Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Practicing counselors will, at some point, work with clients from high-conflict separations/divorces (HCS/D); however, often they have received very little educational training for these experiences. To effectively treat these clients/client families, all counselors should have a working knowledge of the major processes and critical factors involved in these situations. This manuscript emphasizes the role of the counselor within HCS/D, seeks to give both an overview of and describe the complexities of HCS/D that counselors need to understand, and identifies areas of concern and focus for counselors functioning within distinct modalities.

Keywords

high conflict divorce separation couples alienation

High conflict separation/divorce (HCS/D) can have expansive impacts on all involved. The multitude of moving pieces and involved parties can make the entire process overwhelming for families. Counselors and other mental health professionals are often invited into these situations at different levels (family, school, child, adult, co-parenting, evaluators, and psychoeducational consultants/counselors) and can be equally overwhelmed by the varied stakeholders, confusion, and trauma (Chang, 2020). This can make designing the most therapeutically appropriate treatment plan challenging (Fidler & Bala, 2020). Unless a practitioner is well versed with this population, they may be both reluctant and underprepared to work with HCS/D families effectively. This paper seeks to provide an overview of the complexities of HCS/D by outlining the terminology utilized, the process and people involved, the psychological impacts of HCS/D, and the roles counselors play in the process.

The axiom “high conflict” (divorce/separation/interaction) seeks to describe couples going through divorce/separation who engage in high levels of anger and distrust, verbal, physical and emotional abuse, and difficulty working together effectively (Johnston, 1994). While historically, it was thought that approximately 10 percent of divorced couples remain in high conflict, these estimates were made using only litigation data (e.g., how long and how often couples engaged in litigation) to define high conflict (Saini & Birnbaum, 2007). These definitions oversimplify the complexities of these situations. More inclusive definitions suggest that between 20 to 40 percent of divorces are highly conflictual (Erlanger et al., 1987; Johnston & Campbell, 1993; Saini & Birnbaum, 2007); reports in the literature suggest that these types of separations are on the rise (Fidler & Bala, 2020). Although no one definition can encapsulate the intricacies entirely, authors like Johnston (1994) have broken down divorce conflict into three important dimensions (domain, tactics, attitudinal). Counselors should understand that many separations involve conflict at the beginning, but that for most conflict decreases after establishing a life reorganization. Those who do not see decreased discord are categorized as high conflict. These contentious relationships impact all family members, including children, and must be treated both systemically and individually. Counselors across varied settings play a crucial role in helping families navigate HCS/D (Treloar, 2019) and these counselors must be able to navigate multifaceted case conceptualizations and possess a substantial understanding of the HCS/D processes (Shumaker & Kelsey, 2020).

Characteristics of HCS/D

Several individual-level factors like humiliation, shame, grief, and/or feeling helpless and vulnerable due to “assaultive life changes” have been associated with increased divorce conflict (Johnston, 1994). Individual psychopathologies (Hopper, 2001) or “high conflict personalities” (Saini & Birnbaum, 2007) may also contribute to extended conflict. On an interactive level, destructive dynamics that result from a history of marital discord, humiliation and trauma from the separation, a need for revenge, and/or jockeying for power and resources (time with children, money, etc.) cause parties to be highly distrustful of each other (Hopper, 2001; Johnston, 1994). This may result in creating one-dimensional characterizations of the other parent, pathologizing or diagnosing the other parent, and/or exaggerating the other parent's mistakes (Chang, 2020). Parties may feel convinced that they are fighting to protect the needs and well-being of their children (Johnston, 1994) without recognizing the relational damage taking place. External-level coalitions with family members, new partners, mental health providers, and legal professionals may also contribute to an adversarial relationship. Visser et al. (2017) discuss the third-party forgiveness effect, which posits that third-party members (family and friends) are often less forgiving than first-party members and may intentionally or unintentionally prolong divorce. Friedman (2004) also argues that conflict can be encouraged by third parties. Additionally, the court system can increase polarization and hostility (Hopper, 2001; Johntson, 1994). Saini and Birnbaum (2007) outlined 16 research-supported factors (e.g., mental health problems, substance abuse concerns, dissatisfaction with financial arrangements, level of trust, and external support systems) that contribute to HCS/D. One of these factors is titled “factors related to parent-child boundaries” (p. 18), and it stands out because (a) it specifically addresses how heightened conflict impacts the children; (b) it has historically been a topic of debate within the literature. Factors related to parent–child boundaries suggest that high-conflict parents may have trouble focusing on their child's needs as separate from their own which can significantly limit their ability to protect the children from their own emotional distress and anger. Whether conscious or unconscious, these behaviors dramatically impact the level of conflict in the relationship and have negative outcomes for the children involved. While different terms have been used to describe these ‘alienating behaviors’ is the most widely accepted in the literature and a concern counselors are bound to confront. Considering these reasons, the authors felt it important to address this factor explicitly.

Alienating behaviors

The familiar areas of potential contention during a separation (finances, custody, decision-making) are exacerbated when a couple is experiencing high conflict. The most demanding of these areas involve the emotional trauma that stems from a parent seeking to exclude or push out the other parent from the lives of their children. These behaviors can be so severe that they are often considered abusive (IPV- Interpersonal Violence) and are almost always traumatic for the targeted parent, as well as the children. Generally, counselors are unprepared to work with these situations (Fidnick et al., 2011) and seek to learn as they proceed, which can be dangerous.

Efforts toward excluding a parent are understood through a list of descriptive terms: alienation, alienating behaviors, estrangement, restrictive gatekeeping, protective gatekeeping, programing and brainwashing, and parental denigration. Reports from parents, children, young adults, and counselors agree on the variety of behaviors and strategies a parent employs to impact childrens’ feelings, behaviors, and beliefs which lead toward damaging or destroying a child's relationship with the other parent (Clawar & Rivlin, 2013; Saini et al., 2016). Alienation and alienating behaviors occur more often in cases of high conflict (Gagne et al., 2005) and can lead to a plethora of mental health concerns for both parents and children.

Alienating behaviors involve one parent's intentional interference in the relationship between the child(ren) and the other parent; this interference includes behaviors meant to denigrate and reduce contact with the other parent (Sirbu et al., 2020). When the alienating parent is successful in his/her efforts and the behaviors lead to a child rejecting or not communicating with the targeted parent without any legitimate reason, the term Parental Alienation or Parental Alienation Syndrome is used (Doǧan & Aytekin, 2021). This phenomenon was introduced in the literature by Wallerstein and Kelly (1976) as “the pathological alignment of a parent and a child, having as a result of the rejection of the alienated parent by the child.” Gardner (1985) who coined the term parental alienation syndrome which is identified in the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders as a condition with the diagnosis of ‘child affected by parental relationship distress’ (Bernet et al., 2016). It can be found in the same section as child sexual abuse, parent–child relational problems, and other forms of domestic violence. Parental alienation disorder (PAD) has been defined as an attachment disorder (Bernet et al., 2010). When the alienating parent is unsuccessful in turning the child (children) against the other parent, different terminology is often used (i.e., gatekeeping, brainwashing).

Over the past twenty years, many have worked to organize and classify the scope of alienating behaviors and tactics (e.g., Baker & Darnall, 2006; Fidler & Bala, 2010; Kelly & Johnston, 2001; Warshak, 2015). While there is a range of examples, they often vary in severity and can change over time. Some examples include conspiring with children to withhold information, keeping secrets and misleading the other parent, undermining a parent, withholding parenting time, disparaging family members, exaggerating and exploiting the other parent's behavior, and seeking to garner support from others to turn the child(ren) against the other parent (Fidler & Bala, 2020).

There are scholars who oppose the concept of alienation, particularly Parental Alienation Disorder, citing the quality of research on it, full acceptance of the phenomena itself, and its admissibility in court proceedings (Gardner, 1998, 2002). Because of the complexities inherent in alienation situations, those involved (parents, attorneys, counselors, courts) can oversimplify and confuse potentially complicated scenarios; this can lead to unhelpful blaming and stigmatization (Johnston & Sullivan, 2020). Despite the debates in the literature, the concept of alienation and attempts to better understand it continue to be espoused by the public and professional communities (Bernet, 2020; Lorandos, 2020) with some authors describing it at a “blossoming” field of study (Harman et al., 2019). It is estimated that over 22 million American adults have experienced alienating behaviors with half reporting severe instances of these behaviors (Harman et al., 2016).

The impact of HCS/D

There is little argument that children in the aftermath of divorce are at higher risk for developing both externalizing and internalizing disorders, lower motivations to learn, and lower school performance (Amato, 2010; Hetherington & Elmore, 2003). The Center for Disease Control and Prevention lists divorce as one of the ten categories of Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) (CDC, n.d.-a), and divorce/separation is the second most prevalent adverse childhood event (Sacks et al., 2014). Children of high conflict divorce/separation are at even higher risk, so much so that the experiences have been equated to a form of neglect (Joyce, 2016).

While not all children experience significant problems post-divorce, the research has outlined the areas in which they are at increased risk for both short-term concerns and long-term adjustment problems (Amato & Cheadle, 2005). They are more susceptible to externalizing issues like aggression, conduct problems, noncompliance, delinquent behaviors, minimized self-regulation, as well as internalizing disorders like depression, anxiety, low self-esteem, and diminished interpersonal skills (Amato, 2010; Weaver & Schofield, 2015). They are also more likely to develop substance use problems (Jackson et al., 2016), poor nutrition and reduced physical activity (Thuen et al., 2015), and academic difficulties (Amato & Anthony, 2014) than children from intact families. Stated simply, the fracturing of family units with resulting high conflict is one of the most significant psychosocial crises someone can experience (Mitcham-Smith & Henry, 2007).

Children of divorce are not the only individuals to fall victim to its conflict. The adults are often significantly impacted by many of the same internalizing and externalizing disorders faced by their children. Those with prior symptoms for personality disorders are at an increased risk of enhancing and/or increasing symptoms. Generally, these adults have higher rates of mental health and substance use problems (Auersperg et al., 2019), physical health problems (Monnat & Chandler, 2015), and earlier mortality rates (Larson & Halfon, 2013).

While there is a general understanding of the misfortune children of divorce face, this is not always the case and subsequently this mindset can move us away from integrating resilience and strengths-based approaches into interventions. Divorce does not impact all children in the same ways (Shumaker & Kelsey, 2020), and children can have reactions that range from vulnerability to resilience (Kelly, 2012). Researchers have provided us with a healthy list of factors that can safeguard against adverse impacts and potentially minimize future negative outcomes (Karela & Petrogiannis, 2020). These factors can be broken down into systemic and intrapersonal. Systemically, children are protected by minimal conflict and supportive cooperative parenting practices, authoritative parenting methods, supportive social networks, and the emotional presence and frequent contact with the non-custodial parent (Bauserman, 2002; Buchanan & Ritchie, 2004; Hetherington & Elmore, 2003). Researchers have also found that sibling subsystems provide a buffer for the challenges of these family transitions (Young & Ehrenberg, 2007). Other intrapersonal buffering factors include, but are not limited to, internal locus of control, normal or above average mental capacities, sense of humor, social competence, easy temperament, active coping styles, and physical attractiveness (Buchanan & Ritchie, 2004; Hetherington & Elmore, 2003).

The impacts are both varied and powerful and while counselors may have the knowledge and experience to work with the mental health impacts, a lack of understanding of the complexities leading to the conflict and the role additional parties play in the conflict can cause confusion and potentially minimize therapeutic progress. The family court system and all parties involved in it play a powerful and influential role in the perceptions and conduct of HCS/D families and it's important for counselors to have a working understanding of these people and processes.

Family court involvement

United States family courts were established in 1910 and have proliferated exponentially over the last 60 years. Plenty has been written about various ways family law helps and/or hurts families. Still, most separating families are engaged with the legal system to some extent, and those in high-conflict divorces are often deeply entangled in this system. Mediators are often accessed as a first contact for families seeking to separate without the involvement of the court system. Normally these mediators are attorneys and less often counselors. Mediators meet with the couple and attempt to construct a rational, mutually agreed-upon division of finances and custody arrangements. However, not all couples are able to resolve their divisions amicably and many end up moving to proceedings within the legal system.

Once this step has been taken, the family system expands and fractures simultaneously. The ‘system’ now includes new members (attorneys, hearing officers, magistrates, judges, parent coordinators, guardians ad litem, custody evaluators, etc.) causing immediate changes to communication patterns. In low-conflict divorce scenarios, this expansion can be helpful as outside individuals can assist couples (parents in particular) in planning future steps in a less emotionally heightened manner. In high-conflict divorces, this expansion can cause further difficulties as parents become disconnected from the system and therefore focus more on individual concerns based on their current psychological functioning and rationalizations for their perceptions. “It has been said that in criminal court, the worst people are seen at their best, but in family court, the best people are seen at their worst” (Ordway et al., 2020, p. 190). Research suggests that court involvement can increase animosity and hostility and minimize opportunities for positive communication (Bala et al., 2017).

Custody evaluators, guardian ad litem, mediators, co-parenting counselors, parenting coordinators, and mental health providers are often overwhelmed by these situations. As demands on their time increase, it has become clear that the current legal system has not evolved to meet their needs or those of high conflict families (Ordway et al., 2020; Paquin-Boudreau et al., 2021; Target et al., 2017). Counselors are confronted with managing these types of cases even though they have likely not been trained in the complexities of family law. However, they do have the potential to expand their knowledge in this area and combine that knowledge with training and experience.

The role of counselors

Counselors in various settings will encounter members of a family going through or dealing with the aftermath of HCS/D. Often, client families will work with multiple counselors contiguously (school, family, individual, co-parenting, etc.) without any requirement that encourages these counselors to collaborate (Bertelsen, 2021). Because the stakes are often so high and emotions may be at their peak, practitioners may be apprehensive in taking on these types of clients/client families since they can be both exhausting and invite an increase in dissatisfaction and client complaints (Chang, 2020). While counselors are not always involved, as families move through the justice system, counseling is usually recommended or stated as a requirement. Unfortunately, most professionals who work with families traumatized by HCS/D are unaware of the harmful complexities of concepts like alienating behaviors (Marcus, 2020). Many parents and children are not served well by the justice system (Fidler & Bala, 2020) and/or the use of the justice system exacerbates the conflict and the ensuing problems.

Most of the research and writing in this area has focused on legal interventions with these families (Drozd & Olesen, 2016; Garber, 2015) instead of the associated trauma experienced by those involved. Attention must be paid toward determining how we can establish and maintain deliberate and focused interventions for the adults, children, and family systems as they navigate separation and custody (Greenberg & Lebow, 2016). The trauma associated with high conflict and things like alienating behaviors, may not be immediately discernible to legal and mental health professionals, but their impacts are real and often long-term. Counselors can and should be critical players in designing and implementing essential intervention strategies and work toward the prevention of worsening psychological problems. While psychologists and social workers are also involved in this work, the focus here is on those within the counseling profession. The following sections address the role of the counselor across different modalities and specific recommendations for conceptualization and treatment.

Family counseling

Proponents of various schools of family systems work tend to agree on several systemic principles that guide their approach and their practice. These principles include concepts like circular causality, communication patterns, homeostatic tendency, nonsummativity, stages of the family life cycle, problems as symptoms, and family structure (Gladding, 2020). Families tend to seek help when they are experiencing the challenges and stressors that come with required changes in the system to adapt to the evolving nature of the family and those within it. Because families tend to seek out their known steady state (homeostatic tendency) instead of effectively adjusting to changes, counselors act as guides, support systems, and teachers in helping the family move through a change process with the goal of restructuring the family in a way that assists navigation through these changes in a more effective manner.

In the case of divorce or separation, many changes are happening within the family at a rapid pace and all members are significantly impacted. Divorce may have been a long time coming or may be more of a shock to the system, but either way, counselors are faced with family restructuring at its most extreme. Not only is the system undergoing this process of restructuring and redefining itself, but everyone is also experiencing these changes separately. Counselors play a critical role in helping clients re-author themselves and their families, which can promote agency (Treloar, 2019). A number of family system interventions have been suggested for use with families not dealing specifically with violence or abuse: multi-modal family therapy (MMFI), child-centered conjoint therapy (CCCT), family restructuring therapy, integrative family therapy (IFT), structural family therapy (SFT), family reintegration therapy (RT), family reunification therapy (FRT), multi-faceted family therapy (MFFT), and reconciliation therapy (Fidler et al., 2013; Polak, 2020; Polak & Moran, 2017). Systems approaches like these have been adapted for specific aspects of HCS/D, such as parental alienation (Templer et al., 2017), and contact refusal (DeJong & Davies, 2012; Lebow & Rekart, 2007). While alienating behaviors are more easily recognized by the victim parent, the alienating parent normally works hard to conceal these behaviors in front of professionals; with the entire family present, these efforts at disguise are less successful. As the counseling field has embraced trauma-informed care over the past 15 years, so too have those working with HCS/D families and individuals. Counselors must be aware of the role of stress, objective event trauma, and long-standing relational trauma and align their interventions accordingly (Fidler & Bala, 2020).

While there are a range of ‘conflicts’ in HCD/S, normally the families and the counselors involved are underprepared for the process’ complexities and the emotional toil. Since counselors are not specifically prepared in their training for this type of work, the experience can be a whirlwind for the counselor who feels like they are just barely keeping up with the systemic changes the family is undergoing (Fidler & Bala, 2020). When a family systems approach is unproductive, counselors should advocate for more intensive retreat-like programs (Sullivan et al., 2010).

A key aspect of any productive therapeutic work is the development of the therapeutic relationship; establishing this relationship with HCS/D families is historically challenging (Lebow, 2008). In situations with high hostility, it is recommended that counselors schedule sessions with the individual parents before sessions with the whole family to establish a working alliance with each adult (Friedlander et al., 2006; Pinsof, 1995). Because both parents are normally working hard to present the best version of themselves in these sessions, they are reluctant to take ownership of things like alienating behaviors and will seek to explain them away. These are tough moments for the counselor as they must be willing and able to point these out to begin to get under the surface issues and address things like anger, hostility, and resentment while at the same time, retaining an effective alliance with both parents. Imbalances in the alliance with the counselor need to be consistently evaluated and addressed to minimize the perception of a favorable relationship with one member of the couple (Günther-Bel et al., 2021), as this can escalate client fears regarding the counselor ‘siding’ with the other parent.

Individual counseling

Individual therapists are very likely to be involved with separating partners on their own considering the levels of heightened emotions and potential trauma associated with the often-unexpected life changes taking place. Many parents and stakeholders involved in the case initially gravitate towards and recommend individual treatment planning in lieu of systems focused conceptualizations and interventions (Davis & Sexton, 2021). Counselors are well-prepared to assist clients with anxiety, depression, substance use, and other intrapersonal concerns; these mental health concerns must be treated uniquely and individuals experiencing HCS/D are no exception. These individuals have characteristics that contribute to prolonging conflict over time and inhibit the creation of functional co-parenting and fluid communication (Birnbaum & Bala, 2010; Fidler & Bala, 2010; Polak & Saini, 2015). These parents tend to be primarily focused on themselves, unable to recognize their role in the conflict, and have few introspective abilities (Gordon et al., 2008).

Individual counseling is often recommended or required for children involved in a HCS/D. This recommendation may be made regardless of whether the child(ren) is showing symptoms of any problems. For individual counseling of HCS/D children, scholars have suggested and outlined the use of various modalities including narrative therapy (Thomas & Gibbons, 2009), existential therapy (Shumaker & Kelsey, 2020), and cognitive behavioral therapy (Garber, 2015). Methods of play therapy are also recommended considering this treatment approach helps with engagement, expression of thoughts and feelings, and a greater ability to assess treatment needs (Kenney-Noziska & Lowenstein, 2015). Play therapy is particularly appropriate for work with childhood traumatic experiences and given that divorce involves an unexpected and unwanted disruption of the family, it is considered one of the leading causes of child trauma (Herzog & Schmahl, 2018). This traumatic experience impacts children's developing nervous systems, expectations for relationships, access to emotional regulation supports, and their sense of future stability (Levine & Kline, 2008; McKay, 2020; Schore & McIntosh, 2011). Chen et al. (2021) outline a case for utilizing Adlerian play therapy with children of divorce given its perspective on attachment and its empirical effectiveness with trauma symptoms as well as other internal and externalizing symptoms.

School counseling

School-based interventions can play an essential role in children's well-being in the aftermath of divorce (Wyman, 2003), and school counselors are often at the forefront of these efforts. While school counselors are less likely to engage in intensive therapy with HCS/D students, they can be key players in providing additional support, prevention, and communication with parents and other treatment providers. School counselors have immediate access to teachers who are often the first line of defense in recognizing behavioral and emotional changes in students who warrant attention. They also provide ancillary services throughout the school system that have the potential to reach a child in need of additional tools, connection, or support. These children tend to experience increased feelings of loss, loneliness, anger, and anxiety (Clarke-Stewart & Brentano, 2006); how children respond to these feelings can vary and may include poor behavior or lack of motivation (Amato & Cheadle, 2008; Venter, 2006). Teacher or counselor recognition of behavior changes could initiate a connection to the counselor that could lead to a necessary and supportive intervention; oftentimes, the school is the only environment where children can receive necessary emotional intervention (Hoagwood et al., 2007).

As previously mentioned, despite the powerful statistics stating the hardships experienced by children of divorce, not all HCS/D children are doomed to poor outcomes and poor mental health; many demonstrate remarkable resilience (Thomas & Gibbons, 2009). Resilient children have developed protective behaviors that help moderate the risk factors, and school and community systems play a vital supportive role in helping them develop these resiliencies (Rodgers & Rose, 2002).

Over the years, many school counselors have embraced the idea of providing a regular support group specifically for children of divorce/separation. Research has shown that group programs can enhance children's functioning in both social and academic domains (O’Halloran & Carr, 2000). Due to many methodological issues, research showing the efficacy of most groups is lacking (Blaisure & Geasler, 2006). However, there are two programs that counselors should consider given that they have been replicated and empirically evaluated as effective: Pedro-Carroll's Children of Divorce Intervention Program (CODIP) and Stolberg's Children's Support Group.

School counselors should encourage parents to share their separation/divorce status and any concerns they may have with their child(ren)'s teachers and school counselors, allowing them to monitor the child(ren)'s behaviors more closely. While the inquiry might be awkward, asking parents specifically about experiences with alienating or gatekeeping behaviors could help the school counselor better understand the potential emotional turmoil children are experiencing. The traumatic aspects of a high-conflict divorce can be very well hidden as children tend to minimize their intrapersonal challenges amid the obvious ones occurring between their parents.

Co-parenting counseling

Co-parenting counseling is meant to facilitate positive communication for parents, encourage productive parenting behaviors, and avoid additional litigation (Boyan & Termini, 2013). The hope is that parents can learn to collaboratively engage in navigating present issues for the benefit of their children. While this type of counseling is often relegated by the court in cases of high conflict, it can be counterproductive as continued attempts at ‘working together’ only work to further ignite hostility. These can be deeply wounded parents and while consciously seeking to regain balance, direction, and a focus on the children (Shumaker & Kelsey, 2020), many are also subconsciously accustomed to receiving the attention the conflict provides. These parents tend to spend the co-parenting session trying to prove they are right and/or better, introducing new complaints, and ultimately ‘winning’ in the eyes of this new arbiter (Stacer & Stemen, 2000). One program suggests cutting any physical contact and severely limiting any other contact for a specified period; sanctioned contact should only be in writing and only when necessary (Stacer & Stemen, 2000).

Too often, counselors acting in this role do not have any specific educational training in the area nor are they necessarily working from a particular empirically supported model, which means that effectiveness is difficult to gauge. Effective co-parenting counselors focus on underlying parental trauma and fears the couple have held onto to minimize the conflict for effective decision-making. Ineffective counselors are easily sidetracked by day-to-day issues (scheduling, accusations, exchanges, etc.) which only works to enhance the deeper conflict. One mistake often made by the co-parenting counselor is to assume equal contribution to the high conflict by both parties. In many cases both parents can share in the responsibility for conflict (Fidler & Bala, 2020); however, in cases of HCS/D there is usually one parent who initiates and prolongs a disproportionate portion of conflict (Friedman, 2004).

When co-parenting counseling does not work, a parenting coordinator may be the next intervention suggested. These individuals are trained in conflict resolution and conflict management and seek to help the parents resolve disputes and reduce overall conflict (Kelly, 2008). Coordinators may work to teach the couple positive communication techniques including email and text exchanges, which tend to be filled with hostility by one or both parents (Ordway et al., 2020). In some cases, co-parenting counselors may attempt to play the role of a parent coordinator and vice versa.

Summary

HCS/D by its nature is complicated and contentious and while many families desire to minimize its impact on all involved parties, it is hard for anyone to move through these situations without some wounding. Because of its complexity, a wide array of legal professionals, family members and friends, school personnel, and mental health professionals become involved. Counselors are critical to helping these families (Treloar, 2019) and knowledgeable and prepared counseling professionals should hold a prominent role in the healing processes.

A counselor who desires to assist individuals and families going through this challenging process may become frustrated due to the often-diminished psychological functioning of their clients (Parkinson, 2000). Because most counselors are not specifically prepared to work with HCS/D families in their training (Fidnick et al., 2011), their conceptualizations and approaches are often divergent and/or polarized, leading them to be confused about what specific models to utilize (Davis & Sexton, 2021). Davis and Sexton (2021) make clear that HCS/D families may not have access to evidence-based or evidence-informed treatment methods and encourage counselors and incorporate models with empirical evidence. There are vast differences between the approaches mentioned here, but there are also similarities in that they all require a multi-focus and multi-technique orientation that necessitates outstanding skill as well as a working understanding of the processes of HCS/D (Shumaker & Kelsey, 2020).

Because family members may be engaged with school counselors, individual counselors, family counselors, and co-parenting counselors, there can be confusion, manipulation tactics, misunderstandings, fears, and feelings of being overwhelmed. For instance, a parent may behave very differently in front of the co-parenting counselor than how they behave and react with the ex-partner or at home with the children (the children may engage in similar behaviors). A child may fear consequences of sharing details with a counselor or must navigate a parent explicitly telling them what to say and what not to say with a counselor. A parent may seek to minimize or explain away alienating or gatekeeping behaviors. Children will often minimize the impact of the high conflict. Counselors must work very hard to not get pulled into the minutia and the back and forth of repeated confrontations that appear manageable on the surface. Rather, they must maintain a commitment to helping clients explore the depth of emotions prevalent during often tumultuous times. Counselors should seek to collaborate with other professionals involved for the benefit of all family members (Deutsch & Sullivan, 2014; Fidler et al., 2011). Their communication and collaboration (case management) with one another minimizes the influence of inconsistent or erratic behaviors.

As previously mentioned, counselors may be reluctant to take on these types of clients and it is important to reiterate that burnout and vicarious trauma are real concerns. Professionals are not immune to the elevated experiences of their clients and can experience vicarious trauma, compassion fatigue, emotional labor, and/or burn-out (Ordway et al., 2020). However, the need for good counselors is unending and as the incidences of high-conflict divorce continue to increase, effective and knowledgeable counselors are critical.

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article

ORCID iD

Chris D. Schmidt

References

Amato

P. R.

(2010). Research on divorce: Continuing trends and new developments. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72(3), 650–666. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00723.x

Amato

P. R.

Anthony

C. J.

(2014). Estimating the effects of parental divorce and death with fixed effects models. Journal of Marriage and Family, 76(2), 370–386. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12100

Amato

P. R.

Cheadle

(2005). The long reach of divorce: Divorce and child well-being across three generations. Journal of Marriage and Family Therapy, 67(1), 191–206. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-2445.2005.00014.x

Amato

P. R.

Cheadle

J. E.

(2008). Parental divorce, marital conflict and children's behavior problems: A comparison of adopted and biological children. Social Forces, 86(3), 1139–1161. https://doi.org/10.1353/sof.0.0025

Auersperg

Vlasak

Ponocny

Barth

(2019). Long-term effects of parental divorce on mental health—A meta- analysis. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 119, 107–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2019.09.011

Baker

A. J.

Darnall

(2006). Behaviors and strategies employed in parental alienation: A survey of parental experiences. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 45(1-2), 97–124. https://doi.org/10.1300/J087v45n01_06

Bala

Hebert

Birnbaum

(2017). Ethical duties of lawyers for parents regarding children of clients: Being a child-focused family lawyer. The Canadian Bar Review, 95(3), 557–589. https://doi.org/10.1080/10502556.2021.1993022

Bauserman

(2002). Child adjustment in joint custody versus sole custody arrangements: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Family Psychology, 16, 91–102. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.16.1.91

Bernet

(2020). Parental alienation and misinformation proliferation. Family Court Review, 58(2), 293–307. https://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12473

10.

Bernet

von Boch-Galhau

Baker

A. J.

Morrison

S. L.

(2010). Parental alienation, DSM-v, and ICD-11. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 38(2), 76–187. https://doi.org/10.1080/01926180903586583

11.

Bernet

Wamboldt

M. Z.

Narrow

W. E.

(2016). Child affected by parental relationship distress. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 55, 571–579. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2016.04.018

12.

Bertelsen

(2021). Staying with the conflict–parenting work and the social organization of post-divorce conflict. Journal of Family Studies, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/13229400.2020.1869578

13.

Blaisure

K. R.

Geasler

M. J.

(2006). Educational interventions for separating and divorcing parents and their children. In Fine

M. A.

Harvey

J. H.

(Eds.), Handbook of divorce and relationship dissolution (pp. 575–599). Erlbaum.

14.

Birnbaum

Bala

(2010). Towards the differentiation of high-conflict families: An analysis of social science research and Canadian case law. Family Court Review, 48(3), 403–416. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-1617.2010.01319.x

15.

Boyan

Termini

A. M.

(2013). The psychotherapist as parent coordinator in high-conflict divorce: Strategies and techniques. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315808673

16.

Buchanan

Ritchie

(2004). What works for troubled children? Barnado's.

17.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (n.d.-a). Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) . https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/aces/

18.

Chang

(2020). High-conflict divorce and parenting: How solution focused presence can help. In The solution focused approach with children and young people (pp. 179–193). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429198120

19.

Chen

S. Y.

Roller

Kottman

(2021). Adlerian family play therapy: Healing the attachment trauma of divorce. International Journal of Play Therapy, 30(1), 28. doi:10.1037/pla0000146

20.

Clarke-Stewart, A., & Brentano, C. (2006). Divorce: Causes and consequences. Yale University Press.

21.

Clawar

S. S.

Rivlin

B. V.

(2013). Children held hostage: Identifying brainwashed children, presenting a case, and crafting solutions. American Bar Association.

22.

Davis

Sexton

(2021). Using the range of research evidence to help inform clinical decision making and treatment for family court-involved children and families. Family Court Review, 59(4), 641–655. https://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12599

23.

DeJong

Davies

(2012). Contact refusal by children following acrimonious separation: Therapeutic approaches with children and parents. Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 18(2), 185–198. https://doi.org/10.1177/13591045124446

24.

Deutsch

Sullivan

(2014). Top ten tips when a child is resisting or rejecting contact with a parent. Ask the Experts from the AFCC eNEWS: Guidance from Leading Family Law Professionals. https://www.afccnet.org/Portals/0/PDF/Ask_the_Experts_Book.pdf?ver=WGHtJjk77aMthA8LxJc_Ng%3d%3d

25.

Doǧan

R. Y.

Aytekin

(2021). An overview of parental alienation from the framework of ecological systems theory. Psikiyatride Guncel Yaklasimlar, 13(3), 551–572. https://doi.org/10.18863/pgy.826957

26.

Drozd

L. M.

Olesen

N. W.

(eds) (2016). Parenting plan evaluations: Applied research for the family court (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.

27.

Erlanger

H. S.

Chambliss

Melli

M. S.

(1987). Participation and flexibility in informal processes: Cautions from the divorce context. Law and Society Review, 585–604. https://doi.org/10.2307/3053597

28.

Fidler

B. J.

Bala

(2010). Children resisting post-separation contact with a parent: Concepts, controversies and conundrums. Family Court Review, 48(1), 10–47. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-1617.2009.01287.x

29.

Fidler

B. J.

Bala

(2020). Concepts, controversies and conundrums of “alienation:” Lessons learned in a decade and reflections on challenges ahead. Family Court Review, 58(2), 576–603. https://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12488

30.

Fidler

B. J.

Bala

Hurwitz

(2013). Best practice guide: Responding to emotional harm of children in high conflict separation. High Conflict Forum.

31.

Fidler

B. J.

Bala

Saini

(2011). Ten tips for legal and mental health professionals involved in alienation, or alleged alienation. Association of Family and Conciliation Courts Monthly E-Newsletter, 6(5), 1–3.

32.

Fidnick

L. S.

Koch

K. A.

Greenberg

L. R.

Sullivan

(2011). Association of family and conciliation courts white paper guidelines for court-involved therapy: A best practice approach for mental health professionals. Family Court Review, 49(3), 557–563. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-1617.2011.01401.x

33.

Friedlander

M. L.

Escudero

Horvath

A. O.

Heatherington

Cabero

Martens

M. P.

(2006). System for observing family therapy alliances: A tool for research and practice. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53(2), 214–225. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.53.2.214

34.

Friedman

(2004). The so-called high-conflict couple: A closer look. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 32(2), 101–117. https://doi.org/10.1080/01926180490424217

35.

Gagné

Drapeau

Hénault

(2005). Parental alienation: An overview of research and controversy. Canadian Psychology-Psychologie Canadienne, 46(2), 73–87. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0087007

36.

Garber

B. D.

(2015). Cognitive-behavioral methods in high-conflict divorce: Systematic desensitization adapted to parent–child reunification interventions. Family Court Review, 53(1), 96–112. https://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12133

37.

Gardner

R. A.

(1985). Recent trends in divorce and custody litigation. Academy Forum, 29(2), 3–7.

38.

Gardner

R. A.

(1998). Recommendations for dealing with parents who induce parental alienation syndrome in their children. Journal of Divorce and Remarriage, 28(3/4), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1300/J087v28n03_01

39.

Gardner

R. A.

(2002). Parental alienation syndrome vs. parental alienation: Which diagnosis should evaluators use in child custody disputes. American Journal of Family Therapy, 30, 93–115. https://doi.org/10.1080/019261802753573821

40.

Gladding

S. T.

(2020). Family therapy: History, theory and practice. Pearson.

41.

Gordon

R. M.

Stoffey

Bottinelli

(2008). MMPI-2 findings of primitive defenses in alienating parents. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 36(3), 211–228. https://doi.org/10.1080/01926180701643313

42.

Greenberg

L. R.

Lebow

J. L.

(2016). Putting it all together: Effective intervention planning for children and families. In Drozd

Saini

Olesen

(Eds.), Parenting plan evaluations: Applied research for the family court (2nd ed, pp. 555). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/med:psych/9780199396580.003.0019

43.

Günther-Bel

Vilaregut

Linares

J. L.

(2021). Towards an understanding of the within-system therapeutic alliance with high-conflict divorced parents: A change process research. Contemporary Family Therapy, 43(4), 329–342. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10591-021-09593-7

44.

Harman

J. J.

Bernet

Harman

(2019). Parental alienation: The blossoming of a field of study. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 28(2), 212–217. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721419827271

45.

Harman

J. J.

Leder-Elder

Biringen

(2016). Prevalence of parental alienation drawn from a representative poll. Children and Youth Services Review, 66, 62–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2016.04.021

46.

Herzog

J. I.

Schmahl

(2018). Adverse childhood experiences and the consequences on neurobiological, psychosocial, and somatic conditions across the lifespan. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 9, 420. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2018.00420

47.

Hetherington

E. M.

Elmore

A. M.

(2003). Risk and resilience in children coping with their parents’ divorce and remarriage. In Luthar

S. S.

(Ed.), Resilience and vulnerability: Adaption in the context of childhood adversities (pp. 182–212). Cambridge University. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511615788.010

48.

Hoagwood

K. E.

Olin

S. S.

Kerker

B. D.

Kratochwill

T. R.

Crowe

Saka

(2007). Empirically based school interventions targeted at academic and mental health functioning. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 15, 66–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/10634266070150020301

49.

Hopper, J. (2001). The symbolic origins of conflict in divorce. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63(2), 430–445. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2001.00430.x

50.

Jackson

K. M.

Rogers

M. L.

Sartor

C. E.

(2016). Parental divorce and initiation of alcohol use in early adolescence. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 30(4), 450–461. https://doi.org/10.1037/adb0000164

51.

Johnston

J. R.

(1994). High-conflict divorce. The Future of Children, 165–182. https://doi.org/10.2307/1602483

52.

Johnston

J. R.

Campbell

L. E.

(1993). Parent-child relationships in domestic violence families disputing custody. Family Court Review, 31(3), 282–298. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.174-1617.1993.tb00305.x

53.

Johnston

J. R.

Sullivan

M. J.

(2020). Parental alienation: In search of common ground for a more differentiated theory. Family Court Review, 58(2), 270–292. https://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12472

54.

Joyce

A. N.

(2016). High-Conflict divorce: A form of child neglect. Family Court Review, 54(4), 642–656. https://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12249

55.

Karela

Petrogiannis

(2020). Young children’s emotional well-being after parental divorce: Discrepancies between “resilient” and “vulnerable” children. Journal of Educational and Developmental Psychology, 10(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.5539/jedp.v10n1p18

56.

Kelly

J. B.

(2008). Preparing for the parenting coordination role: Training needs for mental health and legal professionals. Journal of Child Custody, 5, 140–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/15379410802070476

57.

Kelly

J. B.

(2012). Risk and protective factors associated with child and adolescent adjustment following separation and divorce: Social science applications. In Kuehnle

Drozd

(Eds.), Parenting plan evaluations: Applied research for the family court (pp. 49–84). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/med:psych/9780199754021.003.0003

58.

Kelly

J. B.

Johnston

J. R.

(2001). The alienated child: A reformulation of parental alienation syndrome. Family Court Review, 39(3), 249–266. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.174-1617.2001.tb00609.x

59.

Kenney-Noziska

Lowenstein

(2015). Play therapy with children of divorce: A prescriptive approach. In Crenshaw

D. A.

Stewart

A. L.

(Eds.), Play therapy: A comprehensive guide to theory and practice (pp. 290–303). Guilford Press.

60.

Larson

Halfon

(2013). Parental divorce and adult longevity. International Journal of Public Health, 58(1), 89–97. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00038-012-0373-x

61.

Lebow

(2008). Separation and divorce issues in couple therapy. In Gurman

A. S.

(Ed.), Clinical handbook of couple therapy (pp. 459–477). The Guilford Press.

62.

Lebow

Rekart

(2007). Integrative family therapy for high-conflict divorce with disputes over child custody and visitation. Family Process, 46(1), 79–91. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1545-5300.2006.00193.x

63.

Levine

Kline

(2008). Trauma-proofing your kids. North Atlantic Books.

64.

Lorandos

(2020). Psycho-legal investigations of the concept of parental alienation: Analysis of American appellate cases. Family Court Review, 58(2), 322–339. doi:10.1111/fcre.12475

65.

Marcus

(2020). Innovative programs in Israel for prevention & responding to parental alienation: Education, early identification and timely, effective intervention. Family Court Review, 58(2), 544–559. https://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12486

66.

McKay

(2020). The trauma of divorce: Reducing the impact of separation on children. American Academy of Experts in Traumatic Stress. https://www.aaets.org/traumatic-stress-library/the-trauma-of-divorce-reducing-the-impact-of-separation-on-children

67.

Mitcham-Smith

Henry

W. J.

(2007). High-conflict divorce solutions: Parenting coordination as an innovative co-parenting intervention. The Family Journal, 15, 368–373. https://doi.org/10.1177/106648070730375

68.

Monnat

S. M.

Chandler

R. F.

(2015). Long-term physical health consequences of adverse childhood experiences. Sociological Quarterly, 56(4), 723–752. https://doi.org/10.1111/tsq.12107

69.

O’Halloran

Carr

(2000). Adjustment to parental separation and divorce. In Carr

(Ed.), What works with children and adolescents? A critical review of psychological interventions with children, adolescents, and their families (pp. 280–299). Routledge.

70.

Ordway

A. M.

Moore

R. O.

Casasnovas

A. F.

Asplund

N. R.

(2020). Understanding vicarious trauma, burnout, and compassion fatigue in high-conflict divorce. The Family Journal, 28(2), 187–193. https://doi.org/10.1177/10664807209040

71.

Paquin-Boudreau

Poitras

Cyr

Godbout

(2021). An interdisciplinary case management protocol for high-conflict families: The evolution of coparental dynamic. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 62(8), 657–672. https://doi.org/10.1080/10502556.2021.1993022

72.

Parkinson

(2000). Mediating with high-conflict couples. Family Court Review, 38(1), 69–76. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.174-1617.2000.tb00559.x

73.

Pinsof

W. M.

(1995). Integrative problem-centered therapy. A synthesis of family, individual, and biological therapies. Basic Books.

74.

Polak

(2020). Mental health professionals’ practice of reintegration therapy for parent-child contact problems post-separation: A phenomenological study. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 61(3), 225–248. https://doi.org/10.1080/10502556

75.

Polak

Moran

(2017). The current status of outpatient approaches to parent-child contact problems. In Judge

Deutsch

R. M.

(Eds.), Overcoming parent-child contact problems: Family-based interventions for resistance, rejection, and alienation (pp. 63–90). Oxford University Press.

76.

Polak

Saini

(2015). Children resisting contact with a parent post separation: Assessing this phenomenon using an ecological systems framework. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 56(3), 220–247. https://doi.org/10.1080/10502556.2015.1012698

77.

Rodgers

K. B.

Rose

H. A.

(2002). Risk and resiliency factors among adolescents who experience marital transitions. Journal of Marriage and Family, 64, 1024–1037. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2002.01024.x

78.

Sacks

Murphy

Moore

(2014). Adverse Childhood Experiences: National and State-Level Prevalence. Child Trends.

79.

Saini

Birnbaum

(2007). Unraveling the label of “high conflict": What factors really count in divorce and separated families. Journal of the Ontario Association of Children's Aid Societies, 51(1), 14–20.

80.

Saini

M. A.

Johnston

Fidler

B. J.

Bala

(2016). Empirical studies of alienation. In Drozd

L. M.

Saini

M. A.

Olesen

(Eds.), Parenting plan evaluations: Applied research for the family court (2nd ed, pp. 374–430). Oxford University Press.

81.

Schore

McIntosh

(2011). Family law and the neuroscience of attachment, part 1. Family Court Review, 49(3), 501–512. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-1617.2011.01387.x

82.

Shumaker

Kelsey

(2020). The existential impact of high-conflict divorce on children. Person-Centered & Experiential Psychotherapies, 19(1), 22–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/14779757.2020.1717985

83.

Sîrbu

A. G.

Vintilă

Tisu

Ștefănuț

A. M.

Tudorel

O. I.

Măguran

Toma

R. A.

(2020). Parental alienation-development and validation of a behavioral anchor scale. Sustainability, 13(1), 316. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13010316

84.

Stacer

D. L.

Stemen

F. A.

(2000). Intervention for high conflict custody cases. American Journal of Family Law, 14, 242–251.

85.

Sullivan

M. J.

Ward

P. A.

Deutsch

R. M.

(2010). Overcoming barriers family camp: A program for high-conflict divorced families where a child is resisting contact with a parent. Family Court Review, 48, 116–135. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-1617.2009.01293.x

86.

Target

Hertzmann

Midgley

Casey

Lassri

(2017). Parents’ experience of child contact within entrenched conflict families following separation and divorce: A qualitative study. Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy, 31(2), 218–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/02668734.2016.1268197

87.

Templer

Matthewson

Haines

Cox

(2017). Recommendations for best practice in response to parental alienation: Findings from a systematic review. Journal of Family Therapy, 39, 103–122. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6427.12137

88.

Thomas

D. A.

Gibbons

M. M.

(2009). Narrative theory: A career counseling approach for adolescents of divorce. Professional School Counseling, 12(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/2156759X0901200310

89.

Thuen

Breivik

Wold

Ulveseter

(2015). Growing up with one or both parents: The effects on physical health and health-related behavior through adolescence and into early adulthood. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 56(6), 451–474. https://doi.org/10.1080/10502556.2015.1058659

90.

Treloar

(2019). Parents making meaning of high-conflict divorce.  Australian and New Zealand Journal of Family Therapy, 40(1), 85–97. https://doi.org/10.1177/2156759X0901200310

91.

Venter

(2006). Short-term structured play therapy with the latency-aged child of divorce [Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation]. University of South Africa. http://hdl.handle.net/10500/2392

92.

Visser

Finkenauer

Schoemaker

Kluwer

Rijken

Lawick

Bom

Schipper

Lamers-Winkelman

(2017). I'll never forgive you: High conflict divorce, social network, and co-parenting conflicts. Journal of Child & Family Studies, 26(11), 3055–3066. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-017-0821-6

93.

Wallerstein

J. S.

Kelly

J. B.

(1976). The effects of parental divorce: Experiences of the child in later latency. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 46(2), 256–269. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-0025.1976.tb00926.x

94.

Warshak

R. A.

(2015). Parental alienation: Overview, management, intervention, and practice tips. Journal of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, 28, 181–248.

95.

Weaver

J. M.

Schofield

T. J.

(2015). Mediation and moderation of divorce effects on children's behavior problems. Journal of Family Psychology, 29, 39–48. https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0000043

96.

Wyman

P. A.

(2003). Emerging perspectives on context specificity of children's adaptation and resilience: Evidence from a decade of research with urban children in adversity. In Luthar

S. S.

(Ed.), Resilience and vulnerability: Adaptation in the context of childhood adversities (pp. 293–317). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511615788.014

97.

Young

Ehrenberg

M. F.

(2007). Siblings, parenting, conflict, and divorce: Do young adults’ perceptions of past family experiences predict their present adjustment? Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 47(3-4), 67–85. https://doi.org/10.1300/J087v47n03_04

Counseling High Conflict: Navigating the Complexities of High Conflict Divorce

Abstract

Keywords

Characteristics of HCS/D

Alienating behaviors

The impact of HCS/D

Family court involvement

The role of counselors

Family counseling

Individual counseling

School counseling

Co-parenting counseling

Summary

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

Funding

ORCID iD

References