(CW Child abuse) Why do mothers not protect their children from abusive boyfriends

I didn't say they were lying. That is a lie on your behalf. I asked how many will lie and how many are abused - thus accepting some have been and some will be lying. Your fabrication that I said they are lying when I clearly said some will be and some will not is quite the false statement. I would assume nothing less from you but can you explain why you say that I accuse them of lying when I did not. I accuse liars of lying which they do and do not accuse those who do not. Not really rocket science. However you saying I accuse victims of lying is wholly untrue. I accuse those of lying who are lying. If they are lying they are not victims so therefore I have not accused a single victim as if they are victims they are not lying. If they are not victims they are lying so they deserve to be called out, yes or no?

Hence why I asked for data which you do not know of and then said you never said abusers do not lie - so are you now calling them liars yourself? Make it make sense!

The studies showed the vast majority did not abuse....while those that did 75% reported being abused so almost all of those who were abused did not go on to abuse others. 75% is of a small proportion not 75% of the whole amount. So no it was not 75% of those abused go on to abuse others it was most do not but of those who do 75% were reporting a history of abuse. Of those 75% some will be lying and some will be telling the truth. As you said there is no way of knowing who is lying or telling the truth as data doesn't exist for that (I suspect it does as it does for rapists). But what we can say is that there will be liars within that group using it to excuse their behaviour.

You believe them all so you are saying that abusers do not lie or are you admitting that you accept that some masquerading as survivors are not in fact survivors at all?

They are not abuse survivors if they are lying about it. if they are telling the truth they are. You admit there is no data so many will not be survivors yet you say they are and believe abusers. If they are not survivors and lying they are not survivors. I never said they were not survivors. I said some will be lying some will not. Is there a reason why you chose to ignore that and pretend that I said none are victims? So no I am not calling them liars if they did not lie however I am calling liars liars who do. You are quite mistaken with that accusation. And a false one too. Ironic!

The main false accusers in rape are the rapists themselves I never mentioned ppl pretending to be raped. You did. In the same way that those who pretend to be abused False accusations when it comes to rape are common. Almost all rape victims are falsely accused of being a liar. You assume that the only person lying is the one making the report not the criminal. Rapists are 175 times more likely to lie than females or males fabricating rape. So yes false accusations when it comes to rape are common - from the rapist.

Some can do that as child on adult abuse exists and is growing as is child on parent abuse. Denying they were criminals is common and framing someone else as the perpetrator is common and also framing themselves as victims is common in all crimes - why not abuse? Pretending that you have an excuse for a lenient sentence and sympathy in court is a way of getting away with it. Criminals will use anything to be able to be out and free to abuse again. Including lying.

To recap. I cited the statistic to counter the bollocks you have posted over and over on this thread saying that survivors of child abuse are less likely to abuse their children than are adults who were not abused as children. I suppose I should not be surprised that you’d decide to say “they’re lying!” in response even though the studies done on adults never arrested, never charged, and never reported also fall within the same consistent range of 75% or more.

I will try and break it down.

I cited a systematic review that found that:
The majority of maltreating parents reported having been abused in childhood with rates in most studies greater than or equal to 75%

You replied to the above with “the conviction data shows the opposite in all countries”. You have expanded what you mean by that is the “conviction data for males vs females abusing others shows males at a significant difference to females” which isn’t remotely relevant much less “the opposite” of the finding I cited.

You then carried on “…as females are abused more often your logic is that most women are abusers or at risk of being while men are the victims of some kind of miscarriage of justice” - nothing I have posted stated or implied any of that so I am at a loss as to why you have written this. My citation refers to “parents” which, as you no doubt know, is a gender neutral term that refers to males and females.

“I would also like to understand why we accept rapists are the main false accusers when it comes to sex crimes yet abusers do not lie...why is that?”
and
”We accept that criminals lie often to deflect and to get away with their crimes. Happens in all crimes...yet not with abuse?”

No one has said that “abusers do not lie” least of all I. The systematic review I cited accurately used the term “reported” for the measure which isn’t a guarantee of absolute fact or truth.

In regards, to the question of how many adult child abuse survivors or “false accusers” as you call them are lying about being victims of child abuse; there is no data on that which I know of. There are many studies into why adult survivors of child abuse have difficulty recognising abuse for abuse, and being able to disclose it at any point in their lives which indicate that it is more likely that false accusations are rare (similar to how victims of historic rape usually aren’t lying either). This applies to all child abuse survivors including the ones who do not go on to abuse their own children and those who do, male or female. I’d ask you for data that shows most adult child abuse survivors disclose historic child abuse done to them immediately after being arrested by police for abusing a child, but I don’t think such data exists.

I don’t think DARVO applies either as it refers to an abuser alleging that their victim is abusing them. With child abuse, an abuser can’t DARVO their way into anyone believing their child victim is abusing them by disclosing historic abuse of them when they were a child by another adult. In addition, disclosing that you were abused as a child, isn’t something that will let you get away with having abused a child so there isn’t the “get away with their crime” motivation to lie that you suggest.

Not vague at all - conviction data for males vs females abusing others shows males at a significant difference to women and as females are abused more often your logic is that most women are abusers or at risk of being while men are the victims of some kind of miscarriage of justice?

Nope I was on about DARVO, you do know what that means, right? Quite something that when criminals are caught they pretend to be the victim. It is classic in things like rape - pretending to be falsely accused of rape when they are not. And all these adults who couldn't ever speak out suddenly find their voice when arrested and blame someone else....now is there a study that shows how many of these who claim to have been abused are DARVO cases and how many are truthful? We accept that criminals lie often to deflect and to get away with their crimes. Happens in all crimes...yet not with abuse? Why so?

Also thanks for the articles that are backing up what I said - one states clearly that most do not abuse. Meaning there is no link, causation or correlation. However there is an odd thing that most abusers say they were abused....most rapists say they were falsely accused....most thieves say they were framed, most ....see the pattern? Lying to avoid punishment is the 2nd most common reason for lying. Now who would lie to avoid punishment? And why do we assume that abusers do not lie?

Your response is so off the wall and vague that I can’t make heads or tails of it in relation to the published statistic I cited. Did you mean to quote a different post?

And yet the conviction data shows the opposite in all countries. Quite interesting that. So most women are abusers and we just wrongly convict men for the majority of crimes when it should be most women incarcerated?

I would also like to understand why we accept rapists are the main false accusers when it comes to sex crimes yet abusers do not lie...why is that?

This is interesting and I sometimes wonder if the response is

• concern due to poorer single mums being vulnerable or
• faux concern rooted in classist assumptions about promiscuity of council estate single mums..ie the stereotype of 4 kids with 4 different dads.

There won’t be one. I have posted above a systematic review that found the opposite to be true, which is exactly in line with what you have posted.

The majority of maltreating parents reported having been abused in childhood with rates in most studies greater than or equal to 75%

”Nevertheless, the experience of abuse in childhood confers significant risk for the intergenerational transmission of abusive parenting behaviors, as the majority of maltreating parents reported having been abused in childhood (Coohey & Braun, 1997; Herrenkohl et al., 2013; Pears & Capaldi, 2001), with rates in most studies greater than or equal to 75%.”

Surely if abused ppl abuse ppl then…

There have been dozens of studies done on the intergenerational cycle of violence. See: Intergenerational effects of childhood maltreatment: A systematic review of the parenting practices of adult survivors of childhood abuse, neglect, and violence
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7476782/#S34

This systematic review evaluated 1,322 articles on child abuse of which 97 met the review criteria: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7476782/figure/F1/.

“In spite of the breadth of populations, definitions, and methodologies included in these studies, there was general consistency in findings that a history of CPA [Child Physical Abuse] confers increased risk for engaging in abusive or neglectful parenting, either directly or indirectly.”

[According to ONS, 7.72% of boys reported being physically abused compared to 7.54% of girls: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/articles/childabuseextentandnatureenglandandwales/yearendingmarch2019]

Other types of child abuse don’t increase risk of an abused child then abusing their children:
“…there was little support for an association between a history of CSA [Child Sexual Abuse] and engaging in abusive or neglectful parenting.”

In addition
“It is important to note that across studies, findings suggest that the vast majority of adults who were abused as children did not abuse their own children, thus breaking the cycle of violence (Augustyn et al., 2019; Kim, 2009; Pears & Capaldi, 2001). Nevertheless, the experience of abuse in childhood confers significant risk for the intergenerational transmission of abusive parenting behaviors, as the majority of maltreating parents reported having been abused in childhood (Coohey & Braun, 1997; Herrenkohl et al., 2013; Pears & Capaldi, 2001), with rates in most studies greater than or equal to 75%. Thus, protective factors that enable parents who were maltreated in childhood to break the cycle warrant investigation in order to facilitate a better understanding of how to prevent this transmission.”

The list I gave comes from the diagnostic booklet itself. So if what I said was rubbish then you have just rubbished the diagnostic procedure! Which for once I agree with you! It is bullshit.

So what is the test for this then? What biological markers do you have for this? I would like to know what this test consists of?

Where on earth do you work for goodness sake, you're talking such a load of rubbish on this thread although this particular post takes the biscuit!

Oh Jesus I'm out. You don't want to get , that's fine. I was going to suggest you read up on brain development and the effects of trauma on the brain, but I see it's pointless.

You do you ,boo.

So now you say she could suffer trauma responses and is a risk to the kids?

Which is it? She is either a risk or not? So now you are saying it is likely she could and the kids may get abused as the go to trauma response is to belt someone apparently.

Make your mind up!

Nope that is not the most important and not even considered in many diagnosis. Meet 5 such statements and bingo, you have yourself a diagnosis. No need for the empathy one if you meet 5 others.

Lack of empathy such as telling abuse victims their abuse wasn't bad as they were adults?

I did not bloody say ‘adults do not suffer trauma responses’ 🤣🤣🤣🤣 do you have comprehension difficulties or something? Or are you on a wind up? I can’t take you seriously anymore. I’m sure you’re just being goady.

Interesting & important discussion.

I know of a (middle class) woman who moved her kids in with a new partner within weeks / months of meeting. But everyone seems to be patting her on the back for finding “happiness” again after divorce….. I do wonder if they would react the same if she were a council estate mum…..

Abuse as an adult can cause the same responses as those in a child. You are very much misguided to think that adults do not suffer trauma responses.

Nope abuse experienced at ANY time in life is considered bad and to minimise it and tell abuse victims that it isn't bad because they are adults is disgusting. Absolutely abhorrent to say that it isn't that bad as an adult.

Trauma impacts everyone at any time in their life and in many different ways. It is as bad as it is for whoever experiences it. I cannot believe you say that it is not as bad when an adult experiences it.

This person is a risk to children as she suffers trauma daily so needs therapy or could be an abuse risk to those kids. Her genes may be impacted and this exposure could cause them to not be in control around the kids and harm them, or are you now saying that there is no risk despite suffering trauma daily and repeatedly and it not changing her genes - odd that - how very odd?

You are quite believable until one considers that you missed the most important indicator of NPD - a total lack of empathy.

Of all the issues those that suffer from narcissism have, an absence of empathy is usually the most challenging and the most visible to others in time.
It is a defining feature that they only have empathy and compassion for themselves and have no capacity whatsoever to truly consider others.

Everyone does not meet the criteria for NPD. You are talking absolute bollocks and this just confirms it so it’s not worth continuing the conversation anymore.

Narcissists are abusive and have a grandiose sense of self, but childhood adversity, feeling less than, and having chronically low self esteem is a cause of NPD.

Everyone meets the criteria for NPD. You do, so that means you are abusive as is everyone in the world. There are no biological markers for this. No test to undergo. No proof it exists. Only someone's opinion and statements which apply to every single person - such as have you ever accomplished anything good? Are you special to someone in your life? Do you get angry or irritated when you do not get treated the way you should be? Answer yes to those and bingo you are well on your way to being diagnosed! As I said - everyone meets the criteria for this 'disorder'!

For the 100th time, not everyone who suffers trauma will be an abuser. No one has said that, and your comparison is nonsense because the daily trauma that poster is experiencing is being experienced when she is already an adult. Abuse experienced in childhood is considered to have worse outcomes than in adulthood simply because of the amount of brain development that occurs in childhood.

You’re deliberately twisting things to suit your narrative, and the more you reply, the less I believe you’re being truthful about your profession because your thinking style is too simplistic.

So they make a choice who to abuse? Thank you for admitting it is a choice.

What is the test done for abandonment issues?

If they believed it was normal they would do it in front of everyone and to everyone but they hide it so that proves they know it is not.

I do not believe that having low self esteem causes a condition that everyone in the world has and for which there is no test. They are not mental - again using excuses to say they didn't choose to do this.

You have used fabricated illnesses to excuse it. You have suggested they lack the ability to control themselves but oddly can control themselves around those they do not want to abuse.

Seek help? So you think that someone gets taught that abusing others is wrong and they come out and say I never knew beating my kid up in private and telling him not to say anything was wrong? Now daft is that suggestion! They do not know they just need educating that abusing a kid, telling the kid not to say anything and covering it up is wrong - they wouldn't know otherwise! And you say you do not excuse them! Jesus Christ!

They hide it this is pretty obvious that yes they do know it is wrong. They threaten the kids not to say anything. They keep the kids off school when there are marks. Do not pretend they do not know. That is the biggest crock of shite ever.

And many will not and will choose their life route and be a success in what they do - as most do who suffer abuse.

A person who is a victim is a victim. A person is an abuser the minute they choose to abuse sadly I do not pre-label like others on here. The two things can happen at the same time - someone can be a victim but it doesn't cause them to be an abuser.

At what point do you believe a criminal who lies to get away with their crimes and not consider them to be the same as all other criminals who lie to get away with it? At what point do you support abusers to abuse more by saying there there bless you? At what point do you pre-label victims as abusers when they are not?

You are ignoring those who mostly suffer trauma and only saying those who are aggressive are the ones with ACEs? Seems very neglectful to use stereotypes to label kids as only having suffered trauma if they are aggressive. Why are you ignoring those who are not aggressive? Seems you have a lot to learn about trauma responses and aggression is never ok and to be excused.

And those with no trauma who belt the shit out of ppl? Do you say oh well its fine given you seem to put no consequences in place to make them stop, you just empower them to do it more by not having consequences. You do realise kids can be badly behaved and have suffered ACEs and the two do not link together and most who suffer ACEs do not behave badly? I don't suppose you do as you assume that the two are linked and nothing else matters. No choice included.

Nope I wouldn't say oh well they made a choice, that is what you do. Let them go without consequences. There must be consequences.

Now given you suffer trauma on daily basis (sorry not abuse as hitting adults is not abuse although KCSIE says otherwise). Do you think you are now at risk of abusing the kids by your own standards?