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

[OutWithTheMule]

There has been another horrific child abuse death and I have noticed in the majority of these cases the mothers boyfriend has been abusing the child, and the mother is aware and allows it to happen, and usually protects them by trying to cover it up from the police after the fact.

In the awful case that has been in the news today the mother had only been with her boyfriend for 36 days. She allowed the abuse to continue because she didn't want him to leave her. How the fuck can you choose someone you have known 36 days over your own child!?

I just can't understand why these women choose their boyfriends over their children, if anyone laid a finger on my daughter I would flay them!! Even if you wouldn't physically intervene you would take your child and leave surely? If the boyfriend isn't the child's father they have no access to them if you just take them somewhere else. I know women are sometimes scared to leave abusive partners but often in these stories the partner is not abusing the mother, they are only abusing the child and the mother either passively allows it or sometimes joins in.

I understand that the fault lies with the boyfriends obviously, they are monsters and there is no excusing their actions, it's horrific. But it makes sense, violent men abuse children, it's straightforward as disgusting as it is. What I cannot understand for the life of me is why a mother would allow a boyfriend to harm their child or actively choose a boyfriend over their child. It just doesn't make any sense to me. Can anyone shed any light on these women's behaviour?

But they are not more likely to, they are less likely to. You have suffered trauma and are not abnormal. I am sorry that you went through that but you have normal behaviours in response to what happened to you. Your behaviours are normal not abnormal.

Experiences do shape you and if you suffer abuse you are less likely to abuse others. You are using stereotypes of people harming others as a response to trauma which is not the case. There are no textbook ways of responding to trauma but we label all who harm others and say there must be a reason. The reason is choice. It is a choice for them. They know it is wrong which is why they do not do it to all in their life. They only do it to those who they want to harm and in private too. If it was not a choice they would do it to all in their life which they do not. It is multigenerational because ppl excuse it and justify it and say they cannot control it and say it is ok and not their fault. It is completely their fault. They chose it they own it. Simple.

Also ACEs is not about abuse. Sad but shockingly that ppl assume ACEs is all about abuse it is not. ACEs in theory is anything that can cause trauma and abuse is only one of those.

Abusers sometimes do have a back story but many do not have a back story - many will say they do when that is not the truth. Many will use lies to try and justify their behaviour and to excuse it and get out of punishment in the same way that rapists say they are falsely accused when the reality is that they are not. What % of abusers are lying to get sympathy and get away with their crimes and what % are telling the truth?

There will be some who have been abused and there will be some who suffered other ACEs but again ACEs is not just abuse so what if they have an ACE of health inequality or suffering a serious injury in childhood which many kids do? What about a pet dying or being homeless, having a sibling die? Are kids who suffer such events more likely to abuse and if so why? Also are they most likely to do the same to others - kill their pets or make others homeless etc?

As is the assumption that a mother is the best person to have custody

I didn’t say all ACE’s were about abuse. I cannot be bothered anymore. Why do so many criminals have a history of ACE’s as a pp pointed out? Very few criminals have childhoods full of love and stability.

Just think what you like I’m not arguing with you over this anymore, you spend a lot of time twisting replies.

@schmeler do you even realise that your word soup of made up stats not only do they not help anyone, but they actively harm children that are suffering the effects from ACEs, trauma, abuse ,neglect etc?

It's only by acknowledging and understanding these adverse effects that campaigning, lobbying and change can happen. Change costs money.Proper help and support put in place costs money. Therapy costs money. Proper placements and appropriate parenting techniques cost money. Addiction support costs money. And so on. The government is reluctant enough to spend without people like you going nothing to see here. There's nothing happening. Nothing bad is going to happen in the future. Everything is fine. They're aaaaall fine.

You only talk about ppl with ACEs being more likely to abuse. So if their sibling died that makes them more likely to abuse? Doesn't at all.

Why do so many say they have ACEs in the same way that almost all rapists say they are falsely accused....? These are criminals who have lied throughout to cover their tracks and suddenly you believe them when they get busted? As I said - some will have and some will be lying to get sympathy and a lesser sentence and excuse it. What is the percentage of abusers who lie to cover their tracks as almost 100% of rapists do and what percent really were abused? learning to understand that this doesn't cause abusers to abuse. Having something in your past doesn't make you more likely to do it. Being excused for lesser crimes does though as it empowers people to commit more and be excused for more.

Many criminals do have childhoods of love and stability having ACEs can also mean that they still had love and stability but suffered in other ways. Having ACEs doesn't automatically link to a poor unloved family life as a child nor does it mean they were abused.

I help victims do not ignore then and justify abuse. I acknowledge that they suffer but I also understand that trauma doesn't make ppl into the textbook violent criminals that you portray. In fact there are so many responses to trauma, many common ones are overworking, people pleasing etc. Also I understand that not all need therapy as people's responses to trauma vary and their needs vary. Labelling ppl are damaged and their future is fucked and they are hopeless cases is shocking and causes significant harm. The ACES have done that and prevented ppl from being mothers (as they were labelled abusers because of their past) and prevented ppl from achieving their goals. ACEs also prevents ppl from getting therapy which I disagree with - why should we stop ppl from getting support who needs it? That is not something I will ever back - by all means you back picking and choosing which kids get support and those who do not meet the 10 listed ACEs have to do without, that is not a policy I support at all and shocking that some do.

I also refuse to excuse abuse and justify it. So you wish me to lobby to exclude kids from therapy and put support in place for kids who only have one of 10 ACEs and fuck the rest and force kids into therapy who do not need it because we think they do and we label them as destined for utter shit without which is not the case. I refuse to do that. I will not pathologise abuse nor will I exclude kids who need it or force kids who do not or not yet ready. Nor will I label them as fucked for life and limit their future because of some bullshit about them being abusers because they were homeless at 4 months old!

Okay. I think your issue is you’re taking things too literally when I’m trying to use broad examples to explain my point. Life is complicated, nobody is saying that people who are incarcerated have never been loved, but many lack either love, stability or both. There’s no way you can possibly know they are lying, but if we are assuming they are lying and have never suffered adversity, then their behaviour must have a biological explanation? However, up thread you stated behaviour can’t be blamed on genes or biology as that’s making excuses, nor can it be based on ACEs? So what, then?

All behaviour has reasons. If they just ‘want to’ abuse as you state, then what causes them to ‘want to’ - it isn’t genes or environment, is it? It isn’t an innate drive?

You’re making out other people are judgemental, yet are calling prisoners who say they have suffered ACE’s liars? Who is judgemental now because it suits your argument?

@schmeler I haven't said any of the things you're ranting about.

I honestly hope you don't work with victims of abuse because your understanding of these issues is awfully lacking and what little you do have is too one dimensional to be of any benefit.

I know some will lie and some will be truthful. I think it is quite naive to assume a criminal who has lied about what they are doing will not lie to get out of it and get some sympathy. As I said what is the percentage who lie and who do not?

Behaviour to abuse is down to choice that is all. If it was genes they would do it to all not just the child in the house. If it was out of their control they would be doing it to all. The very fact they only do it when in private and to a certain someone or certain people shows it is a choice and shows they are in control all the time.

Some prisoners will lie to get away with it as rapists do and as I stated some will not - you chose to ignore that for some reason - why? When it comes to rapist almost all will lie to get away with it - why do you assume child abusers to be different and honest suddenly at the point of being caught when most other criminals are shown to be liars at that point? Why do you think they buck the trend and why do you believe criminals who abuse yet accept others will lie? Seems odd that this would not follow the same pattern?

I support all victims of abuse and show great understanding. Sadly I refuse to cause them harm by labelling them as future abusers and fit for the bin because of what they experience. Shame you do.

They wouldn’t ‘all do it’ if it was genes, things aren’t as simple as that. People have different experiences of childhood and handle things differently, even if they grew up in the same home. Things like gender, types of abuse, natural temperament, birth order are all contributing factors.

If you have a genetic predisposition to aggressive behaviour, for instance, but you are brought up in a loving and stable environment, you are far less likely to be abusive when compared to someone who is genetically predisposed to be aggressive and grows up in adversity. The two must interact.

You keep saying ‘it’s a choice.’ I absolutely accept this, but a choice driven by what?

I didn't say they would all do it. I said they would do it TO all. The fact that they do not do it TO all proves they have it completely under control.

If it is not a choice - why do they not abuse every single person they come across? Why do they not abuse their boss, their mates, strangers on the street, why do they all suddenly lose control of their genetics around the same person each time? How does genetics cause that to happen?

By all means if you can explain why a parent who abuses their child has genes that cause them to abuse but yet only with their child, only in private, never with anyone else? Seems odd how genes would know that they are around that person and are in private? I do not buy that the person is in control in all other circumstances and their aggressive gene oddly takes over and they cannot control themselves when in certain circumstances.

It is by choice. A choice driven by their brain choosing to do it as they want to.

I support all victims of abuse and show great understanding. Sadly I refuse to cause them harm by labelling them as future abusers and fit for the bin because of what they experience. Shame you do.

Again I never said that. Without the right help and support some might. Just like some might kill themselves, or become addicts, or die young, or be more likely to suffer from mental health problems, or certain physical illnesses.

Out of curiosity, at what point do you stop seeing someone as a victim and label them an abuser who made a choice?

At the first incident no matter the circumstances ? When they reach adulthood?

I get verbally abused on a daily basis by some of the kids I work with. Sometimes physically too. I have to put myself between them and another kid and so on. Some are very defensive of me which causes a whole host of other issues. Do I just shrug my shoulders and say "oh well they made a choice " , their background and experiences have no bearing on this , might as well lock them up now and throw away the key?

I didn’t say it wasn’t a choice, but the choices are driven by previous experiences. So, for example, men who abuse women may do so because they see women as weaker, they can more easily over power a woman, abusing a woman makes them feel powerful because they were abused and felt powerless as children, or made to feel ‘less than’ , whereas they don’t feel powerful against another man.

Alternatively, they abuse women because they have abandonment issues and they think that by abusing her and making her fearful, she will stay.

Or maybe they grew up in an environment where it was commonplace for their father to abuse their mother, therefore they believe this is normal and the way men should behave.

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.

Just because there are reasons, it doesn’t mean I think it’s okay, or think it’s okay to excuse abusers - after all, they do have a choice to seek help etc as adults, and people should always try to leave an abusive situation, I’m just acknowledging that there is always something that precludes those poor choices.

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?

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.

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.

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'!

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.

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.

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?

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…..

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.

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?

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!