When children are used in such a manner, emotions are quickly aroused and a very simple divorce case can quickly become a highly contested case fueled by resentment and hostility.  Parents who are successful in getting primary custody of a child in a parent alienation situation share many similar characteristics and may use some of the following tools to assist them in their defense:

• Keep an even-temper, remain logical and keep your emotions under control.  Never retaliate.
• Though you may think of giving up, never do so.
• Go to the financial expense of seeing the case through.  Never give up on your child.  There can be nothing more important than the happiness of your child.
• Seek help from a skilled attorney who has experience with parental alienation.
• Familiarize yourself with how the courts work and the laws as they apply to your specific case.
• Seek professional help and diagnosis.
• Request a social study into the circumstances of the child
• Request a psychological evaluation of the alienating parent
• Keep a chronology or diary of events (this will help to jog your memory, keep track of witnesses, etc.). 
• Document the alienation for submission as evidence in court.
• Keep the best interest of the child at heart.
• Provide the Court with an appropriate parenting plan.
• Make sure you understand the nature of the problem and focus on correcting it, even though you are being victimized.
• Always call and show up for visitation with your child at the scheduled time, even if there is no chance of the child being there. 
• Take witnesses to testify that the child is not at home when you exercise your visitation rights.
• Focus on the child, and never talk to the child about the other parent or the divorce case.
• Never violate the Court’s orders.
• If you are receiving disturbing phone calls from the child or the other parent, tape the calls.
• If you are receiving disturbing emails or text messages from the child or the other parent, make a copy and place in a file.

Though none of these tips will guarantee that you get custody of the child, they will definitely assist you in building a case against the parent who is attempting to alienate you from your child.

Generally, in a fault-based divorce, the court may consider the conduct of the errant spouse in making a disproportionate distribution of the marital estate.  Young v. Young, 609 S.W.2d 758, 761-62 (Tex. 1980).  This does not mean that fault must be considered.

The Texas Family Code sections 3.02 and 3.07 provide six circumstances when a divorce decree may be granted in favor of one spouse.  These include the traditional fault grounds for divorce of cruelty, adultery, and abandonment.  These sections were codified by the Legislature into the Family Code along with section 3.01 which provides for “no-fault” divorce based on insupportability because of discord or conflict of personalities that destroys the legitimate ends of the marriage relationship and prevents any reasonable expectation of reconciliation.

Texas courts have considered the following factors when equitably dividing a community estate: 

1. fault in breakup of the marriage;
2. the benefits that the innocent spouse would have derived had the marriage continued;
3. disparity in the spouses’ income and earning capacities;
4. each spouse’s business opportunities;
5. differences in the spouses’ education;
6. physical health and need for future support;
7. the relative ages of the parties;
8. each spouse’s financial condition and obligations;
9. the size of each spouse’s separate estate and any expected inheritance;
10. the nature of the spouses’ property;
11. the rights of the children of the marriage;
12. waste of community assets or constructive fraud against the community;
13. gifts by one spouse to the other; and
14. tax liabilities.

The court need not divide the community estate equally.  Smallwood v. Smallwood, 548 S.W.2d 796, 797 (Tex. Civ. App. – Waco 1977, no writ).  The court has a broad discretion in making a just and right division, and absent a clear abuse of discretion, such decision will not be disturbed.  Murff v. Murff, S.W.2d 696, 698-99 (Tex. 1981); Boyd v. Boyd, 131 S.W. 3d 605, 610 (Tex. App. – Fort Worth 2005, no pet.) 

When there is no evidence or insufficient evidence to support the property division or an award of attorney’s fees, the appellate court must reverse or remand such decision for a new trial.  Sadone v. Miller-Sadone, 116 S.W.3d 204, 208 (Tex. App. – El Paso 2003, no pet). 

A party who seeks to assert the separate character of property must prove that character by clear and convincing evidence.  Clear and convincing evidence is that measure or degree of proof that will produce in the mind of the trier of fact (judge or jury) a firm belief or conviction as to the truth of the allegation. 

In a popular decision Phillips v. Phillips, 75 S.W.3d 564 (Tex. App. – Beaumont 2002, no pet.), Chief Justice Walker opined that because legislature has now authorized “no fault” divorce, fault could no longer be considered in dividing community estate.  However, In Re Brown, 187 S.W.3d 143, 2006 Tex. App. LEXIS 686 (Tex. App. Waco 2006) states that what is “just and right” in dividing the property should not depend on the ground on which the divorce is granted; the just and right division of property is separate from the dissolution issue. If one spouse’s conduct causes the destruction of the financial benefits of a particular marriage, benefits on which the other spouse relied, a trial court should have discretion to consider that factor in dividing the community estate – regardless of the basis for granting the divorce.

To prove a disproportionate division of assets in a divorce case, counsel must put on clear and convincing evidence.  Without such support, there will be no disproportionate division of community estate.  The circumstances of each marriage dictate what factors should be considered in the property division upon divorce.