In this episode of Split Decisions, veteran California family law attorneys Tim Miranda and Carlos Tavares argue both sides of a high-conflict custody dispute involving parental alienation, reunification therapy, child custody rights, and the wishes of a teenage child.

A 14-year-old boy refuses all contact with his father.

The father believes the child's mother has alienated their son against him and asks the court to enforce reunification therapy. The mother argues the boy's feelings are genuine and that forcing therapy is only making things worse.

Can a court force a child to repair a broken relationship with a parent? 

After the debate, Tim and Carlos break down what would actually happen in California family court, discuss the role of Minor's Counsel, explain how much weight courts give a 14-year-old's preferences, and share why reunification therapy often struggles to achieve the results parents hope for.

Topics Covered:
• Reunification Therapy
• Parental Alienation Claims
• Child Custody Disputes
• Teenagers Refusing Visitation
• California Family Court
• Minor's Counsel
• Child's Preference in Custody Cases
• High-Conflict Co-Parenting
• Family Law Litigation
• Divorce and Parenting Conflicts

Every trial has two sides. Which one wins? You be the judge.

Cast your vote in the comments:
Should courts continue forcing reunification therapy when a child refuses to participate? Or should a teenager's wishes be respected, even if the relationship may never be repaired?