{"id":329906,"date":"2025-08-09T06:50:16","date_gmt":"2025-08-09T06:50:16","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/329906\/"},"modified":"2025-08-09T06:50:16","modified_gmt":"2025-08-09T06:50:16","slug":"the-harmful-pseudo-science-infecting-sheffields-family-courts","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/329906\/","title":{"rendered":"The \u2018harmful pseudo-science\u2019 infecting Sheffield\u2019s family courts"},"content":{"rendered":"

Rosie ushers me into her kitchen in west Sheffield. She puts the kettle on, and we quickly agree that we\u2019re both too wired to drink caffeinated tea.\u00a0<\/p>\n

She later tells me that she\u2019s been anxious about my looming visit for the last few days. I\u2019m reminding her, and asking probing questions about, the time in her life she most wants to forget.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Nevertheless, she sits next to me on her sofa and, while she cradles her \u2018mama bear\u2019 mug, explains how her children were almost taken off her. It\u2019s a strange story, that actually begins in 1980s New York, and ends with a Sheffield psychologist using \u2018harmful pseudo-science\u2019 to recommend separating children from their mothers.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Richard Gardner didn\u2019t shy away from controversy. As a child psychiatrist at Columbia University, he made his name by developing the concept of \u201cParental Alienation Syndrome\u201d (PAS). In his 1987 book, The Parental Alienation Syndrome and the Differentiation between Fabricated and Genuine Child Sex Abuse, he described PAS as being when \u201cchildren are preoccupied with deprecation and criticism of a parent \u2014 denigration that is unjustified and\/or exaggerated.\u201d It comes about by children being \u201cbrainwashed\u201d by the other parent (the \u201cprogrammer\u201d), but also \u201csubconscious and unconscious factors within the programming parent that contribute to the child\u2019s alienation from the other.\u201d Gardner believed he was seeing this syndrome extraordinarily frequently in children going through protracted custody battles \u2014 in roughly 90 per cent of cases.<\/p>\n

A lot of people didn\u2019t like PAS. Critics noted that when Gardner applied the label, it was almost alwyas the mother who was doing the alienating, and the father who was being alienated. Gardner\u2019s response to that was blunt. \u201cThis is the reality. People don\u2019t get angry at doctors who say that breast cancer is more common in women than men. We have to understand the nature of this phenomenon and why it is that women are more likely to be programmers than men.\u201d<\/p>\n

Even more concerning were the implications of accepting PAS in cases where children were alleging that they had been abused, including sexually, by their fathers. In his book, Gardner wrote that the presence of PAS \u201cstrongly supports the argument that the sex abuse is fabricated.\u201d The fact that a child was saying clearly that they were being abused by their father meant they probably weren\u2019t. It was much more likely, Gardner believed, that they had been \u201cprogrammed\u201d to do so. \u201cChildren who have been genuinely abused do not usually manifest the signs and symptoms of the parental alienation syndrome\u201d, he wrote.<\/p>\n

\"\"Richard Gardner. Image: The Secret World of the Very Young<\/p>\n

Rosie had a happy childhood. During the week, her dad worked, while her mum stayed home to raise Rosie and her siblings \u2013 and then they all went to church together on Sundays. When her grandmother became ill, Rosie helped to care for her, and decided she\u2019d pursue a career in healthcare.<\/p>\n

But her keenness to help people backfired in Rosie’s first serious relationship. She lent her partner a lot of money and was left in debt and on antidepressants when their relationship broke down. She was racked with guilt that she\u2019d lost her virginity in the relationship, too, because she believed it went against God\u2019s will.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n

When Rosie met Liam at work, she quickly decided to marry him, because she didn\u2019t want to let God down again. And it was an easy\u00a0decision to make; Liam was taking her for meals and buying her gifts; he even paid off her student debt. She soon met his family, and they got engaged.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Once they were married, Rosie says she and Liam didn\u2019t see much of each other due to different work patterns, and she didn\u2019t feel like they ever emotionally connected. And then, Rosie says Liam began raping her. She kept quiet \u2013 and blamed herself. She\u2019d think of the line in the bible: \u2018Deny yourself. Pick up your cross and follow me,\u2019 and decided this was her cross to bear.<\/p>\n

Don’t miss the stories that matter.<\/p>\n

Put your e-mail in below and never miss an edition of our Sheffield journalism. No card details required.<\/p>\n

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.<\/p>\n

Rosie had two daughters, but felt unsupported by Liam. She had fleeting moments of wanting to end her life because she felt so trapped. She says Liam would tell her she should \u2018submit\u2019 to him, banned her from seeing a male friend, and would regularly check her phone and track her location. Rosie says she developed an eating disorder; a \u2018silent scream\u2019 from her body.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Then, she met someone else. When she told Liam, he made her end the affair, and she says the abuse worsened. She wanted to leave, but couldn\u2019t afford to. Thankfully, she soon found a a job, and she saved up until she and the children could move out.<\/p>\n

At first, they shared custody 50\/50, but the children didn\u2019t want to see Liam because they said he was so strict. Liam started proceedings in the family court.\u00a0But then, one of the children told Rosie that he\u2019d sexually assaulted them, and Rosie went to the police. Liam was put on police bail and his contact with the children suspended.<\/p>\n

The uninitiated might assume this would hinder Liam\u2019s chances of seeing his children. But it’s not that simple.<\/p>\n

\"\"Rosie. Image: Jessica Bradley<\/p>\n

It\u2019s September 2023 and Rosie\u2019s daughter, Lucy, is playing a card game, of sorts, with Dr Maria Downs. She\u2019s been taken out of lessons in her Sheffield high school. Dr Downs gives Lucy one card at a time, with a description on it, and she has to place it next to a figure that represents a member of her family.<\/p>\n

Lucy allocates 32 cards to the figure that represents her father. Of these, 29 are negative. The remaining three are generally interpreted by this psychiatric test as positive traits: the family member who \u2018likes to cuddle\u2019, \u2018likes to hug\u2019 and \u2018likes to be in bed with\u2019 her. But given the allegations Lucy has already made to Dr Downs \u2014 the details of which we are unable to publish \u2014 they should not be interpreted positively. She allocates 14 positive cards to her mother, and a few to other members of her family.<\/p>\n

Later that day, Lucy\u2019s younger sister Emma is playing the same game. She assigns her father 23 cards, 21 of which are negative. The other two are the person who \u2018pays attention\u2019 to her and \u2018likes to be in bed\u2019 with her. She, too, assigns positive cards to her mother.<\/p>\n

As well as these psychological tests, the girls are asked about their family. They detail several allegations of harmful behaviour, including sexual abuse. Lucy also mentions self-harming, which has arisen as a result of the experience.<\/p>\n

When Downs writes up her assessment for the court, she reaches a surprising conclusion. \u201cThe idealisation of [Lucy\u2019s] mother and devaluation of her father when completing the [test] are suggestive of Lucy using the psychological defence of splitting\u201d, she writes. This is the idea of a person having to \u201csplit\u201d part of themselves off \u2014 the part that loves the father, in this case \u2014 to please the other parent.<\/p>\n

As for the allegations of abuse, it is worth quoting Downs\u2019 assessment in full:\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u201c[W]hile rejection of an abusive parent is considered to be an adaptive coping strategy where the child has been subject to abuse, such a response is highly unusual. Children have an innate, evolutionary drive to attach to their caregivers irrespective of the quality of care received, even where the caregiver is abusive. Most children who are abused by a parent struggle to disclose their abuse due to feelings of confusion and issues of loyalty and inner conflict. They usually resort to internalising coping mechanisms such as denial, silence and secrecy.\u201d <\/p><\/blockquote>\n

She concludes: <\/p>\n

\u201cFalse allegations of abuse, misinterpretation or exaggeration of non-abusive incidents are commonplace where there is dispute over child arrangements, and parental alienation in particular.\u201d\u00a0<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\"\"Original illustration by Jake Greenhalgh.<\/p>\n

Downs was writing three and a half decades on from when Gardner published his book. But the ideas are identical. If the child was being abused, they would struggle to disclose it. The fact they are disclosing it means it\u2019s probably not happening. It\u2019s probably parental alienation instead.<\/p>\n

(There are, of course, cases where allegations of abuse are fabricated. But to describe this as \u201ccommonplace\u201d is incorrect. One analysis of multiple studies found that estimates typically range between 2% and 5% of cases. What is absolutely clear is that allegations of abuse should not be used as evidence against abuse.)<\/p>\n

And so, Downs concluded, the children were insecurely attached to Rosie and suppressing their own needs to prioritise hers. There was a risk of the children developing psychiatric and personality disorders if Rosie didn\u2019t \u2018change her stance\u2019. And she suggested that, if Rosie wouldn\u2019t engage in mediation therapy with Liam, the judge should consider giving Liam custody, and suspending Rosie\u2019s contact initially, before giving her supervised contact until she could demonstrate her capability of promoting a healthy relationship between the children and Liam.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Rosie was stunned. There, in black and white, Downs had written: \u201c[The child]…can recall incidents in which she was abused physically and possibly sexually.\u201d And yet, Rosie was the problem.<\/p>\n

Richard Gardner died by suicide in 2003. At that time, the concept of parental alienation had only just begun being used in UK family courts, and generally without success. But ideas often outlive their parents, and the use of parental alienation arguments in UK family courts has been growing. As well as Rosie, I spoke to five other mothers who had all been in cases involving Maria Downs. In each case, \u201cparental alienation\u201d was used to argue for fathers having access to their children in cases where abuse was being alleged.\u00a0<\/p>\n

People like Anna, whose child was ordered by the court to move in with the dad, despite his being arrested for domestic abuse. Downs was instructed to assess the family, and concluded that Anna was causing her daughter\u2019s \u2018splitting\u2019 behaviour and that the dad posed no risk. Downs repeatedly suggested suspending contact between Anna and her daughter, and said the daughter didn\u2019t show signs of having been significantly affected by witnessing abuse perpetrated by the dad towards Anna (despite only meeting with her for two hours). The judge\u2019s decision was eventually overturned by another judge, who concluded that the dad had a \u2018striking\u2019 lack of empathy, and the daughter returned to Anna.<\/p>\n

Or Nicola, who is still battling the courts to prevent her son from being forced to see the father she says abused him. \u201cIt\u2019s so out of hand, I just don\u2019t understand it,\u201d Nicola told me. \u201cIt\u2019s all down to Downs. It\u2019s as if the court can just decide that a happy, safe child needs to be taken away from home.\u201d And then there\u2019s Veronica, who has been cast as an alienator despite the dad being deemed dangerous by professionals, and Becky, who endured a long court battle that has drained her savings after simply raising a safeguarding issue regarding the dad.<\/p>\n

A study<\/a> by Elizabeth Dalgarno, director and founder of SHERA Research Group, interviewed 45 mothers who were domestic abuse victims. All went through private family court proceedings, and 39 of them were accused of PA. The remaining six were threatened that they\u2019d be accused of it if they didn\u2019t agree to contact with the dads. The research found that \u201cinvestigation of DA [domestic abuse] in these cases was diminished or ignored due to the PA allegations\u201d. \u201cWe found that whatever mothers raised, it was construed as alienation,\u201d Dalgarno says.<\/p>\n

The success of the parental alienation argument has led to it being used more and more frequently. As Adrienne Barnett, teacher in Law at Brunel University, has found: \u201cmore recently, a PA \u2018industry\u2019 appears to have amassed, comprising experts, therapists and lawyers.\u201d There\u2019s certainly money to be made \u2014 expert witnesses can charge up to \u00a3100 per hour, and up to \u00a3500 an hour for appearing in court.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\"\"Sheffield Family Court. Image: Dan Hayes\/The Tribune<\/p>\n

After reading Downs\u2019 report, Rosie was terrified that the judge would take her advice.\u00a0\u201cMy kids are my world. If I didn\u2019t have them any more, then what am I? How do you carry on with your life?\u201d<\/p>\n

But the unambiguous recommendation of a psychological expert carries a lot of weight. The judge did take up Downs\u2019 recommendation: Rosie had to agree to joint therapy with Liam, or risk losing the children.\u00a0\u201cI felt backed into a corner again. I said, \u2018this isn\u2019t parental alienation \u2013 we\u2019ve been abused\u2019,\u201d she says. \u201cI was pleading with them to understand \u2013 I kept thinking, am I crazy? Why is no one seeing this?\u201d<\/p>\n

Dalgarno tells me the toll court proceedings take on women is often used to bolster the accusations of PA.\u00a0\u201cThe system is so abusive, not just directly, but it exhausts the mothers,\u201d she says. \u201cThey\u2019re still working and mothering, and very often are [representing themselves], which is a full-time job in itself. They\u2019re desperate to protect their children. The father says, \u2018Look, she\u2019s a mess, she can\u2019t look after the children, she\u2019s a crazy alienator\u2019.\u201d<\/p>\n

The world of family courts is murky. It was only this year that journalists were first allowed to report on them (we would not have been able to publish this story last year). And so the growth of the parental alienation \u2018industry\u2019 has gone mostly unnoticed.<\/p>\n

But at the end of last year, the Family Justice Council (FJC), an official body set up to advise the courts, decided enough was enough, and published guidance about its use. \u201cA child\u2019s reluctance, resistance or refusal to spend time with a parent is often alleged to be a result of \u2018parental alienation\u2019. Despite the lack of research evidence, and international condemnation, reference is still made to the discredited concept of \u2018parental alienation syndrome\u2019\u201d, they wrote. \u201cFor the avoidance of doubt, the Family Justice Council (FJC) recognises that \u2018parental alienation syndrome\u2019 has no evidential basis and is considered a harmful pseudo-science.\u201d<\/p>\n

They also added that \u201c[i]n light of their respective prevalence, and the relative harm to children and adult survivors, allegations of domestic abuse and \u2018parental alienation\u2019 cannot be equated.\u201d In cases where abuse had been found, \u2018alienating behaviours\u2019 would no longer be an acceptable argument, and courts were told it was \u201cinappropriate\u201d to use experts to determine whether alienation was happening. The boom days of the parental alienation industry may be coming to an end.<\/p>\n

\"\"Dr Maria Downs. Image: Instagram<\/p>\n

We asked Maria Downs why she had been using arguments described by the FJC as \u201charmful pseudo-science\u201d. And we asked if she regretted that in cases where she had used these arguments, children had been separated from their mothers, and placed with fathers that they alleged were abusing them. We were told, via a spokesperson, that Downs was not going to comment due to the confidentiality of the cases.<\/p>\n

We replied that we thought these questions could still be answered without reference to specific cases.\u00a0We also asked Downs why her website had previously included \u201cparental alienation\u201d as a service provided, but this had now been taken down. And we asked why in her psychological reports she claimed to be an honorary teacher at the University of Sheffield, something the university told us has never been true. We heard nothing more.<\/p>\n

For Rosie and her daughters the story ends, for the most part, happily. She appointed another barrister, Charlotte Proudman, to take on the case. When Proudman reviewed Rosie\u2019s files, she asked her: \u201cdo you realise how close you are to these children being taken off you?\u201d Proudman suggested getting Rosie\u2019s daughter her own representation, and, with a new judge at the helm, the case turned around.<\/p>\n

Proudman has worked on many cases where \u2018alienation\u2019 has been argued. She told The Tribune: \u201cWe see experts such as Dr Downs and other \u2018alienation\u2019 specialists changing the language from \u2018parental alienation\u2019 to other terminology such as \u2018splitting\u2019 but it means the same. Many experts have carved out a niche practice of alienation in family courts meaning they become the go-to expert on behalf of fathers and legal teams who want a \u2018diagnosis\u2019 of alienation and often removal of children from their mother (who is often a victim of abuse) to their father (who can be a perpetrator of abuse). I have seen in these cases children\u2019s allegations of abuse being ignored, or even findings of abuse minimised because of alienation.\u201d<\/p>\n

\"\"Barrister Charlotte Proudman. Image supplied<\/p>\n

But years of arguing in the family courts takes a toll. Rosie didn\u2019t qualify for legal aid, so she\u2019s in a lot of debt. And she is haunted by Downs\u2019 ghost. She remembers what car Downs drives, and every time she sees the same model and colour on the road, she prays it isn\u2019t her.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The year before his death, Richard Gardner gave a lecture in Frankfurt to defend his much-maligned thesis. He opened with the words of the philosopher Schopenhauer: \u201cAll truth passes through three stages: First, it is ridiculed. Secondly, it is violently opposed. Thirdly, it is accepted as self-evident.\u201d<\/p>\n

Yet parental alienation has only ever been self-evident to a few. The last man to cross-examine Gardner in court, attorney Richard Ducote, commented upon his death that: \u201cParental Alienation Syndrome is a bogus, pro-pedophilic fraud\u201d. He also noted that Gardner hadn\u2019t had hospital admitting privileges for over 25 years, and had stopped being asked by courts to witness. \u201cLet\u2019s pray that his ridiculous, dangerous PAS foolishness died with him,\u201d Ducote added.<\/p>\n

His prayers went unanswered. Though in America Gardner\u2019s ideas had been widely discredited, in Sheffield they live on, two decades later. In cases like Rosie\u2019s, the drawn-out court proceedings have caused huge harm. In others, like Nicola\u2019s, it\u2019s ongoing. Rosie is worried that Downs is still practicing and potentially being instructed to write more psychological reports in the family courts. \u201cIt\u2019s terrifying, and I just can\u2019t see how it\u2019s going to stop,\u201d she says.\u00a0<\/p>\n

All names of family members have been changed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Rosie ushers me into her kitchen in west Sheffield. She puts the kettle on, and we quickly agree…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":329907,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[8817],"tags":[748,393,4884,1620,16,15],"class_list":{"0":"post-329906","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-sheffield","8":"tag-britain","9":"tag-england","10":"tag-great-britain","11":"tag-sheffield","12":"tag-uk","13":"tag-united-kingdom"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@uk\/114997482355618944","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/329906","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=329906"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/329906\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/329907"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=329906"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=329906"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=329906"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}