To apply for a Family Bridges workshop, please complete the contact form at the bottom of the page.

Yes. Referrals to Family Bridges come from courts, child custody evaluators, therapists and counselors, attorneys, and child representatives (such as guardians ad litem, amicus attorneys, best interest attorneys, Office of the Children’s lawyers, and child protection workers). The workshop cannot commence until it has been ordered by the courts.

In some cases, the court will order a target parent to participate with the children in a Family Bridges workshop. In other cases, the court will grant the target parent sole decision-making authority to pursue whatever remedy he or she deems necessary and/or appropriate, including, but not limited to, a Family Bridges workshop. Divorce decrees and court orders determine who has the authority to make educational and health care decisions for children. If a parent has the sole authority to make such decisions, and does not need to consult with or obtain the approval of the other parent, a parent can choose to enroll a child in a Family Bridges workshop just as the parent with such authority can enroll a child in different types of educational experiences, tutoring, counseling, medical treatment, etc. In some particularly volatile situations, where concerns are raised about one parent interfering with the custodial parent’s right to enroll the child in a Family Bridges workshop, such as by unlawfully retaining a child, it may help for the court to take judicial recognition of a parent’s exploration of, or intent to have the child participate in, a Family Bridges workshop.

Family Bridges Institute recommends that all children participate in the workshop, as even those children less alienated can benefit from the educational materials. Parents will need to make arrangements for the care of children under age 9 during some modules of the workshop. Judges and parents will often express concerns about the severity of the alienating behavior in children who are about to age out of the Court system, and they wonder about excluding them from the Court orders out of fear that the older children are beyond reach or that they may disrupt the workshop for their youngers siblings. Family Bridges Institute recommends that all children within the family are included in the planning for the intervention. The workshop leaders are trained to determine when the older child is sabotaging the workshop for their younger siblings and to manage this situation with the target parent.

Usually, everyone in the household where the children will be living post-judgment are encouraged to attend the workshop together. Also, any member of the family or household who has been rejected by the children is invited to participate in the workshop. There are no additional fees for additional participants.

Most children do not choose to attend the workshop. Many comply with a parent’s expectation when the Court Orders give that parent the legal authority to make such a decision. Some adult children choose to participate. A few children younger than 18 years of age choose to participate. In some cases, the court takes judicial notice that the parent intends to enroll the children in the workshop, and in other cases the Court Orders explicitly require the parent and children to participate in the workshop. In this respect, children’s enrollment in a Family Bridges workshop is similar to their enrollment in other educational and therapeutic experiences in which children may not voluntarily choose to participate, such as when a court or parents expect children to participate in psychotherapy and counseling, admit children with drug-abuse problems to a drug rehabilitation program, admit children with mental health problems to a residential treatment center or hospital, or enroll children in a boarding school, military academy, or other private school against the children’s stated wishes.

Family Bridges workshops are offered throughout Canada, the United States and abroad by trained and licensed workshop leaders. The workshop usually takes place at a vacation resort facility. This setting allows the family plenty of opportunities for recreation and enjoyable interactions at the end of the educational day. In some cases, the workshop providers travel to the target parent’s city. In other cases, the family travels to another city and and then enjoys a brief vacation following the workshop before returning home.

Each workshop is customized to meet the needs of each family. It is carefully coordinated to occur immediately after the release of the Court’s decision to help the children transition and adjust to the new Court orders regarding temporary decision-making authority and the change in the children’s living arrangements. In the case of recovered abducted children, the workshop is scheduled as close as possible to the children’s return.

The cost of the Family Bridges workshop is paid by the target parent who is motivated to reunite with their children. The cost of the Family Bridges Aftercare Protocol is paid by the alienating parent who is motivated to reunite with their children. Very often, these costs are re-apportioned by the Court at a later date. In the future, we hope scholarships will be available for families that cannot afford the program. In cases involving returning abducted children, other agencies may provide funding to assist families with the reunification process.

All workshop leaders hold licences with either the College of Psychologists of Ontario (or local psychology board) or The Ontario College of Social Workers and Social Service Workers (or local social work board). Each professional is subject to regulation by their professional college.

No. The workshop is interactional and experiential and requires the physical presence of all participants.

Neither. The workshop provides an educational experience based on scientifically established concepts and procedures. The Family Bridges workshop is unlike traditional office-based reunification therapies that explore the emotional and psychological conflicts disrupting family dynamics. Most target parents and children who participate in Family Bridges workshops have previously engaged in these traditional psychotherapeutic efforts to repair their damaged relationships, without success.

No. Family Bridges Institute has no authority to make Court orders regarding decision-making authority or parenting time. Most families who attend the workshop have a long history within the Family Court system of unresolved conflict. Sometimes Court will determine it is in the children’s best interest to temporarily suspend contact with one parent and to order an intensive reunification program to repair the damaged relationship with the other parent. In such cases, the Court recognizes that the family members will require professional help to adjust to the new orders, and the Court will order the Family Bridges workshop and Aftercare Protocol. Family Bridges Institute is then subject to Court orders, as are the various family members.

No. To the contrary, all siblings and their parent participate together in the workshop. In addition, each late afternoon and evening following the day’s workshop activities, parents and children engage in enjoyable recreational activities together away from the workshop leaders, such as visiting nearby malls, attending movies, hiking, swimming, etc.

No. The term ‘deprogramming’ is a misnomer when applied to a Family Bridges workshop. The term was originally used in reference to work with cult victims and came to evoke images of abducting, forcibly restraining, and isolating cult members while wearing them down with lectures in a process that could be described as a form of brainwashing. None of this occurs during a Family Bridges workshop. Throughout the workshop, the leaders repeatedly solicit feedback from the participants, answer questions, correct misimpressions, reinforce the participants’ prerogative to have their own opinions after each presentation, and ask the participants whether the workshop is meeting their goals and expectations. As opposed to brainwashing, which fosters the suspension of critical thinking and inculcates distortions of reality, the workshop teaches children to think critically and to correct distorted perceptions. Children receive information commonly presented in psychology and sociology classes and it is left to the participants to decide if and how they want to apply what they have learned. Most children whose behavior is inappropriate do not choose to enroll in special schools, special programs, and mental health treatment. Caring adults make the decision for them. Similarly, alienated children do not generally regard their alienated behavior as something they need to change. Adults (e.g., custodial parents) who have the authority to make such decisions for the children enroll them in a Family Bridges workshop. Workshop leaders do not restrain children in any manner, and the leaders make it clear to the children that this is not the role of the workshop leader.

Many children arrive at the workshop with negative expectations. Many have felt empowered to dictate the nature of their relationships with their parents and are stunned that the court has overturned the status quo. By the end of the first day, the participants are usually relaxed and in an upbeat mood. They are relieved that the process is easier than anticipated and the parents often are overjoyed at having contact and regaining some semblance of a relationship with a once lost child. Children usually are relieved when they learn they can restore a relationship with the target parent without forgoing their relationship with the other parent. They reveal that they have all along preferred to keep both parents in their lives. Also, they are relieved when they can save face by not having to rehash all the bad moments and painful scenes in order to reconcile. For the most part, the program is entertaining, benign, non-confrontational, and presented in a manner that respects children’s emotional needs and capacities. Children are given a great deal of latitude in regulating the pace of the program, the emotional intensity of the discussions, and the frequency and duration of breaks. As opposed to pressure the children might have felt in the past to think a certain way about the target parent, this program teaches children to correct distortions of reality and a premium is placed on the exercise of criticial thinking, rather than its suspension. The children appreciate that the goal of the intervention is to foster children’s positive relationship with their target parent, not to damage children’s relationship with the other parent. Also, children appreciate that a goal of the intervention is for children to develop balanced, realistic and compassionate views of both parents rather than polarized views in which one parent is considered all good and the other is considered all bad. In a 2019 outcome study, by the end of the program, most children felt positively about the experience. Naturally the few children who did not respond positively to the workshop had more negative attitudes about the experience. Also, these children, and those who relapse and become re-alienated from a parent, may be prone to retroactively complain about the workshop.

All interventions carry some risks. One risk of the Family Bridges workshop is that it will not accomplish its goals, and a child will remain unreasonably alienated from a parent. If so, this carries the risk that the parent will be disappointed, and the child will complain about the experience. In evaluating such complaints, it is important to remain aware that a court found the alienated child made unwarranted complaints about a parent, and the child’s complaints and allegations about the Family Bridges workshop may be similarly unwarranted. For example, one risk is that a child will interpret the workshop’s efforts to heal the parent-child relationship as an attempt to make the other parent look bad. Although this is not how the workshop operates—the program strives to help children maintain balanced and compassionate views of both parents—some children, who were not able to repair their damaged relationship and continue to align with a parent whom the court found to be engaged in alienating behavior, accuse the workshop facilitators of trying to undermine their relationship with their other parent. Accusations that Family Bridges facilitators have harmed a child merit examination and should be evaluated in the context of the case evidence and outcome data on Family Bridges workshops, particularly the high percentage of children who reported they were treated with respect and kindness by the workshop leaders. Another risk is that some children will blame the Family Bridges workshop for separating them from a parent and requiring them to live with a parent whom they had been rejecting. Naturally, this blame is misplaced since it is only the court that makes decisions about parental decision-making authority. Another risk is that a child could be so resistant or out of control that they are not ready to participate in the workshop. In such a case, the custodial parent may consider the option of a facility, such as a residential treatment program, to protect the child until the child regains self-control. A related risk is that when a child is told about this option, the child will interpret this as a threat and not necessarily protection and will subsequently complain that they were threatened during the workshop. When the court orders are clarified for the children, they may claim they were told that lack of cooperation in the Family Bridges workshop would result in an extended separation from the other parent. Again, such a complaint is misplaced since it is only the court that makes custody decisions.