Reunification Camps and the Alienation Industry
Over the past month, we’ve covered the story of siblings, Maya and Sebastian Laing, who were recently court ordered into Lynn Steinberg’s reunification camp. We have also stood in solidarity with their family, friends and supporters to protest their violent removal from their grandmother’s home in Santa Cruz, California. Terrifyingly, Maya and Sebastian’s story is one of many. No child’s experience is the same, but the disturbing uptick in court orders for reunification camps has been on our radar for many years.
The practice of reunification camps – and relatedly, the concept of “parental alienation” – can be traced back to Richard Gardner, a now disgraced psychiatrist who coined the term “parental alienation syndrome” (PAS). PAS unjustly portrays the safe or preferred parent as the instigator within an unhealthy family dynamic.
Often, the abuser begins the cycle by accusing the safe parent of “enmeshment” or “gatekeeping.” Enmeshment refers to blurred or unclear boundaries between family members, which can vary based on cultural norms. Gatekeeping is similarly used as a counterclaim against the safe parent, specifically when they are trying to protect and/or distance their children from the abuser. Allegations of alienation, enmeshment, and gatekeeping are all indicators of post-separation abuse, and should be regarded as red flags by family court professionals.
Unfortunately, these counterclaims continue to sway professionals in our court system, to the detriment of both children and their preferred parents. When court professionals are receptive to the pseudoscience of PAS, an abuser’s initial claim of alienation can be wielded as a legal strategy. So-called “alienation experts” and “alienation professionals” circulate the misinformation of PAS, which leads courts to prioritize parents’ rights over the rights of children. The actions of these “professionals” fuel this lucrative cottage industry, which pads their own wallets and separates children from safe and supportive adults.
After an abuser successfully makes claims of alienation, children can be court-ordered into reunification therapy and separated from their safe parent. In more extreme situations, the judge will order reunification camp, which prompts the formation of a reunification “team.” This team includes contracted transporters, also called transport agents. They will remove a child or children from their home, from the courthouse, or wherever they are currently located and transport them to the reunification camp. To avoid accusations of human trafficking, guardianship is transferred at each point of the operation: transporters are the first appointed guardians when they arrive with court orders to take a child, and then guardianship is transferred to the reunification camp upon the child’s arrival.
Children typically stay at the camp for four days. After arriving, they will meet with individuals called “deprogrammers,” who craft a narrative that denies the abuse and depicts the preferred parent as dishonest in their allegations. There are often threats involved, especially if the child counters the deprogrammers and refuses to accept the revised narrative.
Therapeutic and educational placement “consultants” are often another key part of this operation. They’re tasked with placing children in an isolated location, where they’ll cut off contact with the child’s preferred parent for a minimum of 90 days. The children may move to a boarding school, wilderness camp, residential treatment facility, or even a group home. While a “blackout period” of 90 days is standard, some parents report losing contact with their children for years after the process of court-mandated reunification camp begins. In these situations, safe parents often lack the guidance, knowledge, and financial and legal power to fight against the machine of reunification therapy and alienation claims. In many of these situations, there are rings of professionals who work in collusion and the safe parent or, the preferred parent is outnumbered and may even be silenced with gag orders.
On October 20th, 2022, a special report by the United Nations finally recognized the endemic of alienation as an abuse tactic. “Accusations of parental alienation by abusive fathers against mothers,” the UN committee writes, “must be considered as a continuation of power and control by state agencies and actors, including those deciding on child custody.” By releasing this statement, special procedures experts at the UN have initiated a global conversation about the role of alienation in the infliction of violence against women, girls, and all others affected by domestic violence.
As advocates, parents, and court professionals, how do we continue this conversation end the industry of reunification therapy? This is a big, overwhelming question, but the following groups and advocates have outlined attainable and necessary solutions.
First, we must recognize the pervasiveness of alienation and related abuse tactics, as most recently acknowledged by the UN. Within the U.S., legal groups and individuals are fearlessly advocating at the federal level. For many years, Policy Manager Danielle Pollack and Professor Joan Meier of the National Family Violence Law Center have done incredible work through research and legislation focused on family court and protecting the most vulnerable members of our society. Pollack and Meier recently helped author Kayden’s Law, which encourages and empowers state courts to adjudicate allegations of abuse and minimize the risk of harm to children.
Kayden’s Law is a valiant step toward the elimination of reunification practices that are not always in a child’s best interest. To support this legislation and other efforts toward exposure of the alienation industry, we encourage you to join National Safe Parents Organization. This group advocates for evidence-based policies to protect children and leads national conversations regarding Kayden’s Law, which is part of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA).
Conversations, awareness, advocacy, and legislation. These four pillars, combined with ongoing self-education, will guide us to the end of reunification therapy and reinstate the rights of children within the family court system.
