P.A.S. {Parental Alienation Syndrome} Specifically Designed for Defense Attorneys, the History you need to know?

I.F.F.O.C. has discovered that P.A.S. is junk science and was created by Mr. Richard Gardner {A psychiatrist} wrote a book called “The Parental Alienation Syndrome”, and published it himself through his own publishing company { Cresskill Publishing Company} then sent a copy out to each and every family court in America with the promise to do training on P.A.S., in which started a whole new carrier path for Mr. Richard Gardner, in which he did family court training for over the next 20 to 30 years.
I.F.F.O.C. has discovered there are a number of courts who will not allow P.A.S. as evidence because it does not meet the Kelly Fry standard or Dobbert standard of evidence. It is very controversial, unscientific and only a concept or a theory, in which is not supported by any research and that these are only Mr. Richard Gardner’s personal ideas.
I.F.F.O.C. has discovered that in 2003 the American Prosecutors Research Institute identified use of P.A.S. as a deliberate means to obstruct means of prosecution of abuse cases. It is a complete bogus Defense for child molesters to use for only a tactical reasons, a Defense mechanism, not that they believe that it is really occurring, it is that they know that the judges will buy this Defense argument.
I.F.F.O.C. has discovered that the family courts allowed and loved the idea of P.A.S. because it is an easy answer, and it allowed them to simply dismiss these cases that they do not want to deal with, although they did not realize that P.A.S. is very controversial, unscientific and only a concept or a theory, in which is not supported by any research, evidence or medical research. It allowed the courts not to deal with real evidence of the abuse cases. P.A.S. is still being used in family courts across the country. This P.A.S. is a result of the mediators, the evaluators, and of the attorneys who use it for tactical reasons and have realized the courts and judges will buy this bogus theory. This explains away these horrible cases the courts do not want to deal with. If we think about whether child abuse occurs then the courts have to deal with evidence and horrible ideas and the actual concept, and the actual events, in which occured.
That it actually happened and you have to deal with the reality of events, in which had occurred, this was an easy out for the perpetrator or the one who actually committed the abuse.
P.A.S. was easily dismissed as a vindictive or disgruntled parent against the other, to ruin the other parents reputation. Then it was used to punish the parent reporting the abuse and hopefully make the abuse go away.
This actually punished the parents reporting the abuse. And we wonder why are courts are the way they are? Nothing like Defense Attorneys coming to the rescue of their clients and protect the abusers. And you wonder why people do not like Attorneys? Now you know.