In a recent ruling by the Supreme Court, the contentious issue of “Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS)” took center stage amidst a custody battle between a estranged couple. This syndrome, the Court elucidated, involves one parent fostering animosity towards the other parent in the child’s mind, swaying the child’s preference during custody disputes.
The Court, drawing from a precedent set by the High Court of Justice Family Division in Re C (‘parental alienation’; instruction of expert), underscored that “Parental alienation” isn’t a syndrome diagnosed per se, but rather a manipulation process inflicted by one parent on the child, termed as “alienating behaviors.” It’s a factual matter, the Court emphasized, echoing principles from the case Vivek Singh v. Romani Singh, which detailed the psychological toll PAS exacts on children.
The bench, comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma, delved into the nuances of PAS, cautioning against hasty PAS attributions without concrete evidence of ‘alienating behavior.’ They stressed the need for discernment in identifying such behaviors before labeling a parent as an instigator.
In the case at hand, the Court ruled that the appellant didn’t exhibit “parent alienating behavior.” Reinforcing the paramount importance of the child’s welfare in guardianship matters, the Court advocated a comprehensive approach considering various facets including socioeconomic prospects, healthcare, and the child’s own preferences.
In essence, the ruling underscored the judiciary’s vigilance in safeguarding the best interests of the child, steering away from premature assumptions, and embracing a nuanced understanding of familial dynamics in custody disputes.
