Skip to content

Spain

Jurisdiction code: ES · Legal system: civil-law
Language(s): es, ca, eu, gl

Spain is the world's only PA-inadmission statutory jurisdiction via LOPIVI 2021 Disposición adicional decimoséptima, which directs public administrations not to admit the construct denominated 'síndrome de alienación parental' (SAP) in family-violence settings — the exact opposite direction to Brazil's Lei 12.318/2010, which statutorily recognises 'alienação parental'. Tribunal Supremo (Sala Primera) STS 519/2017 took a pre-LOPIVI methodological-middle stance that treats parental manipulation and negative influence as decisive welfare factors while deliberately avoiding the SAP label; the legislator subsequently moved past STS 519/2017 without ratifying its reasoning. Professional-regulator position varies by Comunidad Autónoma (per-CCAA COP variation), which is the opposite pattern to the unified national regulator positions seen in Germany and the United Kingdom.

PA recognition status

  • Statutory: inadmits
  • Apex court position: middle
  • Professional regulator position: varies-by-region

Statutory framework

  • LO 8/2021, Disposición adicional decimoséptima — Ley Orgánica 8/2021, de 4 de junio, de protección integral a la infancia y la adolescencia frente a la violencia (LOPIVI) (2021) — https://www.boe.es/buscar/act.php?id=BOE-A-2021-9347
  • Disp. ad. 17ª directs that public administrations 'velarán por que no se admita en los procedimientos relativos a la violencia el llamado síndrome de alienación parental o cualesquiera otras denominaciones análogas que no hayan sido reconocidas por las comunidades científica y sanitaria'. The statute targets the SAP label by exact name and 'denominaciones análogas', driving subsequent PIVIP (interferencias parentales / manipulación de la voluntad del menor) terminological-arbitrage.
  • LO 1/2004 — Ley Orgánica 1/2004, de 28 de diciembre, de Medidas de Protección Integral contra la Violencia de Género (LIVG) (2004) — https://www.boe.es/buscar/act.php?id=BOE-A-2004-21760
  • Gender-violence framework that conditions how family courts read PA-style allegations; LOPIVI Disp. ad. 17ª operates within this gender-violence reading.
  • LO 3/2007 — Ley Orgánica 3/2007, de 22 de marzo, para la igualdad efectiva de mujeres y hombres (2007) — https://www.boe.es/buscar/act.php?id=BOE-A-2007-6115
  • Equality framework cited alongside LIVG in feminist juridical critiques of SAP.
  • LOPJ art. 232 — Ley Orgánica 6/1985, de 1 de julio, del Poder Judicial — artículo 232 (publicidad de actuaciones judiciales) (1985) — https://www.boe.es/buscar/act.php?id=BOE-A-1985-12666
  • Basis for anonymisation of judgments involving minors; Tribunal Supremo and Audiencias Provinciales sentences in family matters are published with initials per CENDOJ practice.
  • Código Civil arts. 92-95 — Código Civil — De los efectos comunes a la nulidad, separación y divorcio (guarda y custodia, responsabilidad parental) (1889) — https://www.boe.es/buscar/act.php?id=BOE-A-1889-4763
  • Core statutory basis for custody (guarda y custodia) and parental responsibility decisions in which PA-style facts are litigated.
  • Ley 15/2005 — Ley 15/2005, de 8 de julio, por la que se modifican el Código Civil y la Ley de Enjuiciamiento Civil en materia de separación y divorcio (2005) — https://www.boe.es/buscar/act.php?id=BOE-A-2005-11864
  • Custodia compartida reform that opened the structural space in which manipulación/influencia negativa arguments became frequent in Spanish family law.

Apex courts

Tribunal Supremo, Sala Primera (Sala de lo Civil)

https://www.poderjudicial.es/search/indexAN.jsp - STS 519/2017, de 22 de septiembre (Sala Primera, ponente Arroyo Fiestas) (2017) — middle — sts-519-2017-spain

Tribunal Constitucional

https://www.tribunalconstitucional.es/ - STC 130/2024 — LOPIVI compliance line (no direct PA ruling; constitutional review of LOPIVI's child-protection architecture) (2024) — middle

Audiencias Provinciales (per-CCAA family-law line)

https://www.poderjudicial.es/cgpj/es/Poder-Judicial/Audiencias-Provinciales - AP Madrid Sección 22ª — recognition-tolerant line on manipulación/interferencias parentales (2022) — recognition - AP Barcelona Sección 12ª — recognition-tolerant line, frequently citing custodia compartida and interferencias parentales (2022) — recognition - AP Sevilla Sección 6ª — critique-leaning line aligned with LOPIVI Disp. ad. 17ª (2023) — critique

Professional regulators

  • Consejo General de la Psicología de España (COP umbrella) — No unified national position on PA/SAP; COP umbrella defers to per-CCAA Colegios Oficiales de Psicología, producing per-CCAA variation rather than a single position-statement-against or position-statement-for. — https://www.cop.es/ — see practitioner practitioner:es.cop
  • Colegio Oficial de la Psicología de Madrid (COP Madrid) — Recognition-tolerant in forensic-family practice: tolerates manipulación/interferencias parentales constructs in peritajes, while avoiding the SAP label per LOPIVI. — https://www.copmadrid.org/
  • Colegio Oficial de Psicología de Andalucía Occidental / Oriental — Critique-leaning: closer to LOPIVI Disp. ad. 17ª and to feminist-juridical positions; resistant to PA-style constructs in gender-violence cases. — https://www.copao.com/
  • Col·legi Oficial de Psicologia de Catalunya (COPC) — Mixed position; forensic-family section has historically tolerated interferencias parentales while the general college aligns with LOPIVI on the SAP label. — https://www.copc.cat/
  • Asociación Española de Neuropsiquiatría (AEN) — Critique: AEN has issued position documents rejecting SAP as lacking scientific recognition, cited by LOPIVI advocates. — https://aen.es/ — see practitioner practitioner:es.aen
  • Save the Children España — Critique: campaigned for LOPIVI Disp. ad. 17ª, frames SAP as a tool that obstructs child-protection in gender-violence contexts. — https://www.savethechildren.es/ — see practitioner practitioner:es.save-the-children-espana
  • Plataforma de Infancia — Critique: aligned with Save the Children España line; LOPIVI advocacy coalition. — https://www.plataformadeinfancia.org/
  • Themis — Asociación de Mujeres Juristas — Critique: feminist juridical position; key voice in inscribing Disp. ad. 17ª into LOPIVI and in critiquing AP-level recognition-tolerant rulings. — https://www.mujeresjuristasthemis.org/
  • FEDEPE — Federación Española de Mujeres Directivas, Ejecutivas, Profesionales y Empresarias — Critique: aligned with Themis line in public advocacy on PA-related family-court practice. — https://www.fedepe.org/
  • Equipos Psicosociales adscritos a los juzgados de familia (EPF) — Operational forensic teams attached to family courts; individual peritos NOT named as practitioners for ethical reasons (civil-servant role). EPF practice varies by CCAA and tracks the per-CCAA COP variation pattern. — https://www.poderjudicial.es/
  • Instituto de Medicina Legal y Ciencias Forenses (IMLCF) — Forensic medical institutes serving the courts; individual peritos NOT named for ethical reasons (civil-servant role). — https://www.mjusticia.gob.es/

Anonymisation convention

Tribunal Supremo sentences are anonymised per LOPJ art. 232 and CENDOJ publication policy; Audiencias Provinciales family-case names typically use initials for adult parties and never name minors. Cross-references in this dataset use the STS roll number (e.g., STS 519/2017) rather than party names.

Key developments

  • 2005 — Ley 15/2005 reforms Código Civil and LEC on separation and divorce, opening the custodia compartida framework within which PA-style manipulación/influencia arguments became frequent. — https://www.boe.es/buscar/act.php?id=BOE-A-2005-11864
  • 2017 — 22 September 2017 — STS 519/2017 (Sala Primera, ponente Arroyo Fiestas) adopts a methodological-middle stance: treats manipulación and influencia negativa de un progenitor sobre el menor as decisive welfare factors for custody, but AVOIDS the 'síndrome de alienación parental' label. Pre-LOPIVI anchor. — https://www.poderjudicial.es/search/AN/openDocument/8b3fb3a3c20d3a8a/20171005
  • 2021 — 4 June 2021 — LO 8/2021 (LOPIVI) promulgated; Disposición adicional decimoséptima directs public administrations not to admit 'el llamado síndrome de alienación parental' in violence-related proceedings. Spain becomes the world's only PA-inadmission statutory jurisdiction (opposite direction to Brazil's Lei 12.318/2010 recognition). — https://www.boe.es/buscar/act.php?id=BOE-A-2021-9347
  • 2023 — PIVIP work by Asunción Tejedor and colleagues consolidates the terminological-arbitrage gap: 'interferencias parentales' / 'manipulación de la voluntad del menor' are used in peritajes to address the underlying conduct while avoiding the LOPIVI-named SAP label. — https://www.cop.es/

Structural findings

  • Spain and Brazil are the world's only two statutory PA jurisdictions and they point in opposite directions: Spain (LOPIVI 2021 Disp. ad. 17ª) inadmits SAP, Brazil (Lei 12.318/2010) recognises alienação parental.
  • LOPIVI Disp. ad. 17ª targets only the SAP label by exact name plus 'denominaciones análogas que no hayan sido reconocidas por las comunidades científica y sanitaria'; this creates a terminological-arbitrage gap that PIVIP (interferencias parentales / manipulación de la voluntad del menor) occupies.
  • There is no unified national COP position on PA/SAP. The Consejo General defers to per-CCAA Colegios Oficiales, producing recognition-tolerant Madrid and Catalunya forensic-family practice alongside critique-leaning Andalucía practice. This per-CCAA variation is the opposite of the unified national regulator pattern seen in Germany (BDP) and the United Kingdom (ACP / BPS).
  • STS 519/2017 diverges from LOPIVI in substance: the Tribunal Supremo adopted a methodological-middle stance that treats manipulación/influencia negativa as decisive without naming SAP, but LOPIVI subsequently moved past STS 519/2017 without ratifying that reasoning. The legislator did not adopt the TS framing.
  • Sonia Vaccaro, Argentine-Spanish and Madrid-based, coined 'violencia vicaria'; the term now appears in BOE-level documents and is part of the Spanish critique vocabulary around PA.
  • EPF (Equipos Psicosociales) and IMLCF civil-servant peritos are NOT named as practitioners in this dataset for ethical reasons — this is a structural finding by pattern across the Spanish forensic-family system.
  • Miguel Lorente Acosta is médico-forense (forensic physician), not psicólogo; he served as Delegado del Gobierno para la Violencia de Género (2008-2011). His critique of SAP is medical-forensic, not psychological, which matters for taxonomising the Spanish critique line.

See also

  • case-study:sts-519-2017-spain
  • practitioner:es.aguilar-cuenca-jose-manuel
  • practitioner:es.tejedor-huerta-asuncion
  • practitioner:es.bolanos-cartujo-ignacio
  • practitioner:es.vilalta-suarez-ramon
  • practitioner:es.escudero-nafs-antonio
  • practitioner:es.vaccaro-sonia
  • practitioner:es.barea-payueta-consuelo
  • practitioner:es.lorente-acosta-miguel
  • practitioner:es.montero-gomez-andres
  • practitioner:es.cop
  • practitioner:es.aen
  • practitioner:es.save-the-children-espana
  • jurisdiction:brazil
  • jurisdiction:argentina
  • jurisdiction:italy

Sources

  1. BOE — LO 8/2021 LOPIVI (texto consolidado) — https://www.boe.es/buscar/act.php?id=BOE-A-2021-9347 (Boletín Oficial del Estado) [es]
  2. CENDOJ — Buscador de Jurisprudencia del Tribunal Supremo — https://www.poderjudicial.es/search/indexAN.jsp (Consejo General del Poder Judicial) [es]
  3. LegalLayer — análisis de jurisprudencia sobre alienación parental y LOPIVI — https://legallayer.com/ (LegalLayer) [es]
  4. Vlex España — repertorio de jurisprudencia AP/TS sobre interferencias parentales — https://vlex.es/ (Vlex) [es]
  5. Consejo General de la Psicología de España (COP) — https://www.cop.es/ (Consejo General de la Psicología) [es]
  6. Themis — Asociación de Mujeres Juristas — https://www.mujeresjuristasthemis.org/ (Themis) [es]
  7. Confilegal — cobertura jurídica de LOPIVI y STS Sala Primera — https://confilegal.com/ (Confilegal) [es]
  8. Bastida Abogados — análisis práctico de LOPIVI Disp. ad. 17ª — https://bastidabogados.com/ (Bastida Abogados) [es]
  9. Iustel — base de datos jurídica española — https://www.iustel.com/ (Iustel) [es]
  10. Blog de Sariego Morillo — análisis de derecho de familia y custodia — https://www.sariegomorillo.com/blog/ (Sariego Morillo Abogados) [es]

Editorial notes

  • Primary sources first: BOE for LOPIVI Disp. ad. 17ª statutory text; CENDOJ for STS 519/2017.
  • LOPIVI Disp. ad. 17ª verbatim Spanish anchor: 'el llamado síndrome de alienación parental' — translation_en: 'the so-called parental alienation syndrome'. The verbatim 'llamado' is load-bearing because it signals legislative distancing from the construct.
  • STS 519/2017 substantively diverges from LOPIVI: the TS treats manipulación/influencia negativa as decisive welfare factors without naming SAP; LOPIVI then moves past the TS without ratifying that reasoning. Both directions of divergence are preserved.
  • Per-CCAA COP variation recorded as a structural finding (opposite of DE/UK unified-regulator pattern).
  • EPF and IMLCF peritos NOT named individually for ethical reasons (civil-servant role); recorded as a structural finding by pattern.
  • Miguel Lorente Acosta classified as médico-forense (not psicólogo) and as Delegado del Gobierno 2008-2011; this matters for taxonomising the critique line.
  • Sonia Vaccaro is Argentine-Spanish, Madrid-based; coined 'violencia vicaria', now in BOE-level documents.

Licensed CC BY 4.0 — AntiAlienate Knowledge. Source of truth is the sibling .json; this .md is rendered. Do not hand-edit.

What this means if your child is being withheld from you in Spain

The operative framework is the Código Civil arts. 154–171 (patria potestad) and arts. 90–96 (medidas relativas a los hijos on separación / divorcio), with the interés superior del menor enshrined in LO 1/1996 de Protección Jurídica del Menor as amended by LO 8/2015. Spain operates a multi-jurisdictional system: each Comunidad Autónoma with civil-law competence (Catalonia, Aragon, Navarra, Basque Country, Galicia, Balearic Islands) has its own foral law on parental responsibility — check whether your region's Código Civil supersedes the state code.

Spain is the world's only PA-inadmission statutory jurisdiction. LO 8/2021 (protección integral a la infancia y la adolescencia frente a la violencia — LOPIVI), Disposición adicional decimoséptima, directs public administrations not to admit the construct denominated "Síndrome de Alienación Parental" (SAP) in family-violence settings. This is the strongest statutory rejection of PA-syndrome framing anywhere in the world.

Practical implication for both parents. A targeted parent in Spain must not ask the Juzgado de Familia for a informe pericial framed around "SAP" — the perito judicial will be barred from applying that diagnostic frame, and the request itself signals an outdated litigation strategy. The Cassationally-correct framing is to plead the underlying conduct (interferencia en el régimen de visitas; incumplimiento sistemático) under Código Civil art. 776 (modificación de medidas) and the Ley de Enjuiciamiento Civil art. 776 (ejecución de sentencia familiar).

Procedural pathway — the Juzgado de Familia. File a demanda de modificación de medidas or ejecución de medidas at the Juzgado de Primera Instancia with family competence at the child's habitual residence. The court can impose multas coercitivas (escalating fines) under LEC art. 776.2 and, in extreme cases, transfer of guarda y custodia. For criminal pathway, Código Penal art. 622 (incumplimiento del régimen de visitas) was decriminalised in 2015; serious obstruction now goes via desobediencia (art. 556 CP) or, where the alienation amounts to coercive control, the violencia vicaria framework introduced by LO 10/2022.

Apex authority. Tribunal Supremo (Sala Primera), STS 519/2017 de 22 de septiembre (ponente Arroyo Fiestas) took a pre-LOPIVI middle position: treating manipulación parental as a behavioural fact to be assessed but rejecting the SAP nosological category. STS 519/2017 remains the controlling reference for evidentiary treatment of alienation-pattern claims; LOPIVI 2021 reinforces it by statute.

Get local counsel. Abogado and procurador are mandatory in family proceedings. Especialista en derecho de familia certification via the Consejo General de la Abogacía Española is the principal accreditation. Asistencia jurídica gratuita is income-tested via the Colegio de Abogados of your province. In Catalonia, the Centre d'Estudis Jurídics i Formació Especialitzada maintains the foral-law-specialist directory.

FAQ — Parental alienation in Spain

Is parental alienation illegal in Spain?

In Spain parental alienation is expressly excluded from family-violence proceedings by statute. The apex court treats the behaviour but not the syndrome label.

What law covers withholding a child from a parent in Spain?

The primary statutory basis in Spain is LO 8/2021, Disposición adicional decimoséptima — Ley Orgánica 8/2021, de 4 de junio, de protección integral a la infancia y la adolescencia frente a la violencia (LOPIVI). Authoritative text: https://www.boe.es/buscar/act.php?id=BOE-A-2021-9347.

What is the leading court decision on parental alienation in Spain?

The leading apex decision is STS 519/2017, de 22 de septiembre (Sala Primera, ponente Arroyo Fiestas) (2017). The court took a middle position — recognising patterns of conduct but rejecting the syndrome framing.

What can a parent do if their child is being withheld from them in Spain?

Apply to the family court with jurisdiction over the child's habitual residence. The court will assess the application under Spain's best-interests-of-the-child framework (LO 8/2021, Disposición adicional decimoséptima) and may order specific contact, mediation, or — in serious cases — investigation by the child-protection authority. A parent in this situation should document the pattern of contact-interference and obtain local family-law advice before applying.

Sources & authoritative references

Topic baseline (independently verifiable):