Let's Get Honest! Blog: Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History

'A Different Kind of Attention Develops Sound Judgment' | 'Suppose I'm Right Here?…' (posted 3/23 & 3/5/2014). Over 680 posts, Public-Interest Investigative Blogging On These Matters Since 2009.

“Why does he DO that?” A walk on the wild side…. [with some 2013 updates]

with one comment


(note — see the comment, from 2009. The person “gets” what I was doing in the post, thank you!)

I am speaking as an owner and long-time appreciator of the book. “Why Does He Do That?  Inside the Minds of Angry & Controlling Men.”.. which showed up like a savior, emotionally, right as my case plummeted from stablized position under protection of a restraining order, into the volatile, “mandatory-mediation” arena of Family Court, which reminded me of “Chutes and Ladders”, with more chutes than ladders.

You take one false step (or have your family placed at the top of a chute through being hauled into this venue) and are on a chute.

Kind of like life WITH the abusive guy (or woman) to start with, anyhow, huh?  Hmm…  Wonder why they function similarly!

(The post on “Family Court Matters a la  board-games” is in pre-development stage, meaning, a little gleam in the blogger’s eye still.  Paper, Scissors Stone (last post) got me thinking for sure…..)

If you haven’t read Lundy Bancroft’s material AND/OR you are not yourself a victim or being forced to co-parent with a batterer, you’re not fully informed in the domestic violence field, period.

(2013 Update, In Hindsight):

Then again, if we’d all been talking about something besides “batterers” perhaps neither Batterers Intervention Programs nor “domestic violence” would have developed into “fields,” coalitions, or industries.

And the conversation about those fields and how THEY operate is the conversation that no one seems to want to talk about, even as updates to “The Batterer As Parent” have been published and being circulated in various circles.

I mean, think about it (why didn’t we earlier??)  There is a crime called “assault and battery” — but by the time someone has become a “batter-er” that means, it’s habitual — which means someone else is experiencing “domestic violence.” How can you domesticate “violence” and what’s domestic about it? (Well, you can tame down its labeling and call it domestic “abuse” — which has been done…

In fact, as it turns out, “BIPs” are actually diversionary programs to criminal prosecution for the beating up on others. Some people figured out, along with programs like, “moral reconation therapy(tm)” and Psychoeducational classes for kids undergoing divorce — that the more programs the merrier. I guess… The money is made upfront in the trainings, yours truly (The United States Government, which is essentially “yours truly” — the taxpayers) set up the policies and the corporations and then runs the population through them every time someone shows up actually needing some realtime social service — or justice — or help.

I can’t explain it too well in a single post, but this conflict was staged and manipulated in order to obtain more and more central control (literally, an economic stranglehold) on most of us through those of us that are willing to sell out for collaboration, sales, and the conference circuit.  As sincere or genuine as these individuals may be, I do know they are playing on empathy to increase sales.  I do not know whether or not they see the endgame, after their own use has expired in the long-range plan of bankrupting Americans so we are left as a human resource without other options than begging or slavery, at a sheer subsistence level.

Some of us have been their in marriage, we have been there AFTER filing restraining orders, which were intended to protect us (allegedly), but we were NOT there after even a year or two in the family court Archipelago.

Somehow, in this destitute and distressed state, we grasp at straws of empathy and keep referring friends and neighbors to explain our own situation to the same types of information — such as if only someone would JUST UNDERSTAND batterers’ psyches, our kids would be safer, and life would be better.

Anyhow, what follows was from very early in this blog (October 2009) and shows my understanding at that time.  Even then, I was questioning the logic of the question.


The question comes to mind (now, years later), why would anyone WANT to go inside the mind of an angry & controlling person?  Who really knows what lurks in the minds of “angry & controlling men (or wants to…..)?

The more relevant question, for these times, is what in HECK was going through the minds of the men, and women, who designed a court system that just doesn’t leave a private space or a free dollar to families that walk in the door?

Maybe the better question is not what’s in those angry men’s minds, but what kinds of (financial) incentives are coursing through the bloodstream of these institutions, soaking time, emotions, energy, and finances, from the unfortunate souls who were dragged in, or entered in to drag someone else in, until one party just GIVES up!  Alternately, until emotions escalate until someone is worse hurt than before, if possible.

{{2013 comment:  What frightens me more than angry and controlling individuals is dispassionately cold, calculating individuals COLLABORATING in places of authority, such as judgeships or court administrators, who figured that these courts were a good idea, and strategized to set them up over a period of decades — and did so!  }}

When it comes to social support of women who are telling the truth, and being told they’re not, this book exceptional.  It helped me.  So is, “The Batterer As Parent,” which (as I show below) is even quoted in a publication by the California Judicial Council, which then goes on to basically ignore most of its advice anyhow.  As to why, well, track those funds.

The Batterer as Parent: Addressing the Impact of Domestic Violence on Family Dynamics

Bancroft/Silverman’s “The Batterer as Parent:  addressing the impact of domestic violence on family” says about what needs to be said in the matter, I feel, and is so well documented.  One of my further-off goals as a person is to get a copy off it in the family courts in my state, or as required reading in the law schools.    I have it dog-eared, and attempted, as I did in the book below, have cast it, like pearls, before a number of relatives, in (alas, misplaced) hope it might lead to some understanding.  In doing this, I forgot a primary principle I’d learned years ago teaching (let alone, how about marketing) — first, determine, or incite interest.  Analytical as I am, it addressed the immediate situation and therefore should be relevant.

I was thinking in cooperation mode rather than stand-up “don’t mess with me!” mode.  Common mistake after leaving abuse….  You learn, eventually.  Again, which mode one is in relates to who one is dealing with, as communication IS (or should be) interactive in things of this nature.

The earlier, a little less technical read (addressed to women dealing with domestic violence in the home) is this one:

Why does He DO that?  Inside the Minds of Angry and Controlling Men

Front Cover

From the amazon site, editorial reviews:

From Publishers Weekly

This fascinating investigation into what makes abusive men tick is alarming, but its candid handling of a difficult subject makes it a valuable resource for professionals and victims alike. Bancroft, the former codirector of Emerge, the nation’s first program for abusive men, has specialized in domestic violence for 15 years, and his understanding of his subject and audience is apparent on every page.

One of the prevalent features of life with an angry or controlling partner is that he frequently tells you what you should think and tries to get you to doubt or devalue your own perceptions and beliefs,” he writes. “I would not like to see your experience with this book re-create that unhealthy dynamic. So the top point to bear in mind as you read [this book] is to listen carefully to what I am saying, but always to think for yourself.

He maintains this level of sensitivity and even empathy throughout discussions on the nature of abusive thinking, how abusive men manipulate their families and the legal system and whether or not they can ever be cured. Jargon-free analysis is frequently broken up by interesting first-person accounts and boxes that distill in-depth information into simple checklists. Bancroft’s book promises to be a beacon of calm and sanity for many storm-tossed families.

Copyright 2002 Reed Business Information, Inc. –This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

From Library Journal

Bancroft, a former codirector of Emerge, the first U.S. program for abusive men, and a 15-year veteran of work with abusive men, reminds readers that each year in this country, two to four million women are assaulted by their partners and that at least one out of three American women will be a victim of violence by a husband or boyfriend at some point in her life.

His valuable resource covers early warning signs, ten abusive personality types, the abusive mentality, problems with getting help from the legal system, and the long, complex process of change. After dispelling 17 myths about abusive personalities, he sheds light on the origin of the abuser’s values and beliefs, which he finds to be a better explanation of abusive behavior than reference to psychological problems. Bancroft extends his approach to problematic gay and lesbian relationships as well, making the book that much more useful and empowering. This is essential reading for those in the helping professions and highly recommended for all libraries, especially those in communities with emergency shelter programs. Dale Farris, Groves, TX

Copyright 2002 Cahners Business Information, Inc. –This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

To actually, as a woman, have a male author voicing what I and others, as women, had experienced, was a thing indeed.  It lent legitimacy to the issue, I felt.  This book is cited in organizations all over the map.

Of course, the industry now has its updated, newer improved (and more politically correct, I bet, with the fatherhood movement) commentary.  After all, if the wheel works, why not reinvent it?  I haven’t read this yet, I just noticed the title:

So, after the domestic violence restraining order with kickout, there comes the “bring him back in” movement, as in:

Parenting After Violence is a new national concept, {{being marketed by certain parties}} which explores ways that both mothers and fathers can restore family safety and help their children to heal when there has been trauma, conflict, and family violence within the home.

{{See my last post about, WHODUN IT?  Nobody.  It was just “there.”  No one acted.. It was just, well, “there.”  Neither he, nor she, nor anyone in LGBT actually was violent.  It just “was there.” (get it??) }}

In many cases when domestic/family violence has occurred, support to become skilled and caring parents after violence has ended is a crucial need for both the mother and the father.

{{Maybe there ARE marriages where there was violence, and then, through therapy, intervention, or social supports, it stopped.  I personally haven’t met many.  I personally have experienced ONLY the opposite, escalation.  This was predictable, as my ex kept his word in that matter — don’t ever oppose me or I will escalate until I win.  THAT’s re-assuring.  Now the language has changed, but not the real dynamics of control.  }}

There is a growing recognition that many men who have been abusive are also fathers who will continue to be involved in the lives of their children and their children’s mothers; and that many mothers who have been abused or abusive will continue to parent their children.

{{Given the current structure of grants, through HHS, to make sure they are, and the financial incentives, plus the religiously conservative insistence that a woman without her child’s father in the home is like a fish out of water, and is responsible for the greatest social crisis of our times, and cause of the nation’s woes, “FATHERLESSNESS.”}}{{I’m pointing out the phrasing:  They will continue to be involved. . . .. yes they will. . . . Not only by mutual choice of the mothers and fathers, but also by policies in the courts, in the churches, and from the Feds.  No one did this either, this site is simply reporting as a passive observer of “what is.”  (I just happen to be reporting its reporting, also !!  🙂  

These families need and deserve more support. The Parenting After Violence initiative is a collaboration between the Philadelphia Department of Human Services and ISF to create and implement a Parenting After Violence Curriculum for child welfare and other providers.

Well, what a coincidence!  The fatherhood backlash to feminism and the Violence Against Women movement begins, back whenever, the HHS has the grants, and here comes this Parenting After Violence initiative.  Of course this is needed not because of federal policies making it all but impossible for a woman to leave violence in cases where it just might really mean not becoming a statistic, or not having emotionally traumatized kids for the next generation, or not ending up homeless, broke, or whatnot, because the money went into the court battle, or becuase (if low-income) the constant interaction with the ex required through these philosophies meant a real life as an independent professional warn’t going to happen.  NEVER could the issue of safety actually be resolved.  In light of this, yes, it would make a lot of sense to teach the children who certainly cannot tell by outsider’s behavior what is or is not considered a good role model. . . . . .   I mean if the systems are not going to allow the nonviolent parent to make this determination as a parent, and act on it, then we’d BETTER figure out how to make things “work.”

I speak with sarcasm as someone who tried to walk the noble line, never did I intend to fully cut off contact.  We were just going to confront the violence, and move on from there, with children in frequent contact with Dad.  Surely this could be done.  However, there came a point in time when I had to say NO! and more frequently, louder, and clearer than I was able to safely do in the home.

Having done this, and done it within the context of family law, showing my children by example, how to disagree with a person, but not disrespect that person, and showing my children by example, how to comply with court orders, as they were in my home, but try to set a stand of not being ordered around — guess what?  — the system would not support ME doing this.  IT (I could name the elements, the organizations, but am not right here), IT did NOT support my wish to have my offspring tell right from wrong, love and be involved with their Dad, yet not be exposed to his abusive and controlling dynamic towards me as a woman (even though formerly, that was more physically and property, etc. destructive).

Then what?  Next thing you know, kids are gone.  . . . . . .  So much for THAT approach to THESE situations….

Parenting after violence.  Is there an AFTER to violence without an attitude change, including the prime indicator, “entitlement.”  So, well, that depends, don’t it.  It depends on what Dad’s idea is afterwards, and to a great deal on the social systems with which he has to deal — are they going to support the abusive dynamic, the cover it up dynamic, the, we want you together is more important than we want you all ALIVE and off welfare, and off being “at risk”?  Or are they going to support the:  “Ask not what you can do for your kids, but ask what you can do for your country — give ’em up, ladies!  You owe it to the nation.”

“Oh, and in the process, sedate your natural motherhood instincts to protect, warn, and teach right from wrong.  They are not welcome; we have parenting education programs for minutiae like that….  If you won’t do that voluntarily, there is always the chemical sedation available too . . . . . Either way, SOMEONE is going to make some money of your kids, or you.  You OWE it to the country.  They don’t want fatherlessness.

(Wow.  Guess I was in a “mood” today over this…..)

Here’s another one:

by

Judicial Council of California 

Administrative Office of the Courts 

Center for Families, Children, & the Courts

Copyright © 2003 by Judicial Council of California/Administrative Office of the Courts.

All rights reserved.

Interesting:

the Judicial Council of California is a major grants recipient:

This printout is an “Advanced Search” from the TAGGS.HHS database, selecting this institution only:

Fiscal Year

Program Office

Award Number

Award Title

CFDA #

CFDA Program Name

Award Action Type

Princ.
Invest.

Sum of Actions

2009

ACF ACYF

0901CASCID

FY 2009 DATA STATE COURT IMPROVE

93586

State Court Improvement Program

NEW

$ 786,069

2009

ACF ACYF

0901CASCIT

FY 2009 TRAINING STATE COURT IMPROVE

93586

State Court Improvement Program

NEW

$ 788,370

2009

CB

0901CASCIP

FY 2009 BASIC STATE COURT IMPROVE

93586

State Court Improvement Program

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS)

$ 266,289

2009

CB

0901CASCIP

FY 2009 BASIC STATE COURT IMPROVE

93586

State Court Improvement Program

NEW

$ 807,034

2009

OCSE

0010CASAVP

2000 SAVP

93597

Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs

OTHER REVISION

$- 48,827

2009

OCSE

0110CASAVP

2001 SAVP

93597

Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs

OTHER REVISION

$- 26,938

2009

OCSE

0210CASAVP

2002 SAVP

93597

Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs

OTHER REVISION

$- 46,392

2009

OCSE

0310CASAVP

2003 SAVP

93597

Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs

OTHER REVISION

$- 15,092

2009

OCSE

0910CASAVP

FY 2009 STATE ACCESS & VISITATION

93597

Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs

NEW

$ 942,497

2008

ACF ACYF

0801CASCID

2008 (SCID) STATE CT IMPROVE. – DATA SHARING

93586

State Court Improvement Program

NEW

$ 818,023

2008

ACF ACYF

0801CASCIT

2008 (SCIT) STATE CT IMPROVE. – TRAINING

93586

State Court Improvement Program

NEW

$ 792,773

2008

CB

0801CASCIP

2008 (SCIP) STATE CT IMPROVE. – BASIC

93586

State Court Improvement Program

NEW

$ 1,082,580

2008

OCSE

0810CASAVP

2008 SAVP

93597

Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs

NEW

$ 957,600

2007

ACF ACYF

0701CASCID

2007 SCIP – DATA SHARING

93586

State Court Improvement Program

NEW

$ 870,481

2007

ACF ACYF

0701CASCIT

2007 SCIP – TRAINING

93586

State Court Improvement Program

NEW

$ 871,401

2007

CB

0701CASCIP

2007 STATE COURT IMPROVE. – BASIC

93586

State Court Improvement Program

NEW

$ 1,272,138

2007

OCSE

0710CASAVP

2007 SAVP

93597

Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs

NEW

$ 950,190

2006

ACF ACYF

0601CASCID

2006 SCIP – DATA ANALYSIS

93586

State Court Improvement Program

NEW

$ 885,142

2006

ACF ACYF

0601CASCIT

2006 SCIP – TRAINING

93586

State Court Improvement Program

NEW

$ 904,380

2006

CB

0601CASCIP

2006 SCIP

93586

State Court Improvement Program

NEW

$ 1,201,407

2006

OCSE

0610CASAVP

2006 SAVP

93597

Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs

NEW

$ 987,973

2005

CB

0501CASCIP

2005 SCIP

93586

State Court Improvement Program

NEW

$ 1,226,900

2005

OCSE

0510CASAVP

2005 SAVP

93597

Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs

NEW

$ 988,710

2004

CB

0401CASCIP

2004 SCIP

93586

State Court Improvement Program

NEW

$ 1,210,185

2004

OCSE

0410CASAVP

2004 SAVP

93597

Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs

NEW

$ 988,710

2003

CB

0301CASCIP

93586

State Court Improvement Program

UNKNOWN

$ 1,192,273

2003

OCSE

0310CASAVP

2003 SAVP

93597

Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs

UNKNOWN

$ 970,431

2002

CB

0201CASCIP

93586

State Court Improvement Program

UNKNOWN

$ 1,071,211

2002

CB

9701CASCIP

STATE COURTS IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

93586

State Court Improvement Program

UNKNOWN

$- 19,049

2002

CB

9801CASCIP

STATE COURTS IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

93586

State Court Improvement Program

UNKNOWN

$- 987

2002

OCSE

0210CASAVP

2002 SAVP

93597

Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs

UNKNOWN

$ 970,431

2001

CB

0101CASCIP

SCIP 2001

93586

State Court Improvement Program

UNKNOWN

$ 778,774

2001

OCSE

0010CASAVP

2000 SAVP

93597

Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs

UNKNOWN

$ 987,501

2001

OCSE

0110CASAVP

2001 SAVP

93597

Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs

UNKNOWN

$ 987,501

2000

CB

0001CASCIP

SCIP 2000

93586

State Court Improvement Program

UNKNOWN

$ 805,456

2000

CB

90CO0874

EFFECTIVE COLLABORATIONS FOR TIMELY ADOPTIONS

93652

Adoption Opportunities

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION

DIANE NUNN

$ 175,000

1999

CB

90CO0874

EFFECTIVE COLLABORATIONS FOR TIMELY ADOPTIONS

93652

Adoption Opportunities

NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION

DIANE NUNN

$ 175,000

1999

CB

9901CASCIP

SCIP 1999

93586

State Court Improvement Program

UNKNOWN

$ 827,811

1998

CB

90CO0874

EFFECTIVE COLLABORATIONS FOR TIMELY ADOPTIONS

93652

Adoption Opportunities

NEW

DIANE NUNN

$ 175,000

1998

CB

9801CASCIP

STATE COURTS IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

93586

State Court Improvement Program

UNKNOWN

$ 846,536

1997

OCS

9701CASCIP

SCIP 1997

93586

State Court Improvement Program

NEW

$ 824,628

1996

ACF

9601CASCIP

 

NONE

Awards not funded from a program listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance**

NEW

 

$ 824,628




Interesting, this coincides with the onset of welfare reform, 1996.  There was no name for the award.  there was not CATEGORY for the aware.  There was on principal investigator for the award — yet it was $824,682!!  Finally a real “specific” name was given for this award series, “State Court Improvement Program.”  In 1998, the “type of award” was also “Unknown.” Who was responsible for this $824K++/year then?  At the same time, Diane Nunn shows up with “Effecive Collaborations for Timely Adoptions.  I’d definitely look up ThAT series (90CO0874!)

YOU KNOW, THE “ACCESS VISITATION” GRANTS GUYS, AMONG OTHER THINGS, WHERE THE “OCSE” (That’s the national Office of Child SUpport Enforcement” whereby noncustodial parents (AKA, when the program was set up, primarily, DADS) get solicited to get more “access” by more and more non-evidence-based, non-due-process-observing programs outside the courtroom.  These grants with the “required outcome” of more custodial access, etc.)


Sometimes, it backfires, and the kids just simply get switched.  Other times, HEY, child support arrears just gets reduced in exchange for more quality time with the NONcustodial parent, which I suppose helps the child, who didn’t really need that child support coming into his or her own household on time, in full, anyhow — as much as they needed a father.  When they have more time with the father, supposedly Dad will be happier and more inclined to pay up.  If not, too bad, they still get more time with Dad and less child support.  This is called “Helping” the children…..  Also note:  rarely applies in reverse after custdoy switching…..).

The key phrase to understanding “Access Visitation”  is “Required outcome.”  Yes, the judicial process: courtroom hearings, filing of motions, submission of evidence, complaints, etc. – – — UNknown to most, is to have a REQUIRED outcome for the government goodies to keep coming — not to litigants, of course, but to corporate entities or people that will help ONE side of debate to, well, WIN, more.  Receipt of grants apparently contingent upon getting more noncustodial time for the parent.  If normal due process doesn’t do that, then THIS process supports things that will influence that process, such as mediation.  Other catch 22 — try being female, AFTEr custody switch, and get access through these programs, many of which nationwide go to groups having the word “fatherhood” in them.  

(See my other post Cooks in the Court Kitchen…)

Summary (this is BALLPARK, and includes a little bit from UTAH — see link above):

93.586: State Court Improvement Program  {{WOW.  Courts should be pretty good by now!]]> > > > > >  $16,739,481
 93.597: Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs $8,726,501
 93.556: Promoting Safe and Stable Families $1,486,068
 16.585: Drug Court Discretionary Grant Program $485,885
 16.560: National Institute of Justice Research, Evaluation, and Development Project Grants $250,902
OK, anyhow, this Judicial Council getting the thousands (Millions, actually), to improve themselves, and in re:  access visitation ESPECIALLY in 2007, 2008, & 2009 (what’s up there, eh?)

And Parenting After Violence is the language this Judicial Council has been speaking.

NB: I’m not sure, but I believe that Diane Nunn (above, “Adoption Opportunities”) is also an AFCC member. Search this post, or find out yourself). It’s relevant as AFCC also prefers the mental health language to right/wrong/criminal language when dealing with families.

Executive Summary 

The courts have been presented with increasing numbers of families for whom difficult decisions must be

made following single or multiple violent events involving both adult and child victims. The social science

literature reviewed in the report entitled “Parenting in the Context of Domestic Violence”1 describes

children’s exposure to domestic violence, the needs of both parents and children in the context of domestic

violence events, and the resources available to help them. The following points summarized by staff at the

Center for Families, Children & the Courts (CFCC)2, highlight the major findings of the full report. 

 

Parenting by Perpetrators of Domestic Violence 

 

Observations and clinical experience suggest that perpetrators of domestic violence are often more

controlling and authoritarian, less consistent, and more likely to manipulate the children and undermine

the mothers’ parenting than nonviolent fathers3.

Child exposure to domestic violence has an estimated 40 percent rate of co-occurrence with child

maltreatment, according to a meta-analysis of 30 studies.

In one study, one-third of battered women experienced domestic violence after separating from their

spouses. Key variables that predicted repeat assaults included threats from the perpetrator, the

perpetrator’s proximity to his victim, and his prior accusations of her sexual infidelity.  

Parenting by Victims of Domestic Violence  

 

    Battered mothers appear to experience significantly greater levels of stress than non-battered mothers do.

However, this stress does not always translate into diminished parenting.

    Battered mothers may be more likely than others to use some type of aggression against their children but

are less likely to do so when they are safe.

    The research on battered mothers reveals that in the face of severe stress they may compensate for violent

events by offering increased nurturing and protection to their children. Adult victims often make

decisions to stay with or leave their perpetrator based on their sense of the best interest of their children.

AND:

Pointers for Practice for Judicial Officers and Court Staff 

The following statements highlight points from the report1 entitled “Parenting in the Context of Domestic

Violence” that require heightened awareness by judicial officers, custody evaluators, staff of supervised 

visitation centers, and mediators. Please see the full report for a more in-depth discussion of these topics.

Parenting by Perpetrators of Domestic Violence 

The parenting of batterers compared to that of nonviolent fathers is more controlling and authoritarian, is

often less consistent, and is more often intended to manipulate the children and undermine the mothers’

parenting. Batterers are often able to perform parenting tasks well when being observed in custody

evaluations or supervised visitation settings, but then may change their behavior once observation by

outsiders has ended. Careful interviewing of adult and child victims and collateral contacts as well as

reviews of police, criminal, and child protection records is needed to assess a perpetrator’s risk to

children.

Adequately assessing a perpetrator’s risk to children includes, according to Bancroft and Silverman

(2002)2, attention to the following factors:

1. Perpetrator’s history of physical or sexual abuse and neglect of his or her children;

2. Level of continued danger to the non-abusing parent;

3. History of abuse of the children and other parent;

4. History of using children in or exposing them to violent events;

5. Level of coercive control that the perpetrator has exercised in the past;

6. Degree to which the perpetrator feels entitled to access to the children and to other family privileges;

7. History of substance abuse and mental illness;

8. Willingness to accept the decisions of the victim and of social institutions such as law enforcement

and the courts; and

9. Risk of child abduction.

THIS was in March 2003.  We are hereby (I just checked) in 2009.

[my 2009 perspective:]

I think something got lost in the translation.  I’ve understood this clearly since about 2003.

I can verify, from California, something isn’t getting through.  And funding to shelters was at risk, schools aren’t doing that well.

Perhaps if instead of PAYING judicial officers and others to be so trained, we PENALIZED or FIRED them if their screwups which result in further abuse or deaths to the litigants (i.e., if they exhibited a pattern of failure to observe these things, which I for sure was voicing in our court documents & to officers, that showed they weren’t paying attention to their own court’s documented principles, i.e., “Pointers.”  PERHAPS if we saw a steadfast indication that, despite adequate training** too many of these entitities took up the training, and then went about life as usual, meaning life as if the violence against women act, and the headlines, did not exist – – there were consequences?  I mean, what do you think?

**(which they get paid to sit through, I believe, and I didn’t.  I bought my own books and took my own time to read, collaborate, research, etc.),

Or perhaps we should remove the financial incentives entirely.  I don’t know.

But as a LONGTIME  reader and owner of this book (see top of post). . .

Front Cover

I have something to say.  I think that JUST PERHAPS this is the wrong question to ask.

I mean, would YOU like to “get inside” t he head of an angry and controlling man?  I wouldn’t, not really.   9 times out of 10, this is what is likely to happen:  He will figure you out long before you figure him out. And enjoy the attention along the way.

I have a PAGE in draft form (vs. post) looking at the various fatalities that happened right after DV program graduation, or while IN the classes, and performing with flying colors, too.  . . . . .  Should “we” really psychologize violence and control?

OR, perhaps, the question should be more focused on BEHAVIOR than PSYCHOLOGY.  I odn’t mean behavioral sciences.  I mean, criminal behavior with criminal consequences.

After all, there are no laws (on the books) against BEING angry.  That’s a state of mind.  The Bible even reads, seems I heard it:  “Be ye angry and sin not.”      It’s the “sin not” part that the INSTITUTIONS of government have any business in.  See Constitution.  The laws against domestic violence relate to things that destroy property and hurt people, and infringe on the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness of others who HAVE got enough self-restraint not to assault others.  Or stalk them.  Or so harrass them that work becomes misery.  Or deprive them of basics a human being ought to have, especially if she or he has worked for and earned them.

When the family courts get into moods and psychology, they are getting into religion.

When they get into what actually took place, whether or not it was a crime as defined on the books, or destructive, as defined on the books, perhaps then some sanity will return to these arenas.

> > > > >>

I’m sure the guys in Emerge and others VERY qualified through years of experience can tell the difference between confronting, or being swallowed up with only the heels kicking out, of the subject “angry & controlling man’s” lifestyle.

Who knows why he’s angry and controlling. . . . Maybe he had a bad hair day.  Maybe when he was a kid, his brother stole his sweetheart.  The thing in this world is that part of growing up includes not beating up on each other.

Speaking as a (former) teacher, I can affirm that when I was just out of class, and in front of them, the kids figured me out a LOT faster than vice versa.  Some are natural at teaching, or performing, but ALL need experience.  One of THE most valuable lessons I learned in life was UNlearning most (not half, not some, but MOST) of my educational theories, and letting the evidence and results speak for themselves.  You cannot go up in front of a crowd of inner city kids with a theory, and come out with the theory intact.  It WILL interact.  Moreover, the new teacher is new.  The kids are quite experienced at sitting in classrooms and scoping out new teachers, in fact it’s virtually an art form, complete with experimentation.  On the teacher.

Gradually you figure out the balance.

When it comes to training judges, etc. and everyone — and when it comes to INTERVENING with BATTERERS (etc.), I’m veering towards, perhaps there’s a better idea.  First of alll, all are not going to get trained.  Second of all, who is going to monitor performance.  PERHAPS the thing to do is even the balance, the dynamics a little more, so that FEWER litigants are exposed to CORRUPT or INEPT judges.

And I think that for this, we have to do something FAST about the inordinate amount of power a custody evaluator, or a mediator, or any other court paraprofessional has, in the system.  I’m starting to have some serious questions also about the police.  I mean, they are human, they can fly off the collar, they can also (as humans sometimes do) stick with their colleagues and lie to coverup.

Correspondingly, there is no other profession where a day at the “office” might end in not coming home, and where the job description requires, on the streets, at least, DAILY gallantry.

MOREOVER, it’s one of the top 3 or 4 professions where batterers are found, statistically, I keep reading.

Except of course living with or trying to leave a seriously overentitled (or otherwise compromised) batterer, and having children with him or her.

Moreover, psychological abuse really does hurt.  It’s sometimes harder (I found) to deal with than the physical, although I’m not kindly inclined to that either.

Now, the police are trained for this, let alone vests, and armed.  They are also trained how to dominate a situation conversationally (backed up by the natural authority — they can arrest, and they can, if necessary, shoot, taser, handcuff or etc.).  They tend to go out in the field in partners, if I”m not mistaken.

MAYBE this is a better approach to helping “victims of domestic violence” or to stopping it.

Can we not police ourselves??  Socially?

ONE thing we ought to find time, somehow to do, is police the courts and what’s going on, and through, them.  And by “we” I mean — if you live in the country.
.I think perhaps a BETTER course of study might be for more of the general public, and that would be in how to assert their rights in court IN PRO PER.  For one, law is logical; you have to reason.  It has certain rules.  Like any game where one player doesn’t know the rules — well, you can see about how well that might go.  How’d you know if someone was breaking them?
In some sports, the idea is the sport.  So the players do well to be evenly matched, it’s better for all.
Not so the courtroom.  The idea there is to WIN, and walk off with the spoils (the court order, and sometimes finances that go along with it).  
Well, I’m just thinking aloud here.  As to 

WHY DOES HE DO THAT?

(just as in the abusive situation, I lost a LOT of time asking that question, and trying to “manage.”  In retrospect, the more appropriate reaction would have been to leave or confront harder.  Earlier.  MIGHT have rescued the marriage to even the power.  Not having run across serious abuse before (first marriage), it was an odd beast, and I just tried to tame it somehow.  It seems.  No deal).    THIS is the answer:

I don’t care.  But he must STOP!  (the question is:  Solution A:  WHAT will, without exception and without requiring a lethality assessment, make him stop?  And if that exists, WHY won’t YOU do it?)

Solution B.  HOW can I defend myself and my loved one without committing any crime myself?  And as a way of life, not just a single event…

Why does he do it, my eye.  Society allows it.  What else is new.  Our culture glorifies violence, and is likely not about to stop that.  Reminds me of the Roman Empire and gladiators (only they used real people and real animals, thousands of them from Africa, all over, died for sport in the sand).  We’re probably going down, without a restoration NOT to Brave New World, but to the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights.  This includes INDIVIDUAL unalienable rights.  And to get to that, at some level, I’m sorry (crucify me if you must), this education system tied to the work economy producing employEES (but not he jobs to go with them) rather than BUSINESSMEN (and WOMEN), has to go.  People need more time, and solitude, and to be able to handle their time and solitude, better.  Especially YOUNG people.


Have been wanting to say this for a few posts, so I just did.  You can’t succed in life without asking the right questions.  

That was a good one, but I just think perhaps it’s time to move beyond it, and I do mean communally.




Look for a June, 2013 update, as this topic is continuing to come up. It will probably contain this paragraph:

While THESE people are publishing, the rest of us are Perishing.  DO click the link please!

It is more than evident that the publishers and the perishers are in a conflict-of-interest relationship involving exchange of public funds and the desire to dominate the conversations about those who are perishing, and their children, who continue to suffer.

One Response

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Dear One, If your name was here, I did’t find it, but what I did find, for the first time, finally, was someone witty, someone who made me laugh out loud, about absurdities and inanities regarding very serious and, often, horrendous behaviors, unconscionable and egregious (by the legal system and its concurrent abuses and crimes). I’ve been divorced since 1969, but I’ve helped/assisted many clients, friends, friends of friends thru that dark abyss. When I get them laughing, maybe hard, with tears and guffaws, they might first bring themselves up short, as if it weren’t allowed, that sweet relief, saying “this isn’t funny.” Yea, you have to find and continue to find humor, even dark humor, or you’ll die of despondence and despair. Then they get it-they get permission to riff and let it rip. That’s why I’m delighted to have found your musings. I spent a while reading just 1/5th of the site (your words–not the links–and the meter says I’ve been “on” for zero minutes. Not so. I’ve figured out your are not blogging by date, so to speak, so I have to impose own breaks. I just mentally noted I should search for the word, variation, to resume your musings. There are some folks I will send to your blog. You are aware that much of what you write is common sense and rational, but the system is not. Chaotic and destructive. You say the law is logical, is rational, ah, but the parties are not and they are not always held to high standards, morals, or principles, even when the Judges could demand it. That’s the worst “sin” because they have the power, that ability to steer and control so often, but “neglect” those abilities and, often, blatently so. So, in spite of your personal tribulations and sorrows, thank you for your brainstorms of saying it like it is, speaking the truth, with humor and grit. If you get hassled by emailers, you know what you can tell them–I wish you the very best, but I wish for myself even better! If you have another blog, I’d like to read it. Hip Hip! Chin Chin! Kindest regards, Kristin Brown

    kristin

    October 13, 2009 at 4:52 pm


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

martinplaut

Journalist specialising in the Horn of Africa and Southern Africa

Let's Get Honest! Blog: Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History

'A Different Kind of Attention Develops Sound Judgment' | 'Suppose I'm Right Here?...' (posted 3/23 & 3/5/2014). Over 680 posts, Public-Interest Investigative Blogging On These Matters Since 2009.

iakovos alhadeff

Anti-Propaganda

Red Herring Alert

There's something fishy going on!

The American Spring Network

News. by the people, for the people. The #1 source for independent investigative journalism in the Show-Me State, serving Missouri since 2011.

Family Court Injustice

It Takes "Just Us" to Fight Family Court Injustice

The Espresso Stalinist

Wake Up to the Smell of Class Struggle ☭

Spiritual Side of Domestic Violence

Finally! The Truth About Domestic Violence and The Church

%d bloggers like this: