Episode Description - The Truth About Parental Alienation That No One Talks About
If your child has started pulling away from you, or saying things that sound nothing like them, you may already know something is deeply wrong, even if you can't prove it yet. In this podcast episode, high-conflict divorce strategist and domestic violence advocate Lisa Johnson, explores the complicated reality of parental alienation and explains why it’s often far more subtle (and more difficult to recognize) than most people realize. She shares how seemingly small actions and unspoken messages can slowly damage a child’s relationship with a parent over time.
Rather than focusing on labels or accusations, Lisa dives into what actually matters to judges and custody evaluators: patterns of behavior, their impact on children, and the practical challenges families face when conflict spills into co-parenting. You'll discover why proving parental alienation can be so difficult, how children can become caught in the middle without fully understanding what's happening, and why some of the most damaging behaviors are often the hardest to see.
The conversation also offers thoughtful strategies for parents who want to protect and strengthen their bond with their children during and after divorce. From improving communication to encouraging critical thinking and resilience, Lisa shares practical ideas that can help parents respond more effectively when relationships become strained. If you've ever wondered how children are affected by ongoing parental conflict, or what parents can do to help, this discussion provides insights that may challenge what you think you know.
Show Notes
About Lisa
Lisa Johnson is the co-founder of Been There Got Out, a high-conflict divorce strategist, and a certified domestic violence advocate specializing in legal abuse. She dedicates her expertise to helping individuals navigate situations where an ex uses the legal system to wear them down and deplete their resources. Alongside her partner, Chris, Lisa coaches people through high-conflict relationships, divorce, custody battles, and difficult co-parenting situations. Her ultimate goal is to help clients secure the best possible outcomes in family court while lowering conflict to protect the well-being of their children.
Connect with Lisa
You can connect with Lisa on LinkedIn at Been There Got Out and on Facebook at Been There Got Out. You can follow her on YouTube at @BeenThereGotOut, on X at @BeenThereGotOut, and on Instagram at been_there_got_out. To learn more about how to work with Lisa, visit her website at Been There Got Out. And you can find her latest book, When Your Ex Turns the Kids Against You, here.
Key Takeaways From This Episode with Lisa
Do you like what you've heard?
Share the love so more people can benefit from this episode too!
Transcript
The Truth About Parental Alienation That No One Talks About
SPEAKERS
Karen Covy, Lisa Johnson
Karen Covy (00:10):
Hello and welcome to Off the Fence, a podcast where we deconstruct difficult decision-making so we can discover what keeps us stuck, and more importantly, how we can get unstuck and start making even tough decisions with confidence. I'm your host, Karen Covy, a former divorce lawyer, mediator, and arbitrator turned coach, author, and entrepreneur.
Without further ado, let's get on with the show. With me today, I have the pleasure of having a returning guest, Lisa Johnson. Lisa is the co-founder of Been There Got Out. She's a high-conflict divorce strategist and certified domestic violence advocate specializing in legal abuse, which is where a person's ex uses the legal system to wear them down and bleed them dry. She and her partner, Chris, coach people in high-conflict relationships, divorce, custody battles, and co-parenting hell so they have the chance of getting the best outcome in family court and beyond, with the intention of lowering conflict so it doesn't bleed onto your kids.
Her book about parental alienation—a topic that affects more than 22 million people in the US and Canada alone—is out now. When Your Ex Turns the Kids Against You was released in early 2026 and is available on Amazon and everywhere you get your books. Links to her course and to the book will all be in the show notes.
Lisa, welcome back.
Lisa Johnson (01:57):
Thank you so much, Karen. It's so great to be back and see you again.
Karen Covy (02:00):
I am thrilled to have you back, especially to talk about a topic that can be a little bit radioactive at times, especially in the court system. We're going to talk about parental alienation. There are as many definitions for this, I think, as there are people defining it. So let's start here: how do you define parental alienation?
Lisa Johnson (02:12):
It is such a controversial label because of its history and how, unfortunately, it's often been used as a weapon against victims of domestic violence. We know that sometimes when you say abuse, the other side says, "No, it's alienation," and it's a complete distraction from what's happening. I just want to acknowledge that, especially having a background in domestic violence.
Alienation basically is when one parent is attempting to harm the child's relationship with another parent when there's no justification. The opposite is something we call justified estrangement, where the parent has actually done something to warrant a disruption in their relationship.
In terms of legal stuff, as I'm sure you know, Karen, it takes a high bar in terms of what's justifiable. So when we are working with clients who say their ex is abusive, we often say, "Well, what do you have to prove that there was extraordinary abuse and/or neglect?" Otherwise, it's going to be very, very tricky. Instead, we really look at that person's patterns of behavior over time and the visible impact it has had on the child's relationship with the other parent. We especially look at the timing that the rupture occurred, because if something started right around the time you decided to separate, or post-separation, it becomes a lot more suspicious.
Karen Covy (03:37):
I want to unpack something that you said, a distinction that I think is important. Is there a difference between estrangement and justified estrangement?
Lisa Johnson (03:54):
Actually, there is. Estrangement is becoming more of a pop-cultural thing where people are hearing the word used when adult kids have chosen to not have contact with their parents. That's considered estrangement, whether the parent did anything to warrant that or not. That's why when I say "justified," it means there's a really good reason. There are a lot of parents whose kids have been turned against them where it's not necessarily due to divorce. The actor Anthony Hopkins just released a memoir where he talked a little bit about his own estrangement from his adult daughter, and he and his wife are still together.
Karen Covy (04:42):
If I'm understanding you correctly, the difference between justified estrangement and standard estrangement is whether the parent did something that rose to the level of warranting the estrangement. Is that right?
Lisa Johnson (04:58):
Right. Then, of course, it's a matter of what "justified" means and who decides what is justifiable or not. For example, we mention this in our book: there's a therapist named Adam Barta that we interviewed, and he was telling us about one of his clients who happened to be a fifth-grade child. The child had not spoken to or wanted any contact with his father for two years. When Adam asked, "What's the reason? What did your dad do?" the child said, "He didn't buy me the crayons that I wanted back in third grade." To most people, that is not a justifiable reason to completely cut out one of your primary attachment figures.
Karen Covy (05:49):
I love that you brought up this example, and I know it's just one of many in your book. For most people, you'd say, "Hey, you didn't buy your kid the crayons they wanted, so what?" That's not a reason to rupture a parent-child relationship. But when you or Dr. Barta hear something like that, does it mean the other parent planted that idea in the kid's mind—that the other parent alienated the child? What is the other parent's role in how this relationship breaks up?
Lisa Johnson (06:10):
There are a number of factors that we often go through with our clients because we think it's so important for people to understand what alienation means, especially because many of them are falsely accused of it. At the same time, we all do things that we don't realize are inadvertently possibly harming our child's relationship with the other parent, especially during divorce. Most people in our community are very angry and upset, so often we'll say negative things about the other person.
Alienating behavior is more when it's a persistent, chronic behavior where you never say anything positive about the other parent to your child—where it's just relentless negative messaging, whether it's verbal or through your body language. I often talk about the 7-38-55% rule that I learned from Chris Voss, who's a former FBI hostage negotiator, because I think it really relates to alienation. It means that people only pay attention to 7% of your words, 38% of your tone, and 55% of your body language. So, 93% of our communication is physical and nonverbal.
When you're dealing with a high-conflict situation or a high-conflict divorce, even if I'm not verbally saying anything about my ex, if I'm rolling my eyes, shrugging, or making comments like, "Oh, he's here on time, that's nice," the kids pick up on that. There is also my own anxiety about my co-parent. Chris and I only work with the craziest cases, so all of our clients are dealing with some level of domestic violence. We work with the targeted parent, so there is a lot of fear around what happened between them and their ex. Of course, especially during handovers or exchanges, there's all this anxiety that the kids pick up. Sometimes we may say things, do things, or not say anything, but the kids feel that we don't feel safe, and so they don't feel safe. One of the messages that parents may inadvertently be sending to their children is that the other parent is unsafe.
One of the most common things that people do inadvertently is call the child when they're about to go to the other parent, or when they're on the other parent's parenting time, and ask, "Are you okay?" By doing this, I am sending the message to my child that something is wrong when maybe there is nothing wrong, simply because that's how I feel. That's considered a subtle form of alienating behavior because I'm sending what I call one of the "three Us": that the other parent is unsafe, unloving, or unavailable.
Another example of something very subtle, which fits into one of Dr. Amy Baker's alienating factors that we go over with our clients, is blocking contact and communication. People always think, "Oh, well, that's when someone's not following a parenting plan." It's not necessarily just that. That's obvious and easy to prove. But let's say I take my ex's name off the coach's list, who sends out the emails of when our kid has an event or a game. My ex doesn't get that information and doesn't show up to the game. My child is like, "Well, where's my dad?" or "Where's my mom?" and the child gets the message that my ex doesn't care about them, is unavailable, or doesn't love them that much. By removing that person's information from school, medical, or extracurricular lists, I am undermining my child's relationship through a trickle-down effect.
Karen Covy (10:40):
Thinking like a lawyer—which is biologically a part of me now—and thinking about what you can prove in a court of law: if you are the person being accused of alienation, maybe it's a new school year and it's time to update the notifications for parents, and you just didn't get to it. Your position might be that you're not trying to alienate your spouse, but you feel like you're the one who always has to do everything. If he or she wants to get notices for games, they should put themselves on the list; it's not your job, which is a fair position.
But then, how do you prove in a court of law what you actually believed? Everything is already so difficult to prove in divorce and family law cases. Trying to prove something like intent, or trying to prove that you were giving bad vibes or that your body language was negative, seems like something you're never going to be able to do.
Lisa Johnson (12:00):
I love that you asked that, and I love that you're an attorney, because there's context here. How do you prove it? First of all, we don't ever like to use the word "parental alienation" when someone's arguing a case because it is a controversial label. Instead, we focus on that person's patterns of behavior over time and the visible impact on a child. If you do something like that once or a couple of times, it's excused. But when there are patterns of constantly doing these things and the child is impacted, then that's something.
I'll give you an example of something that just happened the other week. One of our clients completely flipped custody, and part of it had to do with alienation. I'm obviously not going to say what state it's in, but this was in our Hall of Fame of the biggest decisions we've ever seen. The judgment was made within days, and our client completely flipped physical custody as well as legal decision-making.
This was not easy to prove. This client had tried in the past and it didn't work out well. We started working together just a few weeks ago and got into all kinds of things, mainly focusing on patterns. One issue was that the other side was not sending the child to school, claiming they were afraid because of the days our client would pick them up from school. The kid had missed something like 70 days of school.
Also, our client won the rest of legal decision-making, but they already had medical decision-making. Every time they made an appointment for the child, the ex would interfere and cancel it, so the child wasn't able to go to the doctor across a number of different doctors. This was a really extreme case. The child was also failing school and all the grades were bad. The child had been isolated from our client as well as members of our client's family and friends. There were other adult children in the household who contributed to the enmeshment and behavior.
A lot of pieces pulled together to show that while alienation was part of the case, this child's life had been completely restricted by this parent. The other parent was being cut out of their life in terms of legal decision-making as well as physical custody, plus the parenting plan wasn't being followed. The child was being exposed to all kinds of legal language, even while being told repeatedly that the child was not supposed to be involved in that stuff.
That was just an example of an extreme case where alienation was part of it, but we were able to really get into the stuff that mattered. I remember at the beginning when our client had just had a status conference, they said their lawyer had asked for more time because they hadn't done well the first time they tried. The judge said, "No, I think we just need an hour." I told the client that felt like a good thing, because just hearing about some of the stuff that was introduced before an evidentiary hearing already gave the judge a sense that this was beyond the norm. Making that decision within less than a week, our client's attorney said, "I've never seen something like this." There were psychologists involved, so there were witnesses and people who had seen the behaviors over the years, making it a really powerful case.
Karen Covy (15:49):
In that case, was the other person the one being accused of alienation?
Lisa Johnson (15:56):
No, we never even said the word "alienation." It was more about the fact that this child is really suffering, here is the visible impact, and this is why our client needs to have primary physical custody and sole decision-making for these significant things. They were unable to exercise any rights or do anything unless this happened. Unless the client has physical custody and the other responsibilities, the child can't go to school, the doctor, or do all the basic daily life things that kids should be able to do.
Karen Covy (16:34):
That is totally crazy, but I notice you're practicing what you're preaching and not calling it alienation. Why does that matter so much? I know a lot of people's natural tendency is to immediately put labels on people, saying, "My spouse is a narcissist," "They've got a personality disorder," or "They're alienating." Why do you tell people not to do that?
Lisa Johnson (17:08):
A big part of what we teach is the art of persuasion. When you're telling someone, "Oh, it's alienation," you are not allowing them to draw their own conclusions, and you're insulting their intelligence by telling them what to think. Instead, why don't you present your case without giving a label and let them figure it out? They have the expertise. Don't tell a judge, a lawyer, or a professional evaluator that this is what it is because you're going to look bad. Show them what you have and let them determine it.
Karen Covy (17:45):
Having practiced law for as many decades as I have, I can tell you that in today's world, everybody thinks they're divorcing a narcissist. So when somebody comes in and starts going on and on about it, immediately my radar goes up to try to figure out what's really going on, what's provable, whether this is just jargon they've picked up from the internet, or if there is a real, serious problem.
Lisa Johnson (18:13):
My background was as a high school English teacher, and I also taught writing. The whole basic premise is: show, don't tell.
Karen Covy (18:22):
That is also the foundation of the legal world. I want to go back to something you said about the factors that indicate alienating behavior. I think you have a set of factors.
Lisa Johnson (18:43):
We had 17, but we condensed them into six.
Karen Covy (18:47):
Seventeen condensed into six, got it. If someone out there is listening and wondering if this is something they should be concerned about, what are some of the factors they should look at?
Lisa Johnson (19:01):
The first one is the one we mentioned: sending poisonous messages about the ex to the child, not just verbally or in writing, but through body language indicating that the other parent is unsafe, unloving, or unavailable.
The second, which we also talked about, is blocking contact and communication.
The third is erasing and replacing. This means rewriting the history of the family narrative to make it as though that one person wasn't really present or involved. When a person gets with a new partner, it might look like having the child refer to the new partner as "Mommy" or "Daddy," which we never want to happen in these cases. An example of erasing and replacing occurred with one of our clients who has a teenage son. His son turned to him the other day in the car and said, "You never wanted to be around me as a baby. Why do you want to spend time with me now?" This client actually raised the child until he was a tween, but that was the message he had been getting from the other side. That's erasing and replacing—changing memories, because memories are malleable.
Karen Covy (20:16):
What do you do as the parent in that situation? You raised this child, you were with them 24/7, and now they think you weren't. How do you recover from that kind of false belief or memory that the child firmly believes?
Lisa Johnson (20:41):
That is a huge question, and it's such a complex issue. One thing you absolutely do not do is say, "That's not true".
Karen Covy (20:55):
But it's not true!
Lisa Johnson (20:56):
Think about how a child sees both parents as authorities, and we think authorities are both going to tell us the truth. One parent has said something and the child is believing it, or at least questioning it. A parent who they love has said, "Your other parent was never there for you." They come to you saying this is the truth, and if you simply say, "That's not true," you are doing the exact same thing your ex is doing. You are telling them something where they're thinking, "Okay, both my parents are telling me they speak the truth, nobody's lying, but they're saying completely opposite things." You're insulting your child's intelligence in terms of their own experience with what's real and what's not, and you're making them experience cognitive dissonance where they don't know who to believe because they love both of you.
Instead of saying "that's not true," you bend like the symbol of the yin-yang. You say, "Wow, you believed that I wasn't there for you when you were a baby, or that I wasn't interested in spending time with you. What made you think that?" You want to stop talking and find out what's underneath all of this stuff because the kid is testing you. They're wondering, "Were you really there for me or not?" It's not just about stating a fact that you know is true; they don't know. They want to see your response, and the goal is to get them talking.
At some point, you might want to say, "Oh my gosh, I never want you to feel like I don't want to spend time with you. However you got to feeling that way, I love you more than anything. My relationship with you matters more than anything. What can I do better?" You are bending; you are not aggressively trying to correct the record.
Karen Covy (23:04):
What about doing something like saying to them, "Do you remember the time when you were little and we did this together?" Does that help or does that hurt?
Lisa Johnson (23:16):
Save that for later. Initially, you're putting your truth on top when the child is coming to you because they have fear and feel like you either abandoned them or didn't really want them. We have to address the feeling before we address the facts.
Karen Covy (23:37):
What I'm hearing is that this is a process, and the initial stage is not to try to convince them that you're right and the other parent is wrong.
Lisa Johnson (23:48):
Right. Think about when you're talking to somebody about something you feel really upset about and they immediately say, "Oh, but it must be this or it must be that." That's not helpful. It matters that we want to feel understood, and it's 100% the same with a child.
Karen Covy (24:05):
Let's get back to the six factors. That was number three.
Lisa Johnson (24:10):
Number four is encouraging a child to betray your trust. Unfortunately, kids—usually not little kids, but tweens and teens—become little spies. We'll often see an alienating parent grilling the child when they come back from your house, asking, "What did you do? What happened over there? Who were they with?"
Not only are they grilling them, but they're also rewarding them with attention and possibly other things for reporting back. Kids in these situations are put in conflicts where they will unfortunately get into your phone, your computer, or your drawers. They'll send pictures of things or record conversations with you and give them to the other parent because the other parent showers them with attention and makes them feel good. This is a horrible way to live.
I'll give you an example. One of our clients has a child who is over 18 but has special needs and is still following a custody schedule. Our client is a woman who happens to make more money than her ex, so she pays child support. While our client was on the phone, this daughter was eavesdropping and reported back to her father, "Hey, I think Mom's getting a raise." Consequently, he filed again for more child support, which he has done often. When the daughter came back, our client asked, "Why would you do that? Why are you saying things about my financial situation to your father?" Her daughter said, "Mom, that's the only time he pays attention to me." You have to understand what these kids are experiencing to know why they would do such a thing.
Karen Covy (26:06):
What do you do if that's what's going on in your household? You don't want to live like a prisoner in your own house, locking everything up. What do you do?
Lisa Johnson (26:16):
These are big questions and it's not easy. But rather than addressing it while it's happening, sitting down later to help them develop empathy and talking about privacy and rules can help. You can ask, "How would you feel if I went into your stuff?" It doesn't necessarily have to be about what they just did with their other parent, but rather a broader conversation about respect and how you are going to live and feel comfortable around each other if it feels like there's betrayal going on. These are bigger conversations to have outside the exact moment it happens, rather than a knee-jerk response.
Karen Covy (27:06):
That knee-jerk reaction would be my instant response.
Lisa Johnson (27:11):
Of course, because it is such a betrayal. You think, "How could a child do this to me? I'm the good parent, and now they're reporting to the abuser, and I've got spies living with me".
Karen Covy (27:26):
Absolutely. I'm going to stop interrupting. Let's hear numbers five and six.
Lisa Johnson (27:31):
Five is minimizing your authority—making it seem like the other parent's rules are the only rules, and that things have to be done the same way at both houses, which is what most people believe. They try to control not just legal decision-making, but bedtime, diet, etc.
My partner, Chris, had an experience where his son played the bass. For Christmas one year, Chris decided to get him an electric bass because he thought they could play together, since Chris was playing guitar a bit. His son opened it, was thrilled, and then didn't touch it for two months while it stayed at Chris's house. Chris asked him at some point, "Why haven't you played the electric bass?" He said, "Oh, well, Mom said..." and his mother is a music teacher, "...Mom said that I have to reach a certain level in music before I'm allowed to play it." The child fully believed that Mom's rules are the main rules, and that he had to listen to that one parent.
Number six is encouraging dependence in a child—making a child feel like they are helpless without that specific parent. Most of us want to raise independent children who can function in society. Alienating parents often operate on what is termed "narcissistic supply"; they want the children to need them because that's what they require. Often they will infantilize children and treat them like they're a lot younger than they are. We see weird things where they'll buy them clothes that are too small. We know someone who used to lay out their children's clothing well into middle school when they were perfectly capable of dressing themselves.
There is a lot of emotional enmeshment. As kids get older, we see them having problems making decisions, saying things like, "I need to call Dad first," or "I need to check with Mom if that's okay." If you say you're going to go out for ice cream, they might say, "Well, Mom says I'm allergic," or "Dad says I'm allergic to ice cream, so I don't know if I'm allowed to do that with you."
As they get older, they are made to feel that they depend entirely on that parent: "If I don't do what that other parent wants, they're not going to pay for my phone, they're going to take away my car, or they're not going to pay for college." Those are all forms of subtle alienation.
Karen Covy (30:07):
We've talked a lot about the factors. In general, if you are a parent listening to this and recognizing these signs, what's the best way to handle it? Running to court immediately and making these accusations is very expensive, time-consuming, ramps up the conflict, and for the most part, usually doesn't work. What can they do to either make the best case if they do go to court, or solve the problem without going to court?
Lisa Johnson (30:52):
I love that we are talking about this because I always think about empowerment through education. It is so important to educate yourself to recognize the signs. If you are dealing with a very difficult ex who perhaps has a personality disorder and/or an active addiction, this kind of behavior is probably in your future.
It is crucial when you are separating—whether you're married or not—to have a parenting plan with very solid language, which includes a specific therapy clause. It needs to be carved out so it doesn't become a major decision that you have to debate later. Most times, unhealthy parents don't want things exposed in therapy and will make it very difficult for your child to get help.
What we like to do—and we learned this from an attorney in New York City named Yoni Leverett—is have a therapy clause stating that if either parent or the child wants to get therapy, it shall not require permission from the other parent. We also advise looking into IFS (Internal Family Systems) therapists, because they are considered excellent at dealing with this type of dynamic. You want to have that established beforehand so that if your child enters therapy, it becomes part of their routine. This makes it easier to continue with the therapist and ensures you have something in place to involve the family system if things get worse. I'm not talking about couples counseling; different IFS therapists work with individual members of the family where the child is the client. Even if they don't meet with the child directly, they work with each parent individually to support the child through these situations. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, so let's get things really solid in a parenting plan that's actually enforceable.
Karen Covy (32:42):
That makes so much sense. In my experience, if you can even name the therapist in the agreement, that's helpful. I would advise people not to just name one person; name an alternative in case the first choice cannot do it. I've seen so many people get into a six-month court battle just over who the therapist should be because you both want different people to achieve different results.
Lisa Johnson (33:16):
My partner, Chris, is great with analogies and talks about it as "cutting the cake." When you're a kid, someone gets to cut the cake and the other person gets to choose which side they want. We want our clients to cut the cake if possible. We have our clients come up with three names of reputable therapists, and then their ex gets to choose one of the three. That way, you ensure good people are put forward, but the ex still gets a say.
Karen Covy (33:43):
I like that a lot. Do you have any other tips for people? The clients I've had in this situation are just so hungry for help and want to do anything they can for their child, because it rips their guts out to see their kid turned into such a mess.
Lisa Johnson (34:14):
There is a lot you can do. One tip I got from a psychiatrist who works in the school system with kids from preschool through early adulthood is what we call the "10-minute rule." This is something you can start at any age, and it's basically a way to connect with your child. We know that kids want two things more than anything: control and attention.
If you take 10 minutes—it doesn't matter how often you see your kid—and say, "I want to do something that you want to do, and I want you to teach me how to do it." Let's say the kid loves video games and I hate video games. If my son is really into them, I can say, "You know what? I notice you love to play Minecraft and you're so good at it. Can you show me how it works? Because I don't understand how to do it." Get down on their level and let them teach you something. You're giving them attention, showing that you care, and developing a bond that is going to be harder to break.
When the child starts hearing negative messages about you, they will have their own memories of, "Wait, Mom or Dad is the one who actually spends time with me," because the other side is often not able to focus and give them real attention. You're contrasting how you are as a parent. If a child is a great cook, you can say, "You're so good at making brownies. Can you show me how to do it and show me the recipe?" Just look for little things where you're acknowledging their strengths, putting yourself in a less dominant position, and focusing entirely on them. That's one of the best things you can do.
Karen Covy (35:57):
Does that create cognitive dissonance in the child? If Parent A is saying that Parent B doesn't care about them, but look, Parent B is genuinely interested in this activity and let them lead. Does that make things harder for the child, or better?
Lisa Johnson (36:15):
Not at all. Human beings fundamentally know how they feel and what feels right or wrong. Even when they're hearing that other negative message, whether they realize it or not, they know what is true.
The other thing that's really important is to help them develop critical thinking skills. There is a book called The Sky is Red written by Tyra Juliet. It's a game we've recommended to our clients, especially with little kids. When you are outside doing something, you point out your surroundings and then intentionally say something that is a blatant lie, like, "The sky is red." You want your child to question you and say, "That's not true." If they don't, you can prompt them: "Do you think so? Does that look red to you? What color is red?" You want them to start learning how to question authority, because that makes them less likely to fall prey to manipulation. We really have to learn critical thinking skills. Debate is also great with older kids. My son is a champion debater—he's a pain in the butt to raise, but very smart. Learning to question and learning to see things from different perspectives is always helpful.
Karen Covy (37:34):
I love that. Especially in our world today, whether you're dealing with this kind of a situation with your kids or not, it's excellent advice for both kids and adults. We can all learn to stop taking everything at face value.
Lisa, thank you so much for being here. This has been an amazing conversation. If people are interested in learning more or working with you and Chris, where can they find you?
Lisa Johnson (38:02):
It's super easy. Our website is beentheregotout.com. Everything is under that name: we have a Been There Got Out podcast, a YouTube channel, and Instagram is my main home base, though we're on all the socials under @beentheregotout with little underscores. Our two books are available on Amazon, with the latest being When Your Ex Turns the Kids Against You. You can also email us directly at [email protected] or [email protected]. It's just the two of us and we always answer.
Karen Covy (38:33):
That is wonderful. Lisa, thank you so much. This has been super helpful.
Lisa Johnson (38:38):
My pleasure. Thank you so much. It's been great being back with you, Karen.
Karen Covy (38:42):
And for those of you out there who are watching or listening, if you thought this was a great conversation and you'd like to hear more just like it, do me a big favor: give the episode a thumbs up, like and subscribe to the podcast, subscribe to the YouTube channel, and I look forward to talking with you all again next time.
