When we look back at history, the term “witch” sends a chill down our collective spine—not just because of what it represented, but because of what it enabled. For centuries, being called a witch was all it took for society to turn against you: your credibility was destroyed, your voice was silenced, and your fate was sealed. In my work as the founder of The Quicksand Model® and End Coercive Control USA, I see a chilling parallel in how the label “parental alienator” is used in today’s family courts. The witch hunts may be history, but the mechanisms of scapegoating and silencing—especially against protective mothers—are alive and thriving under new terminology.
The Quicksand Model® was born from my research and lived experience in the coercive control and domestic abuse fields. It illustrates how survivors of coercive control, when trying to protect themselves and their children, are pulled deeper into danger by the very systems meant to help them. Family courts, tragically, have become a central part of this quicksand.
Here’s how it works:
Just as women were once branded “witches” for daring to speak out or resist control, today protective parents—especially mothers—are branded “parental alienators” for asserting boundaries or seeking safety. The result? The more you try to protect your children, the deeper you sink into the quicksand of counter-allegations and institutional disbelief.
Parental alienation refers to a situation where one parent is accused of turning a child against the other parent, often in the context of custody disputes. While research recognizes that some cases involve genuine alienation, critics highlight that the concept is sometimes misused in legal settings. Recently, there has been an uptick in cases where protective mothers have been jailed for trying to safeguard their children from alleged abuse, raising concerns about how these frameworks are applied—particularly when the courts dismiss mothers’ concerns as "alienation." This trend underscores the urgent need for nuanced, trauma-informed approaches in family law.
Coercive control is not just an interpersonal tactic wielded by abusers; it is also systemic. Family courts, whether knowingly or not, have adopted frameworks and practices that mirror the dynamics of coercive control on an institutional scale. By rebranding the “witch” as the “parental alienator,” the system:
This is systemic coercive control: a process where the very structures tasked with protection become mechanisms of further entrapment.
We must recognize that “parental alienation” is often used against those who are already most vulnerable. Just as the witch trials punished women for defying the status quo, today’s family courts often punish mothers for trying to keep their children safe. The “parental alienator” label has become a modern tool of social control, wielded with the same disregard for evidence and the same appetite for scapegoats.The Quicksand Model® shows us that, once this label is applied, escape becomes nearly impossible. Protective parents are pulled under by legal processes that are stacked against them, with devastating consequences for both them and their children.
We cannot allow our family courts to perpetuate these modern-day witch hunts.
If you or someone you know is sinking in the quicksand of the family court system, know that you are not alone. At End Coercive Control USA, we are working to expose these patterns and motivate stakeholders to transform systems. Our mission is to ensure that the “witch hunts” of the past do not continue under new names and new excuses.
Let’s name the quicksand, expose the systemic coercive control, and end the cycle of rebranding victims as villains. The safety of children and survivors of abuse depends on our willingness to see—and challenge—these modern parallels.
With hope and solidarity,
Kate Amber MSc
Founder, The Quicksand Model® & End Coercive Control USA
Find resources, support, and more information about The Quicksand Model® at End Coercive Control USA.
Together, we can end systemic coercive control in family courts and throughout social systems worldwide.
In the intricate dance of power dynamics, whether in personal relationships or the political arena, the patterns of coercive control often lurk beneath the surface of the quicksand, invisible to the untrained eye. Today, we delve into a pressing issue that exemplifies how the tactics of coercive controllers can manifest in the highest echelons of government: the recent continuing resolution situation. By examining this through the lens of The Quicksand Model®, we aim to shed light on the parallels between coercive control within domestic abuse and political abuses of power, revealing the insidious nature of how coercive control functions in our society.
The Quicksand Model®: A Framework for Understanding Coercive Control
The Quicksand Model® of Coercive Control is a comprehensive educational tool designed to make the often invisible patterns of coercive control visible. It synthesizes 70 years of research and theory across various fields, including domestic abuse, human trafficking, cults, and extremism, to educate professionals on detecting and preventing coercive control. This model is particularly effective in overcoming professional and societal biases that hinder the protection of victims and the accountability of coercive controllers.
In the context of political power dynamics, The Quicksand Model® can be applied to understand how coercive control tactics are used by political entities to deceive, manipulate, and maintain power. The model's focus on making invisible coercive control tactics and strategies visible is crucial in political settings where abuses of power are often exerted through subtle and manipulative means.
The Double Bind of the Continuing Resolution
The recent continuing resolution (CR) situation in U.S. politics provides a stark example of how coercive control tactics can be employed on a grand scale. The House Appropriations Committee released the Full-Year Continuing Appropriations and Extensions Act, 2025, on March 8, 2025, setting in motion a series of events that would culminate in a classic double bind scenario.
The Setup (aka The Double Cross): Creating a No-Win Situation (aka The Double Bind)
The Republican-led House pushed the continuing resolution as a straightforward solution to avoid a government shutdown, emphasizing defense spending increases and maintaining essential services without raising taxes. However, this framing created a double bind for Democrats and the public:
The impossible choice, or as Janja Lalich might call it, the "bounded choice," and what Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez called a "false choice", presented to democrats was:
- Support the bill and accept its provisions, potentially allowing for misuse of funds, continued constitutional violations, and cuts to non-defense spending.
- Oppose the bill and risk being blamed for a government shutdown, which could have severe consequences for millions of Americans.
This situation mirrors the tactics used by coercive controllers in relationships, where victims are often presented with choices that have negative outcomes regardless of their decision. The Quicksand Model® helps us recognize this pattern, showing how political entities can entrap people in the quicksand of coercive control similar to in abusive relationships.
Double Speak: The Language of Manipulation
Double speak, the weaponization of language and communication that deliberately obscures, disguises, distorts, or reverses the meaning of words, and is a common tool used by coercive controllers in relationships and politics.
In the context of the continuing resolution, we see this tactic employed through:
- Framing the CR as a "clean funding extension": This language obscures the potential consequences of the bill's provisions and the lack of input from opposition parties.
- Emphasizing "government functionality" over specific funding directives: This rhetoric masks the potential for misuse of funds and the sidelining of important social programs.
The use of double speak in this situation aligns with the patterns identified in The Quicksand Model®, where coercive controllers use language to confuse, disorient, and control their targeted victims. By recognizing these linguistic patterns and signs of coercive control, we can better understand and resist coercive control in both personal and political contexts.
DARVO: As a Political Strategy
DARVO (Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender) is a manipulative strategy often used by coercive controllers to avoid taking responsibility for their actions. In the political arena, we see this strategy employed in the following ways:
- Deny: Republican leadership denied any wrongdoing in the process of crafting the CR, despite concerns about lack of bipartisan input.
- Attack: Critics of the bill were attacked and accused of being willing to shut down the government, shifting focus away from the bill's contents.
- Reverse Victim and Offender: By framing Democrats as obstructionists, the Republican leadership positioned themselves as victims of unreasonable opposition, rather than acknowledging the legitimate concerns raised.
This use of DARVO in political contexts mirrors its application in abusive relationships, where it serves to manipulate perceptions and maintain control. The Quicksand Model® helps us identify these strategies and tactics, empowering us to challenge such coercively controlling behaviors effectively.
Breaking Free from the Quicksand
Understanding the parallels between coercive control in relationships and political manipulation is crucial for fostering a healthier democracy. The Quicksand Model® provides a framework for recognizing these patterns and developing strategies to counter them. By educating ourselves and others about these tactics of coercive control, we can work towards systemic change that promotes transparency, accountability, and genuine collaboration in our political processes.
As we navigate the complex landscape of modern politics, let us remain vigilant against the subtle forms of coercive control that can erode our democratic institutions. By shining a light on these tactics, we take the first step towards breaking free from the quicksand of coercive control and building a more equitable and just society.
Remember, recognizing these patterns is not about partisan politics, but about understanding and challenging the abuse of power wherever it occurs. By applying the insights from The Quicksand Model® to our analysis of political events, we can foster a more informed and resilient citizenry, capable of holding our leaders accountable and promoting genuine democratic dialogue.
In the face of coercive control, whether in personal relationships or the political sphere, knowledge and awareness are our most powerful tools. Let us use them wisely to create a world where coercion and control have no place, and where true democracy can flourish.
