to wish there was a way to make young women aim higher in their choice of boyfriends? (distressing story about child abuse)

[ReputableBiscuit]

First off, this young mother is categorically not to blame for what this awful man did to her child, and ALL the guilt belongs to him for his unforgivable crime and attempts to hide it. But AIBU to just wish she'd had more self-respect than to let a man with 38 prior convictions into her (and her baby's) life? How can we empower emotionally vulnerable young women to protect themselves from dangerous men? This happened local to me. It's so bloody sad.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-30019395

I think you are discounting the psychological effects of living with an abusive partner, Bulbasaur.

Society does not take domestic abuse seriously. That much is abundantly clear from the fact that women's shelters rely on charitable donations to stay afloat, and operate on a shoestring budget. Women's Aid is a charity.

Up to the early 90s it was legal to rape ones wife in the UK. The attitudes that lay behind this former state of affairs are taking a long time to shift. Very often, a women trying to leave an abusive man will find even her own family reluctant to help because of their beliefs about what a relationship should consist of and what women should be willing to put up with.

He's responsible for murdering the child, she's responsible for bringing a man she knew to be violent into her child's life and leaving her alone with him. She knew his reputation, her ex was friends with him, he was wearing an electronic tag, she knew the child was frightened of him according to the father, they all did, apparently the child used to shake with fear when she heard his name and she had changed to a frightened child since he moved in.

Many people knew this child was scared and they failed her by doing nothing.

I'm sick to death of hearing excuses for women who happily bring violent men into their children's lives and ignore the effect on their children until it's too late. Mothers (and fathers) are responsible for what they expose their children to and for protecting them.

Adults are responsible for the decisions they make and they need to be held accountable for the consequences of their actions. That includes women. It's a bizarre strain of feminism that considers women incapable of responsibility for their choices, how insulting. Lack of penis does not render us childlike and stupid, there is no excuse.

Nobody comes out of this well. There's the society that let this scumbag free in spite of his numerous convictions, the idiot mother who welcomed him into her home and handed her kid over to him knowing she was petrified of him (not to mention rushing to Facebook to claim him the greatest man ever hours after he murdered her daughter, unimaginable that her only concern was defending him!!! And yeah, I judge), the father and extended family who knew she was terrified of him and didn't call social services, the authorities who knew he was living with a woman stupid enough to let him live with her toddler and didn't interfere.

The fact is that this child is dead because her mother brought a thug into her home and nobody intervened to remove the child. Her abuse was inevitable, her death unsurprising and for that fact, utterly avoidable and outrageous.

Children need to be protected from violent thugs and the mothers who insist on bringing them home. Everybody has a responsibility to intervene.

My sister was married to a very violent man for 20 years. He was very handsome, charming, always seemed a nice enough guy. He wasn't violent in the beginning, (well not to her, he always enjoyed a brawl), but he was always jealous and controlling and that just escalated really over the years. In the beginning, I think my sister was actually really flattered by his possessiveness.

By the time she disclosed to me what he was doing, (I live 200 miles away, we speak on the phone every couple of weeks) he was slapping her around in front of the kids and being rough and very heavy handed with all three kids. But by then he had completely destroyed all her confidence and she had gone from absolutely adoring him to hating and fearing him.

It still took her a few months to leave, she only had me on the phone for support because she was ashamed to tell our parents and her friends. My Dad went to his grave thinking he was a nice guy, my Mum doesn't know the half of it, and has him round for a cup of tea occasionally, despite me saying he wasn't good to my sister. After he attacked her in front of a group of their friends, at least they all know him for what he is now.

Anyway, my sister's lightbulb moment was when he was being horrible to her child, and she thought, "Tinkly's DP would never ever behave like this."

My sister was a daft 19 year old when she married her DH. They'd been together six months. My parents really liked him. He was already controlling and possessive with a violent reputation. What the hell were we all thinking? People really need to be aware of how these things so often pan out.

Gemma Naughton and her sister Nicole, FB messages
(Gemma wrote: “Ma kids r left without a f*ing dad coz of sick lies.”)

Gemma Naughton has a son with Park, and when they split he had access to his son. It is not clear whether Gemma ever tried to restrict his access to this child. She probably did not. We do not know what might have happened if she had tried to do this. We do not know if she would have been beaten by him or if the courts would have taken any request to keep him from his son seriously or if a non molestation order would have been taken seriously by anyone concerned.

'Daily Record' on Ann Marie White and her response to the murder of her daughter. Ann Marie moved into the flat with her mother. It is not clear if the mother was there or out or still residing in the flat at the time of the murder or what advice she gave to her daughter about Park.

Daily Record again.
Madison's father was a friend of Park's. Why was he a friend of a man who was violent? It is certain that people in the community knew how Park treated Gemma Naughton and I am certain that people in that community are aware of other men who treat women similarly, and treat children badly too.

It is too late now to make a pariah out of him and call him a scumbag, etc. His nature was well known to all concerned. Everyone, including the courts, is too willing to overlook the glaringly obvious when it comes to violent offenders.

I think the culture that assigns status to bearing children needs to be examined. Too often this is all young women in impoverished communities can ever look forward to.

i just read that she posted on facebook shortly after her DD death to defend him

my ghast is flabbered- really dont know what to make of that to be honest. I dont think anyone will find that foregiveable in her community TBH

I also dont quite understand why he did it. To some extent if someone is a serial killer,a torturer, a rapist well thats their "thing", their sick fucking hobby

but what makes a man turn from watching football, to what he did? I am not expressing myself very well but ...

R.I.P Madison-

But rapists, violent men aren't hobbyists (strange way to put it although I think I get your point) - Dexter, the guy in Saw etc are cartoon character villains, fiction.

Rapists, abusers, men who kill their wives and children are ordinary men who watch the football. They're not cackling evil masterminds. They always had it in them.

The woman does sound spectacularly messed up herself.

Actually, I don't know a single person who had an abusive ex, and the courts forced contact with the kids. One reason is that the mother will usually get a restraining order and how can the ex see the kids if he can't go near the mother? Sure you can see the kids, but if you go near the mother where the kids are, you'll be arrested. Good luck figuring out how to get around that. It's a bit lazy from a legal perspective, but it works better than fighting custody in court

I know loads. And often none mols will allow having communications for child contact and handover as will bail conditions. Third party hand overs also happen.

Having worked in DA services for a very very long time I can count on one hand the clients I've had who have been able to prevent direct contact long term when the father has kept on trying. A fair few who got very short term supervised and the fathers just gave up. All those who legally prevented it with out fail every single child had been subject to serious injury during the course of the DA.

Bertie i have not articulated it well- ignore me! its normal I dont understand why he did it, I am sure most of us dont -

I had a violent ex and this fact was completely dismissed when divorcing him and deciding on visitation.

He said out loud to the mediator we were sent to by the court (as we had what is called a high conflict divorce) that the reason he wanted visitation was because he was entitled to it. He never said anything about wanting to spend time with his children because he loved them and enjoyed their company or thought they could benefit from having him take an interest in their homework or their friendships or interests. The mediator did not challenge him when he spoke about his entitlement.

A woman who has had the help, encouragement and courage to get to the point of getting a non-mol order is
(a) already more than half way to freedom from the man, and already on the way to being healed of the idea that she has to do as he says
(b) dealing with someone who should really be in jail.

If a woman feels so threatened by a man, and he is so unable to see that his behaviour is wrong, that he need to be ordered by a judge to keep away from her then he should be in jail.

Oh I understand :) Sorry. I thought you were saying something else but just expressing disbelief/confusion at that cognitive dissonance thing. It's frightening.

Math I totally agree.

How many times do you see written or hear people saying "just because he was violent to the mother it does not mean he is not a good dad"

How about next time you see it you challenge it.

It does mean he is a crap dad and a shit human being. Violent abusers who force their children to witness their other parent being harmed or use their children to assist them in the abuse are child abusers. Child abusers do not tend to make good or even adequate parents.

I think a lot of vulnerable young women are motivated by blind optimism of the fairy tale variety when a man takes a romantic interest in them and project massively onto their partners all their own unfulfilled hopes from their childhoods and their own experiences with inadequate fathers and mothers, fully convinced that their story will be magical and different, that they will be happy ever after, and their children will have what they did not. So I think all the Disneyesque 'Some Day My Prince Will Come' crap that children are exposed to should be examined too.

Yes totally agree Needs.

I don't think that Disney, Twilight etc causes these problems but they do a lot to reinforce those kinds of ideas.

A lot of damage too when children grow up in unhappy/unstable homes, because the drive to "have a family" "be a proper family" is so strong. It means you're looking for a relationship, any relationship, which comes across as quite dull/desperate to people seeking emotionally healthy relationships, but is a total flashing klaxon to others who are seeking that unhealthy dynamic of "any relationship" and "fast forward to family". So a lot of role playing, rushing almost on fast forward. The men, often emotionally immature, get frustrated over time that their fantasy of sexy wife/perfectly behaved children/them being able to continue their "single" life isn't playing out the way they want it to and the frustration comes out as control (violence is just a method to ensure control, and is most often physical and more quickly physical where the man comes from a culture of violence being accepted/inevitable/masculine, which absolutely exists in this and probably every country. In cultures where violence is less accepted/taboo, other forms of control will be used. This is often not conscious, or at least there is no awareness that he's doing anything out of the ordinary or unacceptable. He's just "keeping things in check"). The women don't understand why their fantasy of happy settled home and family isn't playing out but have low expectations of men anyway, and so tend to cling onto every crumb of "but it could be like this" and/or believe it's their fault, if only they can teach or show him how to be better (which can increase the abuse as the man is enraged by this, in his mind he's already trying as hard as he can - the sad part is he probably is - yet she wants more), the relationship ends - either the man decides he's had enough of responsibility and all of that so moves out, claiming she has ruined his life and dragged him down, or the relationship hits a wall - infidelity/abuse/general crapness, she goes straight back into that "be a real family" mindset, which never really left, leading to stop/start relationships with this person, especially if they have DC together, or a string of relationships with people who are exactly the same. Sometimes the man will start this cycle while still in the relationship - they find another woman who will be their super-special soulmate and move directly onto that relationship, but the pattern doesn't break. The saddest thing is when the relationship continues for years and decades with neither party getting what they want - the man not ever understanding that his expectations are impossible, literally breaking the family apart, and the woman not ever understanding that those crumbs she clings to are anomalies, not "the real him".

It's crude and of course not every abuse victim follows this pattern, but this is the cycle of abuse and it is I would say the most common route that abusive relationships take. That's what I meant further back in the thread when I said in the bigger picture, by the time a woman is in an abusive relationship it is too late. Even if you jailed the perpetrator, she will still continue the cycle until she is at the point where she is able to exit it. It's scary, too. You're chasing a dream and that dream seems like it will bring untold happiness. To let go of that is scary - and any alternative feels like letting go of the dream. It's hard to break out. That's why we need to look to changing society, which will lead to more arrests, convictions, courts keeping children safe, and generally increased relationship expectations for all women. There's a lot more awareness in the media at the moment - this is crucial and so positive. I hope it continues.

Unstable homes BTW does not necessarily mean single parent homes, nor are households headed by married parents immune - single parent, same sex, other "unconventional" families can be very stable, it's about the relationships modelled, if applicable how the relationship is with the other parent and if they are absent how that absence is handled. Unstable here means witnessing abuse, lots of partners changing very quickly, an on/off relationship with the other parent where they are coming and going, parents who are emotionally unavailable or entirely absent without this being managed, children being in and out of foster care, etc.

I did go through part of this cycle myself, though I would never have recognised it at the time, and I don't know what it was - the fact my dad was (and still is) on/off, in and out of my life (though definitely not in my mum's) or my mum's fatalistic, men are useless attitude towards relationships. There were no stepfathers or "uncles", so it was stable in that sense. I don't blame her - she didn't know, how could she? I'm probably a lot more angry at my dad and yet he wouldn't realise that, I don't think. Probably does not realise that I consider his input inadequate, now having the perspective of being a parent myself.

Mothers have a responsibility to protect their children. Shacking up with violent criminals with electronic tags is not protecting them.

He was the criminal, agreed. But he was not the parent. She was the parent and she let her child down She is not blameless, just because she is a woman.

"a young, ebmittered, feral, violent hardeneed criminal"
"a vulnerable, ill educated girl with low self esteem"

But these are the unintended consequences of our societal choices regarding the family unit... All adults have agency unfortunately some of our choices lead us down a terrible path and situations arise like this, but some are blind and will continue to avoid responsibility and play the blame game..

Despite all the talk on mumsnet about how a single parent family can be just as strong and happy as a two parent family the reality is that raising kids on your own is really, really fucking hard. The single parents I know who have managed to create a really good life for their children are all people I consider extraordinarily strong, hard working, intelligent. Many women (myself included) haven't got the emotional, intellectual or physical resources to give their children the sort of life they want for them when they're doing it alone, often/usually, on one inadequate income. I totally understand women compromising in relation to partners in this situation - wanting a man, any man, to form a two parent family with.

The tragedy comes when they are doing this in communities where a high percentage of young men have got criminal records, use drugs/drink heavily, are poorly educated and unemployed. In some communities maybe one in 10 men will have a criminal record. This is the pool from which women are selecting their partners and step parents for their children.

www.buzzfeed.com/alexcampbell/how-the-law-turns-battered-women-into-criminals#3nk9o5j?src=longreads

Link. But I found it disturbing with the details. So if you are sensitive to that sort of thing, don't read it. It kept me awake.

CrispyFern; one of those mothers watched her boyfriend beat the hell out of her toddler and then went shopping for hair products, at no point did she call for help, that's why she was prosecuted and quite rightly.

Another watched her child being tortured for hours, did absolutely nothing when something could have been done and lied on his behalf when the police showed up.

Journalists can twist every scenario and omit half the evidence against them to try to excuse and justify their actions, the reality is nobody is being prosecuted for being a battered woman, they're being prosecuted sitting back and watching their child being abused to death. They covered up previous abuse, ignored it and never called for help. Their children paid for their lives. There's no excuse for being that uncaring and irresponsible.

The mother of Madison may be able to claim ignorance and naivety, she wasn't there when the pschyopath battered her child to death, maybe she truly was blinded by him, none of the women above can make that claim, they watched repeatedly, did nothing even when they had plenty of opportunity to do so and they deserve to be punished for their part in their children's death.

There's no excuse for doing nothing to protect your child from being beaten to death when emergency services are just a phone call away. If they didn't have access to a phone and were genuinely unable to get help they wouldn't have been prosecuted. They're not the victims, their children were. Victims of violent men and their female enablers.

where do you draw the line?

The men caused the death of these poor children but these same children need an adult to protect them. With no father on the scene that job falls to the mother. If the mother knowingly becomes involved with a violent man and allows him unsupervised access to her child then I don't think she can be absolved of responsibility.

So the father, who is "not on the scene" is absolved of responsibility simply because he ducked out early on?

Some Women let men like him in and out of their lives everyday violence and chaos is normal, fighting men is normal, drink and drugs is normal slagging each other off over facebook is normal. communities turning a blind eye or taking sidesbecause it is happening in their house too is all normal to them and in the middle of all this violence chaos and drama is little children just like Madison that little mite did not need to die but the selfish ignorant stupid people around her allowed this to happen to her

I can't follow that logic.

How does saying that a mother should protect her child mean that the absent father is off the hook?

The absent father is a shit. but he isn't around and so all that child has to protect him/her is the mother.