Ainsworth, M., Blehar, M., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of attachment: A psychological study of the strange situation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Boroditsky, L. (2011). How language shapes thought. Scientific American, 304, 62–65. https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican0211-62
Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. Attachment. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Cooper, J. M. (1993). Rhetoric, dialectic, and the passions. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy, 11, 175–198.
Garber, B. D. (2004). Parental alienation in light of attachment theory: Consideration of the broader implications for child development, clinical practice and forensic process. Journal of Child Custody, 1(4), 49–76.
Garber, B. D. (2009). Attachment methodology in custody evaluation: Four hurdles standing between developmental theory and forensic application. Journal of Child Custody, 6(1/2), 38–61.
Garber, B. D. (2012). Security by association? Mapping attachment theory onto family law practice. Family Court Review, 50 (3), 467–470.
Garber, B. D. (2016). Exploring a process-oriented forensic family observation protocol. Family Court Review, 54(2), 261–276.
Garber, B. D., & Simon, R. A. (2018). Individual adult psychometric testing and child custody evaluations: If the shoe doesn’t fit, don’t wear it. Journal of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, 30(2), 325–341.
Garber, B. D. (2020). Sherlock Holmes and the Case of Resist/Refuse Dynamics: Confirmatory Bias and Abductive Inference in Child Custody Evaluations. Family Court Review, 58(2), 386–402.
Main, M., Hesse, E., & Hesse, S. (2011). Attachment theory and research: Overview with suggested applications to child custody. Family Court Review, 49, 426–463. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-1617.2011.01383.x
Milchman, M. S., Geffner, R., & Meier, J. S. (2020). Ideology and Rhetoric Replace Science and Reason in Some Parental Alienation Literature and Advocacy: A Critique. Family Court Review, 58(2), 340–361.
No author. R. V. Mohan, [(1994)] 2 S.C.R. 9, (Supreme Court of Canada).
No author. Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923).
No author. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 589 (1993).
Garber/DYNAMICS, NOT DIAGNOSES 369
Rappaport, S., Gould, J., & Dale, M. (2018). Psychological testing can be of significant value in child custody evaluations: Don’t buy the ‘anti-testing, anti-individual, pro-family systems’ woozle. Journal of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, 30(2), 405–436.
Sroufe, L. A., Egeland, B., Carlson, E. A., & Collins, W. (2005). The development of the person. The Minnesota study of risk and adaptation from birth to adulthood. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Dr. Ben Garber, Ph.D., is a New Hampshire licensed psychologist, parenting coordinator, former guardian ad litem, and expert consultant to family law matters across the United States and Canada. Dr. Garber is a prolific writer and
acclaimed speaker. He is the author of eight books concerned with better understanding and serving the needs of children, more than a two dozen juried professional publications concerned with high conflict family dynamics, and hundreds of popular press articles. Dr. Garber’s latest book, “Mending Fences: A collaborative, cognitive-behavioral “reunification” protocol serving the best interests of the post-divorce, polarized child” is available this Spring.