Before the parliamentary recess, the Constitution and Justice Commission (CCJ) of the House definitively approved the extinction of the law on parental alienation, which does not require discussion in plenary. It is essential that the Senate examines the question more calmly and promotes a broad debate in search of a balance between extinction, as desired by the Chamber, or maintaining the current situation.
The term “parental alienation” summarizes the conduct and attitudes of couples in the event of a contentious separation, or of their families, who use their children to reach the other party in the conflict. Among the reprehensible practices classified by the law are: making it difficult for the child or adolescent to contact his or her father or mother; change address without informing the other responsible person; create false narratives to disqualify you; prevent or hinder access to information about health, school and other activities.
- Controversial: Ending Parental Alienation Advances in House Amid Debate Over Use Against Victims of Domestic Violence; to understand
In essence, the law, approved in 2010, establishes references allowing judges to decide, with the greatest possible security, in favor of the father or mother, but always seeking the best, from a psychological and emotional point of view, for the children. Since 2020, the procedures opened on the basis of the legislation have continued to develop. From 4,341 at the start of the decade, they reached 7,157 last year. This year, as of October 31, 6,958 had already been established. In total, 13,845 of these actions are being processed and awaiting judgment.
The law on parental alienation has long been accused by its detractors of serving as an instrument of revenge by the ex-husband against his ex-wife. A study by the Legal Psychology Research Center, based on 404 court decisions from four states, found that in 63 percent of cases, the father is the complainant. In many of these cases, critics say, custody of the child ends up being transferred to parents accused of assault or abuse.
- Also read: Silvinei Vasques breaks electronic ankle bracelet and is arrested in Paraguay while trying to escape
Repealing the law, however, could open a legal loophole, leaving children and adolescents unprotected amid toxic family conflicts, according to Caio Morau, representative of the Family and Inheritance Law Association. He maintains that the Child and Adolescent Status (ECA) would not compensate for the absence of law. Morau proposes that sanctions against those who manipulate the legislation be made more severe, provided there is solid evidence. The solution, he says, is to improve the law. “The legislation cannot be penalized for possible misuse,” he said in the GLOBO report.
The debates at the CCJ were contaminated by political polarization. PT deputies led the votes in favor of abolishing the law, and the PL opened the way for those who opposed it. The division was expressed by the score of 38 votes for the revocation and 28 against. Viewing issues of this nature solely from an ideological perspective does not contribute to creating legislation that ensures the best possible assistance for children. If the Senate approves the repeal, the legal guidelines will be lost in several processes. Even if the courts return to established case law, everything will become more difficult, slower and more expensive. Senators should work to reformulate the legislation to correct its flaws, avoiding creating a legal vacuum.
About The Author
