Parental Alienation in Family Law: Arrighetti & Qodirova [2026] and What It Means for Alienated Fathers

The case addresses the difficult intersection between emotional harm, unfounded allegations, and the Court’s duty to protect a child’s right to a meaningful relationship with both parents.

For many fathers who have experienced long-term alienation due to false allegations, this judgment offers both vindication and clarity about what courts will do when one parent engages in entrenched unfounded allegations or obstructive behaviour.

In this case, the Full Court upheld drastic but necessary orders reversing care from the mother to the father, imposing a six‑month suspension on the mother spending time with the child, and thereafter requiring the mother’s time to be indefinitely supervised.

These orders were originally made after the Judge found that the mother and maternal grandmother held “steadfast and unshakeable beliefs” that the father had sexually abused the child which were not supported by evidence.

Background of the Case

The parties’ daughter, aged 10, had lived primarily with the mother since birth. The child had not spent time with her father since early 2022 due to the mother’s allegations that the father had a “sex addiction” and had sexually abused the child.

Evidence before the primary judge showed that:

• The mother maintained unwavering beliefs that the father had sexually interfered with the child, despite the absence of evidence.
• She stated that the father “should be in jail” and indicated she would call the police if the Court made orders favourable to the father.
• The maternal grandmother reinforced these beliefs, amplifying the emotional pressure on the child.

The father argued that the mother’s behaviour, particularly her inability to support the child’s relationship with him, posed an unacceptable risk of emotional and psychological harm. The court accepted this, finding that the child’s welfare required immediate, decisive action.

What This Decision Means in Complex Parenting Disputes

This decision is especially significant for fathers who have been alienated from their children through false allegations, manipulation, obstruction, or coercive emotional environments.

1. Courts Will Intervene Where Alienation Creates Emotional Harm

The Court’s findings confirm that emotional harm caused by one parent’s conduct can constitute an unacceptable risk, warranting drastic orders and even the complete reversal of care.

Although significant orders were made in this case, the Court does not generally order a change of residence for a child solely because allegations of risk raised by the allegedly alienating parent are not substantiated.

2. Unfounded Allegations Can Be Viewed as a Form of Harm

However, where allegations of abuse are:

• persistent,
• unjustified, and
• used to block the child’s relationship with the other parent,

the Court may treat this as harmful behaviour in its own right. In this case, the mother’s steadfast belief in disproven allegations created significant emotional strain on the child and justified strong protective measures.

3. Courts Expect Parents to Facilitate Relationships

One dominant theme in this decision is the Court’s expectation that parents foster meaningful connections with both sides of the child’s family, even if conflict exists. A parent who demonstrates an inability or unwillingness to do so risks losing primary care.

4. Tactical Litigation Risks Backfire

The mother’s decision not to propose alternative contact or safety arrangements in the event that the Court found the father was not an unacceptable risk of harm proved disastrous. The Court made clear that:

“What cannot be underestimated in cases of this nature, is the benefit of litigants reflecting upon and “reality testing” all of the evidence the court is being asked to adjudicate upon when asked to make findings about allegations of abuse and/or unacceptable risk.”  And

“Likewise, the importance of therapeutic support for parents in these cases, prior to trial, to enable them to critically reflect upon the evidence that is available and how they will parent if their allegations are not proved cannot be understated. Sadly, in some cases fixed beliefs cannot be altered or contained, however this consequence also indicates that broader issues about parental capacity must be considered. Where a parent takes a fixed position as a tactical decision it tells strongly against their capacity to adequately meet the needs of the child. In short, most risk cases are not inherently binary decisions, but unfortunately are sometimes presented as such by those with primary care of a child.”

How We Can Help Fathers  Experiencing Parental Alienation

Our firm has extensive experience representing fathers facing alienation due to unfounded allegations which have resulted in prolonged separation from their children.

Our role typically involves:

1. Strategic Case Design and Evidence Planning: We help you gather and present evidence to challenge unsubstantiated claims effectively and safely.

2. Demonstrating Parental Capacity: We show the Court your strengths as a parent, your commitment to your child, and your willingness to support the child’s relationship with both families.

3. Seeking Restoration of Time and Care: Whether you need supervised time lifted, time reinstated, or a reversal of care (as in this case), we craft strong, child‑centric proposals.

4. Managing Risk Assessments and Expert Reports: We guide you through psychological assessments, family reports, and independent evaluations to ensure your position is fairly represented.

5. Managing Reputational & Structural Risk: For many professionals and business owners, allegations of this nature extend beyond the parenting proceedings themselves. They can affect professional standing, commercial relationships, and personal reputation — particularly where allegations are repeated, escalated, or become embedded in reports or interim findings. Managing these matters requires not only a legal response, but a disciplined and strategic approach to evidence, communication and positioning throughout the proceedings.

6. Long‑Term Strategy: Cases involving entrenched allegations and parental alienation are rarely resolved quickly or through reactive or emotionally driven litigation. They require a sustained, disciplined approach over several years, particularly where matters proceed to a final hearing and beyond. Consistency in evidence, discipline in communication, and a clear, long-term strategy focused on the child’s best interests are key.

Conclusion

Arrighetti & Qodirova is a powerful reminder that the Court will intervene decisively when a child’s emotional wellbeing is compromised by one parent’s conduct.

Matters of this nature require a careful assessment of the evidence, the history of the parenting relationship, and the client’s capacity to present as a credible and child-focused parent.

Where those foundations exist, the Court has shown it is prepared to intervene decisively.

If you are experiencing parental alienation or facing unfounded allegations, we are here to help you navigate the process and protect your relationship with your child.