What we know and what’s disputed

This market is full of confident claims that don’t hold up. Here’s what the evidence actually says, including where it cuts against the framing some readers arrive expecting.

Claim: "Parental alienation is in the DSM-5."

Primary source

Parental alienation and parental alienation syndrome were both proposed for DSM-5 and rejected — first in 2013, then again for the DSM-5-TR revision in 2022. Five related codes describe adjacent territory without naming it.

Source: American Psychiatric Association, DSM-5 (2013) and DSM-5-TR (2022)

Claim: "The WHO recognises parental alienation."

Primary source

Two ICD-11 index terms pointing to "caregiver-child relationship problem" were briefly approved, then removed by the WHO on 15 February 2020. Parental alienation has never been a WHO diagnosis.

Source: World Health Organization, ICD-11 index term removal, 15 February 2020

Claim: "Brazil criminalises parental alienation."

Primary source

Brazil’s Law 12.318/2010 (amended 2022) provides civil measures only — the criminal provision was vetoed before the law passed. In December 2025 a repeal of the law cleared a committee vote in the Chamber of Deputies; it remains in force pending the Senate.

Source: Law 12.318/2010, Lei 14.340/2022; Chamber of Deputies CCJ vote, 4 Dec 2025

Claim: "Spain has banned parental alienation syndrome."

Experts disagree

A LOPIVI expansion bill was approved in first reading on 5 May 2026 and endorsed by the CGPJ on 3 Aug 2026 — it is not law. Headlines calling Spain "the first country to ban SAP" are premature.

Source: LOPIVI expansion bill, first reading 5 May 2026; CGPJ endorsement, 3 Aug 2026

Claim: "Parental alienation syndrome is settled science."

Primary source

Germany’s Federal Constitutional Court called PAS "outdated and scientifically refuted" in November 2023. England and Wales’s Family Justice Council calls it "a harmful pseudo-science."

Source: BVerfG 1 BvR 1076/23 (Nov 2023); Family Justice Council guidance (Dec 2024)

Claim: "X% of divorces involve parental alienation."

Experts disagree

Prevalence figures in this field describe how many parents report experiencing alienating behaviour, not how many cases have been independently confirmed. The two are not the same number, and studies rarely make the distinction explicit in their headline figure.

Source: Self-report survey methodology, general limitation across the field’s literature

Claim: "Courts side with alienation claims and take children from protective mothers."

Experts disagree

Meier’s custody-outcome research is real and widely cited, but drawn from an appellate-court sample — not representative of first-instance outcomes generally. Harman and Lorandos have published a methodological critique of the study; the exchange between them is ongoing and unresolved.

Source: Meier, J.S. et al., custody-outcome study (appellate sample); Harman/Lorandos critique