What’s the difference between a toxic relationship and abuse?

[Justwondering3]

Not that you should stay in either cases.

A toxic relationship implies responsibility on both sides. An abusive one side. (I know there are 2 people in an abusive relationship).

When I was in court the judge said one time “we” were in a toxic relationship not that “I” was in an abusive one. Then went on to say he had abusive behaviours and denied contact with dc. Toxic implies blame on both sides doesn’t it. Victim blaming.

@Watchkeys no that was her fault.

Think about another 4 year old with a mum they can't talk to. Would you say to that child? 'This is your own fault.' or something different?

I know now my mums dad was abusive. But I’m sure she has a learning difficulty. She can’t really read and write well and struggles with all relationships in her life

I'd say toxic would be doing not nice things that don't constitute abuse eg

Cheating
Going to lap dancing clubs
Flirting with others
Lying
Gambling
Poor financial decision making
Addictions
Not trusting
Hoarding
Emotional affair
Refusing to marry/have DCs
Lack of empathy
Learned helplessness
Not making joint decisions
Not supporting the other to work
Sexual harassment
Embarrassing behaviour
Personal hygiene
Lying about fertility/ pregnancy
Not supporting during pregnancy/birth
Not supporting breastfeeding or bottle feeding
Lying about using contraceptives/abortion

If both sides are doing these kinds of things I'd call it a toxic relationship but it might not pass the threshold for abuse.

@Aphrathestorm

You wouldn't say an abusive relationship was toxic, then?

I would say that the key difference is the power imbalance

Perhaps toxic is the act of doing something which could be viewed as poor self control. It causes damage to both parties. Add something toxic to water and it’s all toxic Abuse differs as it’s about taking away the control of someone else. It damages one party..Adding oil and water say, it looks toxic but it’s separatable.

So a toxic relationship is one that is equally abusive from both sides? So... and abusive relationship in that case would be a toxic one?

Or are you saying that abuse coming from only one side means that the relationship isn't toxic?

No, I agree that abusive relationships are always toxic. But in terms of differentiating between 'toxic' when people think of it in the sense of cheating, on and off, petty point scoring, lying - and the tipping point from an unhealthy relationship to an abusive one.

Toxic implies blame on both sides doesn’t it

It just struck me, @Justwondering3 , that it doesn't imply blame on either side. That's quite different from it does imply blame on both sides.

It's quite hard to define the difference, but can you see what I mean? I'm sure judges have to say a lot of things in impartial ways, and I imagine this was one of them. If the judge had said that you were in a 'damaging' relationship, would you have felt that that blamed both parties, or that one was the subject of the damage and one was the object? I think it can be seen like that, too, with toxicity. Your ex was dishing out the toxins, and you were receiving them, so you were both part of the toxicity.

If the judge said that the two of you were in a toxic relationship, I don't think any blame was implied at that point. The blame came later, when s/he started detailing who had done what.

I don't think relational toxicity and abuse are on a continuum, as in 'it's toxic until xyz happens, and that's the point where it becomes abusive.' I think all abusive relationships are toxic, and more has to be said to ascertain where the toxins come from.

The judge wasn't talking about a non-abusive relationship, so I'm not sure that's part of your question. What's toxic to one person might not be toxic to another, though, so it'll be pretty hard to define.

yes @Watchkeys I do understand what you are saying, an abusive relationship is toxic when looked from the outside. Its one big pot of poison. At that point it’s not definable to where the position came from. I understand it’s family court and the judge is not their to decided whether the dad was abusive or not. It’s about safe contact with the child and the father.

It’s just so bloody important they separate that pot into what it really is which is an abuser and a victim. They need to get to the bottom, they make decisions to take children away from healthy mothers, massive decisions. We are talking about a potential person whose it simply unable to learn to behave any differently. If you can abuse your wife (intimate partner) in front of your children and not see the damage it’s doing then you abuse your children. They send them on courses when what if they are just not wired in a way to understand. It’s dangerous not wording it correctly not that it would have much bearing as its contact at all costs.

Was there any intimation that you were anything but the victim, other than that one sentence? I don't think that that sentence intimates anything, and therefore I don't think there was anything worded wrongly or even poorly.

I utterly agree with you; it really is important that it's all phrased/worded/communicated very very accurately. There has to be no room for misinterpretation. But I don't think it's unclear to refer to your relationship as toxic, and to say that you were both 'in' the toxicity. If that sentence is the only part of the process that's bothered you, then I don't think there's been any fault, or any inferred fault, by anyone except your abuser.

@Watchkeys they used the term parental conflict. There was no conflict, he inflicted the conflict. Parental means both.

In one breath they say that his behaviours were both mentally and emotionally damaging to me and the child, then they say parental conflict and toxic. They never use the term abusive. His counter allegations was to admit to my allegations but that it was because of his abusive childhood that he did them, then cried. I feel they were more lenient on him because of this. I’m empathetic but it didn’t make the effect on us any different. Going forward he hasn’t done anything to change his thinking.

I felt they partly blamed me when they used the term parental conflict like I was somehow complicit. I was physically present.

And if you hadn't been, he wouldn't have had anybody to conflict with. Your presence made you a part of the conflict. That doesn't mean you were abusive. It would be the same if someone had walked into your house and punched you. It would have been a conflict that would have potentially affected your children. It wouldn't mean that you broke into anybody's house and punched them.

The court will be looking at the experience of the child, not the experience of mum or the experience of dad. From a child's perspective, if dad is yelling at mum, that's parental conflict. If dad is abusing mum in any way, that's parental conflict. He admitted what he did. The court stated that it was damaging to you and the children, and did not contradict itself in any way.

Are you trying to say that the relationship wasn't toxic?

No I’m trying to say that the relationship was toxic and abusive. Abuse or abusive behaviours are a tool aren’t they used by a person to punish, gain control and power. Someone isn’t abusive they use abusive behaviours learnt from wherever ( different thread). A relationship could be toxic because of one parties use of alcohol or affairs. It’s not abusive.

They found him guilty of abusive behaviours towards myself that directly impacted the child. But saying it was parental made it finite. The relationship was over so the conflict was over and so no more threat. Only that’s rubbish. Very rarely does someone abuse another then go on to be normal and in my case it’s true. They also ordered drops off and pick up at my house.

If you can stand in court and say I threw stuff at my wife, it hit my child by accident but I was aiming at my wife and not see that as bad in itself then I’m pretty sure you aren’t quite right. Or yeah I punched the car windscreen and threw the sat nav because my wife said I was driving erratic. I had my child in the car, but it’s ok as it was aimed at my wife. Can he be trusted going forward. Apparently as that’s parental conflict which has stopped because this particular relationship has.

Is there still conflict between your children's parents? Has the court said there is or there isn't?

Abuse is never, ever excusable.

That doesn't mean to say that both parties in an abusive relationship cannot display toxic behaviours. Just to be 100% crystal clear, someone being "toxic" does not excuse abuse toward them. But being abused doesn't make someone immune to being toxic and dysfunctional themselves.

Do not ever let somebody feel like you were responsible for your own victimisation by an abuser. But, take accountability for your own behaviour too. If there were other things in the relationship that were toxic and bad for the DC besides the abuse, I hope you are getting support to work on them. Leaving abuse behind sounds troublingly hard, so you should be proud that you have left

Sorry I hadn't read these later posts. The situation you are in sounds awful and I also question the validity of a system that seems to put so much onus on mothers to protect their DC from abuse yet little to no responsibility on abusers for being the instigators of abuse.

@CandlelightGlow

But being abused doesn't make someone immune to being toxic and dysfunctional themselves

This is a very good point. The thing that made me identify the fact that I was being abused was my own toxic and dysfunctional behaviour. Nobody behaves perfectly in the face of ongoing abuse. It's one of the reasons it's essential to leave; it ruins you if you stay.

@Watchkeys what I’m trying to say is that his abuse didn’t occur because of any toxic behaviours in the relationship, which I’m sure there were. His abuse was not dependent on the relationship it doesn’t stop when our relationship ended. He is abusive. He abused all his previous partners. He now lives with another girlfriend and our daughter stays there with them. He hasn’t in his 47 years on this earth had a non abusive relationship. Some of them highly physical but again that didn’t count as it’s wasn’t the relationship the children came from.

It is a pattern of behaviour which has nothing to do with parental conflict. He’s a danger to other women and to our daughter. He is subjecting our daughter to this. He is emotionally abusing her also. Parental conflict is a white wash of a word.

I think they are just different terms for the same thing. The same as "unhealthy" or "inappropriate" or "dysfunctional" or "chaotic".

I'm not arguing with any of what you're saying. It sounds horrible. He sounds horrible. I'm sure he is abusive in every relationship. I'm sure you did your best for your children. I'm sure that none of it was your fault.

I'm saying that I don't think the judge was assigning any blame to you when s/he said that the parental relationship was toxic for the children.

Me being a people pleaser and ignoring my own feelings is toxic to myself it is independent to the abuse he dished out. He would have abused me if I did or didn’t have this behaviour. It only made my suffering worse. His predatory nature will have him linked to another person, probably very similar to me, there will be a power imbalance and the cycle will continue. This has nothing to do with parental conflict. Well unless I’m wrong.