Language, Power, and People

Courtroom Terms Every Protective Parent Should Know

When legal terms are wielded by those in court— judges employing their “judicial discretion,” custody evaluators diagnosing and advising on “resist/refuse dynamics,” or TIs citing a “motion to modify”— it can feel like an immersion in alien jargon. They’re exercising power and influence over the case. They are shaping what the court sees, hears, perceives and decides. You’ll need to brush up on legalese to follow along.

This installment of our glossary doesn’t just define new terms— it also shows who uses them, how they're used, and why they matter in real custody disputes.

If you haven’t already, check out:

• The Language of Abuse (May 12): terms covered: coercive control, DARVO, parental alienation/PAS, trauma bonding, reunification therapy

• The Language of Family Court (June 23): terms covered: ex parte, GAL, rebuttable presumption of joint custody, best interests

• Who’s in Charge Here? (July 4): roles covered: the judge, parent’s attorney/ pro se litigant, GAL or best-interest attorney, custody evaluator, therapeutic interventionist/ reunification therapist

---

Language becomes action. Knowing the meanings—and their consequences—is critical. Having a glossary on hand can help you be prepared to understand the conversation. Not many people feel comfortable asking for clarification of terms while a hearing is in motion.

So I hope this primer can set you up for greater comprehension, and thus slightly lower cortisol.

• The judge might say “I'm going to use my judicial discretion” to adjust visitation due to unspecified “conflict.”

• The custody evaluator might label your child's safe refusal as “resist/refuse dynamics.”

• The PC might issue a directive to follow the schedule or face court— a move backed by a subpoena threat.

• And when you uncover new abuse, you must file a motion to modify— but courts won’t grant it without proof of a material change.

---

1. Resist/Refuse Dynamics

A term used in custody cases to describe situations where a child resists or refuses contact with one parent. It is often positioned as a neutral way to assess parent-child estrangement, but in practice, it can obscure abuse and shift blame onto the protective parent.

The term gained traction in family law and forensic psychology literature in the early 2000s, with no single originator, but it is frequently promoted by reunification therapy programs and evaluators aligned with AFCC (Association of Family and Conciliation Courts). It has increasingly replaced “parental alienation” in professional reports—while often maintaining the same assumptions.

This can look like:

• A custody evaluator says your child’s disclosures of abuse reflect “resist/ refuse dynamics,” not trauma.

• A TI recommends severing your parenting time to “treat” the child’s refusal to see the other parent.

• A GAL insists the child needs to be “reunified” without fully investigating what caused the resistance.

📘 Recommended resources:

• Psychology Today – Resist/Refuse Dynamics in Divorce: How Can They Be Analyzed? [Please note, I am not saying I agree or disagree with this author’s statements. I do think this article can be helpful in understanding the term “resist/refuse dynamics.”]

• Oregon Judicial Department: Working with Resist-Refuse Dynamics in Family Law Cases: A Guide for Oregon Judges (PDF) [Same comment]

For our mutual reference, this one post took me several hours to brainstorm, draft, research, cite, format and polish. Thank you for your financial contribution, which will ensure I can continue providing support to protective parents.