This treatment of relocation issues includes everything in CR22 plus all the material that was deleted from that article because of the journal's space limitations. In addition to the topics described in CR22, this monograph covers an overview of legal and policy issues in relocation cases, a discussion of case law (with citations to 39 cases and 16 articles in law publications), a list of factors to consider in relocation litigation proposed by the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, greater elaboration of social science studies, practice tips for attorneys, and suggestions for proposing and opposing relocation. [For other resources on relocation, see CR18 and CR22.]

This book chapter describes characteristics of father-custody families, including the children's and parents' reactions. Unique problems of father-custody families are discussed such as the prejudice faced by custodial fathers and noncustodial mothers in our society. The second half of the chapter describes how psychotherapists can assist father-custody families. The discussion stresses the importance of having flexible guidelines for children's post-divorce living arrangements, promoting coparenting relationships, and preparing the children for the separation. There are sections on facilitating the mother-child relationship, the father-child relationship, and strengthening support systems. Strategies for accomplishing these therapeutic goals are presented and illustrated with case studies. Although this chapter appeared in a book for therapists, for the most part the language is non-technical and can be understood by parents and attorneys without training in psychology. NOTE: THIS ARTICLE IS INCLUDED IN THE PORTFOLIO CR01 DESCRIBED ABOVE.

This pamphlet is an expanded version of an enthusiastically received keynote address delivered by Dr. Warshak in Arizona in 2000. It proposes the types of reforms necessary for parents, professionals, and courts to better define the best interests of children. Dr. Warshak calls for more diligence in custody evaluations and in reviews of the literature. He criticizes policies which automatically discourage joint custody when divorcing parents are in conflict. He demonstrates how false beliefs which harm children come to be accepted as established authoritative wisdom. The discussion covers a wide ground, including Dr. Warshak's views on relocation, parental alienation syndrome, and overnight access between young children and their parents. He proposes a new paradigm of collaboration in research, custody evaluations, and the legal process of divorce. The pamphlet closes on an optimistic note, with predictions of specific areas in which custody practices and policy will improve.

This law journal article, published in 2000, reviews and analyzes psychological research and considerations that relate to relocation decisions. It can assist attorneys in dealing with expert testimony in relocation litigation. Expert witnesses will find it valuable in preparing for testimony and anticipating cross-examination. Parents facing decisions regarding relocation of their children will also find it helpful. The Burgess decision provides the context for this discussion with special attention to the arguments and research discussed in Wallerstein's amica curiae brief. Dr. Warshak identifies and explains crucial errors and oversights in the brief that detract from its value as a guide to children's best interests in relocation decisions. He shows that the brief is inconsistent with a large volume of empirical research and with Wallerstein's own earlier published findings and opinions. The article covers the importance of the custodial mother-child relationship, the significance of frequent father-child contact, the relationship between quantity and quality of contact, direct studies of relocation, the impact of the relocation decision on the custodial parent, the financial impact of relocation, joint custody and relocation, hardships of travel and access schedules following relocation, motives and reasonableness of plans, the role of children's preferences in relocation decisions, relocation and parental alienation syndrome, custody evaluations, and limitations of social science studies which courts should be aware of before applying research findings to relocation dispositions. Includes citations to 82 social science references. Due to space limitations, the published article is half as long as the original manuscript. The complete version is available as item CR16.

This work draws on 88 references to discuss the main criticisms of the term parental alienation syndrome. The article discusses alternative formulations of the disturbance in which children become irrationally alienated from a parent, including a new formulation by Dr. Joan Kelly and Dr. Janet Johnston. Those who anticipate using or defending against the term parental alienation syndrome (PAS) in court will find the discussion of the admissibility of PAS especially helpful. This is the first article in which Dr. Warshak explicitly addresses the status of parental alienation syndrome (PAS) in light of the standards promulgated by the U. S. Supreme Court decision in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 31 journal pages

This article describes and illustrates three general categories of situations that superficially resemble parental alienation syndrome and can be mistaken for it. In addition to helping to reduce the incidence of misdiagnosis of parental alienation syndrome, it can assist those who are opposing the use of parental alienation syndrome in court as well as those who are proposing its use. Those who believe that a child is suffering from parental alienation syndrome should be prepared to demonstrate that the situations described in this article do not apply to the child in question. 22 journal pages

This journal article is a follow-up to CR21. It was written as a rejoinder to an article that attempted to refute the conclusions drawn in the Blanket Restrictions article. This article makes the strong case that an accurate and balanced account of the entire scientific literature relevant to the issue of overnights reveals the lack of scientific and logical justification for blanket restrictions and supports the conclusion that caution should be exercised before depriving children of a valuable experience that can help sustain their normal interaction with both parents. If you are involved in litigation, this article may be important because it refutes objections that may be raised regarding the Blanket Restrictions article. Includes citations to 35 references. 12 journal pages

This article, published in a prestigious law journal, is Dr. Warshak's most thorough examination to date of different ideas about pathological alienation and its status in custody litigation. It examines a continuum of opinions about parental alienation with reference to relevant scientific literature and is an attempt to introduce rationality in an area that suffers from polemics and politics. Professionals agree that children can become irrationally alienated from a parent but disagree about what to call this problem and about how to conceptualize it. Dr. Warshak proposes that a conceptualization that emphasizes the influence of the favored parent, such as Parental Alienation Syndrome, has intellectual and scientific roots in developmental and cognitive psychology, particularly research on children's suggestibility. A conceptualization that emphasizes the role of multiple interrelated factors enjoys support in family systems theory that regards children's problematic behavior as an expression of family-wide dysfunction. The article reviews available studies and concludes that the current status of research supports the prevailing opinion among mental health professionals that the court's authority is a key element in successful remedies of severe alienation. The article describes the possible advantages of the term "pathological alienation" and offers other suggestions for circumventing unproductive disputes and focusing on the welfare of families. This article is essential for any parent, attorney, or mental health professional proposing or opposing evidence dealing with parental alienation. 29 journal pages.

Children's perspectives can enlighten decisions regarding custody and parenting plans, but different opinions exist about how best to involve children in the decision-making process. This journal article discusses why most procedures for soliciting children's preferences do not reliably elicit information on their best interests and do not give children a meaningful voice in decision- making. Instead these procedures give children forums in which to takes sides in their parents' disputes. Dr. Warshak shows how, in addition to hearing an individual child's voice, decision makers can use the collective voice of children, as revealed in research on joint custody, overnight contacts, and relocation, to help understand what children might say about these issues with the hindsight of maturity and in the absence of parental pressure, loyalty conflicts, inhibitions, and limitations in perspective and articulation. This article will interest parents and legal and mental health professionals who must decide how much weight to place on a child's stated preferences. It is essential for cases in which children align themselves with one parent's position in a custody dispute. Includes citations to 113 references.

This chapter is an updated version of CR 27, Bringing Sense to Parental Alienation. See the above description. The primary changes are the addition of a discussion of a new reliability study on parental alienation syndrome, citations to a study on the long-term effects of parental alienation syndrome, and a section on Arguments Ad Hominem. Unless the earlier, peer-reviewed and published article (CR27) is needed for purposes of litigation, this chapter will be sufficient and preferable for most purposes. 46 manuscript pages.