting the children’s time with the primary attachment figure leads to rejection of that parent, rather than solving it. The article suggests a method of scientifically assessing if a child’s rejection of a parent is due to PA, affinity, or justified rejection.

中文翻译：

---

评估孩子拒绝父母原因的有效和无效方法：“父母异化综合症”的持续恶性作用

摘要 尽管父母异化综合症 (PAS) 被广泛拒绝，但一些监护权评估员利用其成分的存在来使虐待指控无效并责怪首选父母。尽管 PAS 支持者声称 PAS 的元素是父母异化 (PA) 所独有的，因此可以用来诊断它，但尚无科学研究证明这一点。对 Gardner 数据的重新分析，以及我们目前对儿童的了解，表明 PAS 的元素并不是 PA 独有的。许多 PA/PAS 倡导者在处理监护权案件时假设，当孩子拒绝父母时，这可能是首选父母诋毁运动的结果。然后，确认偏差会导致评估者旋转、评估和审查信息，以支持他们的预期结论。儿童避免与父母进行大量探视通常是因为他们希望保持主要依恋对象，而不是拒绝另一方父母。强迫探视并减少孩子与主要依恋对象的时间会导致拒绝该父母，而不是解决它。这篇文章提出了一种科学评估孩子对父母的拒绝是由于 PA、亲和力还是合理拒绝的方法。