Systematic Alienation Model Summary

management, education and coaching. In their 2010 article, Friedlander and Walters state that this model differs from reunification: “the goals are broader than a restoration of the child’s relationship with the rejected parent” Friedlander and Walters, 2010, p. 98). It appears that this model may be most appropriate for mild to moderate cases of parental alienation, as there appers to be a lower level of court, or judicial intervention: “therapy has often proceeded without the support of a court order for treatment and without specification from the court of which family members and which professionals are to be involved in the intervention” (p. 99). In an evaluation of the MMFI reported by Fidler, Bala and Saini, reports that a positive evaluation was based on “feedback from the families and clinical judgement of the service provider” (Fidler, Bala & Saini, 2012, p. 127). This evaluation was made by the authors of the MMFI, sample size was small and study was descriptive.

Limitations of this study include a lack of standardized tools

15). From the author’s own practice, Kopetski obtained longitudinal follow-up information from her own practice over a period of 20 years. While the results showed both positive and mixed results, the authors were able to conclude that the court’s ruling on custody and access was essential for interrupting or preventing alienation and that therapy as the primary intervention was ineffective for interrupting alienation and even made the situation