IMG_31.jpg

Tactics of abuse

Warning signs of coercive control

by Clare Murphy PhD on February 1 2012

I wrote a blog post Warning Signs of Coercive Control by Your Partner for the Home & Family Counselling organisation’s Blog to give women some pointers about warning signs of coercive control by a male partner.

Clues to warning signs that you’re in a relationship that is highly likely to continue to get worse – exist on many levels – including . . .

  1. Things your partner thinks, says and does
  2. Things you think, say and do in response to his attitudes, words and behaviours
  3. Things other people observe and tell you about that they see going on – or that other people don’t see it or get it
  4. Your feelings
  5. Your fears

To read about the warning signs click here. If you’re isolated, or silencing yourself, or just don’t feel safe to be your authentic self – it’s totally ok to seek help from an organisation or a person who UNDERSTANDS family violence and the dynamics of power and control. If you ever seek help and the organisation or person do not understand or make you wrong or minimise your experience – it’s a very good idea to continue to seek support from a safe place that CAN and WILL support you.

 

{ 0 comments }

Tactic #3 Inappropriate Restrictions

by Clare Murphy PhD on October 10 2011

This is the third of 16 blogs discussing the patterns of tactics from my power and control wheel – Inappropriate Restrictions.

Clare Murphy Power and control wheel

In our lives we are all restricted in a host of different ways. Laws, social and cultural etiquette, physical and mental ability, the hours we work, and our need to take time out to sleep represent ways our lives are restricted and moulded. We are confined to certain regimes when we have to attend school and work. And ultimately we are limited by the fact we will die one day.

However we all have rights within these restrictions. We have the human right to be heard, encouraged, and to have our emotional, creative, leisure and working lives respected. We have the right to be taken seriously, to develop our potential, explore and express our interests and to find meaning and spiritual fulfillment in or outside of our relationships.

But some people believe that not all should be equal; that they deserve more rights and more freedom than others. This is an abuse of power. In a domestic situation it is a human rights violation when a person engages in ongoing behaviours that inappropriately restrict their partner’s lives.

The key words are “ongoing” and “inappropriate”.

Who judges what is inappropriate? How do you know when you are being inappropriately restricted? How do you know your partner is restricting and moulding your relationship to suit himself more than you? When does a questionable action of a partner become a sinister trend? How do you know that alarm bells should be ringing? It is not easy nor obvious, at first. But clues come with the suspicion that your emotional needs are not being met, that others around you are accorded more rights, respect and consideration than you are.

Some inappropriate restrictions that women experience at the hands of their male partners include making her late for appointments, demanding that she account for her time, and expecting her to ask his permission. Some women say that their partner uses anger, threats, or emotional blackmail such as sulking and silence to restrict her activities.

Eva Lundgren (1995) interviewed 40 Norwegian couples. She noted that the more unpredictable, and the greater the mix of punitive and loving behaviours that the men used, the greater the certainty that the women would narrow their range of behaviours to stereotypical “feminine” ones and the greater the certainty that the men would become more stereotypically “masculine”. Inappropriate restrictions are methods used by some men so they can muscle more space for themselves and reduce the space for women to express their potential and freedom.  One man Lundgren interviewed said, “It’s very important to keep the pattern of nature” by teaching underdeveloped women that they should restrict their lives to the role of subservient partners. And some men do not let up on imposing inappropriate restrictions until the woman obeys and submits to the limits of femininity. Until this happens, some men believe they cannot be the man they are striving to be. Eva Lundgren argues that from the men’s stories, it appeared that the men’s central aim was to shape and design their idea of what constitutes an acceptable form of masculinity – an authoritative independent man who is not influenced by a female partner.

Women I interviewed for my masters research experienced inappropriate restrictions in a variety of ways. Here are some of their stories:

Deprives her of privacy

TeresaPrevent you from small private pleasures? Things like reading a book and staying in the bath for an hour. He’d come in all the time and say, “What are you doing?” It was hyper-vigilant what I was doing. It took away the pleasure of being able to do things. I’d open my eyes and he’d be just sitting there looking at me. It makes you want to be very secretive about anything little, little things.

Discourages her from her own interests

Brian would try to stop Raewyn from doing things she was interested in. Brian would do his own thing all the time and would make it awkward for Raewyn to do hers and he called her selfish. Raewyn – He’d be a sulk basically. He didn’t like me doing a lot of stuff and he would make it hard for me to keep up some interests, or even when I had the children to go to coffee groups he would put me down for doing that sort of thing.

Teresa – I really just stuck to doing the things that he did like and stopped doing the things that he didn’t like. I read a lot and that was my escape really…

Victoria –  I lost interests and wants of my own. I only did what kept the peace. I felt guilty about going onto the nursing course. I didn’t feel guilty at the beginning coz I thought it would be good. But then the more I did it, he’d start to do reactive behaviours like, he’d drop me off at work and then he’d go cruising the main street of the city we lived in. Then I felt guilty that maybe I’d pushed him too much or that I’d offended him, or that I’d damaged his ego because I was moving on and he wasn’t moving on. That was where the guilt came in, that I was making him feel less of a man and I must stop that.

Prevents her spiritual practices

Teresa – One of the things he didn’t like was me going to church which I didn’t do very often but would do at Easter and Christmas and the odd time in between and he really didn’t like that all. I had been a reader in church before we had the relationship and he hated that and I stopped doing that. And he tried to change my mind that there wasn’t a God and I suppose it’s just like having friends believing in God (laughter). I mean it’s somebody that you like to tell things to (laughter) or that might know something that’s going on. I definitely stopped going because he didn’t like it

Intrudes and interrupts her activities

Elizabeth was one more of his possessions. Whenever he wanted anything, she had to drop what she was doing and attend to his needs. For example, he refused to take the house key to work with him so Elizabeth had to always be home at 5.00 pm or at lunch time to let him into the house. If she was late his anger would be explosive.

Elizabeth – I would say, “Take the key.” “Oh no, I don’t want all that stuff jangling around in my pockets.” “Okay well let’s leave a key outside so if you get home you can let yourself in.” “Oh, no, no, no, no people can find keys if you leave it outside. You can’t leave keys outside.” I had to be home and if I was five or ten minutes late, he’d be sitting up on the deck reading the paper, fuming, because he couldn’t get into the house. Even at the time it was happening, I just thought I had to be home at 5.00 pm. It would drive me a bit crazy sometimes I’d think, if he just took a key or if we just left a key out. The logical part of me just couldn’t make sense of this, so in the end I just stopped trying and just went along with what he said.

Acts as if she can do what she wants, then becomes upset when she does

Raewyn – we shared the babysitting and once I was late back from class and he was babysitting and he was so pissed off, it was totally uncalled for, but he wanted to make a scene to make me feel bad because he had missed out on his art class and I’d got it. So even though activities were pretty much well shared it was like, you can’t get more than your share. If anybody gets more it should be me. You are meant to be here with the children because I work whatever.

Susan – when I wanted to go back to school to get Sixth Form Certificate coz I wanted to become an accountant. He said ok, but when it actually came he got really nasty. He used to say, “What a stupid idea, what do you want to go and do that for?” I guess to him he was losing all the things I used to do for him because I’d be out of the house. Response? I left him. My youngest child was one – 1997. I didn’t get the education.

Monitors her whereabouts – demands she account for her time

Susan – I used to do night classes. He’d give me a hard time. He’d say it takes 15 minutes to get there. I was allowed two hours at the class. But at 11pm he’d ask where I’d been. He’d accuse me of being with someone else and I’d just laugh and say, “Well excuse me, but mate you go out four nights a week and you’ll say you’ll be home and you’re not home so don’t start telling me you don’t believe I’ve been where I’ve said I’ve been because where else am I going to go?” I used to argue.

Elizabeth – I’d have a good excuse to cover myself, I couldn’t just say outright, well fuck you mate, I’m not going to be there… I would have to make sure that every five minutes was accounted for because he’d want to know when I got back, where I’d been, and what I’d been doing so I had to keep a check on the time, and keep a check on where I was, so that I was sure I could fit it altogether for him so that I could tell him where I’d been.

Restricts the amount of time she’s allowed out of the house

Susan – His control there was, “Be home by a certain time. You’ve got 3/4 of an hour there, 3/4 of an hour back and an hour to do your groceries”. I was at my sister’s for three hours and Anthony got absolutely mad at me when I got home. I had no respect for him because he put these time constraints on me when I did my sewing classes. The thing that used to get to me was that he’d go out to the pub and say he’d be home at 9pm, yet come home in the early hours of the morning. I resented him, totally resented him. I used to get really angry with him. I used to argue or yell. He used to walk away from me and nothing frustrates me more than someone not arguing back. At least if you’re arguing you’ve got some kind of communication. It all used to build up in me. Did that make you change? I would tend to give in if the children needed a parent, I would tend to have given in, yeah. Because that whole self-esteem, he was earning the money and I wasn’t, so I was indebted to him yeah. Did he prevent you from small private pleasures? Yes. How did you respond to that? I would go for a coffee sometimes, and I would try not to tell him because I knew he wouldn’t approve and about clothing I just wouldn’t buy anything. I used to go around in absolutely rotten clothing, yeah I just didn’t buy much I just kept the basics and get hand-me-downs.

Pressures her to be like him, denies her, her individual tastes

Raewyn – Yes especially if I said I didn’t like something, or if I said I hate that or something he never liked it if I said I hated something. So yeah in a way he did he wouldn’t really let me …. How did you respond? I used to just say nothing because to me it was like so what, so what if he doesn’t agree with what I’m saying, it was often like that. Let him disagree, there’s no point in arguing. Would you go ahead and partake of those things? Sometimes yeah. Sometimes not? I didn’t even realise that I didn’t because of what he would say. He’s very persuasive, it’s incredible, so in some ways it was hard for me to know whether I did because he said, or because I decided myself.

Attempts at restricting her potential

Karen – I don’t know whether he would have specifically wished me any ill health, but there was a very definite campaign to do with intelligence, self esteem, achievements, and education once I started university and started achieving really highly, there was lots of problems with that. He didn’t ever say specifically I don’t want you doing that but he’d go round the house screaming at me you stupid fucking bitch. I’d come home with an A+. He’d be, “You stupid fucking bitch” for the next month. There’d be reasons for it, there’s a tea bag in the sink, what’s the tea bag doing there you stupid fucking bitch. Consequences of expressing true yourself? Bouncing around. He’d say very cutting things to put me in my place to make sure I was still going to be sitting in the box that he’d made for me. …..I chose not to do things because it was too much bother because it would cause hassles, there’d be payback and I was afraid of it.

Pauline – Did he try to prevent you from growing your resources? Definitely. I wanted to go and do some study and I was met with, “You will pay for it yourself and you’ll pay for the child care.” I didn’t earn an income, so it’s like “You won’t do it.” For me to improve anything about myself, it was made impossible. So how did you respond to these things? Oh, I hated it. With regard to wanting education I just felt like there’s no way I can do it. I can’t do it. I haven’t got the money. I used to say I’d really like to go and have a little job, contribute and he just used to react with, “Well how are you going to manage that? What are you going to do with the kids?” He was a shift worker and it gave him a lot of time. I thought that on his days off I could do something. But instead he found something else, so I watched him fill his time up and earning more and doing more and getting out and meeting people. As he got further out into the outside world I felt more and more imprisoned inside the house. I got depressed.

Discourages or refuses to let her work

Heather – I’d gone for a job at a barbershop in town and Luke really flipped out. He didn’t want me to go for that job. “How dare you apply for something like that, you ring them up and tell them you’re not going.” I said I’m going this morning, I can’t just cancel like that I really would like to do the job and then it worked out one of his friends was a partner there. He said, “I’m ringing him to tell him not to give you that job.” First of all I thought he was joking. I still don’t know to this day whether he did or not. That night we went out with his friends and he was going on and on about this job. His friends said what’s wrong with that? They were going for God’s sake man you can’t keep her trapped in doors all day.

Elizabeth – He used to say he didn’t want me working because he thought being a mother was so important, but when I look at it now I think of it was more he didn’t want me working because he didn’t want any competition, he just wanted me there so he knew where I was and what I was doing and that he had control over everything.

Restricts car use

Sally – Dylan monopolised the use of the car, returned it late and empty of petrol when Sally had to keep an appointment. At one point, when they owned two cars, Sally was not allowed to use the nice looking one, rather during snow, hail and frost she had to use the car which was full of rust and which had a broken heater. Dylan refused to fix the heater.

Pauline – One time Chris did up a car and gave it to her for Christmas and proudly told his mates what he had done. Then he sold it in February without Pauline’s consent. For various reasons a car would often not be available for Pauline to drive.

Karen – Felix restricted Karen’s activities and her use of the car in the guise of protecting her from danger and obsessively monitored everything she did.

Donna -  I took myself off to school to get upskilled so I could get a job. The first thing he did was take the car off me so I couldn’t go to school. I had to walk an hour into town and an hour back to go to school and this only lasted till about half past one in the afternoon, it was adult classes and that absolutely infuriated him coz while I was there I wasn’t at home waiting on him, running round after him. I wasn’t allowed to go out because he was scared I’d have sex with someone which never happened, so I wouldn’t be allowed to have the car…………he made sure the car was always empty, I couldn’t go anywhere……

Generalised restrictions

Elsie – My dad’s really fair, he’s just of his generation, they’ve got gender specific roles, but he never stopped mum from doing anything. But this guy never allowed me to have control over anything. I always felt if I wanted to do something that it was put off or just wasn’t as worthwhile as anything he wanted to do. My career, my ambitions, my desire to have a nice, happy, peaceful life and to have lots of interests I wanted to do, I could never do any of them. I basically had nothing, nothing enjoyable in my life while I was married. I was never allowed to do anything that was for me. It was only his things that he liked to do, that was all there was. It was either do them or do nothing. Just to see a friend, he was so mean about it and complaining about the money, but he spent thousands on his own recreation. I’d just put up with it. I very quickly learned because he’d kick in doors and all sorts if he felt crossed. I only really did what he wanted anyway because he had the finances and he controlled what we did and where we went.

Elizabeth – He’d want to come home at lunchtime and I’d think it doesn’t really fit with what I had planned today, but I’d make sure I was home at lunch time and then I made his lunch for him. If he came home at night he would expect me to be there to say hello. I would have to drop what I was doing to be there for him. Even at home I had to drop what I was doing. It couldn’t be “I’m just finishing this off”, or “I’ll be done in 20 minutes.” If he was coming home at lunchtime I had to drop what I was doing, be there and make his lunch and sit and have a cup of coffee with him and I just took that as that’s the way it is.

Reference:

Murphy, Clare (2002) Women Coping with Psychological Abuse: Surviving in the Secret World of Male Partner Power and Control. Unpublished Masters thesis, University of Waikato

Watch out for blogs on the following control tactics:

One-Sided power and control
Mind games
Isolation
Over-protection and ‘caring’
Emotional unkindness & violation of trust
Degradation
Separation abuse
Using social institutions & social prejudices
Denial, minimising, blaming
Using the children
Economic abuse
Sexual abuse
Symbolic aggression
Domestic slavery
Physical violence

{ 1 comment }

Tactic #2 Mind Games

by Clare Murphy PhD on July 14 2011

This is the second of 16 blogs discussing the patterns of tactics from my power and control wheel – Mind Games.

Mind Games are deliberate attempts to psychologically manipulate someone. They are covert, coercive, manipulative intentions masked by innocent sounding communication. Mind Game language is designed to confuse and keep the victim from guessing the perpetrator’s true aim.

Some of the Mind Games men use to psychologically confuse female partners include blocking her from clarifying his mixed messages, questioning all her judgments, and manipulating her by responding with lies. Mind Games are an attempt to indoctrinate someone into believing they are the guilty party and their viewpoints are irrelevant or pathetic, and need to be realigned to the viewpoint of the perpetrator.

Mind Games are especially powerful when the victim totally trusts the perpetrator and believes both their roles in the relationship are well defined and socially ‘normal’.

Mind Games entail brainwashing – a notion that we usually associate with cults or terrorist hostage tactics. But, the truth is, brainwashing is happening in your neighbourhood right now. Ordinary men brainwash their partners when they say one thing and do another. For example when a man lectures her about his life philosophy of caring for others, but only enacts such caring towards others outside the family – not her. They brainwash their partner when they appeal to her instinct and desire to care for him by saying, “If you really love me you’d do what I want”. This gets confusing when you love and trust your partner. But he is slowly – one tactic at a time – oppressing and controlling. It’s insidious – and it can take years to see, and to realise this is a pattern.

Women’s efforts to make sense of mixed messages are often blocked by their partners which is incredibly stressful, anxiety-provoking and can lead some women to experience disrupted sleeps, and illness – physical, psychological and spiritual. Brainwashing, guilt trips and confusion lead to exhaustion, which can make women more susceptible to believing some of the denigrating and manipulative language their partners use against them. Some women are led to identify more and more with the abuser, whilst others are able to maintain morsels of a sense of themselves – of their own thoughts and beliefs.

Women I interviewed for my Masters research, and women I work with in counselling, talk about experiences of emotional blackmail, manipulation, guilt, feeling fearful and feeling mind-numbingly-crazy.

Confusion and crazy-making

Elizabeth said that because she could not “prove that stuff” that her ex-husband did and said to her that now – years later – she still has “this thing, about whether people believe me”.

Victoria said, “The Mind Games leave you in doubt as to whether or not you’re actually being abused … you’re not quite sure anymore and they really start to cloud your judgment. Whereas if somebody hits you, you know you’ve been hit. The psychological abuse has made me pessimistic, untrusting, vulnerable and very strong now I’m at the other end of it. Also I feel there’s this big hole, this big deep cavern that will always be there that I have to work my damndest to walk around and never to fall back into because I know it’s always there because the behaviours have been so well learnt over the years.”

Pauline said, “I had a friend who I used to call a lot on the phone … I was so confused and I needed to talk to somebody to hear it out loud and to get some feedback. At one point I thought I was going quite crazy because he acted innocent. Like if I said, ‘What’s wrong?’ he acted like nothing’s wrong. He wouldn’t really say anything. So I’d think well maybe it’s me, it’s all my thinking, my perception.”

“And my friend who was calling lives in another town and it’s ages later when she was next at our place. And he was home on shift, outside working so I called him for lunch. We’d be sitting down to lunch and he wouldn’t come in. My friend [had previously] thought my husband was an absolute angel, she went to school with him, and she said to me, ‘All these months you talked to me on the phone about what he’s been like, I didn’t think you were lying, but I couldn’t see that’s how he would be, because that’s not him.’ But, she said, ‘Now I’m here today, I can see this is for real, it’s happening’.”

Guilt trips

The combination of tactics some men use to control their female partners lead many women to forgo and lose interests and wants of their own. To survive in the relationship many women continue doing only those things that keep the peace.

Victoria said, “I felt guilty about going onto the nursing course. I didn’t feel guilty at the beginning coz I thought it would be good. But then the more I did it, he’d start to do reactive behaviours like, he’d drop me off at work and then he’d go cruising the main street of the city we lived in. Then I felt guilty that maybe I’d pushed him too much or that I’d offended him, or that I’d damaged his ego because I was moving on and he wasn’t moving on. That was where the guilt came in, that I was making him feel less of a man and I must stop that.”

Questions all her judgments

Teresa said her partner often questioned her judgments about friends: “If I talked about something a friend was doing or had said or some problem that a friend had, if I was talking about it sympathetically he would try and turn it around so I wasn’t sympathetic and say “No, it’s probably this or probably that” and point out negative things about people that I liked to change my judgment of them and so I wouldn’t like them as much.”

Luckily, Teresa didn’t take any notice of what he said about her best friend. Instead she, “considered the things he said and then mentally dismissed them”.

But when he said things about other people Teresa, “would think Oh, I hadn’t thought of that, oh yes he’s probably right. He would also tell me that people had said things about me. People at work, that they had said that I was this, that I was that., horrible things, which I believed and I don’t know whether they had said them or not. I think that he probably twisted a lot of things like that and I believed him, so that would change my judgment.”

Manipulates with lies

Heather said her partner scared her, “how he would fabricate the truth all the time. I never knew what was truthful and what wasn’t. He told people, “I laid all those tiles,” but I’d seen with my own eyes that he hadn’t laid those tiles, I saw the tile man doing it. I said, “Look Luke you didn’t actually do those tiles.” He said, “I did.” I said, “You did a little bit over there where the man showed you coz you wanted to cut a tile. That’s lying.”

If she withdraws he punishes her, if she reaches out he rejects her

Sally said “my husband initiated sex 99% of the time.  He would insist that part of the problem we had sexually was that I didn’t initiate.  So occasionally I would initiate sex … and every time I initiated sex he just wasn’t himself, he just became kind of angry, kind of a hatred on his face … I don’t remember his words but they were something like how dare you initiate sex at this time, I am busy, I’m working, yet generally he was not busy or working.  I was so confused … one day it dawned on me.  I thought he doesn’t want me to initiate sex, but that’s not the issue.  He just wants to be in full control, no matter what.

Damned if you do, damned if you don’t

Victoria said she was not allowed to be independent, nor was she allowed to be dependent. If she didn’t agree with Graham, he would manipulate and twist things to make her doubt herself. She was not allowed to express feelings and, if she did, he said she was either overreacting or misinterpreting.

Behaves differently when people visit

Women share stories about ways their partners don’t carry out household, personal or parental responsibilities, but suddenly when visitors come to the house, their partner starts performing his responsibilities. Raewyn said that if she “wanted a break from the children he was either uncooperative or refused saying that she did nothing anyway. He sulked if he did not get his own way [yet] when friends came over he would suddenly start being a father.” Sally said that Dylan would often not work, but would “appear to be busy when visitors or guests came to stay”. Donna’s husband had trouble putting on his own boots, but she said that “one day Frank’s family were visiting and he bent down and put his own boots on and off in front of them.” Donna was devastated that she had been so used because she did not know he could manage himself.

Charming in public and abusive in private

Teresa said others told her she was misinterpreting things because Patrick was so charming to his colleagues. Elizabeth said her husband, David was charming in public but at home he stomped on Elizabeth’s budding creativity. Heather said that she’s still having trouble coming to grips with her own experience of abuse and control in private and his public utterance of words of love. She was further confused because of other people liking him and validating him.

Mind Games are abuse

Mind Games should not be taken lightly – they are abusive and they are controlling. Patrick attempted to impair Teresa’s judgments by hiding things and suggesting that she was going insane when she could not find them. Victoria said she had no name for her husband’s behaviours when she was in the midst of experiencing his power and control tactics. She said, “I didn’t really consider it abuse until I was deeply entrenched in the marriage. I just thought he was manipulative and I thought he was moody. But in the initial stages I didn’t know I was being abused. I thought he was playing Mind Games with me, but I never considered Mind Games to be abuse. If I had been aware that there was such a thing, then I would have seen it as abuse earlier.”

Mind Games are a warning sign that you are being abused and controlled

If you believe your partner is playing Mind Games, then seek help. If you feel you are going crazy, then you may be in a relationship with a partner who is controlling you. You have the right to seek help and to seek support and validation from people who believe in your judgment about what you are experiencing.

The compassionate view

We live in a society where the notion of being a man is written in a social script that all too often is distorted and suppresses a man’s natural humanity. Acts of dominance hide vulnerabilities and emotions, which results in some men remaining unaware of their underlying needs for love and care. In the distorted society myth it’s not regarded as manly to show feelings. Mind Games are part of this complex cover-up that hides the perpetrator’s real need and desire for human connection. Paradoxically, women often detect such insecurities in their partners whom they love, which can get in the way of women being able to name Mind Games as ABUSE. Until, and unless, the perpetrator is helped to develop empathy and a compassionate view, the victim must acknowledge there is harm being done and need to protect themselves from further harm.

Reference:

Murphy, Clare (2002) Women Coping with Psychological Abuse: Surviving in the Secret World of Male Partner Power and Control. Unpublished Masters thesis, University of Waikato

Watch out for blogs on the following control tactics:

One-Sided power and control

Inappropriate restrictions

Isolation

Over-protection and ‘caring’

Emotional unkindness & violation of trust

Degradation

Separation abuse

Using social institutions & social prejudices

Denial, minimising, blaming

Using the children

Economic abuse

Sexual abuse

Symbolic aggression

Domestic slavery

Physical violence

{ 1 comment }

Tactic #1 One-Sided Power Games

by Clare Murphy PhD on May 17 2011

This is the first of 16 blogs discussing the patterns of tactics mentioned in my power and control wheel – One-Sided Power Games.

Power & Control Wheel Clare Murphy 2002

Research with men and women reveals that men who engage in one-sided power games show more concern about gaining something for themselves than showing concern for what they are actually doing to their partners. In other words – what matters to him is not what he does, but the benefits he gains. There are multiple one-sided power games played by a person determined to maintain power and control. If one tactic does not work, he will merely change to a new tactic.

When I interviewed the men for my PhD research I asked why they’d bother committing to a monogamous relationship if they were so keen on playing the field and seeking sex from multiple partners. I was so surprised when most of the men said they wanted to build a life-long caring relationship. Several of the men said their partners were their best friends. And it was her they wanted to turn to for support when they were jailed, or punished in some way for abusing her.

I also posed the question, “If men took an unwritten contract into marriage what would it say?” All the men said things like:

The unwritten contract would say: “I can do what I want but you gotta do what I tell you to. That’s the way I’d see 90 percent of marriages, from a man’s point of view.”  (Bill)

“Most guys would like their wife or partner to be subservient to them. And be agreeable with the ideals of the husband.” (James)

The man should “have the final financial decision and the final direction for the family.” (Brendan)

And Sam said that in the past he used to believe that women “had to be a slave.”

These are examples of one-sided power games where: He makes the rules, he makes all the big decisions and he has the last word.

Ruler of the castle

Indeed these men’s views of how a marriage should operate fitted with women’s experience of being dismissed and disregarded as an equal partner. Several women I interviewed said their partner had to have the final decision about everything, and regularly ignored them if she had something to say. Susan said her partner “made the major decisions and if any were decided jointly, he did things his way in the end”. Pauline’s husband treated her in such a way that meant she had no right to have judgements or make decisions. On the other hand, Karen made the major decisions such as where to live – however, ultimately if Felix felt a decision needed to be blocked he’d block it.

His wants are most important – He does most of the receiving

Lazarus, a man I interviewed, was of the opinion that the unwritten contract that most men take into a relationship states: “Trust, honour and obey.” Then he added, “Although if I said the ‘obey’ bit, the missus would get upset [and say] ‘You’re not my boss’.”

Other men said the unwritten contract would say, “Do as the man says” and that men can be very domineering. Max said, “We want it our way. Our way or the highway girl.”

Geni said he’d “Think the majority of men would think the wife is like the doting little servant, slave, there to do everything” and that when the man comes home from work in his suit and drops the briefcase “he expects the beer there and the meal on the table.” When this expectation is not met, men say they feel disrespected as a man, that the failure of the woman to carry out her feminine role hurts a man’s pride.

From the women’s experience, Elsie said that everything she and her husband drank, ate and did, including sex, was mostly what he wanted and the way he wanted it. He made all the decisions for his own benefit and nothing else mattered. Whatever these men want takes precedence, therefore the men get most of the receiving.

Victoria said it was vital she ensure her partner’s needs always came first. It had to be his way first and then, maybe, he might think about doing something for Victoria. When the couple went to marriage guidance, Graham agreed with things the counsellor said, but when they got home he said that what the counsellor said was, “All rubbish and that he was not going to f…ing do that, she doesn’t know what she’s on about that woman”. This is a common experience women tell me in counselling. Their partners may say they love her, want the relationship to improve, so agree to go to counselling, but the role they are playing is a major way in which such men gain any sense of self-esteem. Counselling inevitably means having to face feelings these men spend a lifetime denying.

So, these men continue to ensure that all the attention centres on themselves

Elsie’s husband Leon was jealous and aggressive toward his new-born son. From then on there was a huge increase in abuse. All the attention had to be centred on him. He yelled at the baby when it was one week old telling the baby that it had to shut up and not start running the house. To gain further understanding why men engage in these one-sided power games you can read here and here.

Wearing the mask of the Master, he monopolises the woman’s time and energy

An extremely common tactic of the one-sided power game entails the man monopolising the woman’s time and energy. Most women experiencing control by their loved-one say their partners make many promises but never deliver. Susan said that her husband took no responsibility for fathering or household duties and he told people that he had a lazy wife. Yet Susan was overburdened with responsibility, which included being in charge of the finances – which he continually sabotaged.

Most women I talked to expected equal role sharing when they began living with their partners. But, as Karen said:

“Eventually it worked out that I was doing all the girly jobs and he was doing the boy jobs, but then I was doing the girly jobs and the boy jobs. I can remember that being very frustrating and having that argument a lot”.

The burden of these kinds of responsibility increases over time for most women in partnership with men who hold beliefs about male entitlement. Donna said that “When we got married my workload just got heavier and heavier and heavier and heavier and heavier. As the years went by I worked my guts out and I got less and less and less and less for it.”

He has his own selfish way at her expense

Donna said that everything was about what her partner Frank wanted. And what Frank wanted, Frank got. His pattern was to get his own way at her expense, for example, he ate steak three meals a day, gave steak to his friends, yet Donna’s sons were made to eat mince and sausages. Teresa said that if she disagreed with Patrick or said “no” to sex, he would get really angry, nasty and sulk for days. Likewise, if Susan’s partner did not get his own way he would ignore her or disappear for days or weeks at a time.

When a man believes he’s superior she is not allowed to contradict him

Raewyn said there was a great deal of pressure to act, think and be like her husband because he said his way was the only and right way, even though his behaviours were not always congruent with his philosophies. Sally said the exact same things about her husband.

He determines how, when and what things get communicated

Karen’s partner Felix would pull a blanket over his head and hum when Karen wanted to communicate. He would always say that Karen was wrong and that the opposite of what she said was true. Pauline’s husband always avoided talking about issues, he never raised his voice or got angry. Sally said that because her husband would not take responsibility for his behaviours she would get angry in an attempt to be heard and to resolve issues. But . . . then he would say the problem in the relationship was her anger. He always refused to answer the phone, which meant Sally could never get hold of him if she was away from the house. Victoria said that nothing was open to discussion unless it suited Graham’s needs. He walked away when Victoria wanted to talk or he would respond with, “I don’t know” over and over.

His previous marriage makes him right and her wrong

Teresa had a high public profile job working under her intimate partner’s management and they both earned good money. When they first met, Patrick was seemingly happily married with a baby but he pursued Teresa relentlessly, yet blamed Teresa for his marriage break up. When Teresa and Patrick separated he pursued her relentlessly again. Because Teresa had not been in a relationship before, he controlled her by insisting that she knew nothing about relationships, and that he did. Likewise, Sally’s husband claimed to be always right. He, too, had previously been married for ten years and insisted that he knew how to have a relationship, that Sally did not, and he therefore knew best.

And the result of one-sided power games?

As you can see from men’s and women’s stories, one-sided power games don’t always entail physical violence for the man to ascend to the  superior gender status and get the rewards society tells him he deserves. It doesn’t take physical violence for him to ensure she descends into a downward despairing spiral and a position of servitude.

The irony is that men are not truly getting what they really want – which is safety, trust and a caring connection.

As I wrote in 2009:

“Not everyone is safe and free. Huge numbers of people live in fear. Trapped, damaged and in pain. Isolated by perpetrators who are not free either. Masked, driven control freaks lashing out; unhappy like their victims. They emotionally abuse as a way to feel safe. But when they get real – and slip their quest for power and control – they have to admit they are not truly free or safe themselves.”

Watch out for blogs on the following control tactics:

Mind games

Inappropriate restrictions

Isolation

Over-protection and ‘caring’

Emotional unkindness & violation of trust

Degradation

Separation abuse

Using social institutions & social prejudices

Denial, minimising, blaming

Using the children

Economic abuse

Sexual abuse

Symbolic aggression

Domestic slavery

Physical violence

{ 2 comments }

Steps Toward Averting Tragedy

by Clare Murphy PhD on January 27 2011

In the family violence scenario threats of suicide are manipulative and can lead to killing others.

Threats of suicide by a man with a history of psychologically controlling his partner can be an indicator that he could seriously harm or murder family members, often before killing himself. Such threats make it vital for wider family and friends to urge and support a woman to seek frontline help from skilled professionals.

Conducting a Homicide Risk Assessment Tool helps determine level of risk and can keep family members safe – and get appropriate help for the man.

When a controlling man threatens suicide to manipulate his partner these threats are grave – not because he may kill himself necessarily – but because everyday reality in USA, UK, New Zealand, Canada and Australia show such a man can go on to kill his partner and/or his children.

A reader of my blog titled “Domestic violence is much more than physical violence” wrote a comment outlining her concern for her friend whose husband threatens to kill himself as a way of getting her to do what he wants. She states that her friend called her husband to tell him she intended taking the children to her parents for the weekend. But he “left work drove on the highway behind them called her on her cellphone and told her to pull over and come home with him or he would kill himself”. Other men who make such threats say things like, “If you ever leave me, then I’m going to kill myself”, or “I can’t live without you”, or “If I can’t have you no-one can”, or “Death before divorce”, or “You belong to me, no other”.

Not only are these statements coercive – aimed at appealing to women’s sense of responsibility – but they should never be taken lightly. Too often these threats turn to reality. Threatening to commit suicide is a pointer, a red flag of grave concern much like when someone abuses an animal. It represents a risk factor that points toward a real possibility that the person will also abuse family members, as I have discussed previously.

Homicide-suicide may be a comparatively rare problem, not everything finally gets to murder. But it can – and it does

Psychological abuse and power and control know no bounds. There are no rules of certainty about how far things may go – but there is a growing worldwide body of knowledge that cannot be ignored. It’s essential to know what to look out for in order to take precautions to keep family members safe.

So my blog is intended to give you information to help support women who may not be informed about indicators and risk factors that may lead to murder. It is not only OK to speak up and help women, it’s vital.

Remaining silent contributes to the problem – as does ignorance

I know anecdotally that a woman who was killed by her controlling ex-husband last year may have been saved if her family had fully understood the very real risks of her leaving her husband and going back to the house to collect her possessions. Tragically her family had been trying to do all they could to support her – but their lack of knowledge about the signs of abuse makes the woman’s death even sadder.

Some suicidal men may commit homicide before killing themselves

Threats to commit suicide is a red flag, an indicator that such a man could go on to seriously harm or kill his partner and those most close. Men commit most of the homicide-suicide cases. Most victims are women and children. Therefore it is imperative that women (or their supporters) learn to understand the nature and gravity of the situation and seek help by way of a risk assessment.

Find professional help to conduct a risk assessment

Staff at women’s family violence programmes or men’s stopping abuse programmes should be able to assist you in conducting a risk assessment tool. You should expect staff to conduct: “a review of the case history, risk factors, the nature of the risk, the necessity for immediate intervention, safeguarding the victim, and managing the perpetrator” (Office of the Chief Coroner Province of Ontario 2006:45).

Be aware though that not all professionals are specifically trained in the dynamics of family violence and risk factors that can lead to serious harm or murder. In their fourth annual report of the Domestic Violence Death Review Committee, the Office of the Chief Coroner Province of Ontario (2006) describe some cases in which members of the public and/or professionals did not intervene effectively. You can read the document here. The following is one case in which both the man and the woman had involvement with the mental health system at different times in their lives:

“. . . and there was some vague reference to abuse in her relationship, however this was never explored, followed up on or dealt with . . . in the years directly prior to the murder-suicide, the perpetrator had become seriously disturbed and socially isolated . . . yet there was no apparent screening, exploration of relationship issues or abuse by any mental health professional. Level of risk must be assessed and managed. The perpetrator was identified as ‘seriously depressed’ and was encouraged to retrieve his gun to be able to go hunting as form of therapy. However the gun was used in the homicide” (2006:15).

It is vital that the professionals you approach take seriously the possible danger to family members, other than the man who threatens suicide

If you are not satisfied that the professionals you contact seem to understand the problem or that they minimise or ignore it – then it’s important you keep searching for appropriate help. Professionals must “assess whether there is also homicidal ideation when individuals report suicidal ideation and vice versa” (Australian Institute of Criminology, 2009:5) and professionals must be trained in how to use a risk assessment tool.

Risk assessment tools

A risk assessment tool is based on years of research of real life situations worldwide. Risk factors can include psychological, biological, sociological and other factors that were often present for someone who murders, or attempts to murder a family member. However, not every situation is the same and risk assessments are only indicators of possibilities. To avoid missing or misinterpreting clues it is important that lay people do not try to figure this out alone. People trained in the dynamics of family violence can help you and the woman you are supporting.

Trained professionals will assist you in understanding what the list of risk factors means in any given, individual situation.

Campbell’s Intimate Partner Violence Risk Assessment

You can download Jacquelyn Campbell’s Intimate Partner Violence Risk Assessment here and take it to a trained professional who will explain exactly how the assessment works. I have discussed this risk assessment instrument in another blog post here.

Risk Factors indicated by Barbara J. Hart Esq.

  1. Threats of homicide or suicide
  2. Fantasies of homicide or suicide
  3. Access to weapons, previous use of weapons and/or threats to use weapons
  4. “Ownership” of the battered partner
  5. Centrality of the partner
  6. Separation violence
  7. Depression
  8. Access to the battered woman and/or to family members
  9. Repeated involvement with the justice system
  10. Increase in personal risk taking
  11. Hostage-taking

Barbara Hart’s list of risk factors are available here.

Risk Factors compiled by the Office of the Chief Coroner Province of Ontario

The Office of the Chief Coroner Province of Ontario (2006) compiled detailed information about risk factors that might lead to murder. You can download a copy of their fourth annual report of the Domestic Violence Death Review Committee (see reference below) and read pages 30-33. You could take the report with you to a family violence trained person who will assist you in dealing with the perpetrator’s behaviours and will know the steps to take to help keep family members safe.

Risk Factors flagged by New Zealand Police

Risk factors compiled by the New Zealand Police set out below aim to alert professionals that a particular situation may indicate that someone is at risk of dying or suffering serious harm (you can see the following risk factors on page 83 in the Standards New Zealand, 2006 document here).

  1. The offender is obsessed with, dependent upon, or is stalking the victim.
  2. Recent separation, issue of a court order, or divorce and responding in a dangerous manner.
  3. The victim believes the offender could injure or kill her/him.
  4. The offender has strangled or attempted to strangle the victim.
  5. There is a history of family violence and it is getting more severe or increasing in frequency.
  6. The offender has threatened / attempted to commit suicide, or to kill the victim, children or other family members.
  7. The offender has access to weapons, particularly firearms and has used, or threatened to use them. They may have convictions involving weapons (knives, firearms).
  8. The offender has easy access to the victim, children or other family members.
  9. Children are in the home when the violence occurred or have been hurt or threatened in family violence situations.
  10. Incidents of animal abuse by the offender.
  11. The offender has a history of alcohol or drug problems.
  12. The offender has a history of violent behaviour against non-family members.

A history of physical violence is just one possible risk factor. Marie De Santis, from the Women’s Justice Center, Santa Rosa, CA, USA emphasises that many risk factors “usually don’t bleed! In fact, these high risk factors often don’t leave any visible marks at all.”

“If only …”

Speak up on women’s behalf

I urge you to speak up on behalf of women when you believe they’re at risk of serious harm or murder. Silence is not an option anymore – psychological abuse, power and control, family violence are no longer private matters. Keeping abuse private is actually yet another tactic of control and isolation. If you know any woman experiencing anything discussed in this blog, I urge you to support her. She may be isolated and unsure and not be able to help herself in some circumstances. She might not realise the gravity of what a threat of suicide can lead to, and she may not be reading this website or able to find other resources to help herself. The very nature of power and control isolates many women, creates confusion, is crazymaking and can be debilitating financially and psychologically.

You may be her sole link – and only hope

Women need support – some women might reject it – but ultimately keeping women safe from serious harm or death is everyone’s responsibility.

Ask the woman whether she believes she is safe or not

Some women are capable of assessing for themselves whether their partner is capable of killing her, but many are not (as I discussed in a previous blog post).

The Washington State Department of Health guidelines (2008:8) suggest that you could assess the woman’s immediate safety by asking:

  • Do you feel safe to go home today?
  • Are you afraid that your partner may seriously harm you?
  • Are there weapons in your home? What type?
  • Has your partner ever threatened you with homicide or suicide?
  • Is confidential shelter an option you are interested in seeking?
  • What is your plan if future violence occurs?
  • What is one thing, in your opinion, that could be done to support you?

However . . . in a case reported by the Office of the Chief Coroner, Province of Ontario (2006:17):

“the victim [of homicide] did not feel that her partner posed a threat of lethal violence although many warning signs were present that were consistent with a potential risk for domestic homicide. There were opportunities for friends, family and community professionals to intervene but they appeared to feel limited or stymied in these attempts because the victim believed she could handle the situation on her own. Research in this field suggests that approximately half of domestic homicide victims minimized the risks posed and saw their partner as harassing and annoying, but not dangerous. In these matters, the public and professional interveners need enhanced skills to engage the victim in a discussion on the risks that are apparent and the importance of safety planning and risk reduction strategies. These approaches have to recognize the victim’s ambivalence or guilt about separation and her misguided belief that she can manage the threats on her own without police or court intervention.”

Refer to my blog for discussing safety tips with women if they intend leaving their partner. AND seek professional help with this too. I have yet to write safety tips for women if they stay with their partner or if they’ve already left him. For help with those two scenarios I suggest googling for that help.

It is not enough to just warn the victim that she may be in danger

A description of some homicide-suicide situations from the Ontario death review is available for reading in the Office of the Chief Coroner’s 2006 document (see below for the reference). These case studies show that it was not enough to just warn the victim that she may be in danger. Often friends, family, workmates, and so forth suspected there were high levels of risk for various women, “however, with no assistance from any outside resources, were unable to intervene effectively” (2006:11).

It suggests you do not make any conclusions from the above risk assessment tools yourself. Marie De Santis from the Women’s Justice Center in California reiterates in her document on homicide risk assessment the very things I emphasise:

“The only sure way to determine the presence of these high risk factors is through careful, comprehensive victim interviews.”

Men who abuse and control their female partner need help

For my PhD research I interviewed men who admitted to abusing and controlling their female partners. All the men had sought help to change. Often men who use power and control are actually quite vulnerable and dependent on their partner – which in part contributes to their desperation to never let her leave. One man told me the following:

“Well I’d certainly recommend if anybody was in a similar position to me that they should come and attend one of these courses, it’s certainly helped me, like if I didn’t come to this course, I probably wouldn’t have changed my behaviour and I’d be a single man now. Either that, or I would’ve jumped off a bridge, I don’t know, I certainly wouldn’t be happy, I’d say that. Not that I’m big on killing myself or any of that nonsense, but yeah, my life would be over if my wife left me, I would have nothing to live for.”

However, often men refuse to admit they are abusive and refuse to get help to change.

Many men don’t believe they’re perpetrators of family violence, rather they think other men are

One man I interviewed said he had been sneakily hiding his abuse against his partner and that a neighbour had once come over for help to get a protection order against her husband. The man I interviewed said that at the time it did not occur to him that he was abusing his wife in the same way that his neighbour was abusing his.

The popular culture is full of stereotypes about what kind of man threatens suicide to control his wife and what kind of man kills his wife. But it is ordinary men, it is men you buy your groceries from, men you seek insurance advice from, men who are wonderful school teachers, men who offer you help to clear your yard on the weekend. Generally, monsters do not commit murder – it is ordinary men who can, and do monstrous things. Men’s stopping abuse programmes are there to help ordinary men to face the truth of what they do that harms others. And once they start attending – many realise they’ve also been harming themselves and many admit they don’t like harming their loved ones and they want to be challenged and want support to change.

Remember that threats can have serious implications in the end

And speaking up on behalf of others is a way to keep victims safe and a possible way to encourage help for offenders. While most men who threaten suicide or homicide are able to disengage emotionally, Johnston and Campbell (1993) state that some remain obsessed with the woman.

You never want to hear yourself saying “If only . . . .”

So please . . . . speak up, speak out loud on behalf of women. Keep the family safe.

References:

{ 1 comment }

Psychological abuse can lead to murder

by Clare Murphy PhD on November 20 2009

Men who murder their female partners are often motivated by a need to save face by regaining a sense of power and control if the woman threatens to leave, or does leave.

Many mental health and legal professionals do not take women’s experience of psychological abuse and control seriously. But men’s perpetration of psychological abuse against female partners is serious. Very controlling men pose a very serious danger to women who threaten to leave or do leave.

Jacquelyn Campbell PhD devised the Danger Assessment Instrument to aid in assessing the level of risk to women for being murdered by their controlling partner. One of the risk factors noted in this instrument includes whether the woman had left her partner after living together during the previous year.

Controlling behaviours as risk factors

There are several signs of psychologically abusive and controlling behaviours listed in Campbell’s Danger Assessment Instrument. These include: whether the man has threatened to kill the woman or harm her children; whether he has ever forced the woman to have sex against her will; whether he has a history of controlling her activities, who she sees, how much money she can use and when she can use the car; whether he has spied on her, left her threatening notes, made unwanted phone calls or left threatening phone messages; whether he has destroyed her property; and, whether he has displayed constant jealousy saying things like, “If I can’t have you, no one can.”

Other factors that can place a woman at risk of murder

Other risk factors listed on Campbell’s Danger Assessment Instrument include whether physical violence increased in severity or frequency over the previous year; whether the man owns a gun; if he has previously used a weapon against the woman or threatened her with a lethal weapon; whether he has previously tried to choke her or has beaten her while pregnant; whether he has avoided being arrested for domestic violence; whether he is unemployed; whether the woman has a child that is not his; whether he uses illegal drugs or is an alcoholic or problem drinker. Another two factors include whether the man has threatened or tried to commit suicide and whether the woman has previously threatened or tried to commit suicide.

Women’s perceptions of risk must be taken seriously

Several research studies have found that an important source of assessing whether the woman is in danger of being murdered by her partner is whether the woman believes he is capable of killing her. Jacquelyn Campbell PhD importantly includes this question in her Danger Assessment Instrument.

If you know a woman is afraid for her life you must take her fear seriously and help her devise a safety plan. Research shows that women can accurately assess whether their partner will use physical violence, whether he will psychologically abuse her in the future, and whether he will kill her.

However, women are not always accurate. Some women minimise the psychological abuse and physical violence that their partner uses, therefore may minimise future risk. If you, as a professional, friend, or family member believe the woman might be in danger, it is important that you use a risk assessment instrument with her to check for any signs of possible danger.

Jacquelyn Campbell’s Danger Assessment Instrument can be downloaded for free from her website, along with her permission statement and guidelines for the use of the Instrument. You will see on her website that she recommends that people seek training from her to enhance safe and adequate use of the Instrument. The correct use of the instrument is vital.

Disclaimer:

This blog post must not be used to gauge risk to women. The purpose of this post is to name some of the issues and guide you to Jacquelyn Campbell PhD’s website at www.dangerassessment.com . . . The use of any risk instrument should always be used in conjunction with women’s perceptions. Campbell’s Instrument does this.

References:

Bell, Margaret E., Cattaneo, Lauren Bennett, Goodman, Lisa A. & Dutton, Mary Ann. (2008). Assessing the risk of future psychological abuse: Predicting the accuracy of battered women’s predictions. Journal of Family Violence, 23, 69-80.

Braaf, Rochelle & Sneddon, Clare. (2007). Family law act reform: The potential for screening and risk assessment for family violence: Australian Domestic and Family Violence Clearinghouse Issues Paper 12.

Brewster, Mary P. (2003). Power and control dynamics in prestalking and stalking situations. Journal of Family Violence, 18, 207-217.

Campbell, Jacquelyn C. (2003). Danger Assessment Instrument. Available from http://www.dangerassessment.org/WebApplication1/pages/product.aspx

Campbell, Jacquelyn C. (2004). Helping women understand their risk in situations of intimate partner violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19, 1464-1477.

Campbell, Jacquelyn C., Webster, Daniel W., Koziol-McLain, Jane, Block, Carolyn, Campbell, Doris, Curry, Mary Ann; et al. (2003). Risk factors for femicide in abusive relationships: Results from a multisite case control study. American Journal of Public Health, 93, 1089-1097.

Campbell, Jacquelyn C., Webster, Daniel W. & Glass, Nancy. (2009). The danger assessment: Validation of a lethality risk assessment instrument for intimate partner femicide. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 24, 653-674.

Heckert, D. Alex & Gondolf, Edward W. (2004). Battered women’s perceptions of risk versus risk factors and instruments in predicting repeat reassault. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19, 778-800.

Weisz, Arlene, Tolman, Richard M. & Saunders, Daniel G. (2000). Assessing the risk of severe domestic violence: The importance of survivors’ predictions. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 15, 75-90.

{ 0 comments }

Are women who live with abusive partners codependent?

by Clare Murphy PhD on July 8 2009

The other day I met a social worker/counsellor at a seminar. When she found out I research domestic violence she immediately told me that women who stay with violent men are codependent. She said such women were just the same as women who live with alcoholics. She was not interested in another view because she was adamant that she was right.

According to Codependents Anonymous World Fellowship, the following are six of a long list of characteristics of codependency:

She has difficulty identifying what she is feeling

She has difficulty making decisions

She harshly judges everything she thinks, says, or does – as never “good enough”

She does not perceive herself as a lovable or worthwhile person

She puts aside her own interests and hobbies in order to do what others want

She compromises her own values and integrity to avoid rejection, or others’ anger

I have difficulty with applying the ‘codependent’ label on a woman surviving in a relationship where her male partner abuses and controls her – for the following reasons …

Victims of intimate partner abuse are not codependent

Research with women shows that the above six characteristics are an effect of experiencing long-term, ongoing, relentless abuse and control. Many male perpetrators degrade and intimidate women into believing they deserve physical violence, sexual violation, verbal abuse, or other forms of punishment.

A tactic of abuse entails brainwashing women into believing they think and feel something other than they actually do. Many domestic violence perpetrators control the decision-making. Many make women wrong for making decisions, or denigrate any decisions made by women. Many male perpetrators enslave women, making demands that she be a more than perfect housekeeper, partner, parent or woman. No human can meet those kinds of demands, hence can never be ‘good enough’. Being degraded several times a day, or several times a week, month after month after month leads to feeling unlovable and unworthy.

Changing her values and integrity to avoid rejection or anger are often consciously chosen strategies of self-preservation used by abused and controlled women. Women I have interviewed would confront the man, avoid the man, lie to get some freedom, be completely honest to try to make him stop controlling them, become violent themselves, retaliate verbally, be passive or silent. Yet these women would secretly harbour knowledge of their true selves, whilst attempting a variety of behaviours – that went against their values – in order to avoid, or stop the abuse. These are not strategies of a codependent person.

It is dangerous to give the ‘codependent’ label to victims of intimate partner abuse

Codependence implies a lack of assertion. Whereas, if a woman asserts her opinions, needs, or rights to a controlling man, he could then engage in more or worse abuse to stamp out her assertiveness. It may, therefore, be dangerous for a psychologist to coach a woman to assertively stand up to her partner. Anyone wishing to help such a woman should respect her reasoning for not asserting herself.

Codependence implies women serve others to the detriment of flourishing to her full potential. Whereas, women who want to, or do, attend tertiary schooling to improve their skills and talents, can actually experience more, or worse, abuse by their partner because he wants to ensure she does not grow. For example, a man interviewed by Eva Lundgren (1995) said, “It makes her reconsider when I lock her up in a cupboard. Then she gets scared. Give her a sense of her total dependency, that’s the only way.” Therefore, it may be dangerous for a psychotherapist to encourage a woman to go against her partner’s demands by attending school. People in the helping professions need to listen to women’s views on how detrimental to her safety such a step might be.

Codependence implies women stay with violent and otherwise abusive men because they are attracted to being abused, like it, and want it. Whereas, in reality, women engage in multiple strategies to stop the abuse, to help the man change, to protect themselves and their children, or to avoid being abused in the first place. It may be dangerous for a counsellor to encourage a woman to leave. Social workers should honour women’s knowledge about what will, and will not, keep her safe, and that might mean staying with the abuser. It definitely means that multiple services are required to support the woman’s safety, such as police, safe housing, and financial support agencies.

Blaming the victim is tantamount to abusing her

Anyone who gives the ‘codependent’ label – to anyone who is living with a man who engages in a degrading pattern of psychological abuse and control – is blaming the victim and pathologising her. This label implies the victim has behaviours that pull the abuse out of the man. Yet, Jeff Hearn’s (1998) in-depth interviews with male perpetrators shows, for example, that some men threaten suicide as a way of ensuring women do not leave them, and other men threaten to harm or kill pets, children, family, friends and/or the woman herself.

Many perpetrators of intimate partner abuse consider themselves to be the King of the Castle, the Boss, the Master who must be obeyed at all costs. Such attitudes may creep in slowly over time entrapping and disempowering their female partners. These men may also be charming, caring, protective and kind at other times. This is confusing to women. Many women spend years attempting to understand and change the man’s abusive behaviours – they do not accept abuse as their lot.

The subject of this website is domestic violence which is different to mutual abuse – it is about one person’s campaign to control the other through whatever means they find works. For example, one of the men Cavanagh and her colleagues (2001) interviewed said he “was a bit of a tactician” and that he would “more or less try to intimidate her by going quiet and staring.” This kind of intentional behaviour aimed at subservience, and at lowering a woman’s sense of self-esteem, worth and personal integrity, is a hallmark of a systematic pattern over time. A pattern that entails the male abuser refusing to take responsibility for his behaviours and entails blaming the woman, confusing her, isolating her, making her wrong and demanding respect for his position as the man. Coping with such behaviours does not make a woman codependent.

Power and control over women is a social issue

This is not about a woman being codependent by reinforcing the man’s behaviour. The need that many men have to establish and maintain authority over women is a social issue – an issue of contemporary expectations of masculinity. My research with male perpetrators shows that this is a way for certain men to avoid feeling weak, vulnerable and feminine – as not being a so-called ‘real man’ is considered inferior. Controlling a female partner is a socially sanctioned way for the man to gain social kudos. Men who control their partners know what they’re doing. Many men provoke women to do something that the man then believes will justify hitting her. For instance, a man interviewed by Cavanagh and colleagues (2001) said he’d “do anything to get an excuse” to use violence against his partner.

In sum, any psychological issues female victims experience, that resemble characteristics deemed to be codependent, are a result of incessant abuse and control by their male partners, and are reinforced by social issues that support male authority in the home and male control and possessiveness over humans and animals in the home. Women’s coping strategies should be taken seriously. Blaming women revictimises them, further isolates them and deepens their growing sense of not being good enough.

References:

{ 7 comments }

Power and control: Lawyer-client relationship

by Clare Murphy PhD on June 27 2009

A power and control wheel has been developed as a tool for recognising abuse and psychological assault by lawyers against their clients. This Lawyer-Client wheel was motivated firstly by the book Lowering the Bar: Lawyer Jokes and Legal Culture by Marc Galanter, and secondly, by the State Bar of Texas ethics rules (which reflect ethics rules for lawyers across USA generally).

Marc Galanter made a point in his book that lawyers are widely mistrusted by non-lawyers in many societies, and their victims are afraid to speak out loud because of fear of retaliation. But their need to vent is so great that people use humour to express their outrage, and this humour serves as a safe cover. When challenged, the joke-teller can say, “I was just joking!”

Power and Control: Lawyer-Client Relationship Abuse and Psychological Assault Wheel Diagram:

Power and Control: Lawyer-Client Relationship Abuse and Psychological Assault Tactics:

Using Coercion and Threats

• making or carrying out threats to do something to harm the client

• threatening to withdraw as counsel of record on the client’s case

• threatening to commit incompetent or unethical practice by violating the State Bar disciplinary rules of professional conduct

• threatening to request the court to order a psychological evaluation of the client without just reason

• ambushing and railroading the client to prevent informed decisions

• exaggerating the harmful outcomes to the client

• pressuring the client to accept a plea deal offer

• pressuring the client to do illegal things

Using Terrorism and Assault

• making the client afraid by using looks, tones, demeanors, gestures, actions

• staging temper tantrums

• violating rules of politesse; rules of orderly, fair meetings; and the State Bar ethics code

• displaying weapons or other objects or images of violence

• terrorizing the client

• sadistically manipulating the client

• psychologically assaulting the client

Using Emotional Abuse

• putting the client down

• making the client feel bad about herself or himself

• calling the client names

• making the client think she or he is crazy

• playing mind games

• humiliating the client

• making the client feel guilty

Using Isolation and Guilt

• isolating the client and forbidding client to consult with other lawyers without permission

• using presumed guilt or suspicion of guilt of client to justify abuse

• using private meetings instead of telephone, mail and email communications

• refusing to state the purpose of meetings

Minimizing, Denying and Blaming

• making light of the abuse and not taking client’s concerns about it seriously

• saying the abuse didn’t happen

• shifting responsibility for abusive behavior

• saying the client caused the abuse

Using Information Abuse

• misrepresenting the experience and specialized knowledge of the lawyer

• using asymmetric information to mislead the client

• preventing client from seeing all the evidence

• providing insufficient information for client to make an informed decision

• using misrepresentation, double-talk, stonewalling and obfuscation to prevent informed decisions

• not informing the client about public access to the case file at the Court house

• refusing to communicate, explain and clarify in writing

• failing to disclose State Bar ethics rules existence and contact information

Using Attorney Privilege

• acting like the boss

• treating the client like a servant

• making the big decisions

• ignoring client’s instructions, decisions and best interests

• failing to get client’s consent

• being the one to define lawyers’ and clients’ roles

• not writing a fee contract

• preventing preview of contract before signing

• making unilateral changes to contract after initial agreement

• using vague, ambiguous, ineffective language that protects the lawyer but not the client

• refusing arbitration

Using Economy Abuse

• making the client pay more money

• not refunding client’s money if not used for the stipulated purpose or if not earned

• using bait-and-switch tactics after receiving advance fee payment

The wheel is available for reprinting and distribution for non-commercial purposes. You may download the pdf of the wheel and the complete list of tactics from the originators of this wheel here. Or, you can see the welcome page that discusses the making of the wheel and provides other useful links here.

{ 2 comments }

Men’s tactics of power and control against female partners

by Clare Murphy PhD on January 29 2009

Today I uploaded an extensive list of power and control tactics as used by those men who abuse and control their intimate female partner.

Click to see Tactics

Types of tactics

The following list of tactics of power and control summarises the list that you can view by clicking on the image to the left. It’s a pdf so you may save a copy. This short list barely scratches the surface of the range of ways women experience abuse and control at the hands of the man they love:

  • One-sided power games including behaviours that ensure he has his way at her expense
  • Mind games including guilt trips and confusing her in ways that make her feel crazy
  • Inappropriate restrictions including refusing to let her work
  • Isolation including controlling incoming information such as what she reads
  • Over-protecting and ‘caring’ including dissuading her from going out alone in case she gets raped
  • Emotional unkindness and violation of trust including promising to help and then ‘forgetting’
  • Degradation including criticising her strengths and achievements
  • Separation abuse including stalking such as leaving flowers – this sends a threatening message that he can always find her no matter where she is. Whereas, an outsider might look at this act, and think of it as a caring gesture.
  • Using social institutions including engaging in child custody battles to maintain power over her
  • Using social prejudices such as saying to a disabled partner that she can’t even walk out the door – this reinforces his power
  • Denial including refusing to take responsibility for the harm he causes
  • Minimising by saying “it wasn’t that bad, get over it”
  • Blaming by twisting the story so she appears responsible
  • Making excuses such as blaming stress at work
  • Using children for example saying he wouldn’t get so angry if she kept the children quiet
  • Economic abuse including not allowing her access to any money, or putting her in charge of the budget, but then spending all the money and abusing her when the debt mounts
  • Sexual abuse including pressuring her to have sex when she is sick
  • Symbolic aggression including threats to harm her family, friends, pets
  • Domestic slavery including punishing her for not carrying out duties he claims she should have, while not carrying out his own
  • Physical violence including hair pulling and dragging her along the floor

Systematic pattern of power and control

As the above list suggests, physical violence is just one tactic among many that some men subject their female partners to. And not all these men use physical violence – ever. Rather they use some, or all, of the above psychological and structural forms of control.

Each behaviour, when looked at separately, could seem justifiable. Each singular behaviour could look like something minor. Each behaviour on its own could appear that the woman provoked it. Just one of these behaviours viewed from the outside – out of context – could appear like he was just having a bad day.

However, look at this short list in its entirety. Now consider this mass of behaviours as a systematic pattern. Also know that women who are subjected to this pattern of abuse and control experience MANY of these tactics – every day, every week, every month, every year – for years and years. Then ask yourself if you think this systematic pattern of power and control is about the man just having a bad day. Or is there a campaign (whether it is conscious or not) to win at all costs and to maintain power and control?

{ 5 comments }