To think people who stay in abusive relationships long-term and expose their kids to it are complicit in harming them?

[WildHazelCritic]

We all say “they need support” and they do but if someone stays with an abuser for years while their kids witness the chaos, doesn’t that cross into neglect? AIBU to think sympathy has limits?

Similar was told to me by my friend who’s a family solicitor. She’s regularly amazed at the women who choose new loser boyfriend over dc. The fear of being alone is greater than the fear of losing dc.

Earlier today I posted on a thread where I was accused of victim blaming. It’s like people think that being abused removes all personal responsibility because nothing is your fault. We can’t control everyone but we can control our own actions and are responsible for them.

If only it were that easy…

I wish we lived in a world where support was better for women who reported assault. Where the men are carted off and kept away u til the woman can get ducks in a row to kick him out permanently or find somewhere else (and she is supported financially and practically to do so). And that fighting custody was cheap and takes the abuser’s actions into account and event those who are violent from being near children.

Sadly if women call the police, IF she’s ‘lucky’ they’ll take him away, fall for his charm because so many officers have the IQ of a gnat despite training, be all “see you mate” and send him back home to make sure he lays down the law to ensure she never reports him again.

I left an abusive relationship and have spent 6 years being abused post separation. The courts gave him 50:50 so now I’m back in court spending 1000’s trying to get them protected. Maybe the courts needs to take some accountability to what they have subjected my children too. As social services who told me to leave then failed to support me in court

Mothers are punished for staying and punished for leaving. People judge. Some leave and their abuser gets access to the kids and continues to abuse them and her through them. Some get full custody by claiming parental alienation and that she's making up the abuse to stop him from seeing the kids. Some stay and they get judged for making their kids live with an abuser. But their kids will probably have to live with an abuser without their mum for at least some of the time if they leave.

Well yes, but it really isn’t that simple.

When my dad left with us she ramped up her abuse, when we were forced by the courts to visit her she would physically harm us, take photos and tell SS we had arrived injured. She would report our dad for various imaginery crimes, tell people he was a peadophile. She was always believed, so we were removed from his care and forced to live with her. We were only eventually removed from her care again when after six months we were still bruised, dirty, not fed properly, but despite us repeatedly telling SS what has been happening we were placed in care rather than with our dad. We would have suffered less harm if he had stayed, which obviously isn’t his fault.

This is a good point too. Sometimes the lesser of two evils is to stay in the situation because at least you know you're on hand to protect the kids when they're with him. If you separate then you have no control over what goes on when the kids are with him.

Sometimes with fatal results for the children.

In theory I agree with you, but in reality the most dangerous time for a women in an abusive relationship is when she leaves/attempts to leave. Having children with someone, especially someone who would be granted access, essentially gives them a tool to continue the abuse through and it may actually be that to stay is the best case scenario for the children. It's an incredibly sad lose lose situation.

How much can an abused woman really protect her children within the home though? Won’t it just exacerbate the abuse towards her?

It’s like people think that being abused removes all personal responsibility because nothing is your fault. We can’t control everyone but we can control our own actions and are responsible for them.

Then why are you holding one victim responsible for the actions of their abuser?
They aren’t abusing their children, they are trying to defect the abuse on to themselves to protect their children.

I think there are definitely some thresholds where it stops being about the woman , and the wellbeing of the children is paramount.

However, we need to make it a lot easier and socially acceptable for women to leave before it gets to that point. There is still so much social stigma against single mums,being believed to begin with can be a battle in itself ,the courts and police are being used as tools by the abusers, help and support can be a postcode lottery, housing the same , shelters are underfunded and let’s face it, not particularly great to raise children in , especially long term. The list of issues is long, and while millions of women care, petition, volunteer , donate and campaign the powers that be still don’t really give a shit and there’s no desire for REAL change. Instead we get 25 more headlines about single mums on benefits , woman murdered by boyfriend/ex and so on.

I feel this way about my own mother, yes, absolutely.

If you’re stuck in a burning house you don’t make your dc stand with you, you would guide them to safety even if you couldn’t save yourself.

They’re not to blame for the abuser’s actions but they are responsible for protecting their dc and many parents do not act in the best interest of the dc.

Your comparison to a burning house is entirely inappropriate and over simplifies the situation. A burning house isn’t going to pursue you across the country to attack you or through the courts. A burning house isn’t going show up one day and take your kids because it’s got 50/50 and you not know what is going to happen to your kids or if you will ever see them again.

It is a simplification and I do acknowledge that. There’s many grey areas but there are also many times mums do not act in the best interest of their dc and while it’s complex, pretending they have no responsibility isn’t helpful because, if you choose to stay with an abuser you may lose your dc. That’s the reality.

Not always. Sometimes the abuse they suffer is lesser than what the kids go through, sometimes they join in with the abuse, sometimes they ignore the abuse their children suffer(for example, sexual abuse), sometimes they scapegoat the children.

And if you choose to leave them they may well kill your dc.

That's the reality of the situation, you're there and getting the abuse or you leave and fuck knows what will happen to your kids.

It's a horrendous choice and there's no real way to protect your dc until the courts and police start taking DV seriously.

That's not how the law sees it. It's considered child abuse to bring a child up in an abusive household. The child is a witness to their dad beating up their mum, may hear her being sexually assaulted, emotionally abused and so on.

The abuser may also use the children as a weapon or turn on them as well. Children learn to abuse (we have a big problem with son on mother violence), get into abusive relationships and suffer life long mental health problems.

Ofc not always, but that is a departure from the main theme of the thread which is when one partner or parent is abusive, not both

Well the law in this patriarchal society isn’t known for being kind to women.

The law is trying to protect children.

But if you leave, they may kill you and/or the dc as punishment. It’s not unheard of. It’s in the news several times a year where a father kills the DC due to a split, or a man stalks and kills an ex in front of their children.

It’s doing a shit job at it.