A Learning Theory Approach View of Parental Alienation
Bill Dubree, PhD


In the family courts, the family law business and mental health arena, there has been years of efforts to address the issues surrounding the construct of Parental Alienation. To date, the courts and legal professionals have adapted a strategy that consistently fails, yet is consistently used over and over expecting different results.

This capsule desciption believes the best answer is a direct, not a non-directive solution where a child or teen suspected of being victims of an allied parent's alienation efforts needs to be handled by a sound, intuitively clear and proven method to change parental rejection behavior.

As an experimental psychologist specialized in behavioral analysis, I see the issues of emotionally isolating and cutting off a parent through a different lens than clinicians...I see behavioral dynamics that are labeled alienation played out by a parent used to condition a child or teenager to learn to model a behavior that would not normally be predicted within the context of a family dynamic. Alienation is a term used to describe or define a specific set of behaviors of the allied parent that results in the child or teen's complicity in using similar behavior toward a targeted parent. This of course, on a moral and ethical level, is despicable. But as clinicians like to talk about trans generational causes, I like to be more specific in saying that we are all functions of our conditioning history, and that explains the clinical view. Grandmother uses learned behaviors from her family to abuse her child, who then grows up with an inventory of harmful learned behaviors that are repeated. It also speaks to opening the door away from sole reliance on clinical treatment to opening the door away from sole reliance on clinical treatment models with more emphasis on a learning theory approach to understanding, explaining and treating measurable observations of behaviors which result in changing the relationship dynamics between a targeted parent and a child. First and foremost the child's experience field must change immediately ‐ the experience field that is dominated by a parent exploiting idiosyncratic reinforcement opportunities to employ alienation behaviors with a child or teenager.

A major difference between a clinical and a learning view is the methods of intervention. The clinician employs methods to engage the child or teen in confronting a "shared delusion". This is usually a time consuming talk therapy aimed at reunifying the child or teen in emotional re‐bonding with a targeted parent. The learning approach views the alienation behaviors in a value judgment based on a objective strategic baseline observations that create a continuum view of a range of adaptive behaviors where one end of the continuum is loaded with mal‐adaptive behaviors. Objective behavioral indicators that can be observed in either the alienating parent the child or both direct the intervention/learning approach to changing the behavior.

Learning theory assumes the child has had little control over his or her mal‐adaptive behavior. It does not deal with unknown and un‐observable cognitive expressions. It deals only in the world of measurable, observable behavior and can effectively do so by inference as well as direct observation. An observation of a child’s active behaviors that demonstrate parental rejection implies the operant (RS) or classical conditioning (SRS) construct assumptions. No need for confrontation. The evidence is clear from the observation and can reliably infer that under the laws of behavior there is always either a stimulus cause and/or a consequence that shapes, maintains and controls the pattern of rejection behavior.

A confirmed observation prescribes the treatment protocol without need for hours of unproductive talk. The objective is to change the behavior from defined mal‐adaptive to a defined adaptive. A process is initiated that begins with statistically defining and assessing the range of the child's or teen's rejection behaviors, and designing a reinforcement procedure to shape a different set of responses that are given as objectives. This process is usually straightforward and intuitive. Behaviors that are observed will be attributes that are vocal and physical, actions and sounds that any lay person could easily observe.

All behavior is learned through a process called conditioning. Emotions that accompany behavior are outcomes of learned expectations and are reinforced by consequences, either positive or negative. Behavior learned in specific settings is defined as experience fields. For instance, learning specific behaviors in context may be shaped and strengthened by associations with that context. Thus, behaviors in the context of an experience field may include the physical impact of the environment, colors, temperature, design and the impact of other life forms inhabiting the environment, people, animals and even gold fish. Behaviors learned through associative connections in an experience field can range from adaptive to mal‐adaptive.

Looking now at a child or teen who elicits a range of rejection behaviors that are deemed to be mal‐adaptive are learned in an experience field through reinforced associations and direct consequential reinforcement that is delivered to the child by an allied parent either through direct instruction, expectant role modeling or physical guided participation. These are three primary ways of learning that apply to virtually all life forms. And because of environmental influences, the learning is done in the context of an experience field that can include a house, a neighborhood even a town or city. It can be further enabled through the actions of the child or teen reinforcing alliances with other friends or family, what clinicians call "flying monkeys".

The first and most obvious condition of changing behavior is to reduce the impact of the experience field that has contributed to shaping and maintaining the strength of the targeted mal‐adaptive behaviors. Concomitant and preparatory to this strategy is to train a trainer(s), the rejected parent in the methods designed to change their child or teen's behavior. Friends, relatives and even a counselor may be part of the strategy.

Once a team is trained, it's time to remove the child or teen from the alienation environment to a novel or different experience field. In many cases, the experience field may be an environment that once supported an adaptive, loving and happy relationship with the targeted parent. The important consideration is that there be a major separation from most all‐negative associations in the therapeutic experience field.

The child or teen should move in one swift immediate action, preferably in one day or less.

Given distance from the high impact alienation environment on its own will immediately begin weakening the mal‐adaptive responses and set the stage for a new reinforcement paradigm to re‐shape the child or teen's behavior. Hour by hour, day by day, pre‐prepared records will be kept of behavioral observations that the behavioral therapist can use to measure progress, to adjust reinforcement protocols and coordinate with other support enhancements such as friends, family and events.

Unlike non‐directive cognitive counseling, the behavioral approach can be quickly refined, gives immediate feedback, and has the potential for rapid behavioral change. It provides a rational solution for the courts, provides oversight, intelligent and compelling objective feedback and avoids long‐term useless and costly litigation and focuses attention on an outcome to remove a child from harm. It also works to serve the purpose of restoring the whole family dynamic, not just the child or teen.