A call to the domestic abuse field to accept conceptual parity with parental alienation, and to embrace evidentiary governance and relational ethics in family policy

The Child is Still in The Middle

This essay is more direct than my recent writing on relational ethics and future families. I have mostly avoided the parental alienation versus gendered domestic abuse battleground, where possible, because children are not helped by professional culture wars. But there comes a point when refusing the battle forfeits the decision about agreed language and governing categories to others. My argument is simple: domestic abuse is real, parental alienation is real, and children are harmed when either is denied.

Battlelines

 In engaging this battleground, I have also defined the battlelines. However, it is fair to say that neither the parental alienation field nor the gendered domestic abuse field is entirely homogeneous. I have chosen the order of battle for each field based on its dominant narratives, whilst recognising that there may be a range of views within each field.

The dispute between parental alienation and domestic abuse is often described as a culture war. This essay argues that this description is too narrow. The conflict is an ideological and policy battleground over the categories that will govern family law, domestic abuse legislation, public health policy, evidence translation and the future moral meaning of family relationships.

A dominant critique of parental alienation frames it as a legal tactic used by abusive fathers to counter allegations of domestic abuse. That critique should not become a policy shortcut. At its best, the parental alienation field does not deny domestic abuse but insists that parental alienation can also constitute psychological abuse, coercive control and relational harm. The existence of tactical misuse does not disprove the phenomenon, just as tactical misuse of domestic abuse allegations would not disprove domestic abuse.

This essay identifies three battlegrounds: the term “parental alienation”; the gendered definition of coercive control; and the role of family relationships in children’s development. It argues that children do not need winner-takes-all policy. They need conceptual parity, evidentiary governance and relational ethics that recognise domestic abuse, parental alienation, justified estrangement, hybrid cases and ordinary conflict. The parental alienation field should stop apologising for its existence. It should insist that domestic abuse and parental alienation are real, and that children are harmed when either is denied.

No more Winner-Takes-All Policy

The danger of the current ideological battleground is that it invites a winner-takes-all settlement. If the gendered domestic abuse frame wins outright, parental alienation is assimilated, renamed or dismissed. If the parental alienation field were to respond in kind, domestic abuse would be minimised, treated as tactical or subordinated to contact restoration. Both outcomes are unacceptable.

Children do not need one ideology to vanquish another. They need systems capable of recognising multiple forms of harm simultaneously.That requires three commitments.

• First, conceptual parity. Domestic abuse and parental alienation must both be available as possible explanations. Neither should be presumed. Neither should be excluded.
  
• Second, courts, services, policymakers and legislators must embrace evidentiary governance. They must distinguish evidence, advocacy, ideology, expert opinion and legal findings. They must not allow slogans to do the work of assessment.
  
• Third, family policy should incorporate relational ethics and hold safety and relationships together.

A child’s best interests are not served by unsafe contact. Nor are they served by the unnecessary destruction of safe and meaningful relationships.That is not a demand for the domestic abuse field to surrender its achievements. It is a demand that it accept the same evidentiary discipline it asks of others.

The parental alienation field holds that line. Can the domestic abuse field do the same?

Korosi, S. (2026). Essay: The Child is Still in the Middle: Parental Alienation, Domestic Abuse and the Battle for the Future of Family Policy: Dialogue in Growth. In. Australia: University of the Sunshine Coast.https://doi.org/10.25907/01037

Similar Posts:

• Ethics Approval for Research into Parental Alienation as a Social Phenomenon
• Response to UN Special Rapporteur’s Call for Input: Custody Cases, Violence against Women and Children
• The Growth of Parental Alienation Advocacy and Support Groups in Australia
• Important Changes for Parental Alienation Services in Australia
• Family Violence Orders: Should You Really Apply For Them?