Thank you so much.
As a mother who was labelled as an alienator, I was also labelled as someone who had engaged in coercive control by the family court.
The criminalization of coercive control on its own standing would put those whom it is meant to protect at greater risk if the use of parental alienation and its associated remedies remain an option to family court judges.
It has now been 1,033 days since I've had contact with my child because of the use of parental alienation as a legal strategy. No contact means no visits, no cards, no celebrating holidays, no phone calls.
My judgment stated an immediate reversal of custody, inclusive of a police enforcement clause. The non-preferred parent was granted exclusive custody, sole decision-making and an indefinite restraining order, and ordered to participate in a second round of reunification therapy. This order is in direct contradiction of the recommendations of the Office of the Children's Lawyer, who recommended that I should have sole custody and decision-making power.
In 2020, Professor Joan Meier published empirical evidence that alienation claims are effective in undermining mothers and double their rate of losing custody of their children. Our family's judgment further legitimizes this study and is consistent with her findings as published in the Journal of Child Custody regarding children who have been forcibly removed from their preferred parent: “The children in these cases suffered from anxiety, depression, PTSD, self-harm, and suicidality, and some repeatedly ran away, thus exposing themselves to further harm of homelessness and sexual trafficking.”
The content from this journal has now become my child's reality. My child's clinical impression, as documented by the Hospital for Sick Children and the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, is aligned with the Journal of Child Custody regarding children who have been forcibly removed from their preferred parent.
Since the reversal of custody and no contact for almost three years, my child has been diagnosed with suicidal ideation, anxiety, depression and self-harm. Prior to the reversal of custody, my child did not have any concerns with mental health. Once again, the details of my case align with the Journal of Child Custody, as my child has also run away from school and home. Every time, she has been retraumatized, and her cries for help have been met with assault, forcible confinement and punishment.
The typical outcome in family court cases like mine is that the preferred parent is erased from the child's life. The remedies associated with parental alienation are hypocritical. In order to repair the relationship between the child and the non-preferred parent, they completely remove the preferred parent. They stop any and all contact immediately with the preferred parent, family members and friends, and even change schools, doctors and physicians.
Another implication for children affected by the pseudoscience of parental alienation is that all resources put in place to assist children, such as the children's aid societies, Ontario children's lawyers, clinicians, school social workers and mental health practitioners become null and void when there are accusations of parental alienation. Not one of the above agencies has made any attempt to help my child. As a non-preferred parent presents the court order, any concerns for the child's well-being, mental health or life are disregarded.
Accusations of parental alienation can be as simple as the preferred parent not having pictures of the non-preferred parent in the common areas of their home, the children not smiling in pictures taken with the non-preferred parent or the children not telling the non-preferred parent that they love them, and the preferred parent is alienating by not forcing the children to do so. This applies to physical affection. The preferred parent has to force the children to hug the non-preferred parent; otherwise, this is seen as alienation.
Clinical documents demonstrate that my child's views and preferences have remained the same, to be in the primary care of her mother. School and medical reports are consistent that my child is intelligent, mature and a top achiever, yet her views and preferences are still not respected.
Children are the ultimate victims in this process that is imposed upon them by a judge who follows the pseudoscience of alienation and all the unethical and traumatizing remedies associated with it.
In conclusion, I recommend that the Canadian government adopt the recommendations of the UN special rapporteur and NAWL. I additionally recommend the removal of the family court's ability to order custody reversals, no contact orders, reunification therapies in all forms and the use of transport agents.
Thank you.