Like many social science presentations, gendered theories and parental alienation may be considered contested concepts. They both rely fundamentally on the subjectivity of lived experience and assessment of structural factors that cannot be directly discerned. If, as the Irish Examiner claims, the Irish Government should not rely on contestable theories, then governments cannot rely on the gendered theory of violence to guide their policies either.
This false contestability argument has significant adverse implications for formal bodies responsible for legislation and public health policies. The WHO accepting GFV as an essential public health issue affecting women but not accepting PA as a public health issue affecting men, women, and children is contradictory. It is an example of how the false claim that PA is contestable but GFV is not (or that GFV is contestable but PA should still not be accepted) drives policies that harm significant populations that GFV regards as politically incorrect.
Gendered theories’ systemic entrenchment, ideological rigidity, and dogmatic nature render them more contestable. The same rigorous scientific explanation applied to PA should also apply to GFV. A shift towards inclusive, evidence-informed policymaking is essential for equitable justice and support for all affected families.