[Adversarial collaborations] require disagreeing scholars to (a) work together in pursuit of truth, (b) articulate their precise and empirically testable disagreements, (c) mutually agree upon rigorous and unbiased tests of their competing hypotheses, (d) commit to conditions of falsifiability or at least belief updating, and (e) pursue publication of the results regardless of their outcomes” [emphasis in original].
Ceci, Clark, Jussim, and Williams (2026, p. 375)
AFCC has a long history of adversarial collaboration. Peter Salem (2019) said that starting in the early 2000s, “AFCC decided to emphasize opportunities to address critical issues in family law” (p. 232). This was the initiative behind several AFCC “think tanks,” which were elaborate discussions that addressed difficult and controversial topics. A more recent example of inter-agency collaboration was the “Joint Statement on Parent–Child Contact Problems” (PCCP), a shared project of AFCC and the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (2022). Representatives of the organizations met several times and eventually published the “Joint Statement,” a balanced account of various factors related to PCCPs.
For readers who are not familiar with adversarial collaboration, the idea is that scholars with different perspectives and opinions should talk to each other and listen to each other. The concept was promoted by Daniel Kahneman, Ph.D., a psychologist who won the Nobel Prize in Economics in 2002. The history and usefulness of this approach was discussed in a recent article, “Adversarial Collaboration: An Undervalued Approach in Behavioral Science,” in American Psychologist (Ceci, Clark, Jussim, & Williams, 2026).
In 2023, the leadership of AFCC launched a project called “Peace Talks,” with the mission of encouraging dialogue regarding the topic of PCCPs. Among other topics, the Peace Talks participants considered the criteria for the identification of parental alienation (PA) and interventions for cases of severe PA. In order to report their progress, the Peace Talkers presented panel discussions at AFCC meetings in Boston (June 2024) and Columbus (November 2024). The participants included individuals with diverse opinions regarding PCCPs and PA: William Bernet, M.D., April Harris-Britt, Ph.D., Peter Jaffe, Ph.D., Hon. Denise McColley (Ret.), Stacey E. Platt, J.D., and Michael Saini, Ph.D. Later, Bernet and Jaffe—the Peace Talks participants with the most distinct perspectives—received the AFCC President’s Award for their efforts “to reduce polarization in family law topics, particularly with regard to parental alienation.”
To look ahead, we hope that another example of adversarial collaboration will play out at the AFCC meeting in Orlando (November 2026), where Benjamin D. Garber, William Bernet, and Alan D. Blotcky will present a workshop, “In Search of Common Ground: PCCP, Dynamics, Labels, and Assessment.” Each presenter will focus on an area of their expertise. Garber will explain his evaluation rubric—consisting of six functional domains—that assists evaluators in accurately understanding a child’s and family’s dynamics (Garber, 2024). Bernet will discuss the pros and cons of diagnostic labeling in family law cases, including the use of the Baker Five-Factor Model for the diagnosis of PA (Bernet & Greenhill, 2022). Blotcky will examine the uses and misuses of psychometric tests, inventories, and questionnaires in PCCP cases.
The Parental Alienation Study Group (PASG) has created another opportunity for adversarial collaboration among family law professionals. Their book, Parental Alienation Theory: Official Synopsis, published in 2025, is intended as a platform through which writers and scholars with different opinions regarding PA theory can work out their differences. The .pdf of the book is available for free on the homepage of the PASG website, www.pasg.info. The leadership of PASG hopes that PA scholars will submit edits, suggestions, and corrections, so that future editions of the book will gradually create a consensus regarding definitions, assessment, prevention, and interventions for PA.
We hope that we are setting a good example—and that the principles of adversarial collaboration will continue to be utilized in eNews, Family Court Review, webinars, conferences, and even among the AFCC Board of Directors. See you in Orlando!
References
Association of Family and Conciliation Court & National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (2022). Joint statement on parent–child contact problems.
Bernet, W., & Greenhill, L. L. (2022). The Five-Factor Model for the Diagnosis of Parental Alienation. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 61(5), 591–594.
Ceci, S. J., Clark, C. J., Jussim, L., & Williams, W. M. (2026). Adversarial collaboration: An undervalued approach in behavioral science. American Psychologist, 81(3), 374–390.
Garber, B. (2024). A structured rubic
for evaluating the many systemic variables that can contribute to parent–child contact problems (PCCP). Family Court Review, 62(2), 343–358.
Salem, P. (2019). AFCC think tanks: Promoting dialogue on difficult issues in family law. Family Court Review, 57(2), 231–242.
Authors
William Bernet, M.D., is a professor emeritus in the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN.
Benjamin D. Garber, Ph.D., is a New Hampshire licensed psychologist. He restricts his practice to forensic evaluation, consultation, training, and expert testimony in the best interests of children. Learn more at familylawconsulting.org.
Alan D. Blotcky, Ph.D., is a clinical and forensic psychologist in private practice in Birmingham, Alabama, as well as a clinical associate professor in the Department of Psychology, University of Alabama at Birmingham.
This article is based partly on: Parental Alienation Study Group (2025). The importance of different perspectives. In Parental Alienation Theory: Official Synopsis (pp. 139–143). Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas.