Abusers gain custody of children

by Clare Murphy PhD on February 20 2010

On this PBS video you will hear children talking about the impact of domestic violence and the failure of the court system to honour their needs and keep them safe. You will also see domestic violence and legal professionals describe the all too common fact that justice is not being done in favour of many many children.

This is a vast problem that reflects the interplay between male abusers’ use of children as weapons against women to maintain power and control, and to maintain what they consider to be their “rightful” position as head of the family. Plus . . . it reflects the support for such abuse by some professionals who are either ill-informed about the realities of psychological control, or who intentionally support men’s right to have power over women and children.

If you need help with child custody issues please read my suggestions here.

{ 0 comments }

Here I write a review of Dr. Margaret W. Jones’s book about her experience of abuse within church communities.

My first impressions when I received this memoir to review were that it was a heavy long 400-page book with small writing so I thought it better be good! I was surprised that a Reverend had written the foreword, so realised Margaret must have found someone in the church who was not a bully. I thought the foreword was well written and it enticed me to want to read the book. I thought I could learn something – and I did.

In Chapter One titled Vulnerability I read that Margaret had been neglected, physically abused in the house by her father, sexually abused by a neighbour and an uncle, she experienced school bullying, and psychological abuse and ignorance by teachers. The author paints a visual picture of the environment and an emotional picture of the neglect and lack of ability by any adults to nurture and nourish. Her vivid story telling is a major strength of the book. It begins with a story of a child alone, naïve, uninformed with zero wise guidance from any adult. Reading this chapter made me feel very angry and hungry to read what happened next.

The title Not of My Making gave me a clue that Margaret was probably going to describe her experience of being embroiled in abuse of a one-sided nature amongst church members – and she did.

The theme of the book grapples with a belief in a just and safe world within churches and coming to terms with the fact that many church communities are not safe, nor are they just. This book is one person’s life across multiple settings where bystanders support abusers, where those who might ordinarily be considered benign authority figures turn out to condone bullies and never follow through on promises to bring justice for victims.

This book tells a story that could be experienced by any unsuspecting innocent person – male or female – in any community organisation, any workplace, any institution – any place where you think you should expect friendship, safety, kindness, honesty and trustworthiness.

I personally have a poor memory for recalling the storyline in books and movies, but Margaret’s story was so well written and stirred such emotions of outrage that I don’t think I’ll ever forget it. I was frustrated when she was continually up against a brick wall, and joyful when she started to realise that the abuse was not about her being flawed or not good enough, but . . . that the abuse was actually being perpetrated by so-called just people. Her process of discovering this reality was slow and frustrated me greatly because I wanted to see justice done NOW! But that is not reality for many many victims of psychological bullying.

I wondered who the right audience would be for this book. Victims of abuse would find it extremely validating. And this book is important for friends, family or professionals who want to understand what a victim thinks and feels and how they behave in response to abuse – such as endlessly asking the abuser to take responsibility for their actions; self-harm; constant help-seeking from people who want to help, who pretend they want to help but don’t, and who refuse to help. The problem is the victim trusts that ALL people will and do take responsibility for their actions. It took Margaret years to realise this is a myth.

The author’s purpose in writing the book is to have her voice heard in a step towards making religious communities safe places. I think the purpose is only partially met. The main weakness in this book is the lack of analysis throughout the story to explain to the reader why the victim responded to the abuser in the ways that she did and why the abusers (there were many within the church communities) refused to take responsibility for their actions.

Although the author did mention a small number of insightful turning points that helped her, I really wanted more tips for how to recognise, deal with, or stop such abuse. The saving grace here is that the author has provided a bibliography of books that people can read. This list also names books about other themes addressed in the book including: hidden culture of aggression amongst girls; lack of bystander intervention for victims; adoptive families when the experts make things wrong; subtle power of spiritual abuse; how to identify and deal with antagonists in the church; and a book about Sudanese young refugees. Overall I enjoyed every morsel I read and highly recommend the book.

About the author – Margaret W. Jones PhD. Margaret was awarded her doctorate in 1986 from Hofsta University, USA. Her professional background includes extensive work with both severely mentally ill and developmentally disabled clients. Dr. Jones draws from her own recovery from trauma to assist other survivors to thrive. Click this title Not My Making to check out the book at Amazon, or you can find it direct from the author.

{ 1 comment }

Safety tips for leaving a controlling partner

by Clare Murphy PhD on December 2 2009

Women who have male partners who psychologically abuse, restrict, control, manipulate and rob women of their sense of self, need a safety plan whether their partner ever lays a finger on them or not. Many controlling men stalk, threaten and harass women who leave. Other controlling men use physical violence, or threaten to kill, or do kill the woman who leaves and sometimes kill the children too.

By safe I mean – spiritually safe, psychologically safe and physically safe – to maintain a sense of dignity and aliveness. Some women have been controlled by their male partner for 10, 20, 40 or more years and want to make plans to eventually leave. Other women know that they are going to leave very soon and know they need to take safety measures.

If you are a woman being abused and controlled it is highly likely you are always doing what it takes to keep your psychological wellbeing as safe as possible – whether that is arguing and getting aggressive, or going silent and withdrawing into a private world. Here are some added tips for women who may need or want to leave their controlling partner – whether he has ever used or may use physical violence or not.

Plan possible escape routes

  • Plan with your children which doors, windows, fire escapes, stairwells, etc. to use if you need to escape quickly

Enlist trustworthy support

  • Leave copies of your safety plan, your Protection/Restraining Order and Custody Order with a trusted friend, neighbour, your children’s school or day care
  • Develop a code word or phrase with children, trusted friends or colleagues so they know when you are in danger and should call for help
  • Teach your children how to use the telephone to contact police or a trusted friend

Transport to escape

  • Keep the car full of petrol, the driver’s door unlocked and always back the car into the drive to make it easier to leave quickly
  • Hide a spare car key where you can grap it quickly
  • Keep money handy if you need to take a taxi cab
  • Keep the taxi cab number handy
  • Ask people you trust in advance if they will provide a ride to help you escape

Choose a place to go

  • Ask people you trust in advance if they would give you a place to stay
  • Women’s refuge/shelter
  • A holiday park is cheaper than a hotel

Create a false trail

  • Create a false trail, for example, call motels, real estate agencies and schools in a town at least six hours away from where you plan to relocate. Ask questions that require a call back to your house in order to leave phone numbers on record.

Pack a survival kit and hide it

  • Keep the following items in a safe place – could be a friend’s house, neighbour, or workplace: Phone/contact numbers, money, spare keys, clothes, small sentimental items, medication, important documents

Important phone numbers/contacts

  • Crisisline, helpline numbers
  • Trusted friends and family
  • Taxi cab
  • Police
  • Women’s refuge/shelter (if you call from home, immediately dial another number so your partner cannot push redial and find out where you’ve gone)

Money

  • Put money away in a safe place to assist with the escape and getting started again in a different location
  • Small, sellable objects
  • Open a bank account in your own name to increase your independence
  • Money, cheque book, hole-in-the-wall cards, credit cards, bank books

Spare keys

  • Extra set of keys to the car, house, office and safe-deposit box

Clothes, small sentimental and comfort items

  • Clothes
  • Children’s baby photos and other pictures
  • Children’s favourite toys and blankets
  • Comfort items for you and your children

Medication

  • A supply of prescription medicines for you and your children
  • A list of the drugs and dosages

Important documents

Transport documents

  • Driver’s license, registration and ownership papers

Health documents

  • Social security cards
  • Community service cards
  • Medical records
  • Children’s immunization/vaccination records
  • A list of prescriptions

Work/financial documents

  • Work permits, green card
  • Bank records
  • Papers that show jointly owned assets
  • Work references

Identification papers

  • Birth certificates – yours and your children’s
  • Passports
  • Citizenship documents

House documents

  • Mortgage papers, titles, deeds
  • Lease/rental agreement

Legal documents

  • Protection/Restraining orders
  • Custody papers
  • Court documents
  • Marriage license
  • Divorce papers

Other documents

  • School records
  • Insurance papers
  • Address book

References:

  • Calgary Women’s Emergency Shelter. (2005). Resistance to violence and abuse in intimate relationships – A response based perspective. Retrieved November, 2009, from http://www.calgarywomensshelter.com/
  • Hart, Barbara J. (various dates). Barbara J. Hart’s collected writings. Retrieved March, 2009, from http://www.mincava.umn.edu/documents/hart/hart.html
  • { 0 comments }

    Psychological abuse can lead to murder

    by Clare Murphy PhD on November 20 2009

    Men who murder their female partners are often motivated by a need to save face by regaining a sense of power and control if the woman threatens to leave, or does leave.

    Many mental health and legal professionals do not take women’s experience of psychological abuse and control seriously. But men’s perpetration of psychological abuse against female partners is serious. Very controlling men pose a very serious danger to women who threaten to leave or do leave.

    Jacquelyn Campbell PhD devised the Danger Assessment Instrument to aid in assessing the level of risk to women for being murdered by their controlling partner. One of the risk factors noted in this instrument includes whether the woman had left her partner after living together during the previous year.

    Controlling behaviours as risk factors

    There are several signs of psychologically abusive and controlling behaviours listed in Campbell’s Danger Assessment Instrument. These include: whether the man has threatened to kill the woman or harm her children; whether he has ever forced the woman to have sex against her will; whether he has a history of controlling her activities, who she sees, how much money she can use and when she can use the car; whether he has spied on her, left her threatening notes, made unwanted phone calls or left threatening phone messages; whether he has destroyed her property; and, whether he has displayed constant jealousy saying things like, “If I can’t have you, no one can.”

    Other factors that can place a woman at risk of murder

    Other risk factors listed on Campbell’s Danger Assessment Instrument include whether physical violence increased in severity or frequency over the previous year; whether the man owns a gun; if he has previously used a weapon against the woman or threatened her with a lethal weapon; whether he has previously tried to choke her or has beaten her while pregnant; whether he has avoided being arrested for domestic violence; whether he is unemployed; whether the woman has a child that is not his; whether he uses illegal drugs or is an alcoholic or problem drinker. Another two factors include whether the man has threatened or tried to commit suicide and whether the woman has previously threatened or tried to commit suicide.

    Women’s perceptions of risk must be taken seriously

    Several research studies have found that an important source of assessing whether the woman is in danger of being murdered by her partner is whether the woman believes he is capable of killing her. Jacquelyn Campbell PhD importantly includes this question in her Danger Assessment Instrument.

    If you know a woman is afraid for her life you must take her fear seriously and help her devise a safety plan. Research shows that women can accurately assess whether their partner will use physical violence, whether he will psychologically abuse her in the future, and whether he will kill her.

    However, women are not always accurate. Some women minimise the psychological abuse and physical violence that their partner uses, therefore may minimise future risk. If you, as a professional, friend, or family member believe the woman might be in danger, it is important that you use a risk assessment instrument with her to check for any signs of possible danger.

    Jacquelyn Campbell’s Danger Assessment Instrument can be downloaded for free from her website, along with her permission statement and guidelines for the use of the Instrument. You will see on her website that she recommends that people seek training from her to enhance safe and adequate use of the Instrument. The correct use of the instrument is vital.

    Disclaimer:

    This blog post must not be used to gauge risk to women. The purpose of this post is to name some of the issues and guide you to Jacquelyn Campbell PhD’s website at www.dangerassessment.com . . . The use of any risk instrument should always be used in conjunction with women’s perceptions. Campbell’s Instrument does this.

    References:

    Bell, Margaret E., Cattaneo, Lauren Bennett, Goodman, Lisa A. & Dutton, Mary Ann. (2008). Assessing the risk of future psychological abuse: Predicting the accuracy of battered women’s predictions. Journal of Family Violence, 23, 69-80.

    Braaf, Rochelle & Sneddon, Clare. (2007). Family law act reform: The potential for screening and risk assessment for family violence: Australian Domestic and Family Violence Clearinghouse Issues Paper 12.

    Brewster, Mary P. (2003). Power and control dynamics in prestalking and stalking situations. Journal of Family Violence, 18, 207-217.

    Campbell, Jacquelyn C. (2003). Danger Assessment Instrument. Available from http://www.dangerassessment.org/WebApplication1/pages/product.aspx

    Campbell, Jacquelyn C. (2004). Helping women understand their risk in situations of intimate partner violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19, 1464-1477.

    Campbell, Jacquelyn C., Webster, Daniel W., Koziol-McLain, Jane, Block, Carolyn, Campbell, Doris, Curry, Mary Ann; et al. (2003). Risk factors for femicide in abusive relationships: Results from a multisite case control study. American Journal of Public Health, 93, 1089-1097.

    Campbell, Jacquelyn C., Webster, Daniel W. & Glass, Nancy. (2009). The danger assessment: Validation of a lethality risk assessment instrument for intimate partner femicide. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 24, 653-674.

    Heckert, D. Alex & Gondolf, Edward W. (2004). Battered women’s perceptions of risk versus risk factors and instruments in predicting repeat reassault. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19, 778-800.

    Weisz, Arlene, Tolman, Richard M. & Saunders, Daniel G. (2000). Assessing the risk of severe domestic violence: The importance of survivors’ predictions. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 15, 75-90.

    { 0 comments }

    Shame experienced by abuse victims

    by Clare Murphy on August 19 2009

    Dr Angela Jury conducted interviews with 25 survivors of intimate partner abuse for her PhD research. The following are extracts from a Massey University news release about her study:

    Abused women – especially victims of psychological and emotional torment – are often so paralysed by what they see as the stigma and shame associated with their situation that they are unable to seek help.

    Agencies working with them need to better understand how the profound shame the victims feel not only deters them from seeking help, but can be reinforced by educational and promotional messages aimed at trying to help them.

    “My research was focused in one direction – finding the explanation of how it was that some women were able to remove themselves from the experience of abuse and maintain lives free from violence, whereas others appeared unable to do so, remaining with abusive partners for extended periods of time or eventually leaving, only to find themselves once more involved in violent relationships,” she says.

    “It is most clearly illustrated in the use of language around choice and freedom in advice to abused women – ‘you don’t have to live like this’, ‘you can leave’, ‘there is help available’. All of these – while probably selected as terms offering empowerment to victims – can also operate to engender a sense of weakness on the part of victims…thus creating a sense of shame and self-blame.

    “We need to shift the focus for dealing with abuse and violence off the victim. It should not be seen as her responsibility to decide she wants it to stop – nor should not doing so be seen as the victim’s shameful failure.”

    You can read the complete article here.

    { 1 comment }

    The following is an interview I conducted today with Margaret Jones PhD, who has written a book about her experiences titled: Not of my making: Bullying, scapegoating and misconduct in Churches.

    The nub of one-sided psychological abuse and power and control is that it occurs across all social institutions. In fact the trigger that helped Margaret realise what was happening to her was a television show explaining school bullying.

    Whilst the abuse Margaret experienced occurred within the context of churches, her story resembles those told by survivors of workplace bullying. Her coping strategies also resemble those of women who experience psychological abuse by their male partners.

    Church of good shepherd

    Clare: What were the tactics of bullying, scapegoating, misconduct and psychological abuse that you experienced as the target of those tactics?

    Margaret: My adversaries refused to talk directly to me about their complaints. Instead they gossiped with each other about me. They shunned me during social events such as coffee hour but made a big show of coming over to me during church services to hug me even when I told them I didn’t want them touching me. They also carried stories to the minister who then chastised me. Eventually they initiated church discipline procedures against me and ousted me from church.

    Clare: At what point did you actually define what was happening as psychological abuse?

    Margaret: The abuse began in 1993 and went on for 10 years. I was slow to figure it out. Somewhere near the end of that time, Stossel (a TV magazine reporter) had a television shot on school bullying. That was when I realised not only that I was being bullied, but that it wasn’t my fault.

    Clare: I was interested to read in your book at the point where you were really starting to understand what had been happening to you over those years, that in order to forgive, survivors of abuse first need to blame their perpetrators and not themselves. But, like survivors of domestic violence, it can take years to understand the dynamics of the behaviours from people you love and trust. How did you respond in the immediate moment back before you really understood you were being abused?

    Margaret: I kept trying to find out what was wrong so I could fix it. I tried to get the people involved to talk to me about it.

    Clare: How did you cope in the days/weeks after the abuse?

    Margaret: Not well at first. I was anxious, suicidal and fought strong urges to self-harm. I sought counselling and began journaling. I also began reading everything I could find on church conflict and bullying. I corresponded with some of the authors of those books. I also joined some online support groups for survivors. Once I realised I was being bullied and it wasn’t my fault I fought back more effectively. Since my adversaries wouldn’t leave me alone I filed a professional liability claim against them. Fighting back really helped. Writing “Not of My Making” also helped me to figure things out and heal.

    Online support groups Margaret recommends as helpful include http://christiansurvivors.com/ and http://www.advocateweb.org/index.php.

    Clare: What type of people in the churches psychologically abused you?

    Margaret: People bully in churches for the same reasons they bully everywhere. I think if you are more concerned with maintaining appearances and don’t believe in expressing anger directly you are more likely to use back room type of tactics. Also, if you are prone to jealousy and aren’t willing to admit you have “negative emotions” or that you sin like everyone else you are more likely to bully. Often people who bully are trying to protect or gain status and power. One way to achieve power is to defeat someone who is perceived as competent or having status. I think my adversaries were trying to promote their own agendas. By attacking me at Murray church they avoided discussing my concerns. At FXUU church my interest in Christianity was a direct threat to those who wanted to promote neo-paganism. At Immanuel I think there was a lot of jealousy. Pastor Karen whose own marriage was failing resented my successful marriage to Lyndon. Others resented my affluence and professional status. There was also a lot of prejudice about women and race (Margaret is married to a Black Trinidadian man). I think they succeeded in consolidating their power and status while strengthening the cohesiveness of their clique. That is why they had no need to talk to me and negotiate.

    Clare: In what ways do you think (a) being a woman, (b) a woman with a PhD, and (c) a white woman married to a black man related to being abused?

    Margaret: Because they made me different. And there’s a lot of social psychology research into how people treat minorities and women. If a minority or a woman matches their stereotype, and their behaviour matches that stereotype, they will be liked. But if their behaviour doesn’t match the stereotype they will be disliked.

    Clare: What kind of support mechanisms existed that made it easy for the bullies to bully in the first place, and made it easy for them to continue their campaign of psychologically abusing you?

    Margaret: The church leadership both within the congregation and in the denomination supported the bullies. The leadership was assumed to be right and good by virtue of their position. They were able to hide what was going on and/or distort information. There was no policy and procedure to bring a complaint or to ask for mediation by a disinterested party.

    Martinborough Church

    Clare: What kind of help from family, friends or professionals did you find most helpful?

    Margaret: Therapy was essential – it was different from other experiences – because Steve (my therapist) lived through it while I was living it. Being believed was essential. My husband, during the FXUU church thing, was very supportive. He read me a poem about a wife who’s been abused and what it’s like at midnight. He was vigilant at night about where I was at emotionally and what I was doing – also during the day when he was concerned I was suicidal.

    Clare: What kind of help from family, friends or professionals did you find detrimental?

    Margaret: Comments such as, “You should just get over it and move on”. Refusal to talk about it. Psychologists are not well trained about this issue, or they approach it totally wrong. They don’t know their social psychology enough to understand the interactions. Psychologists think the client is misperceiving it. But I was right about my intuitions.

    People still say, “What part of this was your fault?’ and I answer, “That I trusted the wrong people”. Psychologists say both parties are at fault. Mutuality is the belief in a “Just World” – that belief blinds people to evil. It may be person “a’s” fault, or person “b’s” fault or it may be both. In each case you have to investigate the reality – but that requires work – so people just walk away. They think, “If I can say it’s both their faults I can just walk away from both of them.”

    Clare: Why do you think the bullies chose you as a target, and not others?

    Margaret: Same reason they did in the schoolyard. I was short, introverted, competent and intelligent. I also didn’t know how to fight back. I was too nice and not aggressive enough. I think bullies test the waters and see how far they can go. For instance in the early grades school bullies choose targets randomly. By middle school they have figured out who won’t defend themselves well and who lacks allies. Bullying is a way to knock out the competition. My professional status and willingness to share my beliefs and opinions also made me visible. They perceived me as a threat to their own agendas.

    By fighting back and aggressiveness I mean that, if criticised, I would think, “They must be right”, “What can I do to fix it?”– rather than a more appropriate response, “You’re wrong.” So I mean assertiveness.

    Clare: Looking back, what would you now say are the warning signs that someone should look out for so they could define what is happening to them as psychological abuse – and not blame themselves?

    Margaret: I am finding this one hard to answer. I think you need to pay attention to how people talk or don’t talk to you. Do they make comments that leave you feeling inadequate? Do they criticise or put you down especially in front of others? Do they give unsolicited advice? Do they continue to do things that make you uncomfortable even when you have asked them to stop?

    Clare: Given everything you’ve learned from your experience of psychological abuse, how do you deal with it differently now?

    Tauranga Historic ChurchMargaret: First there is a change in mindset. I no longer worry about whether someone likes me or not. I ask myself if I like them and pay more attention to whether they reciprocate offers of friendship. I stay away from people who don’t think it is okay to express anger or who confused feeling anger with behaviour. I am also more willing to be aggressive if I think it necessary. I will push back in some way. I won’t let put downs go by without responding to them. I talk to others about it and seek allies. It is important to have allies. You can see this in the way I have handled some negative reviews of my book. I have written blog posts about it. I also am more observant of other people’s behaviour in group settings.

    For instance, in my current church, power is handled very differently. Initiative from church members is encouraged. Things are not so top down. I also read the church constitution before I joined and noted that the constitution included a structure for dealing with complaints. The minister at the church where I am now has the view that any complaints should be made openly to that person, that you should have the nerve to say it to them, or not say it at all. Whereas in one of the churches where I experienced abuse, Pastor Karen had all sorts of reasons why it was okay for people to go behind my back to her.

    Clare: What advice do you have for others about the most effective strategies they could use to cope if they find themselves embroiled in a pattern of being psychologically abused?

    Margaret: Assert yourself when unfairly criticised. Learn verbal self-defence tactics. Find allies and don’t be silenced. Talk to as many people that will listen about what is happening. There is a risk if you stay. If your adversary is very powerful they will find a way to silence or run you out. If the leadership condones gossip and bullying – for your own sake, you need to leave. I should have left earlier and found a healthier church. Nothing I did was going to change things. I didn’t have enough power.

    . . . . .Knox Church Dunedin

    Although this is the end of my interview with Margaret, I am half way through reading her book Not My Making and intend posting a review of it in October. It is a very personal story of what happened to her and how she made sense of the insidious, often subtle, sometimes obvious psychological abuse across time. Meantime it is available from the publisher or at Amazon.

    { 4 comments }

    The other day I met a social worker/counsellor at a seminar. When she found out I research domestic violence she immediately told me that women who stay with violent men are codependent. She said such women were just the same as women who live with alcoholics. She was not interested in another view because she was adamant that she was right.

    According to Codependents Anonymous World Fellowship, the following are six of a long list of characteristics of codependency:

    She has difficulty identifying what she is feeling
    She has difficulty making decisions
    She harshly judges everything she thinks, says, or does – as never “good enough”
    She does not perceive herself as a lovable or worthwhile person
    She puts aside her own interests and hobbies in order to do what others want
    She compromises her own values and integrity to avoid rejection, or others’ anger

    I have difficulty with applying the ‘codependent’ label on a woman surviving in a relationship where her male partner abuses and controls her – for the following reasons …

    Victims of intimate partner abuse are not codependent

    Research with women shows that the above six characteristics are an effect of experiencing long-term, ongoing, relentless abuse and control. Many male perpetrators degrade and intimidate women into believing they deserve physical violence, sexual violation, verbal abuse, or other forms of punishment.

    A tactic of abuse entails brainwashing women into believing they think and feel something other than they actually do. Many domestic violence perpetrators control the decision-making. Many make women wrong for making decisions, or denigrate any decisions made by women. Many male perpetrators enslave women, making demands that she be a more than perfect housekeeper, partner, parent or woman. No human can meet those kinds of demands, hence can never be ‘good enough’. Being degraded several times a day, or several times a week, month after month after month leads to feeling unlovable and unworthy.

    Changing her values and integrity to avoid rejection or anger are often consciously chosen strategies of self-preservation used by abused and controlled women. Women I have interviewed would confront the man, avoid the man, lie to get some freedom, be completely honest to try to make him stop controlling them, become violent themselves, retaliate verbally, be passive or silent. Yet these women would secretly harbour knowledge of their true selves, whilst attempting a variety of behaviours – that went against their values – in order to avoid, or stop the abuse. These are not strategies of a codependent person.

    It is dangerous to give the ‘codependent’ label to victims of intimate partner abuse

    Codependence implies a lack of assertion. Whereas, if a woman asserts her opinions, needs, or rights to a controlling man, he could then engage in more or worse abuse to stamp out her assertiveness. It may, therefore, be dangerous for a psychologist to coach a woman to assertively stand up to her partner. Anyone wishing to help such a woman should respect her reasoning for not asserting herself.

    Codependence implies women serve others to the detriment of flourishing to her full potential. Whereas, women who want to, or do, attend tertiary schooling to improve their skills and talents, can actually experience more, or worse, abuse by their partner because he wants to ensure she does not grow. For example, a man interviewed by Eva Lundgren (1995) said, “It makes her reconsider when I lock her up in a cupboard. Then she gets scared. Give her a sense of her total dependency, that’s the only way.” Therefore, it may be dangerous for a psychotherapist to encourage a woman to go against her partner’s demands by attending school. People in the helping professions need to listen to women’s views on how detrimental to her safety such a step might be.

    Codependence implies women stay with violent and otherwise abusive men because they are attracted to being abused, like it, and want it. Whereas, in reality, women engage in multiple strategies to stop the abuse, to help the man change, to protect themselves and their children, or to avoid being abused in the first place. It may be dangerous for a counsellor to encourage a woman to leave. Social workers should honour women’s knowledge about what will, and will not, keep her safe, and that might mean staying with the abuser. It definitely means that multiple services are required to support the woman’s safety, such as police, safe housing, and financial support agencies.

    Blaming the victim is tantamount to abusing her

    Anyone who gives the ‘codependent’ label – to anyone who is living with a man who engages in a degrading pattern of psychological abuse and control – is blaming the victim and pathologising her. This label implies the victim has behaviours that pull the abuse out of the man. Yet, Jeff Hearn’s (1998) in-depth interviews with male perpetrators shows, for example, that some men threaten suicide as a way of ensuring women do not leave them, and other men threaten to harm or kill pets, children, family, friends and/or the woman herself.

    Many perpetrators of intimate partner abuse consider themselves to be the King of the Castle, the Boss, the Master who must be obeyed at all costs. Such attitudes may creep in slowly over time entrapping and disempowering their female partners. These men may also be charming, caring, protective and kind at other times. This is confusing to women. Many women spend years attempting to understand and change the man’s abusive behaviours – they do not accept abuse as their lot.

    The subject of this website is domestic violence which is different to mutual abuse – it is about one person’s campaign to control the other through whatever means they find works. For example, one of the men Cavanagh and her colleagues (2001) interviewed said he “was a bit of a tactician” and that he would “more or less try to intimidate her by going quiet and staring.” This kind of intentional behaviour aimed at subservience, and at lowering a woman’s sense of self-esteem, worth and personal integrity, is a hallmark of a systematic pattern over time. A pattern that entails the male abuser refusing to take responsibility for his behaviours and entails blaming the woman, confusing her, isolating her, making her wrong and demanding respect for his position as the man. Coping with such behaviours does not make a woman codependent.

    Power and control over women is a social issue

    This is not about a woman being codependent by reinforcing the man’s behaviour. The need that many men have to establish and maintain authority over women is a social issue – an issue of contemporary expectations of masculinity. My research with male perpetrators shows that this is a way for certain men to avoid feeling weak, vulnerable and feminine – as not being a so-called ‘real man’ is considered inferior. Controlling a female partner is a socially sanctioned way for the man to gain social kudos. Men who control their partners know what they’re doing. Many men provoke women to do something that the man then believes will justify hitting her. For instance, a man interviewed by Cavanagh and colleagues (2001) said he’d “do anything to get an excuse” to use violence against his partner.

    In sum, any psychological issues female victims experience, that resemble characteristics deemed to be codependent, are a result of incessant abuse and control by their male partners, and are reinforced by social issues that support male authority in the home and male control and possessiveness over humans and animals in the home. Women’s coping strategies should be taken seriously. Blaming women revictimises them, further isolates them and deepens their growing sense of not being good enough.

    References:

    • Cavanagh, Kate, Dobash, R. Emerson, Dobash, Russell P. & Lewis, Ruth. (2001). ‘Remedial work’: Men’s strategic responses to their violence against intimate female partners. Sociology, 35, 695-714.
    • Dear, Greg. (1997). Blaming the victim: Domestic violence and the codepenedency model. Retrieved June, 2003, from http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/proceedings/27/dear.pdf
    • Hearn, Jeff. (1998). The violences of men. London: Sage.
    • Lundgren, Eva. (1995). Feminist theory and violent empiricism. Aldershot, UK: Avebury.

    { 2 comments }

    Power and control: Lawyer-client relationship

    by Clare Murphy on June 27 2009

    A power and control wheel has been developed as a tool for recognising abuse and psychological assault by lawyers against their clients. This Lawyer-Client wheel was motivated firstly by the book Lowering the Bar: Lawyer Jokes and Legal Culture by Marc Galanter, and secondly, by the State Bar of Texas ethics rules (which reflect ethics rules for lawyers across USA generally).

    Marc Galanter made a point in his book that lawyers are widely mistrusted by non-lawyers in many societies, and their victims are afraid to speak out loud because of fear of retaliation. But their need to vent is so great that people use humour to express their outrage, and this humour serves as a safe cover. When challenged, the joke-teller can say, “I was just joking!”

    Power and Control: Lawyer-Client Relationship Abuse and Psychological Assault Wheel Diagram:
    PowerControlWheelLawyerClient

    Power and Control: Lawyer-Client Relationship Abuse and Psychological Assault Tactics:

    Using Coercion and Threats
    • making or carrying out threats to do something to harm the client
    • threatening to withdraw as counsel of record on the client’s case
    • threatening to commit incompetent or unethical practice by violating the State Bar disciplinary rules of professional conduct
    • threatening to request the court to order a psychological evaluation of the client without just reason
    • ambushing and railroading the client to prevent informed decisions
    • exaggerating the harmful outcomes to the client
    • pressuring the client to accept a plea deal offer
    • pressuring the client to do illegal things

    Using Terrorism and Assault
    • making the client afraid by using looks, tones, demeanors, gestures, actions
    • staging temper tantrums
    • violating rules of politesse; rules of orderly, fair meetings; and the State Bar ethics code
    • displaying weapons or other objects or images of violence
    • terrorizing the client
    • sadistically manipulating the client
    • psychologically assaulting the client

    Using Emotional Abuse
    • putting the client down
    • making the client feel bad about herself or himself
    • calling the client names
    • making the client think she or he is crazy
    • playing mind games
    • humiliating the client
    • making the client feel guilty

    Using Isolation and Guilt
    • isolating the client and forbidding client to consult with other lawyers without permission
    • using presumed guilt or suspicion of guilt of client to justify abuse
    • using private meetings instead of telephone, mail and email communications
    • refusing to state the purpose of meetings

    Minimizing, Denying and Blaming
    • making light of the abuse and not taking client’s concerns about it seriously
    • saying the abuse didn’t happen
    • shifting responsibility for abusive behavior
    • saying the client caused the abuse

    Using Information Abuse
    • misrepresenting the experience and specialized knowledge of the lawyer
    • using asymmetric information to mislead the client
    • preventing client from seeing all the evidence
    • providing insufficient information for client to make an informed decision
    • using misrepresentation, double-talk, stonewalling and obfuscation to prevent informed decisions
    • not informing the client about public access to the case file at the Court house
    • refusing to communicate, explain and clarify in writing
    • failing to disclose State Bar ethics rules existence and contact information

    Using Attorney Privilege
    • acting like the boss
    • treating the client like a servant
    • making the big decisions
    • ignoring client’s instructions, decisions and best interests
    • failing to get client’s consent
    • being the one to define lawyers’ and clients’ roles
    • not writing a fee contract
    • preventing preview of contract before signing
    • making unilateral changes to contract after initial agreement
    • using vague, ambiguous, ineffective language that protects the lawyer but not the client
    • refusing arbitration

    Using Economy Abuse
    • making the client pay more money
    • not refunding client’s money if not used for the stipulated purpose or if not earned
    • using bait-and-switch tactics after receiving advance fee payment

    The wheel is available for reprinting and distribution for non-commercial purposes. You may download the pdf of the wheel and the complete list of tactics from the originators of this wheel here. Or, you can see the welcome page that discusses the making of the wheel and provides other useful links here.

    { 1 comment }

    Women continue to be bombarded with social messages that suggest they can find self-worth by marrying or committing to live long-term with a man

    But this does not mean they enter a relationship that leads to abuse and control. However, this was the case for many of the women I interviewed in my Masters research, and many of the women I see for counselling.

    Some women talk about having their life mapped out for them. For example, whether or not they worked, or not, after leaving school, some women said that time was about “waiting for Mr Right”. One woman said:

    “I grew up with this idea that I would work for a while then I would get married and I would have children. It never occurred to me that I didn’t have to be married. There was quite a lot of security in the idea of getting married and having children because that’s your life taken care of. You don’t have to make any more decisions, it’s like ‘there it is, that’s what you do’. I can be a wife, I can get up and make the breakfast.”

    Other women said they married because they were past their “due by” date. Some women talk about feeling “desperate” to marry, which was the case for a woman who was four or five years older than when her family members usually married. Social messages shape the idea that it is humiliating for women to be “left on the shelf”.

    Several women believed that remaining single meant being a failure. For example:

    “It was terrible, it was horrific, to be single, aah, no I couldn’t even entertain it, it was just too much to even think about. A failure, unloved, unworthy, no value, don’t bother being here. I think if I never had married him, I probably would have suicided because it just reinforced the belief that I was nothing.”

    couple at park benchMany women say they were aware that there was something wrong before they married their boyfriend. For example, those women saw warning signs that their partners were nasty, lying, neglectful, did not respect women, or that he took her for granted. But, despite seeing such behaviours many women believe they have to marry to prove their worth. For example, a woman who married at age 32 said:

    “I’d finally made it, finally had a sense of worth. The day I wore a wedding ring I felt it in my body, every part of me, as if I had just risen in status. I was so proud to say my name was Mrs instead of Miss. I felt that people looked at me differently and treated me differently as if they had more respect for me. It gave me a real sense of confidence and certainty that I now had a place in society.”

    And several women said as this woman did:

    “It was like an achievement, my mother used to make comments about how no-one would ever want to marry me and it was like, ‘Look, they do, they do, I’ve done it. I’m a real person’ (laughter).”

    Not all women who detect problems early in the relationship continue to stay, for example one woman who had been living with her partner for 20 months, said that she knew from her experience of the abuse that she “wouldn’t have married him if he asked”. However, this decision did not mean the end of abuse. At the time of interviewing her, she was experiencing ongoing custody battles that were eating into her finances. Court orders that favoured the abusive and controlling man’s requests meant that she was not legally permitted to move with her child out of town to where she could pursue better career prospects.

    Fairy tales, Hollywood movies and ordinary people who live next door, give out messages that young women should find a “Mr Right”, settle down and remain married for better or worse. Whilst marriage or living with a man continues to be perceived as superior to being a single heterosexual woman, this leaves victimised, abused and controlled women in a tough position. If living with “Mr Right” turns out to be living with “Mr Wrong” many women then experience shame. Shame for speaking out about abuse, shame for not standing up against warning signs, shame for not seeing warning signs, shame for staying and shame for leaving. Many women lose friends if they stay and they lose friends if they leave. Sisters, mothers, girlfriends and fathers encourage women to stay – “you’ve made your bed, you lie in it”. Cliché after cliché of this type robs women of self-belief, self-confidence and intuition.

    Not all women believe marriage is the only source of self-worth

    On the other hand not all women I’ve interviewed, or whom I’ve counselled, believed marriage or living with a man was the only source of self-worth. Nor did all women experience any warning signs of abuse and control early in their relationships. Nor did all women have doubts that they were definitely being psychologically controlled.

    But . . . many women have never learned to critique social messages

    For women who are abused and controlled by a man they love and trust, if those women have not yet learned to critique social messages that guide their relationship decisions, those women experience a double-bind to contend with. 1. Abuse and control by their partner and 2. Controlling social messages.Both of these rob women of their right to self-determination and free choice.

    { 1 comment }

    Same-Sex domestic violence conference

    by Clare Murphy on June 17 2009

    A conference organised by the Same Sex Domestic Violence Interagency in Australia, comprised of representatives from government and community organisations, is to take place on 11 September 2009 at the Rex Centre, 58A MacLeay Street, Kings Cross, Sydney.

    The call for abstracts pdf states:

    Research has shown that domestic violence is as prevalent among gay and lesbian communities as it is in the wider community. However, there remain significant gaps in data collection and issues with service provision and accessibility for people experiencing same sex domestic violence (SSDV). The need to address SSDV remains a real and formidable challenge. Within and beyond the gay and lesbian communities are individuals with the knowledge, experience and skills needed to make significant headway in addressing the incidence and impact of SSDV.

    This conference presents an opportunity to share our knowledge, skills and experience with one another. This will enhance the standards of clinical care, research and service provision in the field. It is anticipated that the conference will assist us in defining more precisely areas of needed research and identifying gaps in service provision. Through networking and sharing of ideas we will be more able to identify and address the needs of the gay and lesbian communities and the individuals affected by SSDV.

    Registrations for the conference cost $25 for students or $50 for others. To check out further information about this upcoming conference see this attached pdf.

    { 0 comments }