Danielle Pollack of The National Family Violence Law Center is a self-declared “expert” on family matters with a focus on child custody and family violence. To the contrary of being an expert, Pollack is not qualified to render credible opinions regarding these issues.
This article will expose Pollack to be an unqualified, deceptive, and biased bad actor whose negligent behavior is harming and exploiting alienated children and alienated parents – but particularly alienated mothers.
In support of my opinions, I will discuss examples of Pollack’s disinformation about alienation, child abuse, and domestic violence.

Who Is the Real Danielle Pollack?
Daniel Pollack is merely a layperson in the matters for which she claims expertise. She lacks academic degrees, credentials, or licenses in any mental health discipline or in the law.
Despite her dearth of qualifications, Pollack incredulously portrays herself as possessing superior knowledge and credible opinions about family matters. She portrays her opinions as more righteous and correct than those contradictory opinions of credentialed professionals. These credentialed professionals have been qualified by the Courts to be experts on family matters.
The family matters in which my colleagues and I have been qualified to render expert opinions include, but are not limited to, family violence, child abuse, and parental alienation. This is an inconvenient truth for Pollack and her minions.
Pollack pompously maligns qualified experts in parental alienation with ad-hominem attacks. Her ad-hominem attacks lack merit, but she mischievously promulgates them because there is no credible evidence for her opinions.

Danielle Pollack Exploits Domestic Violence and Child Abuse In Order to Deny Parental Alienation
Pollack has been on a malicious and mischievous mission to deny the child abusive family phenomenon of parental alienation. Her goal is to abolish parental alienation claims from being introduced and adjudicated in child custody proceedings.
Pollack has shamelessly and dangerously weaponized domestic violence in support of her mission against alienation. She alleges that all claims of parental alienation should be dismissed because perpetrators of domestic violence (DV) play the alienation card in order to be exonerated from their crimes.

It is true that some perpetrators of DV – both men and women – do play the alienation defense card in the attempt to be exonerated from their heinous crimes. But this does not justify throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Pollack’s meritless and dangerous argument is based upon the logical fallacy known as “appeal to the consequent.” Appeal to the consequent requires the rejection of a credible opinion merely because it has or may have negative consequences.
If the logical fallacy of “appeal to the consequent” guided medical treatment, then chemotherapy would be rejected because of the negative consequences of hair loss and nausea.
Pollack’s exploitation of domestic violence in order to deny – carte blanche – every claim of parental alienation, questions the validity and legitimacy of true domestic violence incidents. That is, the opposite side of the coin of “carte blanche rejection of parental alienation claims” is “carte blanche rejection of DV claims.”
Pollack is placing true victims of DV at great risk for further harm. This is because Pollack’s shameless and dangerous exploitation of DV in order to deny parental alienation thereby casts doubt about legitimate DV claims.
Pollack also claims that false allegations of parental alienation are used by abusive fathers against protective mothers who claim they are justifiably withholding their children from abusive fathers. Pollack makes this claim without offering a shred of neutral quality evidence.
There is an exquisite solution, however, to the above described conundrum. The solution supports the protection of both women and children: the solution is the reliance upon science. Science provides the method for identifying when DV is present – just as science provides the method for identifying parental alienation when it is present. This is an inconvenient truth for Pollack and her minions.
Danielle Pollack Exploits Murdered Children in Her Mission to Deny Parental Alienation
Pollack has maliciously, speciously, and insensitively injected parental alienation into cases of murdered children – when parental alienation had played no such role. Pollack’s scheme exploited these children’s murders and their surviving parents for the purpose of manipulating state legislatures to pass laws banning claims of parental alienation in custody cases.
Kayden Mancuso is one example of Pollack’s egregious, self-serving exploitation of murdered children. Pollack engineered the California state legislature to pass Kayden’s Law. Pollack falsely represented to the legislature that, but for the recognition of parental alienation, Kayden would not have been murdered. Parental alienation had played no role in Kayden’s tragic murder.
Kayden’s Law as passed in California reprehensibly and erroneously denies the overwhelming psychiatric and scientific recognition of parental alienation. Kayden’s Law further hand-straps judges from ordering treatment interventions for alienation that have been peer-reviewed for their safety and for greater than 95% effectiveness in reconnecting children with a safe and loving parent.

Among many catastrophic effects from Kayden’s and similar laws is that alienated children now have a much more difficult – if not impossible – chance of receiving safe and effective therapy and from being rescued from their abusive alienating parents.
The fact is, parental alienation had never been alleged in Kayden’s abominable murder. Nor has parental alienation been alleged in any similar laws that seek to prevent claims of parental alienation from being adjudicated in child custody cases. This is an inconvenient truth for Pollack and her minions.
FURTHER READING: Kayden’s Law, Kyra’s Law, Pique’s Law Not in the Child’s Best Interests
Examples of Danielle Pollack’s Dissemination of Disinformation About Parental Alienation
Misinformation is false or inaccurate information that is unknowingly erroneous. Disinformation is false or inaccurate information that is knowingly erroneous and is intended to deceive and mislead. Danielle Pollack engages in disinformation.

Misinformation Promulgated by Pollack About the Prevalence of Child Abuse and Child Sexual Abuse Allegations
Pollack attempts to convey that false child abuse and child sexual abuse allegations in custody cases are exceedingly rare.
Pollack cites from an outdated 2005 study national study by Trocome and Balla that “Only 12% of all child abuse allegations made by a custodial parent were deemed intentionally fabricated; only 6% of child sexual abuse allegations.”
Pollack deceptively cites a statistic that must meet the impossibly high standard of proof for “intentional.” This standard is exceptionally hard to prove – even by the most skilled, experienced lawyers and researchers. This is because “intent” is a mental state; and because humans cannot read minds, intent is one of the most difficult things to prove.

Pollack’s primary deception is related to the difficulty in proving “intent.” Because “intent” is a product of person’s mental state, it is unlikely that any particular alienation case involving false abuse allegations can be verified by direct evidence. Alienating parents do not transparently admit their “intent” to make false abuse allegations.
Validating “intent” in an alienation case typically relies upon circumstantial evidence. Circumstantial evidence is indirect evidence that can only infer the existence of another fact.
Circumstantial evidence rarely meets the legal standard of proof “beyond a reasonable doubt” – the standard to prove intent. This standard is the highest legal standard and means virtual certainty. So it is no wonder that the statistic cited by Pollack of only 12% for “intentionally fabricated” is skewed against the prevalence of false abuse claims and is thereby misleading. This is an inconvenient truth for Pollack and her minions.
The second issue with Pollack’s alleged statistics – for which she does not cite the page or context – is that the statistics are derived from a single, outdated study that has not been replicated nor validated.
FURTHER READING: Danielle Pollack’s Website
Actual Incidents of Child Sex Abuse in Custody Cases & Prevalence of False Sex Abuse Allegations
Were Pollack an objective, truth-seeking actor, she would have cited an additional study. It is a comprehensive, neutral, 2017 study that summarized the research of multiple studies on the prevalence of child sexual abuse incidents in custody cases and of false allegations of sexual abuse. This compilation of research studies was undertaken by child psychiatrist, George E. Davis, of the Children’s Law Institute. Dr. Davis’ findings dispute the statistics cited by Pollack. Dr. Davis found:
While less than 2% of contested custody cases involve sexual abuse, false allegations may be as high as 35% in this specific context. (p. 29)
The specific context involved of the false sex abuse allegations was “conflicted caretakers, adversarial legal proceeding, positive and negative consequences – coaching.” (p. 29)
The reader should note the <2% statistic of child sex abuse incidents occurring in custody cases. From the way Pollack and her minions report, one would think that sex abuse incidents – primarily by fathers – run rampart in custody cases and should require virtually all of the Court’s attention. Davis’s study is just another study that represents an inconvenient truth for Pollack and her minions.

Indisputably, every case of child sex abuse by a parent must be properly and timely investigated and remediated. Child sex abuse – especially by a parent – is a heinous crime that forever mars a child’s functioning and prognosis in life across the board.
And that is exactly why false sexual abuse allegations committed by a parent must receive the exactly same response as do true incidents of child sexual abuse by a parent. If a child believes a false sexual abuse allegation by a parent, the child will suffer the same risks for PTSD and other severe psychiatric symptoms as if the abuse had actually occurred.
But Pollack and her minions never express concern for nor address false sexual allegations by the alienating parent – whose prevalence of as much as 35% is far more than the prevalence of <2% for actual incidents of sexual abuse by a parent. This is another inconvenient truth for Pollack and minions.
FURTHER READING: Incest in Child Custody Cases
Statistics on Mothers Committing Child Sexual Abuse
Pollack ignores the research affirming that mothers commit child sex abuse. Some studies even found that mothers are the greater perpetrator of sex abuse than are fathers. According to a 2021 study that compared the rate of male versus female perpetrators of child sexual abuse, published in Child Abuse and Neglect, the following results were found:
Within the group of female perpetrators, biological mothers accounted for a larger share than biological fathers in the group of male perpetrators. Among the bystanders, the biological mother was named most frequently (24.6 %).
The general population underestimates the involvement of biological mothers in child sexual abuse. The results confirm that female perpetrators account for a rather small but substantial proportion of the perpetrators of child sexual abuse.
Furthermore, the results indicate that mothers play a role in sexual abuse – either as perpetrators or as bystanders – that has been underestimated so far. It is therefore necessary to sensitize professionals and the public to the topic of female perpetrators and especially to the role of mothers in child sex abuse.
The study concluded:
In research and literature, little attention has been paid to the role of women, especially mothers, in child sexual abuse.
This is another inconvenient truth for Pollack and her minions.
FURTHER READING: Rates of Mothers Committing Child Sex Abuse
Statistics on Mothers v. Fathers Committing Child Abuse and Maltreatment

If one were to accept the opinions of Pollack and her minions regarding child abuse and maltreatment, one could easily be manipulated to believe that fathers are the primary – if not the exclusive – perpetrator of child abuse. Not true.
Pollack chooses to ignore numerous research studies that found that mothers have a much higher incidence of committing child abuse and maltreatment than do fathers.
For example, a 2022 study published by Statista found that 191,000 children had been abused by their mothers while 125,000 had been abused by their fathers.
This is another inconvenient truth for Pollack and her minions.
FURTHER READING: Mothers Commit More Child Abuse than do Fathers

According to a study published by the National Library of Medicine regarding the incidence of parental child abuse, the following was found:
Importantly, most such individuals who perpetrated child maltreatment were parents (77.2%), with 37.6% of the cases involving mothers acting alone and 23.6% fathers acting alone. Another fifth of the cases (20.7%) involved both mothers and fathers acting together to co-perpetrate child maltreatment.
This is another inconvenient truth for Pollack and her minions.
Several social, cultural, and financial factors account for why mothers are more vulnerable than are fathers to committing child abuse. And these injustices demand long-overdue remediation.
But in the best interests of children, we cannot put our heads in the sand like an ostrich, blind ourselves to the fact that some mothers – as well as some fathers – commit child abuse, and not remediate child abuse engaged in by mothers as well as by fathers.
FURTHER READING: Mother v Fathers and Child Abuse
Alienated Mothers Feel Abandoned by Daniel Pollack
Alienated mothers feel abandoned by DV groups – to include Pollack’s – that intervene to protect women from DV but fail to assist alienated mothers, who are being physically assaulted by their sons at the behest of alienating fathers.
Parental alienation is an equal opportunity victimizer. Alienated mothers comprise 50% of my caseload and of many of my colleagues’ caseloads. Just another inconvenient truth for Pollack and her minions.
Alienated mothers, themselves, are victims of domestic violence by proxy. They are being routinely physically battered by their sons – and sometimes by their daughters – at the behest of alienating fathers.
Alienated mothers wish for their sons to get the desperate help they need to relinquish their antisocial, battering behaviors and instead have the expectation for becoming law-abiding, socially responsible adults.

Alienated mothers are desperately attempting to save their physically violent sons from themselves and from the influence by their abusive alienating fathers.
The concerns of alienated mothers are screaming for help and remedy from the DV community.
Because Pollack and her minions deny the reality of parental alienation and are thereby turning their backs on alienated boys who are physically assaulting their alienated mothers, the DV community is contributing to the rise of a generation of potential adult DV perpetrators.
It is incomprehensible to me that Pollack and her minions ignore the potential conflagration of minor boys – and even daughters – becoming adult DV perpetrators. Their denials of this very real family dynamic is irresponsible, unforgivable, and reprehensible.
Prevention of the perpetuation of DV begins with recognition that parental alienation is real, is abusive of mothers as well as of fathers, and is most of all abusive of alienated children for whom DV behaviors are being normalized by their alienating parents – of both genders.
Danielle Pollack’s Disinformation Regarding Parental Alienation and the United Nations
Pollack and her minions dishonorably, maliciously, and falsely implies that the United Nations accepted a report with the following egregious disinformation about parental alienation:
“The report demonstrates how the discredited and unscientific pseudo-concept of parental alienation is used in family law proceedings by abusers as a tool to continue their abuse and coercion and to undermine and discredit allegations of domestic violence made by mothers who are trying to keep their children safe. It also shows how the standard of the best interest of the child is violated by imposing contact between a child and one or both parents and by prioritizing it, even where there is evidence of domestic violence. Predominantly as a result of the lack of training and gender bias and of access to legal support, the custody of children may be awarded to perpetrators of violence, despite evidence of a history of domestic and/or sexual abuse.
This report was submitted to the HRC for the perspective of the author only. The HRC does not accept or reject papers. Pollack and her minions give the impression that the UN accepted the report
If you read the cited reference below from Pollack’s website, National Safe Parents, notice that after all the hoopla and misinformation that Pollack quotes from the presented – but not accepted – report, Pollack fails to report that the report was not accepted by the United Nations.
Just another inconvenient truth that Pollack and her minions deceptively ignore.
FURTHER READING: National Safe Parents
Danielle Pollack Ignores the Overwhelming Scientific and Psychiatric Recognition of Parental Alienation
As with all of Pollack’s publicizing of knowingly false information about parental alienation, she ignores the overwhelming evidence for the scientific and psychiatric communities’ acceptance of parental alienation.
In order not to overwhelm the reader, I cite here one, definitive reference, that acknowledges parental alienation as a form of child psychological abuse. It is the basic textbook for the practice of psychiatry: Kaplan and Sadock’s Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry.

I have provided links below to several articles written by my colleague, Loretta Maase, LPC, and me on parental alienation’s extensive recognition by numerous, repetitive peer-reviewed research studies.
To the contrary of overwhelming research and the clinical and psychiatric literature, Pollack cites a few debunked, non-replicated studies by Mercer and Meir that dispute the phenomenon of parental alienation. These studies and their critiques can be found under the resource link on my website.
FURTHER READING: Parental Alienation and The DSM-5-TR

FURTHER READING: Parental Alienation: Facts and Myths
FURTHER READING: Response to Parental Alienation Primer for Advocates
Conclusion
Pollack and her minions are experts at employing the logical fallacy known as “appeal to emotion.” Who among their targeted groups – legislators and professionals who intervene in child custody – do not wish to avidly protect children?
Who among their targeted groups are not emotionally moved by stories of murdered children – for which Pollack and her minions falsely claim alienation to have been responsible for the children’s deaths?
Beyond their manipulative, emotional misinformation, Pollack and her minions fail to provide a shred of evidence for claims that parental alienation is junk science, that there is a rampart misuse of parental alienation to harm mothers, or that parental alienation results in giving custody of children to abusive fathers.
For those who are concerned with the protection of children – as I am, having worked to help and protect 5000 children for more than 1/2 century – we must demand that Pollack’s exploitation of children be immediately halted.