The Failure of Family Courts to Address Parental Gatekeeping and Parental Alienation
One of the most troubling aspects of parental gatekeeping and parental alienation is the failure of family courts to address it adequately. Family law systems are primarily designed to handle physical custody disputes—who will take the child on weekends, where the child will live, and how much child support will be paid. Emotional abuse, such as parental alienation, often flies under the radar, as it is less visible and harder to prove than physical abuse or neglect. This leads to a significant gap in the protection offered to children and alienated parents alike.
Judges and legal professionals may not fully understand the nuances of parental alienation, often viewing it as just another custody conflict rather than recognizing it as a serious form of emotional and psychological abuse. This oversight allows the alienating parent to continue manipulating the child without consequence, while the targeted parent is left fighting an uphill battle. Moreover, because courts tend to prioritize stability and continuity for the child, they may be reluctant to modify existing custody arrangements, even when alienation is evident. This leads to prolonged legal battles that sap financial resources, waste time, and, most tragically, allow the alienation to become more deeply ingrained in the child’s psyche.
Family courts tend to focus on the logistics of custody—where the child will live, how much time they will spend with each parent, and the financial responsibilities of both parents. While these are important issues, they often fail to address the emotional damage being done in the background. The emotional and psychological manipulation taking place is insidious, and unless courts become more adept at identifying the signs of parental alienation, they risk perpetuating a cycle of abuse.
Another issue is the court’s tendency to require alienated parents to jump through excessive legal hoops to regain their rightful place in their child’s life. Parents are often required to file multiple motions, attend numerous hearings, and present expert witnesses to prove their case, all of which takes time and money—two things that most parents do not have in abundance. Meanwhile, the alienating parent may continue to wield their influence over the child, making the task of reunification even more difficult. “Courts should return the child as fast as they took them.” - Robert Garza
Strengthening Co-Parenting Relationships
While legal reforms are essential, addressing PA also requires a broader cultural shift toward promoting healthy co-parenting relationships. At its root, PA often arises from unresolved conflict between parents. To prevent alienation from taking root, we need to encourage parents to prioritize the best interests of their children over their personal grievances. “You have to love your child more than you hate your ex .” This means fostering a co-parenting culture that is centered around communication, mutual respect, and the emotional well-being of the child.
Effective co-parenting requires both parents to set aside their differences and work together in the best interest of the child. This involves open lines of communication, shared decision-making, and a commitment to supporting the child’s relationship with the other parent. It’s not always easy, especially in the aftermath of a contentious divorce or separation, but it’s essential for the child’s emotional stability. When parents can maintain a healthy, cooperative relationship, the risk of PA is significantly reduced.
Educational programs can play a key role in supporting co-parenting efforts. For parents going through separation or divorce, co-parenting classes can teach them how to manage conflict, communicate effectively, and keep the focus on their child’s needs. These programs can also help parents develop strategies for maintaining a positive relationship with their child, even when they are no longer in a romantic relationship with the other parent. By investing in co-parenting education, we can help reduce the incidence of PA and ensure that children have access to the love and support of both parents.
Legal Reforms: The “Time Taken Time Back” Law
One of the most significant steps toward addressing parental gatekeeping or parental alienation, before it starts is through legal reform. In Texas, the “𝐓𝐢𝐦𝐞 𝐓𝐚𝐤𝐞𝐧 𝐓𝐢𝐦𝐞 𝐁𝐚𝐜𝐤” 𝐥𝐚𝐰 (𝐓𝐞𝐱𝐚𝐬 𝐅𝐚𝐦𝐢𝐥𝐲 𝐂𝐨𝐝𝐞 𝟏𝟓𝟕.𝟏𝟔𝟖 by Robert Garza, offers a solution to one of the most challenging aspects of parental gatekeeping and parental alienation : the loss of time between the targeted parent and their child. This law must be adopted nationwide to ensure that parents are not unjustly denied time with their children due to precautionary court decisions.
Under the old legal framework, targeted parents were often forced to bear the burden of proving why they should be allowed to regain lost time with their child. This process required additional hearings and legal filings, which were both costly and time-consuming. In many cases, parents who had done nothing wrong were forced to spend tens of thousands or hundreds of thousand of dollars fighting for the right to see their children—while the alienating parent continued to manipulate the situation.
The “𝐓𝐢𝐦𝐞 𝐓𝐚𝐤𝐞𝐧 𝐓𝐢𝐦𝐞 𝐁𝐚𝐜𝐤” 𝐥𝐚𝐰 shifts this burden, making it easier for targeted parents to reclaim their time with their children. By eliminating unnecessary hearings and filings, the law frees up judicial resources, reduces delays, and ensures that children can reunite with their targeted parent more quickly to rebond. This law is not just about fairness—it’s about healing. By giving parents the opportunity to rebuild their relationship with their children, after the allegation is ruled-out. This law helps repair the emotional damage caused by the lost time, which was a precaution taken by the court.
Additionally, the law provides relief to an overburdened family court system, which is often bogged down by repeated motions and hearings related to custody disputes. By streamlining the process, the “Time Taken Time Back” law ensures that courts can focus on the best interests of the child without being overwhelmed by procedural delays. It’s a win-win for both parents and the court system, as it promotes timely resolution and reunification.
The 3 Strike Law for Interference with Child Custody
Another critical legal reform that must be implemented nationwide is the “𝟑 𝐒𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐤𝐞 𝐋𝐚𝐰" 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐈𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐂𝐡𝐢𝐥𝐝 𝐂𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐲 by Robert Garza. This law is designed to hold alienating parents accountable when they intentionally interfere with the other parent’s custody or visitation rights. Under this law, interference with child custody is penalized with a $𝟓𝟎𝟎 𝐟𝐢𝐧𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐢𝐫𝐬𝐭 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐬𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐝 𝐨𝐟𝐟𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐞𝐬, 𝐰𝐡𝐢𝐥𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐫𝐝 𝐨𝐟𝐟𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐥𝐭𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐚 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐉𝐚𝐢𝐥 𝐅𝐞𝐥𝐨𝐧𝐲 what it already is in most states.
This law acts as a powerful deterrent against parental gatekeeping, where one parent deliberately obstructs the other parent’s access to their child. It sends a clear message that parental gatekeeping, alienation, and manipulation will not be tolerated. The escalating penalties ensure that repeat offenders face real consequences for their actions, while also providing a pathway for the targeted parent to seek justice and regain access to their child.
By implementing the “𝟑 𝐒𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐤𝐞 𝐋𝐚𝐰,” we can reduce the instances of parental alienation by making it clear that attempts to gatekeep or sabotage the other parent’s relationship with the child will be met with serious legal consequences. This law is perfect for parents and children facing domestic abuse. It allows 2 misdemeanors before becoming a felony, what it already is in every state for interfering with child custody.. The law encourages both parents to cooperate, recognizing that it is in the child’s best interest to maintain a meaningful relationship with both parents.
Addressing the Root of the Problem
Parental alienation is often exacerbated by systemic issues within the family law system. Many families are overwhelmed by the financial burdens of legal fees, child support, psychological evaluations, and court-mandated programs. These expenses can prevent families from reaching a final trial, leaving temporary custody orders in place indefinitely. When parents are unable to afford the costs of legal representation, they may be forced to accept unfavorable custody arrangements, which only deepens the alienation.
In many cases, the alienating parent may use these financial burdens to their advantage, manipulating the system to delay or block access to the child. The alienating parent may file frivolous motions, request additional evaluations, or engage in other tactics designed to prolong the legal process. These tactics not only drain financial resources but also extend the time the targeted parent is separated from their child, making reunification more difficult.
To address these systemic issues, we must streamline legal proceedings and reduce the financial burden on families. Simplifying custody dispute processes, offering more accessible legal services, and providing financial relief to parents facing high legal costs are all essential steps in preventing PA from escalating. Families should not have to choose between financial stability and fighting for their parental rights.
Conclusion: The Urgent Need for Action
Abolishing parental alienation is not just a matter of necessity—it is a moral imperative. The emotional and psychological harm inflicted on children, the violation of parental rights, and the inefficiencies of the current legal system demand immediate and decisive action. By educating legal professionals, intervening early in custody cases, enacting appropriate legislation, and providing support for affected children and families, we can create a legal and societal framework that prioritizes the well-being of children and protects the rights of both parents.
The “𝐓𝐢𝐦𝐞 𝐓𝐚𝐤𝐞𝐧 𝐓𝐢𝐦𝐞 𝐁𝐚𝐜𝐤” 𝐋𝐚𝐰 and the “𝟑 𝐒𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐤𝐞 𝐋𝐚𝐰" for Interference with Child Custody are critical components of this framework. These legal reforms ensure that targeted parents are not unjustly denied their right to maintain a relationship with their child and that those who attempt to manipulate the system face real consequences. Strengthening co-parenting relationships and fostering a culture of cooperation, rather than conflict, will help prevent parental alienation from taking root in the first place. We need to change the psychology of the family court and litigants to promote the other parent and not demote them.
The time for action is now. We cannot allow parental alienation to continue to tear families apart and cause irreparable harm to children. By implementing these legal reforms and promoting a co-parenting culture that centers on the TRUE child’s best interests, we can end this destructive practice and give families the opportunity to heal, reconnect, and thrive.
