![\"GLADBARN](\"http:\/\/mmstudies.com\/pas\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/19\/2021\/03\/GLADBARN-o-GLADMAMMOR-b.jpeg\" "\\"GLADBARN")
\n\t30 p examenssarbete, 2018 \u00a0av<\/p>\n\n\n\n
F\u00f6r\u00e4ldraalienation \u00e4r ett fenomen som inneb\u00e4r att en f\u00f6r\u00e4lder p\u00e5verkar det gemensamma barnet att ta avst\u00e5nd fr\u00e5n den andra f\u00f6r\u00e4ldern utan grund, trots att f\u00f6r\u00e4ldern varit god och omsorgsfull. Det uppst\u00e5r oftast i sv\u00e5ra v\u00e5rdnadstvister.<\/p>\n
Vidare kan detta anses inbegripet i umg\u00e4ngessabotage, exempelvis om<\/p>\n
en f\u00f6r\u00e4lder p\u00e5verkar barnet att inte vilja umg\u00e5s med den andra f\u00f6r\u00e4ldern.<\/p>\n
Barnet tillskrivs m\u00e5nga r\u00e4ttigheter. I svensk r\u00e4tt v\u00e4rnas barnets umg\u00e4nge med best\u00e4mmelser som syftar till att fr\u00e4mja barnets och dess f\u00f6r\u00e4lders relation. Umg\u00e4ngessabotage inkr\u00e4ktar p\u00e5 barnets r\u00e4tt till umg\u00e4nge. Lagstiftaren v\u00e4rnar om barnet och det \u00e4r barnets b\u00e4sta som ska vara avg\u00f6rande i beslut som r\u00f6r det. Ett av de viktigaste elementen i fr\u00e5gor som r\u00f6r v\u00e5rdnad, boende och umg\u00e4nge, \u00e4r barnets behov av en n\u00e4ra och god kontakt med b\u00e5da f\u00f6r\u00e4ldrarna. Det har bl.a. gjort att lagstiftningen ska se str\u00e4ngt p\u00e5 umg\u00e4ngessabotage. \u00c4nd\u00e5 finns det m\u00e5nga exempel d\u00e5 en saboterande f\u00f6r\u00e4lder vinner framg\u00e5ng i v\u00e5rdnadstvister.<\/p>\n
Anledningen kan dock bero p\u00e5 att det i slut\u00e4ndan \u00e4r barnets b\u00e4sta<\/p>\n
som ska vara avg\u00f6rande efter en helhetsbed\u00f6mning av alla individuella f\u00f6rh\u00e5llanden i det enskilda fallet.<\/p>\n
F\u00f6r\u00e4ldraalienation \u00e4r kontroversiellt och blir s\u00e4llan explicit bed\u00f6mt av domstolen som n\u00e5got annat \u00e4n umg\u00e4ngessabotage. Vidare finns det l\u00e4kare och beteendevetare runt om i v\u00e4rlden som h\u00e4vdar att f\u00f6r\u00e4ldraalienation kan leda till ett sjukdomstillst\u00e5nd hos barnet, s.k. Parental Alienation Syndrome, PAS. Anledningen till att f\u00f6r\u00e4ldraalienation har blivit kontroversiellt beror fr\u00e4mst p\u00e5 att teorin om PAS ansetts ovetenskaplig. Vissa h\u00e4vdar ocks\u00e5 att det f\u00f6respr\u00e5kar pedofili.<\/p>\n
Barnet har naturligt en ambivalens gentemot sina f\u00f6r\u00e4ldrar. Allt de gjort, g\u00f6r dem inte enbart till onda eller goda personer f\u00f6r barnet. Ett av symptomen som p\u00e5st\u00e5s uppkomma av PAS \u00e4r att barnets ambivalens gentemot dess f\u00f6r\u00e4ldrar f\u00f6rloras. Avsaknaden av ambivalens kan g\u00f6ra att barnets vilja, vilken domstolen ocks\u00e5 ska ta h\u00e4nsyn till, kan anses klar och tydlig. F\u00f6respr\u00e5karna f\u00f6r PAS h\u00e4vdar att barnet uts\u00e4tts f\u00f6r psykisk misshandel av den f\u00f6r\u00e4lder som p\u00e5verkar det och att barnet riskerar att f\u00f6rlora en god och \u00e4lskad f\u00f6r\u00e4lder. Risken f\u00f6r att ett barn uts\u00e4tts f\u00f6r fysiska och psykiska \u00f6vergrepp \u00e4r tillsammans med behovet av b\u00e5da f\u00f6r\u00e4ldrarna n\u00e5got som domstolen ska ta h\u00e4nsyn till vid beslut om v\u00e5rdnad, boende och umg\u00e4nge. Vidare ska domstolen bed\u00f6ma barnets b\u00e4sta utifr\u00e5n vetenskap och bepr\u00f6vad erfarenhet.<\/p>\n
PAS \u00e4r inte internationellt erk\u00e4nt som en diagnos. D\u00e4remot finns det en m\u00f6jlighet att det i maj 2019 kommer att bli erk\u00e4nt. Numera g\u00e5r det n\u00e4mligen att finna Parental Alienation i klassifikationssystemet ICD-11. Dock \u00e4r ICD-11 inte godk\u00e4nd och f\u00e4rdigst\u00e4lld \u00e4nnu, utan \u00e4r under arbete. Vad detta kommer att inneb\u00e4ra f\u00f6r domstolen \u00e4r sv\u00e5rt att sia om. Men en sak som \u00e4r s\u00e4kert \u00e4r att om det kommer bli intaget i ICD-11 s\u00e5 kommer det att f\u00f6r\u00e4ndras fr\u00e5n ett ovetenskapligt diagnostiskt tillst\u00e5nd till ett vetenskapligt tillst\u00e5nd. (Less)<\/p>\n
Parental alienation is a social phenomenon where a parent influences its Child to dissociate itself from the other parent without justification, even though the parent has been careful and gentle. The phenomenon usually arises in high conflict custody disputes. Furthermore, parental alienation might be considered access sabotage, for example if the parent influences the child to reject access to the other parent.<\/p>\n
The child is assured many rights. Swedish law protects the child’s right of access through provisions aimed to encourage the child’s and parents’ interaction. Access sabotage is an intrusion of the child’s right of access. The legislator protects the child and the child’s best interests shall be conclusive in decisions regarding the child. One of the most important elements regarding custody, housing and access is the child’s need of a close and good Connection with both parents. For instance, this has resulted in a strict view upon access sabotage from a legislation point of view. However, there are many examples of custody cases where the sabotaging parent reaches success. This might be explained by the fact that all circumstances in casu shall be taken into account by the court when considering the child’s best interest in any specific case.<\/p>\n
Parental alienation is controversial and often judged by the court as access sabotage. Medical doctors and behavioural scientists around the world claim that parental alienation might cause the child to develop a condition called Parental Alienation Syndrome, PAS. Some scientists consider PAS to be unscientific, which has caused the controversy of parental alienation. A few even argue the theory advocates paedophilia.<\/p>\n
A child has a natural sense of ambivalence towards its parents. Everything the parents do, doesn’t make them completely bad or good to the child. PAS can be considered if certain criteria or symptoms are met. One of the symptoms is a lack of ambivalence of the child in relation to its parents. The lack of ambivalence might impact the wishes of the child, which the court has to take into account. If the ambivalence is lost, the child’s wishes might be obvious, but caused by alienation. The supporters of PAS claim that the parent who influences the child commits mental abuse and that the child is risking the loss of its loving parent. Apart from the child’s wishes and need of both<\/p>\n
parents, the risk of physical and mental abuse are factors the court has to take into account when deciding in cases regarding custody, housing and access. Furthermore, it is certain that the court has to base its decision of the child’s best interest on proven experience and scientific basis.<\/p>\n
PAS is not an internationally recognized diagnosis. However, it might be recognized in May 2019. Right now parental alienation is included in the ICD-11 which is not valid yet. Before it will be valid it has to be recognized and the current content of ICD-11 has to be approved for the parental alienation to become recognized. It is hard to predict the impact on court of law if parental alienation is included. But one thing is for sure: If parental alienation is included in ICD-11, it will be recognized and scientific. (Less)<\/p>\n\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
BARNET SOM SPELBRICKA 30 p examenssarbete, 2018 \u00a0av F\u00f6r\u00e4ldraalienation \u00e4r ett fenomen som inneb\u00e4r att en f\u00f6r\u00e4lder p\u00e5verkar det gemensamma barnet att ta avst\u00e5nd fr\u00e5n den andra f\u00f6r\u00e4ldern utan grund, trots att f\u00f6r\u00e4ldern varit god och omsorgsfull. Det uppst\u00e5r oftast i sv\u00e5ra v\u00e5rdnadstvister. Vidare kan detta anses inbegripet i umg\u00e4ngessabotage, exempelvis om en f\u00f6r\u00e4lder p\u00e5verkar…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"full-width-page.php","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-1103","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/mmstudies.com\/pas\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1103","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/mmstudies.com\/pas\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/mmstudies.com\/pas\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/mmstudies.com\/pas\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/mmstudies.com\/pas\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1103"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"http:\/\/mmstudies.com\/pas\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1103\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1107,"href":"http:\/\/mmstudies.com\/pas\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1103\/revisions\/1107"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/mmstudies.com\/pas\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1103"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}