There are a lot of non-profit organizations out there that claim that Mothers are abused by Fathers and the system. These advocate for tougher laws and better protection of the Mothers and their Children.
There are a lot of non-profit organizations out there that claim that Fathers are abused by the Mothers and the system. These advocate for tougher laws and better protection of the Fathers and their Children.
Who is right? What is the solution? Unfortunately, these opposing organizations and movements fight against each other.
The below is an analysis of this conflict. It applies to high-conflict family law cases only. Of course, there are many divorcing families that are not high conflict and they can amicably, or for the most part resolve their issues. The high conflict ones are analyzed here.
Mothers' position
Mothers claim that there are many cases where abusive Fathers abused and continue to abuse the Mother and her Children. The abuse can be sexual, physical, or emotional. Additionally, claim goes that Fathers (many times having financial resources Mothers do not have) continue to abuse Mothers through the Court system. Fathers may use manipulation, deception, attacks, gas-lighting and other techniques to continue the abuse, coercion, and deceive the Court in order to win the custody of the Children.
There are undeniable cases with evidence where Fathers did and do indeed abuse the Mothers. There are extreme cases when Fathers even murdered the Child or Children or the Mother. (and sometimes himself as well)
Many Mothers' organizations are advocating for tougher laws. For the Courts to take seriously when Mothers report the abuse. To remove Children from Fathers when abuse is reported and not investigated yet. This is to protect the Children as the conflict escalates through the Court.
Mothers report that when they do report abuse to the Court, Fathers many times counterclaim that it is the Mother who is making false allegations and it is HER who is the abuser and the culprit. And the Children should be protected from HER.
We concur with Mothers' claims that this is indeed happening and that the abuse and threat is real and that Children are indeed in danger under these circumstances.
Fathers' position
Fathers claim that there are many cases where abusive Mothers abused and continue to abuse the Father and his children. The abuse is mostly in the form of false allegations and coercive control. Claims that Fathers raped the Children or the Mother. Claims that Fathers are abusive or violent and that it is important to remove Children from the Fathers in order to protect them. That Mothers use manipulation, deception, attacks, gas-lighting and other techniques to continue abuse and deceive the Court in order to win the custody of the Children.
When it comes to real violence or even murder, the public bias and perception is that Fathers dominate the field. However, there are cases when Mothers commit such acts as well. Actually, to our own surprise, the latest CDC data on child abuse state that, statistically speaking, Mothers have more prevalent abuse and even murder rate of their Children than Fathers do.
Many Fathers' organizations are advocating for tougher laws. For the Courts to investigate false allegations and not to make rash orders to remove the Children from them. To hold accountable any actor who makes false allegations.
We concur with Fathers' claims that this is indeed happening and that the abuse and threat is real and that Children are indeed being removed from Fathers under such claims and given to abusive Mothers.
Additional context
To add complexity to the situation, child support creates financial benefits for the parent who has the children and if the parent is an abuser, it gives him or her a feeling of power and control over the other parent and thus enables and rewards coercive control. (and financially drains the other parent)
Custody situations favoring one parent, even if temporary, while case is investigated, also creates a 'status quo' that is then many times exploited by abusive parents as a precedence to keep the arrangement as is or to even push it more towards their favor.
All of the above is portrayed as "in the best interest of the children".
Our position
We concur that both the protective Mothers and the protective Fathers are correct. The protective parent, whether the Mother or the Father, is decimated by the system and the abusive parent and so are the Children.
If tougher laws are implemented as Mothers are advocating, the dire situation for the protective Fathers and their Children becomes even worse.
If tougher laws are implemented as Fathers are advocating, the dire situation for the protective Mothers and their Children becomes even worse.
Some advocate for tougher laws for false allegations and we concur. However, this can backfire as well. What determines, in the court of law, whether an allegation is true or false? Evidence? Some evidence is clear (such as medical reports) but others not so much. Mothers can call police on Fathers under a pretense of domestic violence and then can use such reports in Court as evidence. How do you prove emotional abuse? Coercive control? It has already been shown that Courts or even psychologists can't see it. Protective Mother making a correct claim that Father is coercing and thus abusing the children can quickly backfire against the Mother with a tougher law, that she is making false allegations, while she is not. Same applies to a protective Father. So then, do you, as a protective parent, take the risk to report actual abuse because it can backfire that you are making false allegations and it is YOU who is abusive and children need protection from?
This is a fine line to walk. And this applies to a solution as well.
There is however a common element in both of these cases. Putting genders aside, it is the malevolent, narcissistic parent that is the abuser. If it is the Father who is the narcissist, Mothers are absolutely correct. If it is the Mother who is the narcissist, Fathers are absolutely correct.
Let's look at parental alienation
Child resides with Parent A and rejects Parent B. Why? It can be that it has been alienated by Parent A, the abuser. Or it can be that the Parent B, the abuser, alienated the Child itself by its abuse.
- Abuser, if the Child resides with him/her and rejects the protective parent, will claim that it is the protective parent who alienated the Child by its abuse.
- Abuser, if the child does NOT reside with him/her and the child rejects him/her, will claim that it is the protective parent who alienated the Child.
- Protective parent, if the child resides with him/her and rejects the abusive parent, will claim (and correctly) that it is the abusive parent who alienated the Child by its abuse.
- Protective parent, if the child does NOT reside with him/her and rejects the protective parent, will claim (correctly) that it is the abuser who alienated the Child.
On the surface however, for the courts and professionals, this will look like two parents fighting and both being a problem at best, and the protective parent to be the problem at worst.
So then, you have two groups of people, one who don't even believe in parental alienation and another who does. More fragmentation and fighting.
We believe and know, that parental alienation exists and is real. However, purpose and motive of the parental alienation is not alienation itself but 'paradigm replication' as explained in this article: Parental Alienation - Not what you think. The label is wrong and ineffective to portray and address what is happening.
Additional context of complexity
The family law industry's motives run contrary to the best interests of the family and thus the Children. Conflict breeds more revenue. Narcissists breed conflict. Industry loves narcissists. As such, the industry and its players are narcissistic themselves. This explains why evidence, psychological evaluations are ignored. Why Children are many times given to the abuser.
The system not only does not work, it actually works against the family by its own motives.
Open request
If there was an effective technique to identify a Narcissistic Paradigm, malevolent parent then the solution would be easier. But we know that nothing of that sort exists. Psychological evaluations do not work or are ignored. Court appointed psychologists and evaluators do not identify them effectively either, or misidentify them on purpose.
This is an open request to all psychologists and professionals who understand the problem on a deep level: how can we identify narcissists BEFORE they do the damage? Before they show their malevolent and destructive behaviors? The technique however cannot utilize people because they are 1) prone to be narcissists as well and thus manipulate the identification or 2) become gas-lighted by the narcissistic deception and misidentify the psychopathologies.
We MUST UNITE
We MUST UNITE to fight our common enemy. The enemy is fragmenting us and pinning us against each other which gives it control and allows it to perpetuate the abuse.