to think that This Morning were utterly irresponsible to broadcast an interview with Natalie Cassidy on how and why she took back her abusive partner?

[wannaBe]

Natalie Cassidy on This Morning. abused to the extent she left and then took out a restraining order against him.

Then decided she loved him after all and took him back - he's admitted he's an alcoholic, has changed and they couldn't be happier.

The whole interview was all about justification, how it was because she was wound up about his drinking, how he drank and it made him do it, how he has now changed.

I vented my anger over it elsewhere and on twitter, but tbh I think that Natalie Cassidy, while very naive IMO, is free to make whatever decisions she sees fit.

However, I think This Morning were totally irresponsible to give it any kind of airtime.

There was no counter view. No-one to say that statistically it is highly unlikely that NC's partner has changed, that once an abuser, always an abuser...

Lots of vulnerable women will have been watching. Many may well believe that if NC's partner could change, perhaps theirs can too. And perhaps they will go back into dangerous situations because of it
.
This Morning does not only have a responsibility to the stars it broadcasts, it has a responsibility to its viewers, and that responsibility IMO extends to not glamorising domestic abuse and helping to perpetuate the myth that abusers can change.

I wonder why the producers of This Morning arranged this interview, and in the way that it occurred.

I know - I read another interview she had done on this subject previously, and her answers were the stock same, so it's not as if This Morning didn't know what she was going to say, pretty much to the letter.

Glitterkitten - if you are referring to my comments about NC. What I was trying to say (perhaps not v clearly) is that she is more vulnerable (I think) than many because she has grown up in the media, with her weight losses and gains, appearance, and relationships being discussed. As many do, she has then had to defend herself against stories very publicly. Her self-worth is then very bound up with what the wider public thinks and writes about her. Bad choices become public bad choices. That makes decision-making a little bit more difficult than you or I.

And also, I think that if you have grown up under that spotlight, pleasing other people probably is a bit of a temptation as well.

I don't want to trivialise the matter as I can entirely see why OP and others are angry, but isn't this part of a bigger problem, that of the obsession with 'celebrity culture'? If people didn't subscribe to the twaddle that can be found on these godawful 'magazine' style daytime shows, jeremy kyle and all those trashy mags, this wouldn't have happened. If shows were aimed at an intelligent audience, with well researched and balanced topics, channels could broach these difficult subjects in a far more responsible way.

She comes across to me as wanting to 'save' him without thinking about the cost to herself and her child

Also she may have been told by her agent to up her profile again of course

I understood from her interview that she thinks he can't cope without her.

Given the DV, that's a whole slew of emotions and rationalisations that I think needed testing out before being presented via ITV for NC's sake, or during presentation for her sake and the viewers'.

just watched the interview... feel very sad now tbh, i wonder if she had help for herself it mentioned him getting help but not her? he werent even there for the interview

i have been in a relationship with DV, i took him back, he could go a year without hitting me longer even but the subtle stuff he did was there even now he controls me and we've been split 18months i wish they'd had someone there from womens aid or something.

maxpower

i have to take issue with the inference that daytime TV is aimed at 'less intelligent audiences'. many people watch it, from all walks of life.

i think TV progs shown on mainstream channels during the daytime should be entertainment, some with a more educational slant than others (obviously), but entertainment is the primary objective, surely

that said, the piece with NC was totally misplaced as an entertainment item, it's so damaging and i say irresponsible to to have it on as a 'water cooler' subject

I'm actually writing a complaint direct to THis Morning. I'd rather they tried to deal with it more quickly, and hopefully get a balanced argument about dv on the show sooner rather than later.

Flame me but I don't believe violent men deserve a second chance. If someone has to go to therapy to learn that hitting other people is wrong then that person isn't somebody I'd want in my life and certainly not in those of my children.

Admittedly I haven't seen the interview but I'll catch up now.

Eglu, have you got an email link to This Morning?

I couldn't believe my eyes, didn't see it all was anything mentioned about her little girl and if she was affected? Or if she was at some kind of risk if it happened again. I don't see anyone gaining from the interview except if she was getting paid maybe. Total crazyness from all involved.

Some attitudes here towards the subject are very strange to say the least. By claiming that women must be stupid to be swayed by a public figure's very public justification of dv by blaming herself shows a staggering ignorance of the facts about dv (or is a deliberate attemp to start an argument or call people ''fascists"?!). By the very nature of the abuse, women (and men) are continually told it is their fault, they caused it by their actions/attitude/dress code/lack of actions, etc etc etc. After a period of time they come to believe this. To hear anyone (but particularly someone on tv, regardless what a crappy or otherwise celeb they are) state the same, and not have it challenged directly, only allows the victim to further believe it, and reinforces their belief that they just need to put up with it as they caused it, therefore deserve it! This does not indicate stupidity (as no one condemning the interview has actually claimed), however is the effect of weeks/months/years of humiliation, control and fear.

Excellent post by NoWayNoHow - exactly explains the problem with this ill-advised interview. Many people will cling onto the least justification to stay with their abuser - this interview has given them that justification.

OF COURSE NC has the right to put her side of the story but they really really should have got someone on the other side there as well, even to do a piece after NC. I have no doubt that they were trying to avoid a Jeremy Kyle type of situation erupting, where the DV expert would be trying to convince NC that she was putting herself in rather naive danger, and NC would be doing the usual "But you don't understaaannd - he's changed and I lurve him, we can get through this together so long as he doesn't drink and I don't wind him up".
But still - a statement read out by PS, not enough. Especially as it was dismissed out of hand by NC. :(

This Morning are not above styling themselves as moral educators when it suits them. If NC had been on to sell her story about escaping domestic abuse, they would be spouting moral disapproval and offering support. I think BOTH NC and TM have some moral duty to the vulnerable public. This purile shit is accessed by so many people. Sure, if she had wanted to write an article for the Guardian about her experiences its one thing but TM and Jeremy Kyle are not there to raise intelligent discussion. Ask her to come on MN and discuss (unpaid)

Well, This Morning's on in ten minutes so I'll listen out for their response, if any.

Resounding silence.

Its up to her what she does, personally I'm sick of all the celebs doing interviews about their relationships etc - yawn - boring. I know I'm only interested in celebs because of what they do ie I like a comdian because they are funny or an actor because they can act, I'm not interested in their private lives. And no I do not think that she or This Morning were irresponsible by showing the interview.

YANBU. I have only just heard about this. I have just watched the interview and am totally shocked that Natalie has taken him back and also just how irresponsible This Morning have been by airing this.

I think it was interesting that Denise wasn't included in this interview, maybe TM know what her opinion would be and just didn't want Natalie to be confronted about it.

Oh and people do change by the way. I know from experience. We all go through bad patches and shouldnt be judged the rest of our lives for a mistake or even a series of mistakes. If he is trying to change and is doing well, why shouldnt they be together? Everyone has the ability to snap, even those who have never been violent or aggresive in the past. I do believe everyone has got their jusgey pants on way too tight today!

LouMacca, Yes, if you look at todays' interview about trans-gender young people, there is a parent on, but the porgramme has also invited another parent/commentator in to offer an alternative perspective and to add some wider evidence, context and balance, including the potential 'bad news' along with the 'good news'.

today's sorry for typo

NCs first responsibility is now to her (very young) child. Letting someone who is 'trying to change' back into that child's life in such a short space of time is nothing short of selfish and irresponsible. But that's her decision and not for anyone to judge. Fwiw, as far as we've been led to believe, it wasn't a one off loss of control, but an ongoing issue, fueled by addiction to alcohol. All that aside, it is the serious lapse in judgement in allowing nc to preach that 'statistics don't apply to her situation', 'she wasn't beat black and blue', and 'she wound him up', without countering that properly which could be misleading at best, and deadly at worst to other victims of dv.

"NCs first responsibility is now to her (very young) child. Letting someone who is 'trying to change' back into that child's life in such a short space of time is nothing short of selfish and irresponsible. But that's her decision and not for anyone to judge."

Well of course you're judging; as should we all. She is choosing to make her child share a home with her dangerous father.