Parental alienation syndrome (PAS) and its reformulation as parental alienation (PA) have gained traction in family courts despite persistent scientific controversy. This review synthesizes peer-reviewed research across psychology, law, and family studies from 1985 to 2025 to examine the empirical foundations and professional acceptance of PA/PAS. The analysis suggests that Gardner's original formulation and subsequent iterations fail to meet basic validity requirements for psychological constructs and are unsupported by research. Major medical, psychiatric, and psychological professional organizations have rejected PA/PAS as a legitimate concept. Empirical data shows a troubling correlation between PA allegations and documented domestic violence, with such claims frequently functioning as litigation strategies that redirect attention from abuse allegations. When courts credit PA claims, children face measurable harms including placement with abusive parents and subjection to unvalidated reunification interventions. These findings suggest that PA allegations often represent a form of post-separation coercive control and call for heightened judicial skepticism when such claims arise alongside safety concerns.

Please see 'Notes' below for any suggested/official citation information added by the author(s) of this work. Otherwise, you can cite the HSS Commons instance of this publication as follows:

• Head, K. R., (2026), "The Scientific Case Against Parental Alienation: A Critical Review", HSSCommons: (DOI: 10.55544/ijrah.6.1.11)

  Copy Citation | Export metadata as... | JSON | CSV | RO-Crate | BibTex | EndNote

1. child abuse allegations
2. child welfare
3. coercive control
4. domestic violence
5. estrangement
6. family court
7. intimate partner violence
8. parental alienation child custody
9. parental alienation syndrome
10. pseudoscience