In the early hours of last Friday morning, a man named Mick climbed to the top of Sydney Harbour Bridge and unfurled two banners, begging Sydney and the world to help his children. Reportedly frustrated by several years of attempting to gain access to his children through the usual channels and facing a loss of any relationship with them, Mick used the resources at his disposal (namely his considerable fitness and strength along with apparent military training) to bring attention to his plight. Initially, media outlets almost uniformly focussed on the disruption to traffic, the security breach and the economic cost of Mick’s actions. Some commentators implied that these were the actions of a selfish or mentally unstable individual. But do Mick’s actions truly seem like the actions of a mentally ill individual, or like the actions of a rational man who feels powerless to protect his children? In truth, faced with the same circumstances and with the same resources, what parent would do any different?
Reports have indicated that Mick may have served with the military in Iraq. It seems certain that he was a witness to a fatal shooting during which he himself was injured, in April last year. A friend apparently told reporters that he had been suffering symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). If this is true, Mick is likely to be persistently re-experiencing aspects of the shooting, whether in the form of flashbacks, nightmares, hallucinations, or intense sensitivity to items or circumstances related to the event. His day-to-day life may be affected by his avoidance of people or places associated with the shooting. His attitude to life and towards others may have changed – he may feel that there is no hope for the future and he may find that he no longer feels close affection for other people. He may feel constantly keyed up, on guard and on edge, which may affect his ability to concentrate and to sleep.
Whilst it would be inappropriate to comment on whether Mick is or is not experiencing some or all of these symptoms, it’s possible to look at his actions through the framework of the above PTSD symptoms in an attempt to understand what happened. Mick’s actions do not seem, on the surface, to be those of a mentally unwell man. In response to the extreme stress of losing access to his children, and the ongoing frustration he has reportedly experienced in trying to access assistance, he has acted in a way which seems considered, well-planned and executed. He stated in his interview with the Today show that he felt that “most men” in his situation would “turn to the bottle”as a way of avoiding the pain. He certainly has not acted in an avoidant manner. He seems to have been well aware of the consequences of his actions and prepared to deal with them. His actions at no time endangered anyone else and seem to have been planned to minimise danger (if not inconvenience) to others whilst maximising exposure.
In Mick’s interviews, he mentioned “parental alienation syndrome” and called it “child abuse”. On the website http://www.parentalalienation.com.au, this is described as a psychiatric syndrome that arises in the context of custody litigation, when the child engages in an unjustified campaign of anger and accusation against Parent A, as a result of the Parent B’s “brainwashing” as well as the child’s strong wish to gain the approval of Parent B. The purpose of parents who engage in this alienating behaviour is allegedly not to protect their children, but to punish the other parent. However, it must be noted that no such syndrome has been recognised by the psychiatric community at large, and in fact, the basis for its formulation has been roundly criticised for being unscientific, unreliable and invalid. Primary amongst the many criticisms of the syndrome is its assertion that children will fabricate stories of abuse by the alienated parent. Research has consistently shown that children very rarely fabricate such stories – in most cases, allegations of abuse by children will be shown to be true.
Where does this leave Mick and other alienated parents? Whilst “parental alienation syndrome” is not likely to be recognised as a valid disorder , there is no doubt that parents engaged in high-conflict separations or divorce at times participate in behaviour consistent with a desire to punish the other parent by destroying their relationship with their children. The nature of separation means that parents are forced into making decisions about the future of their children whilst they are coping with intense grief, anger, despair and shame about the end of the relationship. It is not surprising that such decisions are not always made objectively or with the best interests of the children in mind. It is also unsurprising that institutions such as the Family Court and the Department of Community Services struggle to effectively cope with families who are facing these issues, and it is therefore on the individual, rather than the institutional level, that the solutions to these problems are likely to be found. Mick himself has shown a striking example of how individuals can best act under these circumstances, by restraining himself in the face of what must have been significant temptation to use his sudden audience to air specific grievances against his former partner.
The following are practical steps that individuals can take to avoid a separation escalating as Mick’s has, and to guide children through this difficult time;
- Try to accept your separation as soon as you can. That way you can start to help children to accept it too.
- Reinforce to the children that they are loved by both parents and that that will always be the case.
- Speak positively about the other parent in front of your children. Save any negative comments about the other parent for conversations between adults.
- Let your children know how that it’s important for them to have a good relationship with both parents, even if Mum and Dad aren’t getting along.
- Let your children know that even though separating is upsetting, you are handling it and that things will get better over time.
- Be aware that children often tell you what they think you want to hear and sometimes what they say should not be taken too literally. A young boy who says, when questioned about his time with his father: “I don’t like the food my daddy gives me to eat”, may just want to reassure his mother that he likes living with her.
- Talk to the other parent about issues concerning your children and their activities.
- Talk to your children’s teachers about what is going on for them.
- Allow and encourage your children to talk about the other parent and their feelings for them.
- Avoid conflict in front of your children. Don’t rely on your children to pass messages to the other parent.
- Turn to other adults for emotional support rather than relying on your children.
- Reassure your children that they are not to blame.
Further help is available for parents who are separating and facing these issues. A psychologist or other trained professional may provide assistance for parents to cope effectively with their negative emotions at the same time as providing effective and loving guidance for children. There are also multiple sources of information online about how to cope and how to help children – Relationships Australia (www.relationships.com.au), Family Relationships Online (www.familyrelationships.gov.au) and Mensline (www.menslineaus.org.au) all have significant amounts of information on their sites.
The public response to Mick’s protest appears to have been largely tolerant and understanding, in spite of the media’s focus on the cost of his actions to the public. A Sydney Morning Herald poll showed that 63% of respondants thought that actions of the magnitude of Mick’s are sometimes justified, whilst Twitter and online forums also seemed largely supportive. It remains to be seen whether his actions will have any long term benefits, either in his own case or in the case of others coping with these issues. What seems certain is that he has succeeded in generating public debate about parental alienation and the role of the state in protecting children during parental separation, and this can only be seen as a positive thing.
If you have any questions or concerns about what I have written here, please contact me directly at heather@mindsightpsychology.com.au and I will respond to your query as soon as possible.
Mindsight Psychology Services 