Copyright (c) 2005 Blackwell Publishing
Family Court Review
READER COMMENTARY: Parental Alienation Syndrome: Proponents Bear the Burden of Proof
January, 2005
43 Fam. Ct. Rev. 8
Author
Robert E. Emery
Excerpt
Richard Gardner's response to Kelly and Johnston's (2001) critique of so-called "parental alienation syndrome" (PAS) provokes two strong reactions: sympathy and frustration. On the one hand, I am sympathetic to authors who wish to write rejoinders to critiques of their ideas, and I am particularly sympathetic since Gardner's paper was submitted post-humously. On the other hand, Gardner makes sweeping and misguided claims about PAS and about science. As a scientist, I am outraged by the misunderstandings, errors in logic, and sweeping assertions in his article. Gardner writes forcefully and with conviction, and I worry that the unwary will be more persuaded by the tone than the substance of his arguments. Rhetoric is a tool for pursuing truth in the courtroom. Rhetoric is not a tool of truth in science. 1 If it were, scientific journals would be perpetually filled with arguments about, for example, evolution versus creationism or the psychological parent versus the alienating parent
No comments:
Post a Comment