Stan Korosi

Parental alienating behaviours (PABs) constitute a communicative, relational, and structural discourse that can restructure family relationship meaning, sometimes culminating in the coerced parent-child relationship rupture. Research on parental alienation has repeatedly linked exposure to PABs with adverse psychosocial outcomes, including suicidality with parents, especially alienated fathers, who are frequently identified as high risk. Yet, the field lacks a specified mechanism linking PAB exposure to suicidogenic conditions, including a plausible account of why male suicide mortality is overrepresented in family-relationship disruption and how discursive pathways may vary by gender. Contemporary suicide theories are not wrong, but they under-specify social-to-psychological translation processes in this domain. This article develops a testable conceptual model in which PAB-induced parental identity degradation interacts with (i) delegitimising sociolegal narratives about parental alienation, (ii) culturally available scripts that frame masculinity/fatherhood through suspicion, danger, or disposability, and (iii) institutional uptake of these scripts in assessments and determinations. The model proposes discursive foreclosure: intersecting discourses progressively narrow socially intelligible, non-stigmatised identities and future pathways, thereby intensifying established suicide motivations (e.g., burdensomeness, defeat, entrapment). A gender-variant pathway is also hypothesised for targeted mothers, whose identity scripting and institutional legibility may differ. The model complements motivational–volitional suicidology by specifying a discursive pathway through which identity degradation and institutional narrative uptake can intensify burdensomeness, defeat, entrapment, and thwarted belongingness. The article specifies falsifiable indicators and a mixed-methods agenda; it does not test the mechanism.

Parental alienation (PA) is a contested yet increasingly recognised phenomenon at the cutting edge of contemporary families. The PA field straddles the intersection of family dynamics, power, gender and politics. Defined by behaviours one parent adopts to manipulate a child into rejecting the other parent without reasonable grounds, PA is a form of social and psychological abuse and coercive control with significant public health implications. Critics often dismiss PA as a pseudo-concept or patriarchal discourse. Yet, according to extensive research, alienating behaviours are agnostic to gender. They result in adverse outcomes for children regardless of the family member's gender. This article situates PA as a form of "discursive violence" that restructures family relationships and undermines children's needs and rights. It traces the evolution of the concept from Gardner's "Parental Alienation Syndrome" to contemporary nonmedicalised approaches, noting how ideological disputes-particularly with gendered theories of domestic violence-shape its reception in law and policy. Globally, some jurisdictions have policies and laws to address PA, while others, such as Australia, maintain ambivalence, influenced by ideological contestation. Drawing on international experience and policy debates, the article argues for recognising PA as a gender agnostic form of relational abuse requiring integrated evidence-based policy and legal reform. It concludes that policy should adopt a childcentred, needs and rights-based framework that acknowledges the harms of alienation, balances protection from abuse with maintaining parental relationships. It should resist