Domestic Violence by Proxy

As more and more abused women lose custody to batterers in family courts, they are wrongly embracing the very ideas that enabled their abusers to gain custody in the first place. False accusations of “parental alienation" are often used by batterers to gain custody and to defend against accusations of abuse.

Some unfortunate women after years of enduring domestic violence have then lost custody to the batterers who abused them. In these cases, batterers have made good on their threat to attack their ex-partner in the place she is the most vulnerable—by taking her children away from her. After separation, these batterers continue to wage their campaign of manipulation and abuse by attempting to convince involved children that their mothers never loved them. Looking for a way to describe their batterers' behavior, some mothers have called what their batterer is doing "parental alienation syndrome."

In reality, what these women are describing from their ex-partners is better termed Domestic Violence by Proxy (DV by Proxy), a term first used by Alina Patterson, author of Health and Healing . DV by Proxy refers to a pattern of behavior which is a parent with a history of using domestic violence or intimidation, uses a child as a substitute when he no longer has access to his former partner. Calling this behavior “parental alienation” is not strong enough to convey the criminal pattern of terroristic behaviors employed by batterers.

When his victim leaves him, batterers often recognize that the most expedient way to continue to hurt his partner is to assert his legal rights to control her access to their children. By gaining control of the children, an abusive male now has a powerful tool which allows him to continue to stalk, harass and batter an ex-partner even when he has no direct access to her. Moreover, by emotionally torturing the child and severing the bond between children and their mother, he is able to hurt his intended victim -- the mother -- in a way she cannot resist.

DV by Proxy includes tactics such as: threats of harm to children if they display a positive bond to the mother, destroying favored possessions given by the mother, and emotional torture (for example, telling the child the mother hates them, wanted an abortion, and is not coming to get them because they are unloved).

DV by Proxy may also include coaching the child to make false allegations regarding their mother's behavior and harming or punishing the child for not complying. DV by Proxy perpetrators may also create fraudulent documents to defraud the court in order to prevent the mother from gaining custody. Whether or not the child is biologically related to them is irrelevant to perpetrators of DV by Proxy. The perpetrator's main motivation is to hurt his ex; whether or not his own child is harmed in the process is irrelevant to him.

This is very different from "parental alienation syndrome" as described by the late Richard A. Gardner. Dr. Gardner described PAS as is an internal process by which a child aligns themselves with a preferred parent to protect themselves from the divorce conflict. “PAS” is conceptualized as a psychological process of identification with a parent who, according to the theory, encourages this identification at the expense of the other parent.

PAS inducing parents, according to Gardner, are often unconscious of what they are doing to encourage the identification. In contrast, perpetrators of DV by Proxy are very conscious of what they are doing. Controlling, coercive, illegal acts often done by abusive and controlling people, usually men, are not subtle, and do not encourage an identification with a parent. Criminal, fraudulent, coercive acts are visible and obvious. These behaviors encourage compliance by threats and fear. Behaviors involved in DV by Proxy are deliberate and often illegal. These behaviors include: battery, destruction of property, locking children in rooms to prevent them from calling parents, falsifying documents, along with other similar overt behaviors.

The most dangerous aspect of Gardner's PAS theory is that that the alienating parent's behavior is theorized to be so subtle as to be unobservable. In other words, the behaviors that are supposed to cause the alienation are assumed to be happening without any proof that they have actually occurred. As many women have discovered this makes a charge of "alienation" almost impossible to defend against.

While Gardner's theories regarding PAS have been shown to be overly general and have not been supported by careful research, behaviors seen in DV by Proxy can be readily observed. Behaviors involved in DV by Proxy are deliberate and planned; many are illegal, and if the child is given the freedom to talk, will be described in great detail by the child.

If the child's formerly favorable view of the victimized parent changes when exposed to tactics like this over time then it is more likely a form of "Stockholm Syndrome" or traumatic attachment to the abuser, rather than the alignment with one parent and negative reaction to the other that Gardner described as "alienation".

You've Got to Be Kidding Me ...

Domestic Violence Victims Have a Pre-Existing Condition?

Insurance companies have used the excuse of "pre-existing conditions" to deny coverage to countless Americans. From cancer patients to the elderly suffering from arthritis, these organizations have padded their profit margins by limiting coverage to patients deemed "high risk" because of their medical condition. I know this first hand as I have Multiple Sclerosis and have been denied insurance time and time again due to my pre-existing condition of M.S. As a result, I am one of the millions of Americans without health insurance. It's not that I wouldn't like it. It's that I can't seem to get accepted by any insurance company to let me have it because of my pre-existing condition called Multiple Sclerosis.

This is bad enough, and just when a person thinks it can't get any worse, several states have decided to declare "domestic violence" victims as having a pre-existing condition. The madness really needs to cease!

It's true: In Arkansas, D.C., Idaho, Mississippi, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Wyoming, insurance companies have gone too far, claiming that "domestic violence victim" is also a pre-existing condition.

Words cannot describe the sheer inhumanity of this claim. It serves as yet further proof that our insurance system is broken, destroyed by the profit-mongering of the very companies who's sole purpose should be to provide Americans with access to care when they need it most. In 1994, an informal survey conducted by the Subcommittee on Crime and Criminal Justice of the United States Senate Judiciary Committee revealed that 8 of the 16 largest insurers in the country used domestic violence as a factor when deciding whether to extend coverage and how much to charge if coverage was extended.

It is clear that insurance companies refuse to police themselves. It's up to us to call on Congress to take action now to pass health care reform and end discrimination against patients with pre-existing conditions.

Everyone Knows Someone ...

Everyone knows not just one but many victims of domestic violence. One out of four women in the United States is affected by domestic violence in their lifetime, so if it isn't you, it's someone in your immediate circle of friends, family, and co-workers.

The truth is, domestic violence impacts us all; an estimated seven people are impacted by each single incident of domestic violence. In my quest to change the public attitude about domestic violence, I have become honest about domestic violence.

Domestic violence doesn't care how much money you flash, what kind of car you drive, where your kids go to school, or what you do for a living. And it doesn't care how many victims it leaves in its wake. Our friends are degraded; our sisters, daughters and mothers are isolated; our co-workers are punched, hit, and kicked; and worst of all, when an abuser can't charm us, this same abuser tries to intimidate each and every one of us.

You say you wouldn't allow this to happen. I don't really know anyone who would. But when we're talking about domestic violence, it's what we don't do that tells the story. We don't become outraged when there's no reason why we shouldn't.

Domestic violence consumes us because it is relentless. It knocks on our door at any hour of the day or night. And, worst of all, it generates a devastating transformation in our lives. So this is a call to action. Everyone needs to be the voice saying this is not acceptable.

Speak against domestic violence, write against domestic violence, sing and dance against domestic violence. Form neighborhood groups, organize task forces, testify against domestic violence. Just do something. Because doing nothing sends the message that domestic violence is OK.

If you don't think domestic violence is close by, look around. It is in our communities, workplaces, schools and homes. And if you ask me, it doesn't get any closer than that.

Secretiveness Can Kill

I've decided to keep this post short and to the point ... So, here it goes ...

Denying the past dooms us to repeat it. And, thus, the cycle continues. The pervasiveness of domestic violence trauma and its long lasting impact is the big secret, and survivors who try to talk about their experiences are often shamed and stigmatized. Fact is, the silencing, minimizing, and blaming that can occur when a survivor tries to tell his/her story is a whole other level of traumatization. I see visibility and conversation about trauma-related topics like domestic violence is crucial. It is why I see blogging and using social media to be an important part of my advocacy to combat domestic violence. By speaking out about trauma and its impact I hope to support those who must live with it and to educate those who do not yet understand.

I was lucky –- I pulled the plug on the cycle by leaving my abusive relationship. Of course, that didn’t stop me from having to deal with PTSD, but it certainly has kept me out of harm’s way in a practical sense.