Parental alienation sometimes can occur in divorce situations. Parental alienation refers to an attempt by one parent to brainwash their children into having negative feelings towards the other parent. Studies have shown parental alienation can take place in as many as 15% of all divorces.

Parents Badmouthing Each Other

Although divorces can be contentious, aggravating and emotionally debilitating, it is extremely important parents do not actively discuss the negative aspects of their divorce litigation with their children. They should avoid saying negative things about their spouses when their children are present. This can have a negative effect on the child’s relationship with the other parent.

Children Respecting Their Parents

Children should love both their parents. They often have problems dealing with the breakup of the relationship of the parents with each other. If the children have coping problems with regard to this issue, counseling may be necessary to help the children to deal with their new situation in life.

Parents should educate their children to speak to the other parent in a respectful, appropriate manner. Children should not denigrate one parent to the other. Even though the parties are not married, they still must work together to raise their children. By having the children denigrate or disrespect one of the parents will have a negative impact on both parents ability to raise the children.

Parents who seek further information on parental alienation, child custody issues or co-parenting can contact Elliot S. Schlissel, Esq. at either Elliot@sdnylaw.com or he can be called at 800-344-6431.  Elliot has been practicing matrimonial and family law for more than 40 years.

In a case before Justice Jeffrey Goodstein, who sits in the divorce Supreme Court part in Nassau County, a husband brought an application to set aside a provision in a 2017 court decision after trial awarding a wife a $226,042.00 money judgment for support arrears. He also sought to modify the court’s decision crediting him for $200,907.68 in support payments. The court allegedly failed to give him the appropriate credit among other things.

The Wife’s Position

The wife opposed the husband’s application. She brought a cross-application to allow her to trade cash assets awarded her in exchange for the husband’s equity in the marital residence. She claimed it was essential for the parties’ special needs son to remain in the marital residence, to stay in the same school district, keep his friends and maintain the same routine.

The Trial Judge had Retired

Justice Goodstein, in a matter of first impression, ruled that under the circumstances presented in this case the prospective of a trial judge, now retired, was essential to the appropriate evaluation of the parties’ motions. Since the trial judge was retired, Justice Goodstein found he had no authority to rule on these post trial motions. The decision regarding all financial issues was resolved by the decision after trial. Therefore, under both statutory law and case law any change or challenge to the trial court’s decision would have to be made to the Appellate Division, an Appeals Court. Only the Appellate Division could determine if the modification of the trial court’s decision was appropriate. He therefore denied both parties’ applications.

Conclusion

In this case there were issues that should have been dealt with before the original trial judge. Parties in divorce cases should always resolve all issues when they settle or take a case to trial.

Elliot S. Schlissel has been representing parties in divorce and family court cases in the courts throughout the Metropolitan New York area for more than 45 years. He can be reached at 800-344-6431 or e-mailed at Elliot@sdnylaw.com.