I can’t sleep because of DA’s comments in chat.

How far would you go to prevent violence against women? Serious questions.

• Discard the principle of “innocent unless proved guilty” replacing it with “guilty unless proved innocent”?
• Place bugs in the homes of people suspected of being violent to women?
• Automatically give the woman child custody?
• Automatic right of police entry into homes without a warrant?
• Inspect women for bruises without their permission?
• Round the clock police protection for women deemed at risk?
• Free permanent housing and a new identity for victims?
• Involuntary sterilisation of sex offenders?
• Involuntary education of women?

Or would you limit changes to

• Longer sentences for offenders?
• More women police and judges?
• Faster processing of claims?
• Advertising?

More widespread and better funded women’s shelters would be a start.

They’re very thin on the ground in many regions.

Early eduction

Teach children how to cope with emotional stress.

Teach children how to control their emotions in an argument

Teach children good debating skills

Teach children emotional intelligence which is simply being intelligent with ones emotions.

Secondary eduction

Teach teenagers how to deal with jealousy, rejection, life skills.

Teach teenagers relationship skills, and how to tell if your in a bad relationship etc

The only way to reduce domestic violence is thorough relationship skills and emotional awarenesses skills.

Tau.Neutrino said:

Early eduction

Teach children how to cope with emotional stress.

Teach children how to control their emotions in an argument

Teach children good debating skills

Teach children emotional intelligence which is simply being intelligent with ones emotions.

Secondary eduction

Teach teenagers how to deal with jealousy, rejection, life skills.

Teach teenagers relationship skills, and how to tell if your in a bad relationship etc

The only way to reduce domestic violence is thorough relationship skills and emotional awarenesses skills.

Teach people how to get along with their neighbours

Fixed.

Tau.Neutrino said:

Early eduction

Teach children how to cope with emotional stress.

Teach children how to control their emotions in an argument

Teach children good debating skills

Teach children emotional intelligence which is simply being intelligent with ones emotions.

Secondary eduction

Teach teenagers how to deal with jealousy, rejection, life skills.

Teach teenagers relationship skills, and how to tell if your in a bad relationship etc

The only way to reduce domestic violence is thorough relationship skills and emotional awarenesses skills.

Agreed, and stop talking as though violence towards women was the natural state in men, and treating male/male violence as being OK.

The Rev Dodgson said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Early eduction

Teach children how to cope with emotional stress.

Teach children how to control their emotions in an argument

Teach children good debating skills

Teach children emotional intelligence which is simply being intelligent with ones emotions.

Secondary eduction

Teach teenagers how to deal with jealousy, rejection, life skills.

Teach teenagers relationship skills, and how to tell if your in a bad relationship etc

The only way to reduce domestic violence is thorough relationship skills and emotional awarenesses skills.

Agreed, and stop talking as though violence towards women was the natural state in men, and treating male/male violence as being OK.

Violence happens across all genders.

The Rev Dodgson said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Early eduction

Teach children how to cope with emotional stress.

Teach children how to control their emotions in an argument

Teach children good debating skills

Teach children emotional intelligence which is simply being intelligent with ones emotions.

Secondary eduction

Teach teenagers how to deal with jealousy, rejection, life skills.

Teach teenagers relationship skills, and how to tell if your in a bad relationship etc

The only way to reduce domestic violence is thorough relationship skills and emotional awarenesses skills.

Agreed, and stop talking as though violence towards women was the natural state in men, and treating male/male violence as being OK.

don’t think that is true. the lock-out laws in sydney were a direct response to male on male violence i believe.

Some articles

What about men?: Challenging the MRA claim of a domestic violence conspiracy
https://www.abc.net.au/triplej/programs/hack/challenging-the-mra-claim-of-a-domestic-violence-conspiracy/8632190

People who argue male victims of domestic violence are overlooked by police, the courts, and health services often quote a single, trusty statistic: one in three DV victims are male.

Facts and figures from OurWatch
https://www.ourwatch.org.au/understanding-violence/facts-and-figures

Violence against women is now recognised to be a serious and widespread problem in Australia, with enormous individual and community impacts and social costs.

However this significant social problem is also ultimately preventable.

A lot of articles are not gender balanced either, most seem to focus on one or the other not both.

That needs to change.

Violence is preventable but only through education and understanding emotions that cause it.

Emotions can obscure reality.

Anger can cause people to say things or perform actions that later they might regret.

versus being calm and seeing things clearly

People need to be more aware of their emotions so that in a relationship, be aware of frustration so that it does not lead to anger then violence.

> The only way to reduce domestic violence is thorough relationship skills and emotional awarenesses skills.

Disagree. Totally and completely.

The phrase “silence of the lambs” comes to mind.

Some people are just toxic. They need to be separated from all potential victims either physically or involuntarily medically.

Emotional awareness is what toxic people use to destroy others – it’s called emotional abuse, and I’ve witnessed it in action.

And that’s one of the five types of abuse.

mollwollfumble said:

> The only way to reduce domestic violence is thorough relationship skills and emotional awarenesses skills.

Disagree. Totally and completely.

The phrase “silence of the lambs” comes to mind.

Some people are just toxic. They need to be separated from all potential victims either physically or involuntarily medically.

Emotional awareness is what toxic people use to destroy others – it’s called emotional abuse, and I’ve witnessed it in action.

And that’s one of the five types of abuse.

Yes some people are toxic however

If you teach emotional awareness then the victims know its emotional abuse and then so does everybody else.

Doing nothing solves nothing.

I was thinking last night about my Brother Drew. It was his birthday yesterday.

It was also provoked about last nigiht’s discussion here about whether I bruised easily. Drew used to hit me to watch me bruise I think. Never when anyone was around. He liked to close fisted type hit me into the muscle. And he got away with it. He was my mother’s favourite and could no wrong. I was clumsy and I did it all to myself.(I am clumsy.)

Andrew had one relationship and he was frequently violent with her. When their little girl was 18 months old she left him.

I think back to how there were so many times to tell Andrew that this behaviour was just not on.

Tau.Neutrino said:

mollwollfumble said:

> The only way to reduce domestic violence is thorough relationship skills and emotional awarenesses skills.

Disagree. Totally and completely.

The phrase “silence of the lambs” comes to mind.

Some people are just toxic. They need to be separated from all potential victims either physically or involuntarily medically.

Emotional awareness is what toxic people use to destroy others – it’s called emotional abuse, and I’ve witnessed it in action.

And that’s one of the five types of abuse.

Yes some people are toxic however

If you teach emotional awareness then the victims know its emotional abuse and then so does everybody else.

Doing nothing solves nothing.

The education system is dealing with bullying by teaching kids what it is

so that they can identify bullying has a negative behaviour and report it.

and they then can discuss it.in a classroom situation.

If they didn’t teach it that behaviour then that behaviour would continue.

Its the same thing with emotions.

Teach emotional awareness skills and relationship skills it, so things can change.

Do nothing and the 400 police call-outs a day will continue.

Tau.Neutrino said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

mollwollfumble said:

> The only way to reduce domestic violence is thorough relationship skills and emotional awarenesses skills.

Disagree. Totally and completely.

The phrase “silence of the lambs” comes to mind.

Some people are just toxic. They need to be separated from all potential victims either physically or involuntarily medically.

Emotional awareness is what toxic people use to destroy others – it’s called emotional abuse, and I’ve witnessed it in action.

And that’s one of the five types of abuse.

Yes some people are toxic however

If you teach emotional awareness then the victims know its emotional abuse and then so does everybody else.

Doing nothing solves nothing.

The education system is dealing with bullying by teaching kids what it is

so that they can identify bullying has a negative behaviour and report it.

and they then can discuss it.in a classroom situation.

If they didn’t teach it that behaviour then that behaviour would continue.

Its the same thing with emotions.

Teach emotional awareness skills and relationship skills it, so things can change.

Do nothing and the 400 police call-outs a day will continue.

Our outdated education system is causing 400 police call outs a day for domestic violence.

and bad parenting

and drug abuse

etc

Its not black and white.

Tau.Neutrino said:

mollwollfumble said:

> The only way to reduce domestic violence is thorough relationship skills and emotional awarenesses skills.

Disagree. Totally and completely.

The phrase “silence of the lambs” comes to mind.

Some people are just toxic. They need to be separated from all potential victims either physically or involuntarily medically.

Emotional awareness is what toxic people use to destroy others – it’s called emotional abuse, and I’ve witnessed it in action.

And that’s one of the five types of abuse.

Yes some people are toxic however

If you teach emotional awareness then the victims know its emotional abuse and then so does everybody else.

Doing nothing solves nothing.

Enforced education like that is a fine start, but knowledge is not much use in preventing domestic violence.

I was extremely impressed by the way the police and courts handle domestic violence. Despite my hyper-cynical opinion of the legal profession.

Step one was guilty unless proved innocent. The victim’s story was believed completely, except for the self-destructive beliefs in it (as a result of emotional abuse).

Step two was separation of victim from abuser. All this happened very very fast.

Step three. Get a counsellor who specialises in domestic abuse cases. Again very fast.

By way of contrast, the abuser also abused a dog, starving it so much that it was eating its own fur. The rspca immediately returned the dog to its abuser.

mollwollfumble said:

By way of contrast, the abuser also abused a dog, starving it so much that it was eating its own fur. The rspca immediately returned the dog to its abuser.

:(

sarahs mum said:

mollwollfumble said:

By way of contrast, the abuser also abused a dog, starving it so much that it was eating its own fur. The rspca immediately returned the dog to its abuser.

:(

Do all states do that ?

Have things changed ?

If you teach kids behaviours, then kids can identify those behaviours and then they know what it is.

Tau.Neutrino said:

sarahs mum said:

mollwollfumble said:

By way of contrast, the abuser also abused a dog, starving it so much that it was eating its own fur. The rspca immediately returned the dog to its abuser.

:(

Do all states do that ?

Have things changed ?

I only know Victorian law here. According to the law here:

• You are allowed to starve your pet to death, but not sell a starving animal.

• An abused animal must be held for 6 days before retuning it to its abuser, but that time limit only applies to abuse by violence.

mollwollfumble said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

sarahs mum said:

:(

Do all states do that ?

Have things changed ?

I only know Victorian law here. According to the law here:

• You are allowed to starve your pet to death, but not sell a starving animal.

• An abused animal must be held for 6 days before retuning it to its abuser, but that time limit only applies to abuse by violence.
  

My guess is that the law in Victoria was set up with dog fights (abuse by violence) and farm stock in mind. A farmer can’t be held responsible for his stock starving in a drought.

I suppose nobody thought that a person would deliberately starve their own pet when the law was formulated.

complete equality and gender neutrality

SCIENCE said:

complete equality and gender neutrality

This would need medical intervention to give everybody the same hormones at the same levels. The world is more more complicated than that. It is about healthy relationships and healthy relationship expectations. It goes beyond intimate partner relationships and into the wider area of moral codes, manners and general matters of social expectations.

mollwollfumble – I have addressed each point in the non indented line
I can’t sleep because of DA’s comments in chat.

How far would you go to prevent violence against women? Serious questions.

• Discard the principle of “innocent unless proved guilty” replacing it with “guilty unless proved innocent”?

We already have that sort of system… I mean I know they say we don’t but we pretty much charge people because we think they are guity…

• Place bugs in the homes of people suspected of being violent to women?

you can’t and shouldn’t assume an antisocial behaviour is going to occur based on a suspicion. That would be like saying “Well you are growing up in poverty so we assume you are going to steal stuff”

• Automatically give the woman child custody?

this has nothing to do with intimate partner violence.. and is not a good solution anyway.. fathers have as much right to see their children and be fathers if they demonstrate care giving abilities (we are not talking about domestic violence here we are talking about Intimate partner violence, IPV)

• Automatic right of police entry into homes without a warrant?

if there is an escalating situation occurring police already have the right to enter a premise

• Inspect women for bruises without their permission?

nope, terrible idea

• Round the clock police protection for women deemed at risk?

again, at risk? what is that in terms of being able to predict future behaviour?

• Free permanent housing and a new identity for victims?

many victims of IPV, while they would like to disassociate with the offender, need to rebuild autonomy. It a vital part of their journey… free emergency housing and protection I agree with.

• Involuntary sterilisation of sex offenders?

nope, also completely different behaviour type (tough sexual violence can form part of IPV)

• Involuntary education of women?

Studies are rather unanimous that forced any type of treatment is ineffective. You can empower victims, but forcing them to empowerment is probably not going to work

Or would you limit changes to

• Longer sentences for offenders?

longer sentencing wont treat the behaviours

• More women police and judges?

we are moving towards more female role model positions..

• Faster processing of claims?

this would be awesome

• Advertising?

Just so you and tau know… there are already programs run by outreach agencies that address the issues of relationship violence. LoveBites is one of them https://www.napcan.org.au/Programs/love-bites/…. and there are others I suspect.

SCIENCE said:

complete equality and gender neutrality

As in clones?

Or as in law?

What about age neutrality?

Arts said:

mollwollfumble – I have addressed each point in the non indented line
I can’t sleep because of DA’s comments in chat.

How far would you go to prevent violence against women? Serious questions.

• Discard the principle of “innocent unless proved guilty” replacing it with “guilty unless proved innocent”?

We already have that sort of system… I mean I know they say we don’t but we pretty much charge people because we think they are guity…

• Place bugs in the homes of people suspected of being violent to women?

you can’t and shouldn’t assume an antisocial behaviour is going to occur based on a suspicion. That would be like saying “Well you are growing up in poverty so we assume you are going to steal stuff”

• Automatically give the woman child custody?

this has nothing to do with intimate partner violence.. and is not a good solution anyway.. fathers have as much right to see their children and be fathers if they demonstrate care giving abilities (we are not talking about domestic violence here we are talking about Intimate partner violence, IPV)

• Automatic right of police entry into homes without a warrant?

if there is an escalating situation occurring police already have the right to enter a premise

• Inspect women for bruises without their permission?

nope, terrible idea

• Round the clock police protection for women deemed at risk?

again, at risk? what is that in terms of being able to predict future behaviour?

• Free permanent housing and a new identity for victims?

many victims of IPV, while they would like to disassociate with the offender, need to rebuild autonomy. It a vital part of their journey… free emergency housing and protection I agree with.

• Involuntary sterilisation of sex offenders?

nope, also completely different behaviour type (tough sexual violence can form part of IPV)

• Involuntary education of women?

Studies are rather unanimous that forced any type of treatment is ineffective. You can empower victims, but forcing them to empowerment is probably not going to work

Or would you limit changes to

• Longer sentences for offenders?

longer sentencing wont treat the behaviours

• More women police and judges?

we are moving towards more female role model positions..

• Faster processing of claims?

this would be awesome

• Advertising?

Just so you and tau know… there are already programs run by outreach agencies that address the issues of relationship violence. LoveBites is one of them https://www.napcan.org.au/Programs/love-bites/…. and there are others I suspect.

Brilliamt answer, Arts.

Amazingly (for me) i find myself in complete agreement. Thanks.

mollwollfumble said:

Arts said:

mollwollfumble – I have addressed each point in the non indented line
I can’t sleep because of DA’s comments in chat.

How far would you go to prevent violence against women? Serious questions.

• Discard the principle of “innocent unless proved guilty” replacing it with “guilty unless proved innocent”?

We already have that sort of system… I mean I know they say we don’t but we pretty much charge people because we think they are guity…

• Place bugs in the homes of people suspected of being violent to women?

you can’t and shouldn’t assume an antisocial behaviour is going to occur based on a suspicion. That would be like saying “Well you are growing up in poverty so we assume you are going to steal stuff”

• Automatically give the woman child custody?

this has nothing to do with intimate partner violence.. and is not a good solution anyway.. fathers have as much right to see their children and be fathers if they demonstrate care giving abilities (we are not talking about domestic violence here we are talking about Intimate partner violence, IPV)

• Automatic right of police entry into homes without a warrant?

if there is an escalating situation occurring police already have the right to enter a premise

• Inspect women for bruises without their permission?

nope, terrible idea

• Round the clock police protection for women deemed at risk?

again, at risk? what is that in terms of being able to predict future behaviour?

• Free permanent housing and a new identity for victims?

many victims of IPV, while they would like to disassociate with the offender, need to rebuild autonomy. It a vital part of their journey… free emergency housing and protection I agree with.

• Involuntary sterilisation of sex offenders?

nope, also completely different behaviour type (tough sexual violence can form part of IPV)

• Involuntary education of women?

Studies are rather unanimous that forced any type of treatment is ineffective. You can empower victims, but forcing them to empowerment is probably not going to work

Or would you limit changes to

• Longer sentences for offenders?

longer sentencing wont treat the behaviours

• More women police and judges?

we are moving towards more female role model positions..

• Faster processing of claims?

this would be awesome

• Advertising?

Just so you and tau know… there are already programs run by outreach agencies that address the issues of relationship violence. LoveBites is one of them https://www.napcan.org.au/Programs/love-bites/…. and there are others I suspect.

Brilliamt answer, Arts.

Amazingly (for me) i find myself in complete agreement. Thanks.

Didn’t fancy having your balls surgically removed then?

PermeateFree said:

Didn’t fancy having your balls surgically removed then?

Who says i have any?

mollwollfumble said:

PermeateFree said:

Didn’t fancy having your balls surgically removed then?

Who says i have any?

Arts will be disappointed, she was probably sharpening her knife.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06-23/jess-hill-domestic-violence-cruel-twist-abusive-men/11188842

Divine Angel said:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06-23/jess-hill-domestic-violence-cruel-twist-abusive-men/11188842

Heavy reading.

Divine Angel said:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06-23/jess-hill-domestic-violence-cruel-twist-abusive-men/11188842

> By 2017, the number of calls to Safe Steps had shot up dramatically, along with the severity of abuse women were reporting: counsellors were logging more accounts of strangulation, stalking, sexual assault and threats to kill — all red flags showing that, far from being fixed, domestic violence was actually getting worse.

That’s a worry. How many years has “safe steps” been in operation and why have i never heard about it?

Checking around. Abused women have never heard of it either, only the similar organisaion “white ribbon”.

> Hill argues many abusers harbour a deep desire for intimacy and belonging, which is being warped into violence by powerful feelings of shame.

Interesting. So she doesn’t blame mental illness. If shame is all it takes then every man is a potential killer.

> “Men are afraid women will laugh at them,” Atwood famously wrote, “and women are afraid men will kill them.”

I … Um. I happen to disagree with that. Totally. I’d rephrase it as:

“Men are afraid of killing women, and women are not sufficiently afraid of the men in their family.”

By that I mean – all the women i know are only afraid of being killed by strange men (or sometimes women), which is wrong because the greatest risk comes from those who are closest.

Moll, I apologise for my outburst the other night.

I get fired up when people say things are hunky dory in this country. There are too many women dying from family violence. There are too many children growing up to perpetuate the cycle because that’s all they’ve known in life.

Australia is a lucky country in many ways: women are allowed to drive, vote, be educated, run a business, go outside while pregnant (or even menstruating!). Still, women are afraid to walk alone at night or go to a guy’s place after meeting him at a nightclub.

And for women already in abusive relationships, your comment about “it’s amazing that these women don’t leave” sounds awfully like you’re blaming the victims. It’s this that really got my blood boiling. May I recommend the You Can’t Ask That episode, currently on iview, about Domestic Violence.

The heading should be, Violence against women, men and children.

isn’t broad brushed categorizing women as a group itself damaging?

and men, even as a flipside

to generalize so lends to unhelpful generalizations.

half a step from hostile

Sure, it’s all genders. The actual conversation moll and I had the other night was about women. I am not familiar with statistics for men.

Divine Angel said:

Sure, it’s all genders. The actual conversation moll and I had the other night was about women. I am not familiar with statistics for men.

one third

Tau.Neutrino said:

Divine Angel said:

Sure, it’s all genders. The actual conversation moll and I had the other night was about women. I am not familiar with statistics for men.

one third

People who argue male victims of domestic violence are overlooked by police, the courts, and health services often quote a single, trusty statistic: one in three DV victims are male.

https://www.abc.net.au/triplej/programs/hack/challenging-the-mra-claim-of-a-domestic-violence-conspiracy/8632190

one third

transition said:

isn’t broad brushed categorizing women as a group itself damaging?

and men, even as a flipside

to generalize so lends to unhelpful generalizations.

half a step from hostile

ahhhh the usual lets define what we talk about rather than try to fix the problem.

I find these conversations strange, I don’t think in categories of men and women, not bigger picture really, certainly not political (social force or whatever).

I use the term lady, fondly, though, but not really as an element of a larger class. Not a subordinate example of larger classes or categories anyway. Subject to, determined so.

i’m uncomfortable with the term gender.

more I see humans as mammals than primates, or tend to, i’m inclined to do so by seeing people (individuals) as diverse nurturers.

ChrispenEvan said:

transition said:

isn’t broad brushed categorizing women as a group itself damaging?

and men, even as a flipside

to generalize so lends to unhelpful generalizations.

half a step from hostile

ahhhh the usual lets define what we talk about rather than try to fix the problem.

not really, I don’t jump to I understand big things, i’m not gifted with any sort of genius for that sort of knowing.

transition said:

I find these conversations strange, I don’t think in categories of men and women, not bigger picture really, certainly not political (social force or whatever).

I use the term lady, fondly, though, but not really as an element of a larger class. Not a subordinate example of larger classes or categories anyway. Subject to, determined so.

i’m uncomfortable with the term gender.

more I see humans as mammals than primates, or tend to, i’m inclined to do so by seeing people (individuals) as diverse nurturers.

Well this fact might bother you a bit more then as mammals, primates, animals etc all have heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, asexual and transexual behaviours.

transition said:

ChrispenEvan said:

transition said:

isn’t broad brushed categorizing women as a group itself damaging?

and men, even as a flipside

to generalize so lends to unhelpful generalizations.

half a step from hostile

ahhhh the usual lets define what we talk about rather than try to fix the problem.

not really, I don’t jump to I understand big things, i’m not gifted with any sort of genius for that sort of knowing.

We realise this. You fiddle around the edges.

ChrispenEvan said:

transition said:

ChrispenEvan said:

ahhhh the usual lets define what we talk about rather than try to fix the problem.

not really, I don’t jump to I understand big things, i’m not gifted with any sort of genius for that sort of knowing.

We realise this. You fiddle around the edges.

yeah, probably true, not too much damage done, not too imposing, not too convinced of my own intention/s.

It takes two to tango

The education should start and finish with the woman ie they be taught the early warning signs and not allow themselves to be drawn into a having children with men they haven’t studied or appraised for any significant amount of time. Women need to be a little more selective in their mates.

Divine Angel said:

Moll, I apologise for my outburst the other night.

I get fired up when people say things are hunky dory in this country. There are too many women dying from family violence. There are too many children growing up to perpetuate the cycle because that’s all they’ve known in life.

Australia is a lucky country in many ways: women are allowed to drive, vote, be educated, run a business, go outside while pregnant (or even menstruating!). Still, women are afraid to walk alone at night or go to a guy’s place after meeting him at a nightclub.

And for women already in abusive relationships, your comment about “it’s amazing that these women don’t leave” sounds awfully like you’re blaming the victims. It’s this that really got my blood boiling. May I recommend the You Can’t Ask That episode, currently on iview, about Domestic Violence.

Cripes, don’t apologise. I always enjoy a wake up call that makes me rethink what i think I know.

> And for women already in abusive relationships, your comment about “it’s amazing that these women don’t leave” sounds awfully like you’re blaming the victims.

I realised that afterwards. Knee jerk reaction, i know. I certainly don’t blame the victims in any way. I blame the abusers, i am seriously angry at a society that allows these abusers to operate at all. I fervently wish there was a way to legally separate abusers from victims when the victim strongly resists help.

Thinking hard, i think i can see four or more ways that every abuser holds onto their victim. All lies. As in “i need your help”, “you can change me”, “you’re equally at fault”, “i love you”, and sex.

Must find a legal way to keep abuser and victim separate in the first place. Information has to be the key, the victim has to be informed of the of the abusers real history before the victim falls in love. But how?

> Still, women are afraid to walk alone at night or go to a guy’s place after meeting him at a nightclub.

Women don’t fear husbands and close friends enough.

> Hill argues many abusers harbour a deep desire for intimacy and belonging, which is being warped into violence by powerful feelings of shame.

I still have trouble with this. Particularly with cause and effect. For many abusers, the shame would be a consequence of seeing the after-effects of the violence, not the other way around, wouldn’t you say? For other abusers, perhaps the majority, the shame would be a complete sham, a hook to garner sympathy to stop the victim from leaving.

Since this thread, i’ve spoken to the mother of a daughter who was even more violently abused than Missy. Two long-term boyfriends in a row, resulting in a broken arm in one case. In both cases, drugs were involved. Once heroin and once ice. I want to have a chance to learn more next time we meet.

For Missy, no drugs were involved, and there was no sexual abuse, and no instilling of fear.

But Missy withstood every other type of abuse including emotional abuse into a state of sadness so extreme that i would never have believed it existed if i hadn’t seen it with my own eyes, verbal abuse, physical abuse, financial abuse, getting Missy to believe she was to blame for the abuse, getting Missy to believe she has a mental illness (she doesn’t).