by Sarah Squires

One of the hardest elements of parental alienation is when allegations are made by both
children and parents. Professionals have a duty of care to investigate and gather evidence. But
how reliable are the memories being recalled?
It has long been accepted that false memories exist and there are countless studies which
confirm how easy it is to “implant” a memory (which we will look into later) but for a practitioner
involved in a parental alienation case, it can be hard to identify real from false memories and
therefore recall confabulation can result in prosecution for the “abuser”, possibly jail and
definitely the loss of the relationship with their child.
It is therefore important that we understand what memory is, how it is stored and how false
memories can occur.

What is memory?

Bartlett (1932) describes memory as “imaginative reconstruction” meaning that memories
consist of numerous elements, pieced together and replayed in a format familiar to the teller.
The first two elements are:
● Declarative
● Nondeclarative

Semantic memory refers to the facts involved in the memory which you just know and are not
from personal experience. For example, the names for colours. Craik and Lockhart (1972) found
that complex semantic processing produced better recall than simple semantic processing.
Meaning it’s the details which help with the recall.

Episodic memory refers to the unique experience linked to the time and place in our lives.
Rogers et al (1977) found that episodic memory was more reliable than semantic in recall
situations. Meaning we remember things better which have a personal and emotional
connection to us. A study by Hayne and Imuta (2011) found that by the age of 3, children exhibit
rudimentary episodic memory skills, and that strict reliance on verbal recall may underestimate
their episodic memory ability.

Interestingly, more recent findings have suggested that it is the ability to retain, as opposed to
form, episodic memories that may be the source of the advantage inferred through age in older children, with 3-year-old children demonstrating good retention of episodic recollection across short but not long delays (Scarf et al., 2013).

Nondeclarative memory, also known as procedural memory, is the repository of information
about basic skills, motor (muscular) movement, verbal qualities, visual images, and emotions. It
is our unconscious memory based on what we have been taught and experienced in the world
around us.

Conditioning plays an important role in procedural memory and two main conditioning elements
have been identified: classic and operant.

Classic conditioning theory was developed by Pavlov following experiments with dogs.
He found that you could associate a behaviour to a previously non-associated action
through classic conditioning. He rang a bell and the dogs did not respond. He showed
them food, they salivated (required response). He then gave the food and rang the bell
at the same time, dogs salivated (required response). Finally he rang the bell on it’s own
and the dogs salivated (required response). The dogs had been conditioned to associate
the bell and food.

Operant conditioning was developed by Skinner (1948) and Thorndike (1905). They both
found that animals would repeat the same action if the outcome was pleasant (positive
reinforcement) and would stop an action if the outcome was negative (negative
reinforcement). The animals learnt this through trial and error. This became known as
the “law of effect”

Both are behavioural theories but these responses becomes procedural and so form part of our
long term memory.

In order for memory to be developed, we also need the cognitive abilities to piece it all together.
Jean Piaget (1932) developed 4 cognitive stages of childhood development:

1. Sensorimotor Stage: Birth through about 2 years. During this stage, children learn about
   the world through their senses and the manipulation of objects.
2. Preoperational Stage: Ages 2 through 7. During this stage, children develop memory and imagination. They are also able to understand things symbolically, and to understand the ideas of past and future.
3. Concrete Operational Stage: Ages 7 through 11. During this stage, children become more aware of external events, as well as feelings other than their own. They become less egocentric, and begin to understand that not everyone shares their thoughts, beliefs, or feelings.
4. Formal Operational Stage: Ages 11 and older. During this stage, children are able to use logic to solve problems, view the world around them, and plan for the future.

“Six-month-olds have a memory span of no more than about 24 hours, which gradually expands
to up to a month by 9 months. In the new study, 13-month-old babies could not remember
events they had witnessed and mimicked four months earlier– a task that came easily to their
elders, ages 21 months and 28 months.”
(https://www.upi.com/Older-children-remember-longer/47801036004400/)

Using this and the previous studies mentioned, we can see how memory develops in children
and the ages at which specific types of memory develop alongside their cognitive and language
abilities.

How false memories can be created

Freud (1923) first identified that likelihood of false memory, naming it confabulation and
reconstruction.
Confabulation is the unintentional manufacturing of information to fill in the missing details
during recall. It’s usual purpose it to make the story more coherent and can occur under
conditions of high motivation or emotion.
In 1997 Coan found that “our recollection of memories can be manipulated and even entire sets
of events can be confabulated”.
Reconstruction involves the distortion of the original memory through a series of filters including
our past experiences, beliefs, schemas and stereotypes.

Elizabeth Loftus and Cara Laney (2013) found that the verbage used to frame a question when
trying to illicit a memory recall can impact false memory recollection. For example, asking “did
you see THE dog?” was more likely to get a false memory recollection than asking “did you see
Adog?”
Nicholas Spanos (1996) found that 50% of participants were led to contrast complex, vivid and
detailed false memories using a process called “guided mnemonic restructuring” which involves
active encouragement.
Loftus and Laney also found that imagination inflation can occur as the more a subject
visualises/images the event, the more “real” it becomes.

In the same paper three key elements which impact the forming of false memory were identified
as:
● social pressure
● encouragement
● individual encouraged not to consider if the memory is true or not

Implications for parental alienation

In studies adults have been shown to be very susceptible to suggestion and manipulation to
create false memories if they are encouraged to by someone they have an interpersonal
relationship with meaning children, who are much more susceptible to their parent’s influence,
could easily “create” memories which they retain through rehearsal.

Attachment System Suppression and Phobic Anxiety Toward a Parent

The child’s symptoms evidence a selective and targeted suppression of the normal-range
functioning of the child’s attachment bonding motivations toward one parent, the
targeted-rejected parent, in which the child seeks to entirely terminate a relationship with this parent (i.e., a child-initiated cut-off in the child’s relationship with a normal-range and affectionally available parent). (Childress 2015)

A child who previously had a positive and secure attachment to the alienated parent, suddenly
hates them and vilifies them for everything they do and have done.

They have no good memories of the alienated parent. The age of the child is important as is
how long the child has been separated from the parent. However, we know that children are
capable of storing and recalling memories from a very young age and so for there to be a
complete absence of any good memories, may suggest manipulation or conditioning. For
example a child could say they love the alienated parent and get shouted at (negative
reinforcement) so they stop saying it and instead say “I hate them” and get rewarded (positive
reinforcement). Following the law of effect, the child would make more negative statements
towards the alienated parent in order to receive more rewards. There is also the added
dimension here of the attachment style of the parent. If they were previously rejecting-neglecting
the child, there is even more motivation for the child to say negative things as they will get their
primary needs met as well.

Fixed False Belief

The child’s symptoms display an intransigently held, fixed and false belief regarding the
fundamental parental inadequacy of the targeted-rejected parent in which the child
characterizes a relationship with the targeted rejected parent as being somehow
emotionally or psychologically “abusive” of the child. While the child may not explicitly
use the term “abusive,” the implication of emotional or psychological abuse is contained
within the child’s belief system and is not warranted based on the assessed parenting
practices of the targeted-rejected parent (which are assessed to be broadly normal
range) (Childress 2015).

In some instances there may be a genuine reason the child feels angry towards the alienated
parent. But the reaction is still disproportionate to the incident which has made them angry. As
an ex child protection social worker I have witnessed contact between abusive parents and their children and in almost all cases, the child will interact with the parent and the relationship will
return to its previous state. Obviously here the age of the child is important though. An
adolescent child may demonstrate more anger due to their increased understanding and their
own interrupted emotional state as they go through puberty. A younger child however, whose
memory is still developing, would struggle to recall memories from over two months ago.
Therefore it is important for practitioners to remember that a child will have both good and bad
memories of the alienated parent. Bad events do not delete good ones. If a child is unable (or
unwilling) to recall positive memories, this could indicate manipulation or conditioning. It may
also be possible that false memories have been implanted and cemented through rehearsal,
ensuring that the child thoroughly believes their accusations.

Splitting

The child evidences polarized extremes of attitude toward the parents, in which the
supposedly “favoured” parent is idealized as the all-good and nurturing parent while the
rejected parent is entirely devalued as the all-bad and entirely inadequate parent.
(Childress 2015)

The child has a very “black and white” view of their parents. One is all good, the other all bad.
No positive qualities can be recalled for the alienated parent and no negative ones for the
alienator.

Memory is very rarely erased (except in amnesia cases) and instead fade over time. So for a
child to be unable (or unwilling) to recall any positive qualities in their parent, suggests that
conditioning has taken place. For example, the alienating parent could classically condition the
child into believing the alienated parent is all bad by associating all bad memories with that
parent. “We can’t go on holiday this year because of your mother/father”. If this process is
repeated often enough, the child will be conditioned to believe the alienated parent is all bad.
Diversely, the alienating parent will be telling the child that they are the only one who loves them
and understands them, conditioning the child to see them as all good.

Role-Reversal Dynamic

In alienation, a child’s psychological boundaries may be compromised, and differentiation
from that parent may not occur. Instead, the child becomes infused with the mindset of the
pathogenic parent and alienated from the normal-range parent through covert psychological
manipulation on the part of the pathogenic parent. (Childress 2015)

The child will adamantly deny that anyone has influenced their decision.
Again, age will be an important factor here. Does the child have the cognitive ability (as outlined
above) to make these statements? Do they understand the consequences? It is therefore
important the practitioner explores the child’s understanding of what the statements mean and
uses memory recall exercises to confirm this. For example, a child who states that they have
decided they never want to see their parent again could be asked “what about at Christmas? Do
you not want a present from them?” and explore “what did you get from them last year?”. Future
and past tense exercises can help bypass the possibility of false memories because it is unlikely
(and impossible) for someone to have rewritten their entire history or talked about the future with
the child.

Absence of Empathy

The child displays a complete absence of empathy for the emotional pain being inflicted
on the targeted-rejected parent by the child’s hostility and rejection of this parent.
(Childress 2015)

The child will feel justified in their actions and cold towards the alienated parent.
According to Erikson’s Psychosocial (1950, 1963) stage theory, around age three and
continuing to age five, children assert themselves more frequently. They will play independently,
make up games and and initiate activities with others. This is the Initiative v’s Guilt stage.
Therefore it is important when a child is expressing that they are using their own initiative, that this behaviour is observed in other settings as well. Does the demonstrate the ability to think
independently about other subjects? Any inconsistency may suggest manipulation.

Grandiosity

The child displays a grandiose perception of occupying an inappropriately elevated
status in the family hierarchy that is above the targeted-rejected parent from which the
child feels empowered to sit in judgment of the targeted-rejected parent as both a parent
and as a person. (Childress 2015)

The child will always side with the alienating parent. The child does not want to hear the
alienated parent’s point of view.

This demonstrates elements of concrete thinking. i.e. seeing something as fixed and certain. It
is evident in very young children but as children age they begin to develop logical and
eventually abstract thinking as well (see Piaget’s development stages above). The absence of
logical thinking, which would be developmentally appropriate for their age, suggests either
developmental delay or manipulation.

Transgenerational Trauma and the Trauma Reenactment

This is the process by which differentiation between family members across generations
affects individuals and their personal differentiation process. The transmission occurs on
several levels involving both conscious teaching and unconscious programming of
emotional responses and behaviors. Due to the intricacies of the relationship dynamics,
some children develop more of a differentiated “self” than others. (Childress 2015)

The child may make accusations against the alienated parent which phrases and scenarios
which are inappropriate for their age. For example, a child might say “I hate mum/dad because
they made us homeless” but when you ask them what homeless means they have no
understanding of it.

Whilst not all allegations are false, those which use language which isn’t congruent with the
child’s natural speech, would suggest that false memories have been implanted. As outlined in
the above section on “how false memories are implanted”, this is relatively easy to do and
children will be highly sensitive to this kind of manipulation from a caregiver. Especially if it is
coupled with condition behaviours.

Avoidance of Parent

The child seeks to avoid exposure to the targeted parent due to the situationally
provoked anxiety or else endures the presence of the targeted parent with great distress.
“Childress 2015)

Anyone associated with the alienated parent will be rejected by the child for little or no reason.
Using Erikson’s psychosocial development model again, the crisis of trust vs mistrust occurs
during the first year or so of life. During this stage, the infant is uncertain about the world in
which they live. To resolve these feelings of uncertainty, the infant looks towards their caregivers
for stability and consistency of care. This forms the attachment.

Initially Bowlby (1969) believed that a child formed one primary attachment which superseded
all others. However later research has shown that children form multiple quality attachments to a
range of caregivers, including grandparents, aunts and uncles (Furnivall 2011). Therefore it is
important when a child is rejecting whole families or those associated with alienated parent, that
a practitioner explores early attachment and experiences with the wider family through taking
family history. The child is unlikely to have forgotten those experiences and, unless severe
abuse has taken place, it is unlikely the memories have been repressed. Therefore the child
may have been conditioned and manipulated into “forgetting”.

Conclusion

Both memory and parental alienation are complex theories and we have to draw upon many
additional theories in order to give a comprehensive picture of what is going on. However I hope
that this paper has demonstrated the important role that memory and memory manipulation
plays in parental alienation syndrome and provided some practical advice on what to look for.

False Memories by Sarah Squires

My comments – Although this article speaks of younger children, adult children can also act this way towards a targeted parent, creating false memories about them due to the manipulation and conditioning from the favoured parent. I have had contact with thousands of mothers who are experiencing this.