The pathogen has three defensive structures:

The pathogen has three defensive structures:


Remain hidden;
Seek allies;
Attack threats of exposure with great viciousness.

When I analyzed the pathology and it’s solution I took these defenses into account. No other pathology has a defensive structure. Not ADHD, not oppositional defiant disorder, not autism, not conduct disorder – I’ve only ever seen a defensive structure to the pathology with trauma pathology.

The key to developing a solution was in identifying a diagnostic structure that could address the first and primary defensive structure of the pathogen – remain hidden.

The pathogen baits us into trying to identify the problem parenting of the narcissistic-borderline parent, and the pathogen then hides behind the child’s symptoms – “It’s not me, it’s the child who…” and the child vouches for the allied narcissistic-borderline parent – “They’re a wonderful parent.”

The manipulation and psychological control of the child is so fully accomplished and complete, that the pathogen wants us to chase it into trying to prove the narcissistic-borderline parent is doing something. It then hides behind the child.

So in the 2010 range, I had to figure out how we diagnosis it from beneath it’s veil of concealment. The solution is to not try to penetrate the veil of concealment.

I’m smarter than the pathogen. I’m a good clinical psychologist. We cannot psychologically control a child without leaving telltale signs of the psychological control in the child’s symptom display… in very subtle but clear ways, the child’s behavior will not be authentic to how the brain and children actually work.

The strategy is to lift the “fingerprints of psychological control” of the child from off of the child’s symptom display. That’s what Foundations is. It establishes the diagnostic context for the three diagnostic indicators – the “psychological fingerprint” evidence – of the child’s control and manipulation by a narcissistic-borderline parent.

Another way of saying that is that the child is being used as a weapon in the spousal conflict. The weaponization of the child will leave telltale indicators in the child’s symptom display. The three diagnostic indicators of AB-PA represent the telltale signs in the child’s symptoms of the child’s weaponization into the spousal conflict by a narcissistic-borderline parent.

AB-PA is designed to expose that which hidden.

AB-PA is also going to expose the allies of the pathogen who are disabling the mental health system response. How? Because AB-PA is entirely Bowlby, Minuchin, Beck. Standard and established knowledge. There is absolutely zero authentic reason not to apply the principles of attachment, personality disorder pathology, family systems therapy, and complex trauma to pathology. Standard clinical psychology.

Research says that about 6% of the population has narcissistic personality disorder, and about 6% of the population has a borderline personality disorder. So between 10-15% of the population will have either narcissistic or borderline personality pathology. We absolutely know in professional psychology that the full display of narcissistic and borderline personalty pathology is going to be triggered by the rejection and perceived abandonment of divorce. We know that.

All AB-PA is saying is that professional psychology needs to proactively address what we know to be true. We do this by defining the domains of relevant knowledge from professional psychology and applying them to the solution. Those relevant domains of professional knowledge are the attachment system, personality disorder pathology, family systems therapy, and complex trauma.

This is absolutely 100% normal-range professional psychology. There is not a single mental health professional who should have any objection to standard clinical psychology.

The pathogen, on the other hand. It won’t want AB-PA to solve the pathology. It will want to stop a return to standard and established constructs and principles. Once it perceives AB-PA as a threat to exposing it, it’s going to attack. And in attacking what is totally 100% normal-range professional psychology, it’s going to expose itself.

AB-PA is going to expose the allies of the pathology who are disabling the mental health system response to the pathology.

The pathogen is going to attack AB-PA. The approach will be to trot out the same tried-and-true arguments it used with Gardner’s PAS model. This will further expose the pathogen in the ally. AB-PA is an entirely different model of pathology. The arguments used against Gardnerian PAS don’t apply to AB-PA. That’s intentional. I know what the pathogen is going to do before it does it.