Studie von Clawar & Riflin zur Elternentfremdung
Clawar, S. S. and Riflin, B. V. (1991), Children Held Hostage:
Dealing with Programmed and Brainwashed Children. Chicago, Illinois:
American Bar Association
den Seiten 127–130 findet sich Gardners Darstellung der klinischen Studie
des elterlichen Entfremdungssyndroms von Clawar & Rivlin (1991) mit
GENDER DIFFERENCES IN PARENTAL-ALIENATION-SYNDROME INDOCTRINATORS
Over the years, my experience has been that mothers are much more likely than fathers to induce a parental alienation syndrome (PAS) in their children. It is not that fathers are not trying, but they have been far less successful. It was this gender difference that provided me with additional insight into the causes of the PAS, and it has had implications for my recommendations. This observation has subsequently been confirmed by others. In 1994 I sent out a questionnaire to approximately 50 mental health and legal professionals who I knew had direct experience with PAS families. I asked them a simple question:
What has been your experience regarding the gender ratio of PAS inducers, i.e., mothers/fathers. Only one respondent stated that the ratio was 50/50. All the others described a preponderance of mothers over fathers, with ratios varying from 60 percent mothers/40 percent fathers to 95 percent mothers/5 percent fathers.
The same preponderance of mothers over fathers has been described in the literature (Rand, 1997a; Turkat, 1994,1995; Wallerstein and Kelly, 1980). The ratio of mothers over fathers is even greater when a sex-abuse accusation is incorporated into the PAS (Blush and Ross, 1987,1990; Ross and Blush, 1990;
Thoennes and Tjaden, 1990; Wakefield and Underwager, 1990). It is important to note, however, that physical abuse of children is much more commonly perpetrated by fathers than mothers. We see here gender differences in the style by which a parent may act out hostility. Women, being the "weaker sex," are more likely to use verbal and psychological methods, whereas men, being the "stronger sex," are more likely to utilize physical methods.
Many authors (Clawar and Rivlin, 1991; Johnston, 1993; Johnston and Campbell, 1988; Wallerstein and Blakeslee, 1989; Wallerstein and Kelly, 1980) have described the increased likelihood of a parent's becoming the target of a PAS if the marital breakup results from the rejection of a spouse in favor of a new partner. The rejecting parent is viewed as responsible for the marital breakup and therefore worthy of all the scorn heaped upon him (her). But even in situations in which a new partner has not precipitated the marital breakup, the subsequent appearance of a new partner may engender great rage in the other parent, rage that fuels the PAS.
Clawar and Rivlin (1991) studied 700 programming/brainwashing parents and categorized their most common techniques, e.g., threat of withdrawal of love, "I’m the only one who really loves you," denial of the existence of the estranged parent, etc. In 11 of 12 categories the fathers were significantly less likely than the mothers to utilize the alienating maneuver. For example, threat of withdrawal of love was used by 5 percent of males and 42 percent of females. Their studies provide important confirmation of my observation, and that of others, that mothers are far more likely than fathers to program their children against the targeted parent. Clawar and Rivlin devote a chapter of their book (pages 155-162) to this important distinction. Their study of 700 subjects reveals that 4-85 percent of females were likely to be programming their children as opposed to 2-25 percent of males. The authors enumerate the factors they consider operative in the predominance of females over males. I comment here on some of the factors that Clawar and Rivlin considered operative in this gender disparity.
1. Birthright The fact that the woman gave birth to the child and suffered the pain of delivery is considered justification for the programming.
2. Proprietary-Exclusionary Perspective The mothers profess the strong opinion that they—by virtue of the fact that they are women—should more justifiably be considered the primary custodial parent. "The children are mine, not his." These mothers clearly are proponents of the tender-years presumption.
3. The Family and Women Are Synonymous Males are viewed as extraneous, as second-class citizens, and the family is viewed as basically matriarchal.
4. Female Identity and Parenting The woman is more likely to identify herself as the child rearer than her husband. The loss of a child, for such a woman, means the loss of her identity, a loss of her raison d'etre.
5. Financial Support Needs This factor relates to the fact that women, following separation, are far less financially secure than men, especially because their earning power is less. Under such circumstances, spending more time with the children, by achieving primary custodial status, justifies requesting and even demanding more money from the estranged husband.
6. Lack of Other Resources This factor refers to the sense of impotency that women generally suffer in comparison to men in the realms of career, social status, and the acquisition of skills. The custody conflict becomes a power struggle regarding who is the stronger one, and PAS programming is in the service of this goal.
7. Continuity and Family History This element refers to the deeper bonding mothers generally have with the children as compared to fathers. This is the result of the fact that they are more available to children, are primary figures in the children's upbringing, and should therefore continue in that regard, the divorce notwithstanding.
8. Negative Opinions of Men's Capacity to Parent Here reference is made to the belief that women are innately and biologically superior to men in the child-rearing realm. These women hold that men are not as sensitive as women to the emotional, social, and physical needs of children. Although this is not the "politically correct" thing to say in the late 20th century, I am in agreement that women do have a genetically determined superiority to men in the child-rearing process. Men, in contrast, are superior to women on the battlefield, not only because of greater strength and muscle mass but because they are less concerned with sympathy and empathy, qualities that are at a definite disadvantage on a battlefield. There has been selective survival in both sexes of these particular qualities. I have described this in greater detail elsewhere (Gardner, 1991b, 1991c, 1992c, 1996a).
9. Peer-Group Expectations In our society, women are expected to be the child rearer, the primary caretaker, and a father's trying to usurp this role may cause the woman to feel she will be socially stigmatized.
10. Fear of Another Loss Loss of the husband is grievous enough. Loss of the children adds formidable pain to this grief. Accordingly, the battle for the children becomes a battle to protect oneself from further loneliness and the erosion of self-esteem.
11. Desire to Move or Leave a Geographical Area Sharing the children can be very problematic if one wants to relocate. Obtaining primary and exclusive custody increases the likelihood that the mother can enjoy both: relocation and the children.
12. Desire to Create a New Family This factor operates when the mother has a male replacement for the father. This situation increases the likelihood that she will exclude the father and encourage the children to view his replacement as the "real" daddy.
13. Opportunity Because women have more time available with the children, they
have more opportunity to brainwash them.
The preponderance of mothers as PAS programmers does not preclude my observation that on occasion (in about 10 percent of cases) it is the father who is the successful alienator. It would be an error for the reader to conclude that my frequent designation of the mother as the alienator and the father as the targeted parent represents sexist bias on my part. Rather, it is merely a reflection of my own clinical observations and experiences as well as those of others who work in the field. It also would be an error for the reader to conclude that my belief that mothers, more often than fathers, are the active contributors to the brainwashing components necessarily implies condemnation of these women. Actually, as I will discuss later, I am in sympathy with most of these mothers and believe that they have been shortchanged by the aforementioned recent developments regarding the criteria courts use for deciding custodial preference. The reader will note that I use the word most. I did not say that I am in sympathy with all of these mothers. Some are very vicious and cruel, and their sadistic treatment of the father has no justification and does not evoke any sympathy at all in me. I will also describe situations in which fathers are the primary programmers and mothers are subjected to the children's deprecations. Fathers, too, vary with regard to my degree of sympathy, depending upon their cruelty and the amount of unnecessary grief they visit upon their families. Turkat (1994, 1995) considers the female/male ratio to be so high that he refers to the PAS as the "malicious mother syndrome."
siehe auch: Vortrag für die Fachtagung an der Ev. Akademie Bad Boll, 9.–11. Dezember 1998: Ursula Kodjoe, Dipl. Psych., Mediatorin
englischsprachige Informationen beim VeV:
weiteres zu PAS bei PaPPa.com
|Autor: Prof. Dr. Richard A. Gardner Datum: 9.12.1998 Mail: firstname.lastname@example.org|
|© G*A*B; Überarbeitet am: ; Adresse der Webseite: http://www.gabnet.com/psy/gardner1.htm|