The Psychological Association's need for censorship
Eivind Meland
When the Norwegian Psychological Association withdraws prior approval of a conference without giving a reason, it appears to be a form of censorship.
The Parental Alienation Study Group Norway held a major international conference in the first week of September in the Deichman Library on parental hostility and alienation. The conference gathered 250 participants from 23 countries. The 43 speakers presented their own research and reflection related to legal, psychological, socio-medical and coping aspects of parental alienation.
Withdrew approval
The Norwegian Psychological Association had pre-approved the conference as counting hours in its own continuing education. Three days after the conference was held, the organizer was informed that the approval had been withdrawn, without any justification. This is not very trustworthy for members who participated in the conference with the expectation that the conference would count.
It is even more serious that the association demonstrates a professional narrow-mindedness. It is difficult not to perceive this as a need for censorship that does not belong in democratic societies. I can't help but wonder if there is anything the Norwegian Psychological Association wants to protect itself from?
Professional debate is absent
Last autumn, twelve influential psychologists and family therapists wrote an op-ed in the Journal of the Norwegian Psychological Association in which they called for the abolition of the concept of parental alienation https://psykologtidsskriftet.no/debatt/2023/09/foreldrefremmedgjoring-bor-skrotes (Stokkebekk et al., 2023). I responded to the post by documenting several falsehoods https://psykologtidsskriftet.no/debatt/2023/09/heller-dialog-enn-skroting-av-forskning (Meland, 2023). I encouraged dialogue and invited the signatories to the conference.
No one signed up
On the other hand, well-known international critics of the concept of alienation participated in the conference, including Robert Simon from the United States. In the United States, there is now an ongoing dialogue between proponents and critics of the concept of alienation under the auspices of the AFCC (Association of Family and Conciliation Courts). The work is led by a group of five members. Four of them participated in the conference. The Norwegian Psychological Association could have brought this dialogue closer to its own members and at the same time contributed to an important exchange of opinions also taking place in Norwegian professional communities.
Instead, they withdraw their approval of the conference and leave the impression that they are trying to silence an important academic debate.