The Inadmissibility of the Parental Alienation Defense in Cases of Vicarious Violence

Abstract

This study analyzes the use of allegations of parental alienation as a defense strategy in judicial proceedings involving gender-based violence, particularly in contexts of vicarious violence. The research is guided by the following question: to what extent is the procedural inadmissibility of such allegations necessary when they are used to render gender-based violence invisible? The objective is to examine the effects of this discursive and procedural strategy, demonstrating the need to limit its admissibility when it is used as a narrative diversion, shifting the focus from the reported gender-based violence to the woman’s conduct. The study adopts a bibliographic and documentary research methodology, based on an analysis of legal scholarship and legislation. It is grounded in the hypothesis that allegations of parental alienation reflect patriarchal domination and are used to delegitimize reports and hinder the recognition of the violence suffered by women and children. Therefore, their procedural inadmissibility is necessary to prevent the reproduction of institutional violence and ensure greater protection for victims, contributing to the development of appropriate legal criteria for addressing vicarious violence.