European Journal of Parental Alienation Practice — Issue 3

Description

A child’s voice is indispensable in family justice. Yet the question concerning us is not simply whether a child has been heard. It is whether the contextual conditions in which that child has learned to speak, remain silent, agree, resist or withdraw have been sufficiently understood. The distinction matters profoundly in proceedings where family relationships, safety and a child’s sense of belonging are contested.

The phrase “voice of the child” can convey an impression of clarity: ask the child, record the answer and present it to the court. But a child’s account is not produced outside relationships and contexts. It is expressed within a family history, an emotional climate and an anticipated future. A child may worry about hurting one parent, angering another, being questioned afterwards or losing the security of a valued attachment. Another child may be speaking with great clarity about frightening or harmful experiences. Both deserve to be heard without their words being recruited prematurely into an adult explanation.

This is the central editorial concern: recording what a child says is not the same as establishing why the child says it, whether the child feels free to say something different or what arrangement will best protect European Journal of Parental Alienation PracticeOctober 2026 Issue 3 5 their welfare. Equally, the presence of family conflict does not license an assessor to discount an inconvenient account as the product of influence. We must resist both errors.