62
Part II
Developmental Theory in Overview
cognitive sophistication so much as it is due to inappropriate exposure
to adult matters, as when a child is artificially promoted by an immature,
self-centered, and/or needy parent into an ally, a process known as
adultification
, or to become a caregiver to the parent him- or herself, a
process known as
parentification
(Burton, 2007; Chase, 1999). In both
of these dysfunctional but tragically common dynamics, the child is
likely to experience the parent’s neediness and associated attention as
a compliment. In an effort to fit into the new and dysfunctional role,
the child will adopt many of the adult’s words. Thus, the adultified 10-
year-old might talk about mortgages and taxes, might discuss her dad’s
dating behaviors or her mom’s job search, all with very impressive
language. But the meaning is shallow or nonexistent. Ask this child
what a mortgage is and the answer will be empty of genuine understand-
ing: “It’s something that you pay” or “it has to do with the house.”
What first may appear to be linguistic sophistication may quickly prove
to be a form of mimicry that reveals the family’s dynamics.
Even more insidious is the effect of
alienation
, that abusive dynamic
whereby one caregiver exposes a child to information about another
caregiver, resulting in the child’s otherwise unjustifiable loss of a sense
of security in the targeted caregiver. Alienation (mentioned in chapter
2 and discussed at length in chapter 16) is commonly seen in a child’s
incorporation of the aligned parent’s verbatim words and phrases about
the targeted caregiver. When this occurs, the child’s words are predict-
ably rote, rigid, and repetitious. Eleven-year-old Billy might report that
his dad “cheated on us” but be unable to define the concept or evidence
the associated indignation. Asked to justify the expressed charge, the
child may rely on one or a small handful of exaggerated or even fabri-
cated incidents that may echo verbatim from Mom’s independent report
of the same matters. Push a little harder, and Billy will take the offensive,
quickly accusing you of “being on Dad’s side!”
Recognizing that children often use words and phrases that they
don’t genuinely understand is an excellent reason for the investigating
family law professional to “play dumb.” Rather than assume what a
child means when using a critical word (e.g., “hit,” “touch,” “pee-pee,”
“friend,” or even “Daddy” or “Mommy”), it is routinely worthwhile to
raise a confused eyebrow, shrug your shoulders, and ask a curious,
nonconfrontational, “What does that mean?” For example, many pre-
school and early elementary school children will report that their parents
are “divorced.” Rather than assume that you and the child share a
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |