What’s Love Got to Do with It?

I grew up with the highs and lows of the 60’s and 70’s. One thing I am truly grateful for during that era is the amazing music and the artists of its times. Aretha “Rockin’, Rollin’” Franklin, Mick Jagger, The Temptations, and the amazing and talented Tina Turner. Only to name a few. But for this piece, I’d like to look more closely at one of Ms. Turner’s biggest hits, among many. “What’s Love Got to Do with It?”

As Ms. Turner’s life unfolded before us with the release of the biographical film by the same name in 1993, it became apparent why and how Turner could write the below lyrics:

In her chorus Tina sings:

“What's love got to do, got to do with it
What's love but a second-hand emotion
What's love got to do, got to do with it
Who needs a heart when a heart can be broken”

In her verses she recites:

"You must understand how the touch of your hand, makes my pulse react
That it's only the thrill of boy meeting girl, opposites attract

It's physical, only logical
You must try to ignore that it means more than that

It may seem to you that I’m acting confused, when you're close to me
If I tend to look dazed I've read it someplace, I've got cause to be
There's a name for it; there's a phrase that fits
But whatever the reason you do it for me

I've been taking on a new direction, but I have to say
I've been thinking about my own protection, it scares me to feel this way”

Clearly in her lyrics, Ms. Turner is speaking about a physical attraction. And love, real love, is clearly denounced or, at least, not worth being sought. She speaks of opposites attracting and we clearly know today, via Quantum Physics, like attracts like.

This emotion she’s read about has led to broken-heartedness. And, if you know her story a few broken bones, as well. This may have been your experience. So, from this, let’s explore love from a different perspective, for just a few minutes, please.

Let’s look at love from a personal, purely selfish view point. That is looking at love within ourselves first, not narcissistically but from self-preservation. We will see that love, agape, is all beautiful, perfect, and divine. So now we must look at what is this agape?

Agape is an ancient Greek-Christian term referring to love. It is the highest form of love and charity. Agape is the love of God for man and of man for God. The word should not be confused with philia, brotherly love, as it embraces a universal, unconditional love that transcends and persists regardless of circumstance.

As a family-violence specialist, I’ve had the opportunity to work with many women in domestic/family violence situations. This is what brought Susan Murphy Milano, Delilah and I together. And, what have I found common in every situation? The absence of universal, unconditional love for oneself. I have uncovered guilt, shame, and even self-loathing.

I have had countless agencies; hence individuals, tell me a woman must cycle in and out of a shelter at least seven times or until she, her children, and/or extended family experience some drastic situation or behavior from the abuser. This is usually the threat of death to herself, children or family members.

I still stand on this truth. If one: male or female; heterosexual or homosexual; transgender; and of any ethnicity will accept they are made in the image and likeness of Almighty God; and can begin to experience the unconditional love of God for themselves, the violent and abusive cycle will cease. It must.

With this unconditional love and acceptance of self, several things begin to happen almost instantly.

1. One’s self esteem and self-worth is magnified; 
2. The offender is no longer able to bully the victim because they, the victim, realize they are only a victim to their own limiting beliefs and mindset. The victim’s self-power is instantly increased. 
3. The energy level of the victim shifts, and they then only attract those in their like energy. Opposites do not attract. We attract exactly what we are. Thereby, individuals with low self-esteem will not be drawn to those with higher vibrational levels believing in a higher love. Resonating in love for themselves, first! 

(Abusers are attracted to those with low self-esteem so they might appear bigger and more powerful to their victims. AKA: bully boogers.)

• When one takes on the consciousness of Christ and realizes there is no greater love, anything that attempts to approach not of the same consciousness, feels uncomfortable. They, or the situation, is rejected right away or soon following. 

And, how do we experience this love? Through:

• prayer; 
• meditation. (That is being silent and allowing God’s love to flow into you and through you. Bring both hands to your heart, as a suggestion of embracing, and feel the Source of love); 
• keeping company with loved-filled individuals; (Learning to say no thank you, without explanation, to anyone who brings otherwise—in your own mind’s eye.); 
• listening to uplifting and positive music; (Reject music that refers to you as anything less than your Divine self); 
• abstaining from main-stream media; 
• reading inspirational, faith and love-filled works to include Scripture and literature to raise your consciousness. 
• repeating loved-filled affirmations or declarations. A good place to start is “I AM that I AM.” Interpreted as “I AM all that God is.” 
• Find yourself a good adviser, support group, or assistant. 

These are only a few things you can begin to do to raise yourself from the doldrums of victimhood. You may not find yourself walking into freedom or understanding any of the above overnight. But remain diligent; tenacious; and focused, desiring the life that Source; God; Mother Nature; (whatever name making you comfortable) has planned for you from the beginning of time. Their plan is to prosper you and to bring you hope. You will one day, very soon, begin to live your best life, as Ms. Winfrey would put it

What’s love got to do with it! Everything! All the time! And Everywhere! And it’s starting right here! Right now! With you!


Pamela Chapman is a certified life-wellness/life transition coach and family-violence specialist through the State of California. She is the owner of Yucatan Wellness Corporation and the previous owner of Iascend Programs, Inc which was dedicated, specifically, to helping abused women.

Today, Chapman works with others motivating, inspiring and teaching all who are willing to do the easy life work so they may walk into their well-being while transitioning through one of life’s challenges.

Pamela and team incorporate mind, body, and soul betterment using both ancient and cutting-edge healing techniques helping you to create your perfect self. To find out more visit: https://www.yucatanwellness.com.

The NFL Just Doesn’t Get It

Baltimore Ravens Ray Rice
photo/Wikipedia

by Diane Dimond

The statistics are easy to find. One in every 3 women in the United States will experience domestic violence in their lifetime.

It is the leading cause of injury to women – more than car accidents, muggings and rapes combined. Every single day in America women are murdered by their “loving” husbands or boyfriends. And, studies report that up to 10 million children are eye-witnesses to the brutality every year.

Anyone with half a brain knows domestic violence is a big, under-reported problem in the United States. So, why didn’t it dawn on executives at the NFL or the Baltimore Ravens that running back Ray Rice could be a domestic abuser?

When they watched the first video of Rice, 27, and his then-girlfriend, Janay Parker, going into an empty casino elevator and seconds later emerging on a lower floor with Rice manhandling Janay’s limp body what did they think might have happened?

Did Ray Rice’s bosses think a tipsy Janay simply tripped and fell as the elevator descended? If they did, that’s just nonsense.

Rice was clearly seen dragging his unconscious fiancée off the elevator, dropping her face first to the floor, giving her legs a kick as he tried to get them past the elevator threshold and might have, as some reports indicated, actually spit on her. By the way, this occurred last Valentine’s Day weekend and the initial police report specifically stated that Rice had assaulted his sweetheart with his hand, “rendering her unconscious.”

So, after seeing the disgusting display and reading the police report the league tells the five-year, $35 million player that he’s suspended from playing in the first two regular season games. Big deal. Rice was also fined $500,000 as if money could erase the deed.

NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell
photo/Wikipedia

It took NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell about a month to hear the howls of protest from victim advocates. Going forward, he then announced, all first time domestic abuse violations would be met with a six-game suspension. He didn’t mention what would happen if one of his prized athletes went to jail for the offense.

The NFL has an official intervention policy for athletes who take illegal drugs but up until now no official response to team members who beat the crap out of a girlfriend. Something is off-kilter there.

Domestic abuse exists because we let it. We, collectively, fail to adequately shame and punish the perpetrator. Too many people focus on why the victim didn’t pack up and leave after the first attack instead of asking the common-sense question: What is wrong with him!? (For the record: domestic abuse can also happen to males but it occurs at a vastly less frequent rate.)

As we all know it took a second, much more graphic videotape to surface -- one from inside the elevator which captured the moment Janay, 26, was dealt a left hook so vicious that it knocked her unconscious – before Goodell announced Rice would be “suspended indefinitely.” Only then did the Ravens terminate Rice’s contract.

Apparently Goodell, the father of twin daughters, couldn’t imagine there had been a domestic assault. He had to actually see the 5’ 8”, 206 pound Rice decking his soon-to-be bride and treating her like a gym bag full of dirty clothes before taking definitive action.

As I write this, the NFL’s credibility has taken another blow as opposing versions have surfaced about when league officials first saw the knock-out video. The Associated Press reports the football big-wigs received a copy back in April. Goodell denies that and said he first saw it when the TMZ website posted it as an exclusive on September 8th.

That’s beside the point, in my opinion. No one should have needed to see the pathetic sight of Janay Palmer-Rice being brutalized and struggling for consciousness before condemning the man who put her in that position.

Having said all that, let’s remember it wasn’t the NFL or Goodell or the Ravens that slammed a fist into the face of a young woman. It was Ray Rice. And, it is his new wife who refuses to see herself as a victim.

It’s a dynamic that plays out every day in countless intimate relationships. Someone gets horribly hurt but still clings to the abuser. Healing that kind of tortured psychological mindset is what we should focus upon because many times someone gets killed.

Diane Dimond

To find out more about Diane Dimond visit her website at www.DianeDimond.com . To read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com. COPYRIGHT 2014 CREATORS.COM

Men and Domestic Violence

By Heidi Hiatt

2010 has been the year of betrayals, breakups, and divorces. I continue to be shocked at the number of relationships falling down around me.

While there are two sides to every story, it seems to me that it is becoming increasingly common for one party in a relationship to carry the majority of the blame. It’s like the world is dividing into two camps in anticipation of some great shift, narcissists and those who try to follow the Golden Rule.

This week I had the opportunity to catch up with several longtime friends and discuss their situations. It hit me that in nearly every breakup I’ve seen this year, it is the stable, hard-working, faithful, committed partner that does not abuse drugs or alcohol getting dumped like garbage.

Every one of these people openly admits their quirks and the things they need to work on, but none of those issues are divorce-worthy. Many are normal human shortcomings and residual trauma that can be worked through. I see these people as attractive, intelligent, fun, and successful, but their partners have decided that the grass is greener with more risky people.

Risky is the correct word. I’ve witnessed children being put on back burners to accommodate their parent’s games and used as weapons. I’ve seen how one parent’s hatred of the other conditions the children to become abusive, hate-filled people themselves. It is heartbreaking to see children form bonds and then be forced to break bonds with the people who are cycled through their parents’ lives.

Unfaithful partners are using their unwitting faithful counterparts as child care and their families as a resource to facilitate their liaisons. In one case, a friend’s in-laws had actually been encouraging the other woman’s presence and involvement while their son was still married. Other people find themselves used financially, or being pushed away when things aren’t adding up.

It is not unusual for families to enable a relative’s pathology even when that risks hurting their children. Enabling an unhealthy or dishonest relationship is sanctioning poor parental choices and setting the kids up for their own lifetime of instability. Children are often the last people who matter in the midst of these games.

One person told me how painful it is to watch another woman—the “friend” who decided to “help” her husband and kids at a critical time—end up with her house, her former vehicle, and many of her belongings. Another told me how their spouse demanded the divorce, but tries to control who they see and to keep them on hold in case they want them back in the future. It seems that a significant number of people are practicing this “Plan B” narcissism—if their affairs don’t work out, they want the option of going back.

The lengths that people go to in an effort to legitimize these unhealthy new relationships seem to be part of some sick rush they get by having affairs. One of the most common tactics seems to be blame-shifting, an attempt to make everything that’s wrong look like it’s caused by the faithful partner. Another is flat-out character assassination, slandering or falsely accusing that partner to relieve themselves of taking responsibility for their actions.

Yet a third is embarking on a public relations mission to build their new partner up at the expense of the old. If a person has to consciously try to win support for what they’re doing at the expense of another, there’s a good reason to question what they’re doing. When I see this happening, it reminds me of playground bullies that only feel good about themselves by putting someone else down.

The mental shift that unfaithful people undergo is frightening. They seem to have no genuine concern for any aspect of their partner’s well-being, physical, psychological, emotional, or spiritual. They recklessly put their partners’ health at risk and play head games with them either to avoid getting caught or punish them for not letting them have their cake and eat it too.

This has me wondering if deceptive, dangerous, or dysfunctional is the new “sexy”. Pop culture certainly seems to glamorize those “d” words—collectively, a darkness that destroys committed relationships. I understand the attraction that bad boys can have for women and bad girls can have to men. In those conditions we are able to indulge our own unresolved character issues and desire to rescue others.

But you can have a healthy kind of crazy, “bad”, or adventurous within a committed relationship too. To me, developing that sounds way more fun than risking my partner and family’s well-being to break a vow or a covenant. I would much rather spend time working on the tough issues in a committed relationship, reaping hard-earned rewards, than flitting around in dishonest, secretive hookups that won’t last.

This may seem like a long lead-in to the subject of men and domestic violence, but the point of mentioning all of these behaviors is that they go both ways. Women are abused, especially physically, more than men, but after hearing friends talk about female-on-male physical violence, control issues, stalking, and cheating, it’s clear that domestic violence is not a gender issue. Abuse is equally wrong whether a man or woman is committing it.

Statistics about domestic violence against men are probably skewed since it is very likely to be underreported. Not only is it awkward and embarrassing for men to publicly admit that they have been hurt by a woman, but many authorities won’t take them seriously or file reports when they do. The “you’re a man, deal with it” attitude, and many stereotypes about domestic violence, run rampant in this country. Men may think that reporting abuse or seeking help for it is a sign of weakness.

Reality is that men can be victims of psychological battering, physical violence, stalking (in growing numbers), manipulation, financial control, sexual abuse, and everything that a woman can. Somehow our society doesn’t want to believe these crimes and behaviors are as serious if they happen to a man.

Our culture has normalized aberrant behaviors in women, such as striking a man in the face, putting them down publicly, controlling them through sex, and allowing certain entitlement mentalities (seehttp://wildninja.wordpress.com/2010/04/21/sitcom-wives/). Much of this may be seen as valid payback for thousands of years of mistreatment of women, but it is still WRONG.

Man or woman, being attacked by someone else on any level damages your health and your self-worth. It can forever alter your existence and the way you look at life. The denial men engage in to cope with or rationalize woman-perpetrated abuse can lead to entrapment in unhealthy relationships. Men may endure many cycles, even years and decades, of abuse because they don’t want to be abandoned, see winning the abuser back as proof of their manhood, or mistakenly believe that they can love a pathological woman into healthiness.

The most common type of abuse I see when a woman abuses a man is not physical abuse. Most of the material you will find about female-on-male domestic violence is about that. But it is psychological abuse that seems to be the most prevalent form of abuse utilized by women. This may be because psychological abuse is the more subtle form of beating someone into submission. You also can’t get arrested for it unless you threaten their life.

In the 1993 Tina Turner biopic What’s Love Got To Do With It, moviegoers saw Ike Turner viciously beat and belittle his partner, then turn around and buy her expensive gifts to “make up for it.” A male friend of mine pointed out that women rarely do that; instead, they rip into men’s psyches and then use sex and seduction as the “make up gifts” to worm their way back into their lives.

That is an extremely abusive cycle because a man endures great personal harm, then is lulled back into a false sense of stability for awhile until it happens again. Over and over some men are verbally abused, taken advantage of, subjected to psychological terrorism, and cheated on, then reeled back in by the “gifts” of what is essentially sexual abuse. These cycles are all about power and control, not love. I call it “Reverse Ike Turner Syndrome” (with apologies to a man who hopefully got his rage under control).

Because of the lack of resources and shelters out there for male victims of domestic violence, a man’s best defense may be to educate himself on the subject. Both sexes need to know how to attract and retain healthy people with the ability to grow in mutually beneficial relationships. Instead, we often enter adult life without a proper sense of boundaries, tend to be attracted to the same type of controlling or abusive person that our opposite sex parent was, and can’t accurately define domestic violence.

Everyone needs to be educated about pathological behaviors, psychopathy, and other selfish, evil states of being that can damage us. Because men are expected to be the tough ones who take care of themselves, they may not recognize or acknowledge such issues when they encounter them. It is important to know what you might be dealing with to save your children, your current partner, and yourself from harm. My advice: read, read, read, get into counseling, and find Bible-based support through church.

One issue that continues to jump out at me when I research domestic violence is how personality disorders may dictate a person’s conduct in a relationship. Think of a personality disorder as a way of thinking that inaccurately colors the way a person looks at life. Of all the personality disorders that seem to affect women’s treatment of men, it is borderline personality disorder that seems to lead the pack. One of the first books written on this subject was called I Hate You, Don’t Leave Me.

Movies like Fatal Attraction and Single White Female are the Hollywood versions of this disorder. From my own experiences, I don’t think Single White Female was too far off. I’ve ended friendships and had other unsettling experiences because of that type of behavior. It wasn’t behavior I could “learn to deal with”; it’s unpredictable, backstabbing, and like being in a constant competition for a Miss Popularity award that I have no interest in vying for.

Some of these women will do anything to “prove” they’re the most “desirable” or to “win”, even if it means seducing or stealing someone else’s man. They get a thrill out of disrupting or slaughtering other people’s committed relationships, much the same as the rush some serial killers get when they take a life.

Alcoholism and substance abuse is common among borderlines, and in their private lives, many are emotionally immature, never progressing beyond a junior high emotional intelligence level.

These women have an empty spot inside of them that is never filled, and their behavior may become more dangerous and erratic with time. It may also become less obvious with time because they’re well-practiced.

If you try to leave them, though, you may soon find yourself looking down the barrel of the “if I can’t have you, no one can” mindset. They’re also the ones who will leave you of their own accord, but come back as soon as they see you having a serious relationship with someone else.

Some of these women might be fine with an open marriage or open relationship concept in which you are the emotional support, the “rock”, or even a sort of parent that they always come back to. But they want the freedom of seeing other people as well, whether they do that behind your back or coerce you into it.

Women like this will use anyone and anything to keep their targets at their beck and call regardless of the cost to others. Some borderline behavior overlaps with sociopathic behavior to the extent that experts have coined a new term for such people, borderpaths. Life is all about them, and they want men who will kowtow to that. They often purposefully latch onto nice and generous men believing that they will be easy to manipulate. That’s not love, that’s slavery. That’s sick.

If any of this sounds familiar, the diagnostic criteria for Borderline Personality Disorder, and more information, is athttp://www.borderlinepersonalitytoday.com/main/dsmiv.htm. I’d also recommend the book Sometimes I Act Crazy, below. While I do not advocate breaking up a marriage just because someone has mental issues (don’t we all), men need to be able to draw the line when they and their family’s safety is at risk. Unrepentant, chronic abuse and adultery can be valid grounds for divorce, sad as divorce is.

Men, although you may think that you have to tolerate certain behaviors because of your sex, please remember that abuse is not biblical. It’s not God’s way. This is not what He wants for you. You were created to, as I said in another post, live adventurously, love passionately, and accomplish feats that no one before you or after you can.

Abuse molds you into who someone else wants you to be, not who God wants you to be. It robs you of your strength and dignity, and it prevents your family from experiencing your authentic self. Your children especially need a consistent, healthy role model that will set the standard for their relationships.

Children are little sponges who thirstily absorb your example, and the legacy you create for them is important. It’s been said that children are messages you send to a time you will not see. Your current circumstances may be setting the stage for your great-great-grandchildren’s lives.

That’s a sobering thought. But a quick look at our own family’s histories might show that to be true already. We are the people who have to stop the dysfunction with this generation and raise the bar.

In a world of James 1:8s—double-minded people who are unstable in all of their ways—kids really need their parents to model loving, committed behavior if they are to have a chance at true love without violence.

This means that both men and women need to know their enemy—domestic violence– and get whatever help they need to deal with it. That may mean severing relationships, because you can’t solve someone else’s pathology for them, no matter how traumatic the pathology’s origins.

Lastly, I know that there are those that downplay domestic violence towards men believing that it detracts from domestic violence against women. Some experts don’t like to discuss male abuse because fewer men experience it than women, and even fewer men report it.

No one has to convince me how serious of a problem this is for women—I have been through several deceptive, damaging relationships and have experienced persistent sexism in the workplace. You’re preaching to the choir.

Here’s the bottom line, and I’m turning on the caps lock to shout it out on behalf of the men who have been hurt by it:

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE IS A GENDER NEUTRAL ISSUE. NO VICTIM DESERVES TO HAVE THEIR EXPERIENCES DOWNPLAYED BECAUSE OF THEIR SEX. WHETHER A MAN OR WOMAN COMMITS DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, IT IS WRONG, AND IT NEEDS TO BE DEALT WITH.

Videos

When Women Abuse Men, ABC News
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hn-wL6hPq8

Men Suffer Domestic Violence Too
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGDTDawB4wE&feature=related

Male domestic violence victim speaks out
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lPTOXG6Ha48&feature=related

Websites

The “Duluth Model” Power and Control Wheel, a version for female perpetrators
http://www.dvservices.org/id41.html

A Men’s Guide to the Signs of a Bad Dating Choice
http://www.datebetterwomennow.com/docsfordating/TheSignsofaBadDatingChoiceInWomenE-book.pdf

Abused Men: Domestic Violence Works Both Ways
http://www.aardvarc.org/dv/malevictims.shtml

Male Abuse
http://www.wadv.org/maleabuse.htm

Stalking & Domestic Violence Statistics
http://new.abanet.org/domesticviolence/Pages/Statistics.aspx

Books

How to Avoid Dating Damaged & Destructive Women (E-Book), Sandra L. Brown
http://saferelationshipsmagazine.com/how-to-avoid-dating-damaged-destructive-women

Sometimes I Act Crazy: Living with Borderline Personality Disorder, Jerold Kreisman and Hal Strauss
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0471792144/ref=pd_lpo_k2_dp_sr_2?pf_rd_p=486539851&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe-1&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=0380713055&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=1AM6MSQR08YS2266KGKB

Abused Men: The Hidden Side of Domestic Violence, Philip Cook
http://www.amazon.com/Abused-Men-Hidden-Domestic-Violence/dp/0275958620/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1283035856&sr=1-1

Women Who Love Psychopaths, 2nd Edition, Sandra L. Brown
I recommend this book for men? Yes. Men can absolutely be victims of female psychopaths. The material presented in this book can go either way despite the title.
http://www.amazon.com/Women-Who-Love-Psychopaths-2nd/dp/0984172807/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1282971995&sr=1-1

Safe People: How to Find Relationships That Are Good for You and Avoid Those That Aren’t, Henry Cloud and John Townsend
http://www.amazon.com/Safe-People-Relationships-Avoid-Those/dp/0310210844/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1283036191&sr=1-1

Too Nice for Your Own Good: How to Stop Making 9 Self-Sabotaging Mistakes, Duke Robinson
http://www.amazon.com/Too-Nice-Your-Good-Self-Sabotaging/dp/0446673862/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1283036300&sr=1-1

Hold on to Your NUTs: The Relationship Manual for Men, Wayne Levine
(NUTs = Non-Negotiable Unalterable Terms)
http://www.amazon.com/Hold-Your-NUTs-Relationship-Manual/dp/0979054400/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1283036347&sr=1-1#_

Boundaries: When to Say YES When to Say NO To Take Control of Your Life, Henry Cloud and John Townsend
http://www.amazon.com/Boundaries-When-Take-Control-Your/dp/B001AN8BAC/ref=sr_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1283036547&sr=1-4

The Sociopath Next Door, Martha Stout
http://www.amazon.com/Sociopath-Next-Door-Martha-Stout/dp/0767915828/ref=sr_1_6?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1282972138&sr=1-6

Emotional Blackmail: When the People in Your Life Use Fear, Obligation, and Guilt to Manipulate You, Susan Forward and Donna Frazier
http://www.amazon.com/Emotional-Blackmail-People-Obligation-Manipulate/dp/0060928972/ref=sr_1_39?s=STORE&ie=UTF8&qid=1282972238&sr=1-39

In Sheep’s Clothing: Understanding and Dealing with Manipulative People, George K. Simon
http://www.amazon.com/Sheeps-Clothing-Understanding-Dealing-Manipulative/dp/1935166301/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1282972328&sr=1-1

Venus: The Dark Side, Roy Sheppard and Mary T. Cleary (I have not read this, but it sounds like someone has finally come out with a book about female sociopaths. Hopefully it’s respectful.)
http://www.amazon.com/Venus-Dark-Side-Roy-Sheppard/dp/190153412X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1282972488&sr=1-1

Love Must Be Tough, James Dobson
http://www.amazon.com/Love-Must-Tough-James-Dobson/dp/0849913411

The Gift of Fear and Other Survival Signals that Protect Us From Violence, Gavin de Becker
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0440508835/ref=pd_lpo_k2_dp_sr_1?pf_rd_p=486539851&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe-1&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=0440226198&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=1J6A0DZRFVEW6MFE5KKP

Please note that most of these books are secular, but I include them because I have yet to find equivalents in the faith-based realm. Obviously if any content runs counter to your Christian beliefs, disregard it, and keep only what’s worth keeping.

**********************************************************************************

Whatever I do for my spouse, I do it to Christ as well. –Emerson Eggerichs

Voice Actress Amy Robinson Creates Domestic Violence PSAs

Many organizations, advocates and citizens across the country are promoting national Domestic Violence Awareness Month in October raising awareness and educating the public about the nuances of violence in the home using traditional gatherings, events and speeches.

One woman who thinks outside the box has taken awareness a step further by creating FREE public service announcements to be used by any radio host, podcaster, or any means of broadcasting.

Amy Robinson has a stake in Domestic Violence Awareness Month, losing her sister to murder in 2011. She created the blog, Justice for Nique, in memory of her murdered sister as a way of releasing her own emotions and being a resource for others.

Dominique “Niqué” Chatham Leili was murdered in July, 2011. Her husband, Matthew, is the only suspect. Her body was found concealed in the woods near the entrance to her subdivision in Lawrenceville, GA. Her husband has fled the state, and taken their two young daughters, Amanda and Rebecca, with him. This blog is to fight for Niqué’s memory – to provide a voice – to tell the truth so that one day her daughters have a record of who their mother really was and how much she sacrificed for them.

Amy had an idea to create the PSAs and put the idea out to her group and was surprised at the number of volunteers who stepped up to make her dream a reality.

These are PSAs for the National Domestic Violence Hotline. If you are in broadcasting, podcasting, or radio of any sort, please feel free and encouraged to download and distribute these freely. 

1. He Says I Am…
2. Kids Of Abuse
3. Psychological Abuse
4. Violent Relationships
5. When Friends See Violence

The following amazing and talented voice actresses (and a couple of their children!) contributed to this amazing project.

• Cassie Boyd Baker
• Heather Costa
• Rebecca Davis
•  Glad Faith
• Anne Ganguzza
• Jennifer Knight
• Jodi Krangle
• Katie Leigh
• Diane Merritt
• Talmadge Ragan
• Catherine Smith

About Amy Robinson

Amy Robinson

“The girl next door with the smile you can hear.”

With a character for every occasion, and a voice that’s easy on the ears, Amy (Elk) Robinson can bring your characters right off the page.

An actress from a young age, Amy’s first taste for acting was in a school production of “The Giving Tree” where she played the tree at the tender age of 6. She’s come a long way since then, studying Voice Over acting with heavy hitters like Bob Bergen, Rob Paulsen, Della Cole, and Paul Armbruster.

Amy is always looking to stretch her acting muscles, and take on a new challenge. She recently recorded the upcoming audiobook for Susan Murphy-Milano‘s Autobiography “Holding My Hand Through Hell” where she tells the harrowing tale of growing up in an abusive household.

She has also performed in several video games for European gaming company “Artifex Mundi” and is the official voice of NCR Advanced Store’s training presentations.

Amy is currently studying Improvisation at Dad’s Garage Theatre in Atlanta.

Offering a wide range of inflections and accents, female voiceover talent Amy Robinson can bring a variety of characters right off the page. Amy’s voice is fun, friendly, and very versatile.

Visit Amy’s Website: AmyRobinsonVO.Com

Voice Actress Amy Robinson Creates Domestic Violence PSAs

So Who REALLY goes missing?

         by Cynthia Caron                       

                                                             

Alzheimer's:  This disease touches many lives. Those with cognitive disorders are at risk of becoming a missing person due to confusion and becoming lost or wandering. Many of those who have gone missing have families that depend on us to help locate their missing loved one.

Developmentally Challenged
 Those who are developmentally challenged are very much at risk and we work with many families whose missing loved ones disappear who are developmentally challenged.  There is a higher rate among those who are young adolescents due to their vulnerabilities. They are always considered endangered and may qualify for a "Silver Alert", depending upon the laws set forth in their state.

Autism

  With the increasing amount of loved ones diagnosed with autism each year, an increase also occurs with those who suffer with autism who go missing.  We've noticed that many of those who have autism, and go missing, are usually children or teens.  Depending on the level of their cognitive awareness determines the probability of where we may need to focus in locating them. Those who are higher functioning may be "wandering" the streets and find themselves in situations in which they are at risk of becoming harmed and/or taken advantage by others. Some are manipulated and persuaded to leave the comforts of their homes with false promises of "love" in which they are invariably "preyed upon" and are at high risks of danger. 

Those who are at a lower level of cognitive awareness may wander from their family and are highly drawn towards water. Studies are ongoing as to why and unfortunately many that become missing for more than 48 hours are commonly located passed away in a death by water. (Lakes, streams, ponds, pools, etc.)

Special and Medical Needs

From Diabetes, epilepsy to traumatic brain injury, (Stroke or brain damage) those who have possess any of these condition "types" are also at risk of becoming a missing person due to a medical incident/accident to confusion from cognitive awareness.

Emotional Disorders  

 Commonly known previously as "mental illness."  A large number of families of missing come to us whose loved ones have battled emotional disorders and have disappeared.  Families are already very exhausted, stressed and many have spent years helping their loved family members by advocating for them and assisting them through their low emotional states. Emotional disorders is a very difficult "find" for a missing loved one because many have the intelligence capabilities that can keep them missing for a very long time. 

While they may not be plagued with a lower intelligence level, they are in fact at-risk due to their emotional disorders, which in many cases can have disastrous outcomes including self-harm and suicide.  Those who are at higher risk of becoming a missing person are loved ones who have chosen to go off their medication(s). 

Some of the most common diagnosed loved ones who go missing are those who suffer with depression, Bi-polar disorder or Schizophrenia. Many times they are young adolescents who are in the process of receiving a diagnosis but disappear prior to it being confirmed. (This is very common in those between the ages of 18-24 and are college students.)

Accidents 

Missing loved ones become missing due to numerous "accidental situations" such as off road vehicle accidents, those lost in mountains while hiking or even "freak" accidents and can become a missing statistic due to not being able to locate or find them timely. A large majority located deceased are also known to have gone missing from a public gathering in which alcohol was served.

One does not have to be intoxicated or legally drunk to suffer an accident which can be fatal. Far too often we assist families of young college age students (primarily young men) who leave a public gathering, pub or nightclub (under the influence and not legally intoxicated) only to be located deceased with a death by water. (Same common to those with cognitive disorders, above.)

LostNMissing established the campaign, and website, "Friends Don't Leave Friends Alone" [2] as the same young deaths we believe could have been avoided had the person left with someone else and did not stray off alone from their friends.

Divorce/Separation/Break-Up
 It is very unfortunate but it is known that many women, and men, who go missing and are in the process of a separation from their spouses, or boyfriend/girlfriends, may disappear and a very high rate is due to foul play and by the hands of those they were leaving. This is a very complicated missing person case as families are enduring not only the pain of their loved one missing but also in states of confusion as to why law enforcement processes seem so complicated.

 Families find there are many barriers, due to the legal system and laws, that stand in the way of finding their missing and loved family member. In nearly all cases the family already is aware that their missing will not be located safely and this adds to the stress and trauma.  Detectives and investigators must adhere to the law of "just cause" in order to find needed answers.  This frustrates law enforcement, as well.  While many may want to do full "homicide investigative procedures", if there is not "just cause" to enable them...their "hands are tied." (Example: Luminol spraying a home, arresting a potential suspect and "making them talk" are just two examples of many tactics families expect, but is halted due to laws that protect those who are suspect.)  Because a case may turn to a homicide investigation, or may be classified as missing with foul play, organizations are limited in what information is presented to them (and sometimes to the family, as well) to enable finding the missing loved one.

 Law enforcement will always take the lead and organizations assist by making pleas to the public for awareness of the missing person.  At LostNMissing we will focus on looking for a "living missing loved one" and respect that law enforcement is looking for a deceased missing person.  By doing this we are making sure the family of the missing receive both aspects of a missing persons' case. When presenting a missing loved one as possibly being "alive and out there" invariably is also assisting law enforcement because the awareness campaign of seeking the missing loved one may bring tips/leads that can help make a break in the case. 

We also know, and have experienced, many cases in which all indicators show the missing may have been a victim of foul play (with homicide investigating) and the missing person is invariably located safely. Unless solid evidence (such as an obvious crime scene) exists, we always go with the hopes that the missing can be found alive and well.

Human Trafficking 

Missing loved ones can become victims of human trafficking and quite a majority that are trafficked is for sex purposes. According to the FBI website, they explain, "It's sad but true: here in this country, people are being bought, sold, and smuggled like modern-day slaves.They are trapped in lives of misery-often beaten, starved, and forced to work as prostitutes or to take grueling jobs as migrant, domestic, restaurant, or factory workers with little or no pay.

 We're working hard to stop human trafficking-not only because of the personal and psychological toll it takes on society, but also because it facilitates the illegal movement of immigrants across borders and provides a ready source of income for organized crime groups and even terrorists."  [2] While primarily those missing are young women, young men are known to have been trafficked as well.

Drugs of Abuse
 When a loved one is under the influence of drugs and/or associates with those who buy, sell or take drugs...this puts them at risk of danger in which they can possibly become a missing person. We've had cases in which those have been located safely and living a life "off the streets" in a drug dazed world and we've had missing loved ones who were located deceased a victim of drug activities, suicide under the influence (or through withdrawal) or due to an overdose.

Of One's Own Choice with cognitive awareness and decision making 

Surprisingly, this is one of the lowest common causes of an adult person's disappearance. Highest among minors. Yet, adults receive very little media and public awareness.

Unfortunately the "general public" has the misconception that this is the "number one reason" someone is missing, especially as it pertains to adult males.

We certainly do need to have this category, and fact is...we wish this was the reason most loved ones go missing as the alternative reasons are not usually with a good ending.  85% of our missing adult cases end each year with the missing adult either located deceased or known to be deceased and no body recovered.

Those  missing, of their own free will, are due to their own choice to leave their present life. Again, a very low percentage of adults, high for teens. (ex: runaways.)  These decisions are made with cognitive awareness, are usually planned and usually are the easiest cases to locate the missing person as they leave more "trails" for investigations to track their whereabouts.  Some of the more common reasons are: To start over a new life, to escape and hide from law enforcement, to experience life outside the rules of a parent/guardian (commonly known as "runaway"), to escape an abusive person by going into hiding or to "live off the land" away from everyone, to start a new life with another person, or due to joining a cult.

Abduction/Kidnapping While rare, abduction is a possible cause for a missing loved one (both adults and children) to have disappeared. Parental abduction is the leading cause of missing children in this particular category along with abduction for trafficking purposes.  Lower on the rate of statistics is the kidnapping for the purposes of rape and/or murder. It is also extremely rare that one is kidnapped for the purpose to extort money in exchange for their safe return. According to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, the major causes for missing children are:

• The most recent, comprehensive national study for the number of missing children estimated in 1999: [3] 
• Approximately 800,000 children younger than 18 were reported missing.
• More than 200,000 children were abducted by family members.
• More than 58,000 children were abducted by nonfamily members.
• An estimated 115 children were the victims of "stereotypical" kidnapping. These "stereotypical" kidnappings involved someone the child did not know or was an acquaintance. The child was held overnight, transported 50 miles or more, killed, ransomed or held with the intent to keep the child permanently.

Over 2,000 go missing in the United States EVERY day in the USA.
No person, no family is exempt from the trauma of having a loved one disappear. Every person, and every family, from all walks of life can have this happen at any time....and feel lost, confused, worried, fearful and will turn to us for help. We are here for those families and hope this public awareness campaign provides more clarity as to the plight families of missing have and the need for the public to assist whenever someone goes missing in their community.

Respectfully,

Cynthia Caron
President/Founder
LostNMissing, Inc.

NamUs-Victim Advocate (NH)

Office: 603.965.4621
24-hr Cell: 603.548.6548
www.lostnmissing.com

LostNMissing Inc., is an all-volunteer national tax-exempt organization under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code (the "code") and qualifies as a public supported organization under Sections, or Categories: P99 (Human Services - Multipurpose and Other N.E.C.); M99 (Other Public Safety, Disaster Preparedness, and Relief N.E.C.); I01 (Alliance/Advocacy Organizations). LostNMissing is organized and incorporated under the laws of the State of New Hampshire. We never charge a fee for our services.

Lies of the Fathers (Rights Groups)

by Barry Goldstein

The United States Department of Justice offered some good news to long suffering protective mothers and their children when it announced grants to courts in Illinois, Delaware, Minnesota and Oregon to develop improved practices to protect battered women and their children. Incredibly, the abusers’ lobby objects to any possible reforms to promote children’s safety out of concern the improved practices might undermine the privilege of abusive fathers to maintain strict control over their victims. The National Parents Association, formerly Fathers and Families wrote a distorted article attacking the Office on Violence Against Women and the Battered Mothers Justice Project, which is one of the organizations working to help the courts create effective reforms.

I normally try not to pay much attention to these male supremacist groups because I witness enough traumas without listening to their attempted justifications and they tend to live in a reality deprived world. My friend Eileen King, the founder and director of Child Justice asked me to write an article to correct the misinformation that permeates the article from the National Parents Association. In reading their article I was reminded of a friendly disagreement I sometimes have with Joan Meier of DVLEAP. I am a strong supporter of the use of current scientific research because the use of good research would inform the courts and create better outcomes for children. Joan often expresses concerns that the abuser groups will use their bogus research to justify continued harm to our children. This is exactly the kind of material relied on in their article. Joan is, of course, right that flawed research can and is used to mislead the courts and they do not always recognize the difference.

While I regularly discuss research that comes from the Department of Justice and Center for Disease Control, the abuser rights groups rely on “research” based only on the personal beliefs and biases of a man who made many public statements to the effect that sex between adults and children can be acceptable. It is hard to imagine that judges could not appreciate the difference if the lawyers present the information effectively. Nevertheless we have seen all too many cases where bogus studies are the ones relied on by the courts.

In deep appreciation of the wonderful work Eileen does, I will go through some of the false claims made in their article and then discuss the more encouraging topic about the impact of the grants to the four court systems.

What about Male Victims?

There are men who are assaulted and seriously mistreated by their female partners. This is a horrendous situation and should not be tolerated, period. There are sincere people working on this issue and it is a worthy cause. Unfortunately many abusive fathers use and exaggerate this issue as a way to nullify and negate the work to end men’s violence against women.

One of the first articles I wrote for this blog demonstrated the falsity of articles and “research” claiming that women abuse men about as often as men abuse women. Some of this propaganda such as those cited by the abuser lobby is produced by professionals who are part of the cottage industry that makes its money helping abusive fathers gain custody from safe, protective mothers. Some of this research is produced by sincere but unqualified researchers who do not understand domestic violence dynamics and fail to consult with genuine experts. These researchers like the court professionals we see in custody cases possess a false sense of competence about domestic violence and so don’t seek the help and expertise they need.

A good example of this came in a workshop I attended at an IVAT conference in Hawaii. Two young female psychologists who had been students of the conference organizer presented their findings based on a grant they had received. They claimed their research proved that abuse by men and women was roughly equal and described their methodology. It turned out they got their information from questionnaires filled out by men they found on web sites. Most of the men came from “fathers’ rights” organizations. This was hardly a neutral or reliable source, but they accepted everything the men said uncritically. At one point they said that the police refused to bring charges against the men’s alleged abusers because of the bias against men who claim to be assaulted. It never occurred to the psychologists that the police did not bring charges after investigating the claims and finding a lack of evidence.

There are many common mistakes unqualified researchers make that lead to the mistaken results. This “research” is often based on phone calls to the general population and reliance on the discredited conflict tactics scales. Results from phone calls to the general public distort the results because it will usually be safe for the men but not the women to reveal assaults. It would also focus on less serious assaults than would be found in a survey from emergency rooms or shelters. The problem is exacerbated by the fact that abusive men are more likely to make false allegations and women routinely minimize the abuse committed by their partners. The researchers’ lack of familiarity with domestic violence dynamics means they are not even aware of the inevitable distortions in their data.

The conflict tactics scales are designed to just count the hits. No distinction is made based on the fact that in general men are bigger and stronger than women, hit harder and cause more serious injuries. The findings by the unqualified researchers are belied by good research that demonstrates women are far more likely to need treatment in the emergency room and are at least three times more likely to be murdered. Research based on murders is particularly reliable because there is a body so no one can claim she is lying about his abuse. Another problem with these methods is that men and women hit their partners for very different reasons. Men usually do this to maintain control while women assault men in self-defense and out of frustration at his abuse. The researchers do not understand and so make no effort to differentiate the pattern of coercive and controlling behavior; most of which does not involve physical abuse. Perhaps the most important difference is that it is common for women to be so afraid that her partner will kill or seriously injure her that she will give in and do whatever he wants just to protect her safety. This is rarely true of men. This is the essence of domestic violence and no accurate analysis is possible without taking this into consideration. These studies also do not include rape which in heterosexual relationships is something overwhelmingly done by men to women.

One of the fundamental problems both with the abuser rights perspective and of the courts is that they want to treat people and groups the same even though they are very different. There is a long history of husbands being entitled and even encouraged to assault their wives, control them and make the decisions for the family. The first law in the United States about what we would now call domestic violence said that husbands may not beat their wives ON SUNDAY. In other words beating her any other time was acceptable. There was never the equivalent expectation or permission for wives to assault their husbands. Although the laws have changed, this history means there are still many men who feel entitled to control their partners and use abusive tactics to do so. An individual woman might repeatedly assault her male partner but it is not based and supported by beliefs that wives are entitled to control their husbands.

My friend, Molly Dragiewicz wrote an important book, Equality with a Vengeance that includes a ton of good research that disproves the frivolous claims coming from abuser groups. The research is clear that men commit most violent crime both in this country and throughout the world. Well over ninety percent of familicides, crimes in which an individual kills the spouse and children are committed by men. As I write this article there have been more than one hundred mass murders in the year since the Newtown tragedy and all but one were committed by males.

The research about batterer narratives helps us understand how abusive men can appear so sincere when they confidently repeat their misinformation. Many will say that it is wrong for a man to assault a woman EXCEPT if she does something he defines as improper or she is a (insert the slur). They then view their attack on her as justified and even self-defense. Again there is nothing remotely similar for women.

Mothers Make False Claims

The “fathers’ rights” movement and cottage industry that supports abusive fathers are permeated with the belief that most abuse allegations made by mothers are false. This is really based on ideology and assumption because there is no valid research to support it. PAS is based on this assumption. Significantly, the Saunders’ study (from the U.S. Department of Justice) found that professionals with inadequate training tended to believe the myth that women frequently make false allegations and unscientific alienation theories. So when their propagandists encourage courts to disbelieve mothers’ complaints they are demonstrated their lack of training and qualifications.

Nicholas Bala led one of the leading studies about false allegations in the context of custody and in fact it was a study that looked at many other studies. He found that mothers make deliberately false allegations less than two percent of the time. Any “research” with significantly higher numbers reflects the frequency that true allegations of abuse are disbelieved. Interestingly the Bala study found that fathers involved in contested custody are 16 times more likely than mothers to make deliberately false allegations. The common abuser tactics of claiming alienation and claiming mothers lie about their abuse are examples of these false allegations by abusive fathers. In fairness the Bala study is not saying that all men are this dishonest. The study applies only to contested custody and a large majority of these cases involve abusive fathers who feel entitled to use any tactic including false allegations to regain the control over their partner they believe had no right to leave.

At least 40 states and many districts created court-sponsored gender bias commissions. They found that there is widespread gender bias against women and particular woman litigants. Common examples are that mothers are given less credibility than fathers, are held to a higher standard of proof and blamed for the actions of their abuser. These findings help explain why so many true allegations of abuse are disbelieved by the courts.

Shared Parenting Benefits Children

Shared parenting is another ideological belief of abuser groups that is not supported by valid research and is not beneficial to children. Many of us can remember when shared parenting was either not permitted or strongly discouraged. An initial study based on a small population and short time period found that shared parenting could be beneficial to children under the best of circumstances. This encouraged courts to promote shared parenting as a way to resolve difficult and contentious cases. Abusers have promoted shared parenting as a way for fathers to gain control when they otherwise would have difficulty winning custody because of their abuse and the mother provided most of the children care.

Later research based on a larger population and a longer period of time found that shared parenting is actually harmful to children. Constantly going back and forth is disruptive, having two homes is really having none and needed items are often in the wrong home.

There is legitimate research that shared parenting can benefit children under the best of circumstances. This would include a voluntary desire by both parents to share parenting, an ability of the parents to cooperate and living nearby. There is other good research that found shared parenting is never a good idea for children. Indeed most cases in which shared parenting are initially tried are quickly changed because of the problems it creates. There is no need to reconcile this dispute in the context of contested custody and domestic violence as these cases are not close to the best of circumstances.

Shared parenting laws usually include exceptions for domestic violence, but this does not protect the children when courts have difficulty recognizing true allegations of abuse. The courts are littered with cases in which mothers are pressured to accept shared parenting with their abuser and often severely punished if they object. The Saunders’ study found that abusers use decision making authority to control the mother and hurt the children. They use the exchanges to harass the mothers and although contradictory to try to resume the relationship. If the court is not inclined to limit an abuser to supervised visitation, parallel parenting would work far better for the children. Until the courts create the necessary training and reforms to improve its response to domestic violence consideration of shared parenting is a particularly bad idea that causes enormous mischief.

Children Need Both Parents Equally

This statement is effective in misleading people because it sounds so reasonable and fair. It is really based on an ideological belief in treating individuals the same even when they are very different. This approach is designed to treat the mother and father the same REGARDLESS OF PAST PARENTING. This is not in a child’s best interests. The truth is that children do not need both parents equally. They need their primary attachment figure more than the other parent and the safe parent more than the abusive one. In domestic violence cases courts should stop pressuring the victim to cooperate with the abuser and instead force the abuser to stop the abuse in order to gain time with the children.

The reach and harm of this misleading statement is illustrated by a statement by one of the leading family court judges in the United Kingdom. In a speech to an abuser rights group he said that the worst thing that can happen to children is for the mother to bad mouth the father. We have heard judges in the United States make similar statements. It is hard to imagine that this is meant literally. I would hope the judge realizes that assaulting, killing or sexually abusing a child and many other abusive actions are far more harmful. The ACES (Adverse Childhood Experiences) studies demonstrate the profound harm to children’s health caused by trauma which is not true about negative statements. Indeed some negative statements are beneficial for children to learn. When children see an abusive father mistreat them or their mother it is important for the mother to tell them that such behavior is not acceptable in our society.

The misuse of the belief that mothers should not make negative statements about the father was taken to the extreme in a notorious case in Poughkeepsie, N.Y. The court found the mother to have engaged in alienating behavior because she encouraged the children to eat healthy foods, dress appropriately for the weather and avoid adult oriented television programs. This was considered alienation because the father encouraged all of these harmful activities. In the world outside of family courts this would just be considered good advice that any parent would be expected to give their children. As a result of widespread gender bias in the courts more serious negative comments by fathers are routinely ignored or minimized.

Mothers Most Often Already Receive Custody

This is a statement we often hear from those supporting abusive fathers. It is literally true, but highly misleading. Over 95% of custody cases are settled more or less amicably. Some involve abusive fathers who love their children enough that they would not deliberately hurt them by separating them from their mothers. Accordingly these cases tend to be settled with the mother giving up economic benefits she and the children deserve in order to retain custody. In the more common cases that do not involve domestic violence the parents work out a truly voluntary arrangement they believe will benefit their children. In this still sexist society, mothers continue to provide most of the child care and loving fathers sacrifice their personal interests for their children to create arrangements where the children live with the mother and spend significant time with the father. This is why mothers receive custody far more than fathers, but it is based on voluntary agreements and not favoritism from the courts.

The problem in the custody court system is the less than 5% of cases that cannot be settled and continue to trial and usually far beyond. Most of these cases involve abusive fathers who seek custody as a tactic to regain control over their victims. These are the most dangerous abusers because they believe the mother has no right to leave them. This is why three-fourths of all women killed by their male partners are killed after they have left. It is why in a recent two year period we found news stories about 175 children murdered by abusive fathers involved in contested custody. More commonly the abusers seek custody as a way to regain control and punish the mothers for leaving. The abusive fathers understand that the best way to hurt a mother is to hurt the children, but the courts routinely just assume the father is seeking custody out of love for the children.

Although contested custody cases overwhelmingly involve true complaints of domestic violence by mothers, most of the time the dangerous abuser receives custody or joint custody. One troubling finding is that abusive fathers are more likely to win custody than safe fathers. The flawed practices, gender bias, and reliance on unqualified professionals, result in 58,000 children being sent for custody or unprotected visitation with dangerous abusers every year. Although mothers rarely make false allegations of abuse, the courts routinely disbelieve or minimize their complaints.

The significance of the Saunders’ study is that it explains why the courts so frequently mishandle domestic violence cases and give control to dangerous abusers. Saunders found that we now have substantial scientific research that courts could use to inform their decisions about domestic violence allegations. Unfortunately judges never developed the practice of looking to this research because it was not available when courts were first creating responses to domestic violence. Saunders specifically found that the standard and required training for evaluators, judges and lawyers does not provide them with the specific information needed to respond effectively to domestic violence cases. This is the worst of all possible situations because the training received does not make these professionals qualified to recognize and respond to domestic violence but gives them a false sense of competence so they refuse to consult with genuine experts.

Saunders recommends that evaluators and other professionals receive training in screening for domestic violence, risk assessment, post-separation violence and the impact of domestic violence on children. Most of the evaluators claimed to have training in these subjects, but when tested with vignettes they demonstrated they did not have the needed understanding. Most of the evaluators claimed they screened for domestic violence by using standard psychological tests that tell them nothing about domestic violence. This means they are not screening for domestic violence and routinely disbelieve true allegations because they don’t know what to look for. This failing undermines the entire court system because lawyers and judges look to psychologists and other mental health professionals for expertise in cases and training. The misinformation they receive in one case poisons many other cases. After hearing the outdated and discredited claims throughout their careers it becomes deeply ingrained so that many judges and lawyers are resistant to accurate information. It sounds so different from what they constantly hear from the “experts.”

Saunders found that evaluators and other professionals without the needed training tend to focus on the myth that mothers frequently make false allegations, unscientific alienation theories and the mistaken assumption that attempts to protect children from dangerous abusers are harmful to the children. These false beliefs lead to outcomes that hurt children.

The problem is compounded by the development of a cottage industry of psychologists and attorneys who make their living promoting approaches biased in favor of abusive fathers. Domestic violence are tactics men use to coerce and control partners. Economic control is a common form of domestic violence and this means that in most contested custody cases (which are really domestic violence cases) the abusive father controls most of the family’s resources. Accordingly the best way to earn a large income is to support practices that help abusers. Unfortunately courts do not tend to be skeptical of these biased professionals and in many cases we see courts appoint “fathers’ rights” attorneys and psychologists for neutral roles such as GAL and evaluator. Good mothers have no chance to win the support of professionals who are part of the cottage industry.

The Saunders’ report found that domestic violence advocates possess exactly the training and expertise needed to help courts on domestic violence cases. They knew more about the specific topics recommended by Saunders than evaluators, judges and lawyers. Nevertheless we repeatedly see courts refuse to listen or minimize the testimony of genuine experts claiming they are biased because “they always oppose domestic violence.” The courts also place great weight on academic degrees that provide no domestic violence training. The cottage industry seeks to undermine domestic violence laws while advocates try to support them. And yet it is the advocates who are treated as if they were biased.

The research suggests that a multi-disciplinary approach works best in domestic violence custody cases. Mental health professionals have expertise in psychology and mental illness. Lawyers and judges are experts in the law. Doctors can be used for medical issues and other experts for substance abuse and sexual abuse. Domestic violence advocates are the experts in domestic violence. The Saunders study demonstrated support for a multi-disciplinary approach by favorably citing many of the chapters in my book co-edited with Dr. Mo Therese Hannah.

The findings about inadequate training, flawed and outdated practices and gender bias are incompatible with any view that the courts are responding properly to domestic violence cases much less the abuser fantasy that mothers are favored. Judges cannot do their job of protecting children while they continue to be burdened by outdated and discredited practices.

Mothers Commit Child Abuse More than Fathers

This is another example of the National Parents Association taking information out of context in order to distort the circumstances. It is true that mothers commit more child abuse and neglect than fathers, but that is because they provide so much more of the child care. If the statistics were adjusted based on the amount of child care provided, it would be clear that fathers are far more dangerous to children. The problem is further compounded by the tendency of child protective agencies to always focus on the mother because moms are easier to find and far more compliant.

Courts Receive Grants to Reform Practices

Those of us who work to protect children from abuse are reminded every day of the enormous pain and ruined lives caused by the failure of the court system to recognize and respond effectively to domestic violence and child abuse allegations. When our book, Domestic Violence, Abuse and Child Custody came out, I wrote an article about the ten ways we knew the custody court system was broken. This was based on the frequency of harmful outcomes, denials of true allegations and deeply flawed practices that undermine the ability of courts to get it right.

It seems obvious that what we need to do is meet with court administrators; present the overwhelming research and work together to create the needed reforms. So far the courts have been resistant, if not hostile to considering the adoption of best practices based on new research that was not available when the courts created the present practices. Each time important new research came out whether it was our book, The Batterer as Parent, the Saunders’ study or the new ACES research; we have hoped that it would create the impetus for courts to discuss the needed reforms.

One problem is that fundamental to our jurisprudence is the doctrine of res judicata which requires that once a decision and finding is made, it can no longer be challenged (aside from appeals) and it is assumed to be right. This is an important and valuable principle because otherwise you would have to constantly relitigate the same issues over and over and just imagine what wealthy abusers could do with that. This is working particularly badly in domestic violence cases both because courts frequently fail to recognize true allegations of abuse and often refuse to look at new evidence of the pattern of abuse in the context of the previous evidence that was rejected. Context is critical to understanding domestic violence, but many of the court practices and abuser strategies prevent courts from understanding the facts in context. I have seen many cases in which the court disbelieved allegations of abuse and forced children not only to live with the abuser but to engage in therapy based on that assumption. When new information comes out demonstrating the initial decision was a mistake the professionals believe they must ignore it and silence the children.

In the next volume of Domestic Violence, Abuse and Child Custody which we hope to submit to the publisher this month, we have a chapter following up on the 175 children murdered by abusive fathers involved in custody disputes. We asked judges and court administrators in the communities where the tragedies occurred what reforms they had created in response in order to safeguard other children. The judges interviewed were the best and most knowledgeable which is why they agreed to be interviewed. Nevertheless the answer was that they created no reforms because they assumed the murder was an exception. Domestic violence experts recognize the problems in the court because we look at the patterns both within a case and over many cases. The courts seem never to look for patterns and thus have not been open to research that proves the present practices routinely place children at risk.

Some of the judges interviewed said that they regularly participated in meetings that included domestic violence advocates and these experts helped with training judges and other professionals. These are good practices that promote a multi-disciplinary approach and would tend to lead to better results. The problem is that these good practices are rare in the court system.

More common is for courts to rely on the same small group of psychologists and other mental health professionals for expertise in domestic violence cases. They are expert in mental illness and psychology but not domestic violence. Hearing from the same often unqualified experts creates an insularity in the custody courts that contributes to their satisfaction with the failed practices. Other courts, government agencies and civilian organizations look to a much wider group of experts with knowledge of current research. This is why other parts of society respond more effectively to domestic violence and are less likely to repeat the myths that are so prevalent in family court.

So the problem is how do we create a dialogue with court leaders and encourage them to be open to considering how the new research impacts old practices that have been shown to hurt children. This is why the grants to courts in four states is such an encouraging sign and why the National Parents Organization was so aggressive and unreasonable in attacking the Justice Department, Battered Women’s Justice Project and the grants to state courts.

The Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) conducted an impressive and lengthy investigation about concerns the custody courts are failing children. Every day I hear stories of children’s lives ruined I wish they could have moved more quickly. But I recognize that by doing a thorough job they could make sure their findings are correct and they will not be vulnerable to the unreasoned attacks from abuser groups and the professionals who make their money off the misery of children.

OVW reviewed much of the newest research including the Saunders’ study. I know that staffers read our book. They created roundtable discussions with leading experts to present current research and experience. Significantly, the experts they listened to are very different from the mental health professionals relied on by the courts who know little about domestic violence. The courts rarely hear from a professional who would be considered one of the nation’s leading experts and indeed in some cases the courts refuse to consider testimony from genuine experts without irrelevant mental health degrees or people they are used to seeing in their courts.

I know something of the process because I had the honor of being selected as one of the experts to participate in the roundtable discussions. My colleagues on the panel are the very best experts in this nation and provided a wealth of information for OVW to study. I believe the quality and quantity of research and information made it easy for OVW to make findings that the present practices in custody courts are failing to protect children. I greatly appreciate my colleagues at the Battered Women’s Justice Project who are knowledgeable and caring. I often turn to them for research for the books I am working on. I am sure they will do a wonderful job in implementing this grant project.

The four states are being asked to create models for responding to domestic violence cases based on current scientific research and the widespread problems caused by the present flawed approaches. It is extremely valuable to include court systems in the process of creating needed reforms. Inevitably the new practices tried in these four states will work far better than what we have now. Coming from state court systems, other courts will be more open to adopting these reforms. Accordingly this is an encouraging development and one we hope will lead all courts to finally make the safety of children the first priority.

I am deeply grateful for the work of the staff at OVW, the National Institute of Justice, the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, the Battered Women’s Justice Project and the experts and victims who participated in the discussions that led to this potential breakthrough. They deserve praise and encouragement because work to prevent domestic violence and child abuse must never again be viewed as an attack on fathers. Good men and good fathers want all children to live in a world without trauma. I hope that this project will be an important step in bringing the custody courts into a coalition of people and organizations working together to prevent domestic violence and child abuse. Ending domestic violence is not a biased position---IT’S THE LAW.




Barry Goldstein is a nationally recognized domestic violence expert, speaker, writer and consultant. He is the co-editor with Mo Therese Hannah of DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, ABUSE and CHILD CUSTODY. Representing the Domestic Violence Survivor, co- authored with Elizabeth Liu is designed to train attorneys to present domestic violence cases and was released in April of 2013. Barry can be reached by email at Barryg78@aol.com 

For more information about the new book, including access to the first approximately 50 pages or to purchase the book go to the publisher’s web site at http://civicresearchinstitute.com/rdv.html Elizabeth Liu and I have convinced our publisher to make available the last section of our chapter about GALs that lists and explains the best practices for GALs in domestic violence cases. You can now download and print this information and share it with your GAL. Everyone is welcome to share this information. I also hope you will check out my new Face book page, Barry Goldsteins Representing the Domestic Violence Survivor. Barry’s web site, www.Barrygoldstein.net is back up and running with new material.