Has Psychiatry Gone Psycho?

0 Comments | Insight on the News, April 26, 1999 | by Kelly Patricia O'Meara

David Gatewood, supervisor of counseling at Focus on the Family in Colorado Springs, believes that Gardner's theory is an attempt to bring a nonadversarial approach to custody issues. "It can be a legitimate syndrome," Gatewood says, "but I think Gardner is trying to get it applied in every child-custody suit. It's just not appropriate. Gardner seems to minimize the abuse that is going on, and I have great trouble with him being used as a resource, given his ideas on pedophilia."

Many of the mothers who have been stripped of their parental rights because of alleged PAS blame not only Gardner and his theory but the court system that credits it. "The entire system is perverse" says Anderson. "The more evidence you have, the more you are attacked and, in the meantime, the kids are being destroyed." Anderson concludes that "as long as you have a mother fighting for her kids, psychologists and lawyers who credit this sort of thing know they're going to keep making money"

Hashimoto also thinks money is the bottom line but, for her, being branded as having PAS has caused damage that no amount of monetary damages could fix. "By accepting the PAS, the system has abused my son as bad, if not worse, than his father" she tells Insight.

Jensen vows that she never will stop fighting for her daughter. She sees the system as money-generated but is convinced that with official acceptance of Gardner's PAS theory and changing state laws, mothers seeking custody can be in a no-win situation. "I never should have allowed the pediatrician to mention the abuse" she says, "but if I didn't, I could have lost her for failure to protect. It really is a `damned if you do and damned if you don't' situation".