Avoidant attachment is reinforced from parental messages that emotions are not important in a child’s self-identity and in making decisions. Thus, the child (and as an adult) may feel like he or she does not really matter. An avoidant person may even believe that emotions steer one into danger or disaster and are not to be trusted. So emotions are left out of daily interactions. It may be hard to comfort or connect with an avoidant person. A second type of avoidant attachment seeks to please a significant other and downgrade one’s own needs because one can only accept emotions if they are not opposed by the significant other. This is a co-dependent relationship.

Ambivalent attachment patterns are derived from close connections that are not stable. The parent could be hot or cold. When cold, the parent may be preoccupied; it does not mean that the parent’s love wavers. So fear may develop associated with closeness and connection, because closeness and connection could be lost. The child or adult in this case may crave intimacy but not want to ask for it. If intimacy does happen, this person may eventually find it stifling. The child or adult may then experience anger and would distance from the significant other, but then fear would overtake from being feeling alone. The pattern then becomes hot pursuit, but then cold distancing.

Disorganized or dysregulated attachment patterns stem from parents who are ruled by the “fight or flight” autonomic nervous system. Parents tend to be aggressive or controlling, stemming from fear. On the other hand, parents could be overwhelmed or a victim, again stemming from fear.

Secure attachments are stable patterns but do not have to be perfect. They stem from a parent’s capacity at a particular place and time to recognize and value the emotions of a child, or to connect with what the child is doing. When the child comes to the parent, the parent in effect says to the child that the child is okay even when the child or parent is having negative emotions. The child is allowed to be separate from the parent, with the child’s own set of valid emotions and self-confidence.

The author Dan Blair is a family therapist at Blair Counseling and Mediation.

1. A wall of resentment has been built brick by brick. Depending on how the spouse handles anger and resentment, that wall is not coming down, so intimate feelings and thoughts will not survive.
2. A pattern of negative thinking about the spouse and the relationship is entrenched, so that positive feelings are no longer available.
3. Loneliness in the relationship or an inability to have fun with each other. A good adventure can be more bonding than sex.
4. Continuous criticism turns into contempt.
5. One spouse suffocates another with demands.
6. A spouse is continuously on the defense.
7. Nearly all of one’s energy is poured into other endeavors besides the relationship.
8. Someone special is waiting in the wings, or the thought is “I can do better.”
9. No trust = no relationship.
10. No external source of hope and commitment, such as God.

Henry Cloud in his book Necessary Endings requires eight conditions for trusting change.

1. Involvement in a proven change process that is known to be capable of bringing results.
2. There should be a “time and place” structure to the change process. i.e. “I will attend this x every week at x time.”
3. New information and knowledge is specified and applied.
4. New experiences, skills, and abilities. The “how” and “when” should be specified.
5. Self-sustaining motivation, as opposed to being constantly pushed into change.
6. The ability to say, “I need some help.”
7. A support group to give energy.
8. A visible process of change. This does not mean that all is well or done, but that “something” is happening.

The author Dan Blair is a marriage counselor at Blair Counseling and Mediation.

Separation from an attachment figure may cause distress, but secure attachment encourages temporary separation and development. Insecure attachment is still attachment, and the child will still seek or monitor the attached figure. Attachment exists even in maltreatment. A child who avoids a parent has not lost interest, but may be angry, anxious, sad, and even feel guilty. If the needs represented by these emotions are met, the child will gradually decrease avoidance. Three subtypes of insecure attachment include avoidant, ambivalent, and a disorganized or controlling descriptor. Parental behavior associated with the types of attachment follow: secure attachment with parental flexibility and stability, avoidant attachment with dismissive parenting, ambivalent attachment with preoccupied parents, and disorganized attachment with overwhelmed parents. Parental capacity is important to consider.

Appearances can be misleading. The parent that looks like the better parent in counseling, mediation, and court is not necessarily the better parent. Where there is high conflict, usually both parents are contributing to the conflict. Another way appearances can be misleading is the way a child acts out distress upon return to a parent. The child is often expressing how upset he or she was to be apart, and not that he or she had a negative experience while apart.

Since primary attachment is crucial to self-regulation, experts recommend primary custody with one parent for the first three years with frequent visits by the non-custodial parent, though not overnight. Between eighteen months and three years, whole day visits and overnights can be gradually introduced, carefully monitoring reactions. The child’s ability to comprehend that they will return to the custodial parent is important. Some children may take longer to adapt than others. Items brought from the primary home may help. Time may be closer to equal by the time the child is between six and eight.

What disrupts attachment? Parental conflict. It is recommended that protracted court cases involving high conflict and children be buffered by an ongoing support system, counselor, or advocate. Minimizing exposure to parental conflict is paramount, and providing a transitional space and place can be helpful to the child. Perhaps dropping the child off with a “neutral” third party from whom the other parent can then meet for pick-up, or at least a public place. For more information, see How One Parent Undermines Another Parent and Reunification Therapy with Estranged and Alienated Parents.

Emery (2011) has recently reviewed his longitudinal finding that, twelve years after random assignment to mediation or litigation, non-residential parents who had mediated their parenting dispute saw their children far more often than parents who settled via an adversarial process, and additionally had improved their parenting. Co-parents who mediated reported significantly less conflict (Main, Mary; Hesse, Erik; Hesse, Seigfried. “Attachment Theory and Research: Overview with Suggested Applications to Child Custody.” Family Court Review (2011): Volume 49, Issue 3, pages 426–463).

The author Dan Blair is a Divorce Counselor, Divorce Mediator and Parenting Coordinator at Blair Counseling and Mediation.

Families are often referred to counseling or mediation because (1.) a child is distressed, or (2.) a parent is hoping for support in a court case, or (3.) counseling or mediation is court-ordered. Each of these scenarios differs in the nature of the information that is presented to the counselor or mediator, and in the expectations of the counselor or mediator. Each participant has an agenda that is influenced by the legal process. The clinician should be focused on the psychological health of the client, the mediator should be focused on communication and negotiation, and clinicians and mediators should respect the role of attorneys, forensic evaluators, parenting coordinators, and the Court. Clinicians and mediators should not mix roles. If there is a court order, the role should be clearly defined.

Clinicians and mediators should be knowledgeable in child development, and obtain each parent’s perspective and maintain objectivity. The clinician should be careful with attitudes and beliefs of the children that reflect one of the parents. These attitudes and beliefs may be hiding true feelings and may be causing distress. Clinicians and mediators should also know characteristics of divorcing parents and children, family systems, best practice for high conflict, and understand relevant research and standards of practice. Clinicians and mediators should also have ongoing training, especially in domestic violence, parental alienation and estrangement, and special needs of the family and children. Clinicians and mediators should be understanding of expectations and processes of the legal system and work well with collateral contacts.

The author Dan Blair is a Divorce Counselor, Divorce Mediator and Parenting Coordinator at Blair Counseling and Mediation.

Parents especially in divorce can become estranged or alienated. Estranged parents generally involves the deterioration of the parent’s relationship with the child due to parental factors and child behavior. The child and parent both experience the disconnection. For children of alienated parents, the emphasis is more on what the child has been told about their experience, which may include exaggerations and negative allegations. The child may want to “protect” their other parent in this case. Even if the allegations are true, it is difficult if not impossible to accurately measure the exact impact on the child, other that statements by the child. Some signs of alienation can be found in the post “How One Parent Undermines the Other Parent.”

Reunification therapy is difficult because it requires not only the usual willingness to make personal changes but also the elusive ability to utilize (versus attack) someone else’s point of view. Therapeutic goals are many, based on each situation, but always involve the parent and child seeing the impact of their own behavior on the other, expressing remorse, the ability to rebuild the relationship, and effective restriction on the other parent’s interference. Interventions include cognitive and communication retraining, resolving attachment issues, and building self-esteem. Therapists should be active, directive and able to confront maladaptive interactions.

The author Dan Blair is a Divorce Counselor, Divorce Mediator and Parenting Coordinator at Blair Counseling and Mediation.

Parent coordination can be used to develop adherence to a parenting plan and as a quicker analysis and resolution of child-related parental disputes. The aim of parenting coordination is to
stem the drain on family financial and emotional resources by resolving any disputes arising between parents. Note that a parenting coordinator does not resolve the matter of custody, but may be used as an interim basis to the address the implementation of a temporary parenting plan.

The author is Dan Blair, LMFT, LCPC, NCPC is a Nationally Certified Parenting Coordinator and is trained to draft arbitration decisions with precision.

What is “it?” On the moderate side it is undermining the other parent and it can lead to alienation. While some parents undermine themselves, one parent undermines the other when intentionally or non-intentionally one parent sends a message that a positive relationship with the other parent is not that important.

How does this happen? It may happen not so much by what a parent says but how he or she feels when he or she says it. If a parent is concerned about his or her child’s welfare when questioning the child about the other parent, the child may perceive your concern as if the child is in a bad situation. Subsequent comments may suggest to the child that something is bad about the other parent. Perhaps the comments are an exaggeration of the other parent’s flaws. A parent’s natural wish to protect a child may lead to proposing ways the child can deal with this “awful” situation, and maybe even question the appropriateness of time spent with the parent.

The next step in undermining the parental relationship would be to give power to the child in deciding whether or not a parental relationship is appropriate. While most parents would not hesitate to insist their child do something that they must do, building a workable relationship with the other parent may be seen as optional. For a child, though, to choose between having a relationship with a parent and not having a relationship is distressing. Even though kids may complain about their parents and protest against seeing a parent, they generally deep down want a good relationship with both parents. When one parent sides with the protest, however, the child may see this is a way to connect with the “better” parent, and the other parent may lose out.

The more the child avoids the “problematic” parent the easier it gets to avoid the “problematic” parent. Plus, the child gets approval and attention from the “better” parent. A powerful reinforced cycle develops.

The child may react by idealizing one parent and devaluing the other. Or the child’s complaints are listed and some of them are trivial or untrue. The complaints sound like they don’t reflect the child’s true feelings, or there is little ambivalence. Children may deny hope for reconciliation.

Children who are burdened by an undermining parent learn that it is not possible to have a good relationship with both parents. The other parent may give the child space to come around, but this may inadvertently reinforce negative perceptions. Or, the other parent may “push” the relationship, again reinforcing negative perceptions. Also, the parent may respond to undermining by undermining the other parent, and then underrate the effect on the kids. Both parents end up with little insight into one’s own contribution to the problem.

The effect on the kids can include changes in how the child views the world, lowered self-esteem, loss of self-confidence, future conflict, issues with attention, depression, and/or anxiety, future addiction and other effects revealed by research. Unfortunately, kids identify with negative aspects of both parents. Often though, the better the relationship with one parent the better the relationship with the other parent. In retrospect, adult children report that they wish someone helped them with their relationship with the “other” parent.

The author Dan Blair is a Divorce Counselor, Divorce Mediator and Parenting Coordinator at Blair Counseling and Mediation.

Often when one thinks of disciplining kids you think of angry exchanges with both sides feeling frustrated and misunderstood. You usually won’t get the right response unless you and your child are calm, so make that the first step. When your child is responsive, which means ready to listen, he or she can practice a skill you are trying to teach them, instead of just giving them a consequence. You can remember this approach as “CPR: Calm, Practice, and Reinforce.”

Calm first. Don’t argue. Discipline should not exhaust the parent. Talk with them if there are genuine questions. Otherwise, choose to deal with the emotions instead of just the behavior. They are probably too upset to respond appropriately. Model a calm state to slowly turn off their “alarm system.” Identify and accept what they are feeling. For now, don’t teach. Physical and verbal aggression, however, is designed to shock, upset, and control you. Don’t let it work. If your child is too disruptive, lead him or her from the room to a spot where he or she can sit. Ensure safety. As soon as you can and are calm, join your child. Don’t address behavior yet at this point.

In general,
•Increase the amount of calm time spent together in the home.
•Create routine and warn about transitions ahead of time.
•Expectations should not be too high. Take it step by step.

Practice the right behavior. Of course, they must be calm and responsive for practice sessions. Start by modeling calm ways to solve problems since it is the most effective teaching tool. Focus on the right behavior instead of the wrong. For example, if a child slams doors, he can practice telling you what he feels and wants from you. That does not mean he is entitled, just that he can express himself appropriately. Younger kids can be shown what to do. Older kids can practice describing both sides of an issue and thinking of possible solutions, even if they don’t agree.

In general,
•Positive interactions need to outweigh negative interactions.
•Spend time, talk, and show affection.
•Describe their accomplishments throughout the day.

Reinforce with routine privileges, plus special privileges at unexpected times, after calming and practicing. Perhaps a designated light can be used to indicate privileges, and when it is turned off, privileges are on hold until responsibilities are completed.

In general,
•Negative reactions are powerful reinforcers of negative behavior.
•Long-term disadvantages exist for using fear, threats, and isolation.
•Make the right behavior get better results for the child.

Using calm approaches work better in the long run, and positive consequences teach more than the negative. Negative consequences can control behavior in the short-term, but not necessarily in the long term. Positive consequences include enabling your kids to research a topic, volunteer somewhere, or provide restitution. Most importantly, your positive or negative reaction to kid’s behavior is a useful predictor of future problems. Whatever approach you use, don’t forget the three “C’s:” consistency, consistency, and consistency.

The author Dan Blair is a Divorce Counselor, Divorce Mediator and Parenting Coordinator at Blair Counseling and Mediation.

Would you like to learn more about parenting approaches?

1. Tell the kids with the whole family present (unless there is potential for arguments or violence between the parents). Decide what each of you will say beforehand. Take turns giving information.

2. Base your explanation of the divorce on observations the children have already seen to affirm their point of view. Each parent should take responsibility for their side. For example, if the kids see a lot of fighting (one of the most damaging aspects of divorce), ask them how they feel about the fighting and tell them that mom and dad are not able to live together because of the fighting. Both mom and dad are unable to resolve their differences and have agreed to divorce. Or, if the kids notice that mom and dad don’t spend much time together, mention that. Say that mom and dad should have spent more time together, or listened more to what each feels, or did more for each other. Don’t give out personal information. While kids are curious, they don’t have the understanding or coping skills to deal with it. Don’t put down the other parent; each kid identifies with each parent.

3. Address four primary negative emotions:

Anger: Kids have a right to feel angry because their world is going to be turned upside down. Tell them that frustration and anger is allowed. Give examples of good ways to express it.

Fear: Ask your kids what they think divorce means. Ask them what they are afraid of happening and tell them how the parents will handle it. Kids are often unaware that they fear abandonment. Counter fears by giving details on what the kids can expect, like when transitions will occur, where mom and dad will live, and what will be the family schedule for seeing mom and dad. Don’t give them more to worry about. Tell them that everything is going to be as normal as possible and that they will have open communication with both parents (unless that is not true).

Sadness: Tell the kids that mom and dad once loved each other. Mention good times the family experienced, even if it was a long time ago. Affirm the good so the kids can accept the bad.

Guilt: Kids may feel shame about the divorce. Let your kids know that they did nothing to cause the divorce and that mom and dad only are to blame. Both mom and dad have learned from this but both feel there is nothing either can do to make the marriage work and there is nothing the kids can do to make the marriage work.

4. Ask if there are any questions.

Each parent should take responsibility for their part in the loss of marriage; however kids do not need to know details of each parent’s faults unless the kids already know about them. In that case, affirm that the kid’s observations are true and ask the kids how that impacts them. What you feel when you are talking with your kids is more important than what you say. They will respond to how you feel, so model how you would like your kids to respond.

Parenting Tips.

The author Dan Blair is a Divorce Counselor, Divorce Mediator and Parenting Coordinator at Blair Counseling and Mediation.

For more ideas on personally helping kids through divorce see:

Further complications include how the divorced are treated by the church.  If a spouse who was abused or neglected by his or her spouse had a relationship with a kind friend that turned sexual, one of the spouses would be free to divorce and marry again and even serve as a church leader, and the other may be judged and shunned by people in the church.  Which do you think is which?  While both sides contributed to the breaking of the covenant of marriage, the side that sexually erred is often blamed.

Divorce is a legal issue, and some treat the Bible as a legal document to justify their divorce or condemn someone else.  The Bible moves from rules and regulations in the Old Testament toward behavior based on a growing personal relationship with God.   Laws are an external demand.  God wants more than external change.  He wants internal change through a personal interactive relationship.  Both the Old and New Testament are also clear about God’s intention for marriage.  While the Old Testament permitted divorce, the New Testament made clear what the Old Testament also made clear: God meant marriage to last.  The Bible underscores the need to save marriages.  There is no doubt divorce has major negative consequences on a person and the family.  There are a number of options to take before divorce is unavoidable.  However, if one does not view the Bible as a legal document addressing every circumstance, the justification for divorce is not captured by rules alone.   It is based on one’s relationship with God and other Biblical values that come into play.

So one’s view of divorce may rest on one’s view of the Bible.  Is the Bible like a legal document that covers all situations?  Or does the Bible present principles that need to be applied to individual situations?  Either view can support the high value of saving the marriage and that divorce is only acceptable if a party crosses this line: sexual infidelity.  But, does that position address every situation?  Is the New Testament more restrictive than the Old in that divorce was permitted but now is not?

There is a line between the position that Biblical rules have no exceptions except what is stated, and the opposite position that rationalizes one’s decisions to the point that they are not based on Biblical principles nor a personal relationship with God.  Each one must look to their own conscience and ask if they are seeking God in their decisions, and especially in this decision to divorce.  This may be difficult to do without consultation.  Most likely at the point of divorce there have been sins committed on both sides; each side has to take responsibility for their own by examining the impact of his or her behavior on the other, expressing sincere remorse, making a commitment to the marriage and making sustainable changes.  However, one’s position on the issue of divorce that comes from a personal relationship with God and Biblical values like justice, mercy and grace is ultimately preferable than one that merely follows rules.

God is a God of redemption. God seeks to restore that which was lost, and make it better.  “Plan A” is preferred, but God can create a “Plan B,” even after divorce.  David, a man after God’s own heart, required a “Plan B” after he committed adultery with a woman who later became his wife.  Their son was chosen to be heir to a throne over the son of his first wife.  This lineage led to Jesus Himself.  This Old Testament story is one of many underscoring the message of a God who takes the bad and turns it around for good for those who return to God after their sin. Consequences remain, but redemption has the last word.  Is the New Testament meant to imprison people in unholy relationships, only to punish them indefinitely after a divorce?  Does the Old Testament convey more grace under the Law than the New Testament where people are covered by God’s mercy and grace ? The Pharisees in the New Testament followed the law but missed important values in applying the law. Instead, the more one builds a relationship with God based on personal and didactic knowledge of Him (as revealed through reliable sources) the more clarity on this personal decision. The decision has to be personal because very few want a marriage based merely on duty, and such a relationship is bound not to last. In contrast, while God does not control people, He also may be the one resource that enables one to save the marriage.

The author Dan Blair is a Divorce Mediator and Parenting Coordinator at Blair Counseling and Mediation.

For more information on this topic see: