I have posted several times over the last month, mostly posting with my emotions.
My wife filed unexpected restraining order on me and got me kicked out of house and children taken away.
Now as I observe with less hurt feelings and shock it sure seems to me that this was done to put me out of sight out of mind.
Wife is now basically clearing out anything that belonged to me and is bagging it up, making it look like I never exsisted, like we were not married for 16 years with 2 kids.
Keeping me away from house and her so she can bring new boyfriend in to her life.
To me this sure seems what is happening, but remember this is what I feel, for I cannot get near her or my house to see what is actually going on.
I'm hearing about new friend from 9 year old daughter and how much time he is spending around the house.
I also believe that my wife had been telling this new friend that she was in the process of a divorce over the last several months and is keeping me away as if I had already seperated from her months ago, instead of actually getting blindsided 4 weeks ago.
This is just my unemotional observance from afar.
I mean I've heard of Spring Cleaning, but isn't this just taking it abit too far?

Robertc,
I have quickly read some of your other posts and see you have been asked if you were abusive and there was never a clear answer. You said you were never abusive to the children so you should still be able to see them. If you were abusive to your wife and they saw it heard it or witnessed the aftermath, they ARE abused.

Your wife allowing it to continue would be an accomplice to the abuse. If you abused your wife you are teaching your D what marriage is about and how a woman is to be treated. How would you feel if a man treated your D the way you have treated your wife? If you cannot own up to your mistakes you cannot fix them. recognizing is the first step to recovery. Even if you never get back with you W, your D will have much more respect and admiration.

I don't know what your story is, I could be wrong. Something to think about.

What are the signs and symptoms of Emotional Abuse?

A common misconception is that emotional abuse has to take the form of a partner yelling over every little thing, belittling or constantly criticizing a partner. Other forms of emotional abuse, can however, be just as damaging, and far less overt. They can include being disrespectful, discourteous, rude, condescending, patronizing, critical, judgemental, "joking" insults, lying, repeatedly "forgetting" promises and agreements, betrayal of trust, "setting you up", and "revising" history.

To outsiders, abusers often appear as decent, successful, sensitive, calm and nondescript. To their families, they are often controlling, self-absorbed, hypercritical, compulsive, childish and mean-spirited. Most of abusers are actually BOTH. It is the disparity between the one they love and the one that harms them that keeps the woman confused. He may intersperse episodes of abuse with words of love, telling her that she is "the best thing that has ever happened" to him, and that he wants to start treating her that way, confusing her further. She keeps hoping that if she does enough, if she gives enough, he will stop hurting her and the loving, caring side of him will prevail. Unfortunately, this is a fallacy that often keeps the woman in the relationship for far too long. Ask yourself: Do you have a drawer full of "apology" jewellery, or a closet full of "apology" clothes?

One of the most difficult things about identifying and leaving someone who is a psychological and emotional abuser, is that the REALLY successful abusers are highly intelligent and hide their abuse incredibly well. They may have shelves of filled with psychology books; many are well-read and very well spoken. They know how to twist and manipulate language and people. They present an exterior of calm, rational self-control, when in reality, they have no internal control of their own pain and chaotic self-hate, so they try to control others, and drive others to LOSE control. If an abuser can cause YOU to lose control, it proves how healthy HE is, so he can say, explicitly, or implicitly (it's amazing how sighs, and rolling of the eyes can accomplish as much as words), "There you go again, losing it, crying and yelling. I'm not the one who needs therapy, *you* are." Unfortunately, if an outsider sees the abuse at all, all they see is an outburst from you, NOT the abuse that triggered it. It may make you feel as if you have had all your lifelines withdrawn, as if you are going crazy, because nobody believes you that this charming, "nice", helpful, successful man could be so incredibly psychologically cruel and deliberately hurtful.

Abusers play the pushme-pull-you game threatening to withdraw their affections, dropping statements out of the blue intended to destabilize. This has the effect of making their partners insecure and uncertain, but that plays right into the abuser's hand as he then can accuse the partner of being "too needy". Ploys such as casually talking about how he's thinking of taking a job in another city are one such example of destabilizing talk. In this kind of case, it doesn't start with any discussion of your relationship, or what might happen to it - he talks only of the cool job opportunity, with no recognition of the impact it might have on you, your relationship, or your family.

An emotional abuser may make fun of his partner, or make subtle or not-so-subtle disparaging remarks about her while with other friends, and encourage the friends to make disparaging remarks. He will then be sure to tell her about the jokes they made and act surprised when she doesn't find them "funny". He may even tell her that she is overreacting and that it was "all in fun" and that no harm was meant by the "joking".

Not all emotional abusers criticize their partners directly - sometimes it can be as simple as constantly criticizing how someone keeps a kitchen, or complaining about the mess in the house, or continuous grumbling about the laundry, or complaining about the noise and mess the kids make. He will make her think it is her job to keep him happy, and imply that household things are contributing to his unhappiness and bad temper.

An emotional abuser will seem to encourage his partner to grow, to develop new skills and expand her horizons, but then will do things to impede or prevent that progress. He will mope and sigh about how little time she has for him now that she is working more or taking that course, or back in school. Or, he will "encourage" her to advance herself, but refuse to provide any additional assistance around the house/family to ease her workload, effectively making it impossible for her to take that course or job. If he DOES provide assistance, he will let her know how HARD it is for him, and how MUCH he is doing for her, every step of the way... he will play the "sad puppy" to the hilt, trying to get her to feel guilty for the burdens she has put on him.

An Emotional abuser will try to make his partner responsible for his happiness. Either through direct comments, or indirect implications, the abuser will let his partner know that he is not happy, that it is somehow her fault, and that she must fix it. The problem is, no matter what she does, it will never be enough, and it won't ultimately make him happy.

The abuser may take this behavior to an extreme, insisting that he is the best partner or relationship she will ever have, the only one who can truly love her (despite all her faults!), and that if she doesn't live up to his expectations, he will leave the relationship. Since abuse is really about control, the abuser knows he can have the upper hand in the relationship if he can keep her uncertain and insecure.

Emotional abusers overcompensate for their self-hate with a warped kind of narcissism. They genuinely believe that YOU SHOULD know how they feel, and know what to do to make them happy. AND that you should be willing to do those things without having to be asked or told. They believe that they DESERVE to be treated better, to be put first, to be given preferential treatment. He will expect you to read his mind. He lives by the "if you really loved me, you'd KNOW how I feel" game, and of course will punish you for not being telepathic. If confronted with the unreasonable nature of this behavior, the abuser will blame his partner for his lack of communication - it will always be her fault that he couldn't tell her what he needed or wanted. He will project HIS behavior on her, and insist that he couldn't talk to her about what was bothering him because she was too intense, or critical, or angry, or judgemental, or needy. Don't buy it. Those are HIS issues. Not yours.

And speaking of narcissism, the emotional abuser will be envious and resentful if YOU get more attention than HE does in a social setting. He will likely punish you for it by one of any number of techniques: ignoring you, sulking, disappearing for hours, flirting heavily with someone else, or leaving the party or function without notifying you.

Emotional abusers expect the rest of the household to live by their waking, sleeping and eating schedules. If his schedule is interrupted or disturbed, or if the partner chooses not to follow the same patterns, the abuser feels justified in "punishing" the offender. This can include the full battery of emotional abuse and passive-aggressive tactics - because in the abuser's mind, the partner or household member "deserves" it for not caring enough about him to live by his schedules and activity calendar.

Emotional abusers may use punishment tactics like leaving (without a word to you), a party or function that you both went to. They will have socially plausible, pathos-laden excuses for their unannounced departure, like they couldn't find you, or they were tired and wanted to go home. However, the REAL reason they left without a word, was to punish you; to wind you up, to get you worried about them, and ultimately, to have you feel guilty for not paying enough attention to them. When you confront an abuser on the concept of COURTESY around these sorts of things, the abuser will either apologize weakly, (but the damage has been done), or insist that your distress over his behavior is overreacting.

Emotional abusers will remind you of your flaws under the guise of trying to be "helpful" or sensitive. He may make comments like, "You seem unhappy with your body" - even though you have made no comments about your body image or otherwise, or "You are running late again - you never can get anywhere on time", or "There doesn't seem to be much point in planning things with you." All are comments intended to unbalance and remind you of what he perceives to be your weaknesses.

Emotional abusers will try to isolate you from family and friends. There are several tactics that may be employed. If he can't manipulate your friends, he will either find reasons to denigrate them or will be "uninterested" in doing things with you AND your friends. He may find them "boring". You may find yourself caught in a double-bind where he "encourages" you to go out with *your* friends, refusing any invitation to participate, but then mopes that you never spend enough time with HIM. Over time, you may find yourself isolated from your friends by virtue of the demands on your time that he makes. You may also find him VERY upset if he finds out that you have been talking to a close friend or family member about him and/or your relationship with him - especially if that person is likely to tell you he's behaving like an [censored].

One emotional abuser went so far as to "set up" his wife so that she would isolate herself. He did it by "reminding" her of her "shyness", and how socially backward she was. He did this under the guise of "being sensitive" to her and the areas she "needed to work on". Then he would offer to "help" her by suggesting she come along to a party or social function with him. Prior to the function he would again "help" her by briefing her on people attending the party, so that she could "have something to talk about" with them. As part of his tactic, he told his wife distortions or half-truths so that she would make social faux-pas at the function. If she ever questioned him, he would insist that SHE must have heard him wrong, and it must have been HER nervousness that made her forget or screw up. The man was a "pillar of the community", so to his friends, she looked like a bumbling (and even insensitive) fool, and they "couldn't figure out why a man like him was with a woman like HER." Combined with his subtle denigration of her friends and family, she gradually isolated herself by not attending social functions, and cutting off relationships with her support network.

Instead of "lying" to a partner, an emotional abuser may "forget" significant promises he made to his partner - especially if forgetting that promise will hurt her. He may also "forget" things so that he can let her know that things that are important to her are NOT important to him. This tactic can take the form of making a special dinner for her, containing shrimp when he has known for years that she is allergic to shellfish, so she can't eat it, or buying a feather comforter for their bed, when he knows she is allergic to feathers. He will claim that his lapse was due to "forgetting", when in fact, it was a passive-aggressive ploy to trick the partner into believing he was doing "something nice", get her hopes up, and then bring her down with the fact that she could not enjoy this "gift" of his after all... It is a passive-aggressive slap-in-the-face.

Emotional abusers expect more from their partners than they are willing to put into a relationship. The problem is, no matter how much the partner gives, it will never be enough, and the abuser will expect more - because the relationship isn't about love for the abuser, it's about control.

The more independent a partner becomes, the more abusive the abuser will be, because he sees he is losing control of his partner.

Emotional abusers expect to be forgiven for their "mistakes" (otherwise known as abuse) but are unable to forgive their partners for legitimate mistakes - and will continue to "punish" their partners for those mistakes, long after apologies and restitution have been made.

Emotional abusers expect their partners to change for them. Unfortunately, the changes the partner makes will never be enough - the abuser will always want more.

The abuser says it's not completely his fault, or she pushes his buttons, or that something she did triggered him to do or say something hurtful or damaging to her.

Emotional abuse can take the form of him insisting that she isn't spending enough time with him, forcing her to "prove her love" by booking extra time and adjusting her life and her schedule around him, so that he can then reject any suggestions she has for activities, and act disinterested when they do have time together.

When she tries to make plans with him, the abuser will remind her in a condescending way of how poor she is at planning and how he doesn't believe that the plans will work out. Over time, comments like this insidiously undermine her self-confidence, by telling repeatedly that she is untrustworthy. Her untrustworthiness becomes yet another excuse for him to "punish" her with abusive language or actions.

Another emotional abuse tactic is to reject activities that she suggests and then do them with other people - letting her know that he is doing them with other people - establishing control and implying that she is not worthy of doing the activities with him, but other people are.

An emotional abuser will often use condescension as an effective tool in manipulating and hurting his partner. In expressing his own internal anger, he targets his partner. But because she has done nothing to "deserve" his anger at this point (or any point!), he may be rude, brutally inconsiderate, condescending, patronizing, or even use the "silent treatment" to get her upset or angry. When his partner gets upset, and an argument ensues, he can then express his anger at her, and blame the fact that she "got angry" at him, for the whole argument - even though HE started it. Don't let him convince you that your anger at his disrespect and emotional cruelty, is somehow wrong or abusive to him. That is part of his control and escalating cycle of abuse technique.

As part of this "control" technique, the abuser may "set up" his partner, pushing as many buttons as possible to get the partner to lose control by breaking down in tears or getting angry or yelling. If you raise your voice, he will insist that YOU are the abuser. Don't buy it, and don't believe it. While there might be better ways to handle the situation, (more easily enacted if you weren't emotionally involved with this person), chances are that he has inflicted so much psychological warfare that you have been backed into an emotional corner, and are reacting in self-defense. Emotional reactions in self-defense to an abusive situation do NOT make YOU an "abuser".

One of the more subtle but effective ways an abuser can "wind" his partner up is by invalidating/rejecting/showing no compassion for the feelings of his partner - especially in conjunction with a deliberate act of malice that was designed to upset or hurt the partner. He will claim the act was either "accidental" or intended to help the partner. He will try to tell his partner that it is NOT OK to feel angry or hurt or upset by his actions - or that if she DOES feel those things, her "feelings are her own" - that he has no responsibility towards repairing any emotional damage he may have caused. As part of this tactic he may pay lip-service to personal responsibility by saying he "takes responsibility" for his actions, but then make no offer to do anything about the resulting emotional pain, or say that there is nothing he can do to repair the damage or make restitution. If she tries to get him to do anything to make restitution he will use the word "blame" as if it is a dirty word, and accuse her of trying to lay "blame" on him for his actions. This is the functional equivalent of someone using a board to "fan" you and when he "accidentally" hits you over the head, telling you that he was just trying to HELP and that if you feel PAIN, well, your feelings are your own, and he can't be responsible for YOUR feelings, and there is nothing HE can do about it now... Non-abusers who genuinely ACCIDENTALLY hurt a loved one's feelings, do not refuse to nurture those feelings - they help repair the emotional damage, and they don't repeatedly make the same "mistakes" over and over with their partners.

The flip side of this, of course, is that emotional abusers want to reap the emotional rewards for being nice and doing "good" things for their partners - they want the affirmation, appreciation and attention they feel they deserve when they do something positive for a partner.

The truth about responsibility for one's feelings is that if you love and trust someone - if you open your heart to the love and caring, you also open it to the potential for hurt. Yes, in the strictest sense of the word, no one can make you feel anything - you choose to let them affect you for good or bad. But very few people, (except perhaps those with borderline personality disorder), can be completely "unfeeling" when dealing with someone they care deeply for. Most people are unable to open their hearts up completely to love and be able to "let" only good things affect their feelings and not the bad. To disconnect yourself from feeling hurt and pain is to disconnect yourself from feeling love and joy. When you open your heart to someone, you are granting them your trust as well as your love. You are trusting them to respect and honor your love. If someone abuses you by violating your trust, you are not wrong for trusting - THEY are wrong for breaking that trust and using it to hurt you.

Emotional abusers have huge double standards. What is ok for them, is NOT ok for their partners. I.e. THEY are allowed to get angry - their partners are not.

Abusers will blame their partner for "allowing" or encouraging them to be abusive. In as much as a refusal to capitulate can trigger an abusive attack, any sign of "guilty" feelings or weakness in a partner is like blood in the water for sharks, when it comes to abusers. Of course, according to the abuser, it is up to the woman not to provide him with the temptation to abuse, by changing HER behavior.

If caught in a lie or exposed in a situation where he can't immediately manipulate his partner into taking the rap, he may try to go for the sympathy ploy, in an attempt deflect the situation away from his bad behavior. For example, one abuser caught in the middle of a lie, blamed his lie on "bad memory", almost started crying, and began bemoaning what he would do if his memory was going, because his whole job depended on being able to remember lots of details. All of a sudden, the situation turned from him being caught in a lie, to his partner being expected to feel sorry for him because of his "bad memory"... Other deflection techniques he may use when his behavior is exposed, are:

-to bring up stories of childhood/parental abuse (watch these, they are the same old stories each time, and if you listen closely, you may see that his behaviors closely match those childhood abuse patterns...)
-to bring up troubles and things bothering him at work
-to bring up his hurt and "pain" over something YOU did ages ago, and have long-since paid for.
-"missing" a grown child who has left the home, or children he abandoned and his former partner "won't let him" visit (big wonder why...).

If you DO manage to get an abuser to a relationship counsellor, (something many abusers will insist you two don't need - he'll insist that you "can work things out yourselves..."), the abuser will work to ensure that the counsellor sees HIM as the mistreated partner, or at the very least, that his behaviors are one-time incidents rooted in just cause. These kinds of emotional abusers are often highly intelligent and manipulative. They will manipulate and lie to the counsellor, pinning the onus back on YOU to change your behavior for HIM. You may find it very frustrating and difficult. Even if he can't avoid having his trust-breaking behavior exposed, he may find a way to manipulate the situation so that his "reasons" for breaking trust were because of YOUR inability to meet his needs. Beware. Sometimes counsellors buy into that stuff, and you end up getting a double-whammy.

Emotional abusers will hide their abuse in acts that they can claim were done to "try and help" their partner. For example, taking a partner's kids away camping for the weekend, ostensibly, "to give her some time off", but without phoning and checking with her first, "forgetting" she had made plans with them already, and deliberately making sure the kids didn't have time to pack up and be properly equipped. This is designed to get her upset, but have it look like, on the surface, he was "just trying to be helpful and she got upset at me." Similarly, an abuser might do some of your laundry "as a favor" to you, without your asking, and then shrink or stain your clothes. When you get upset about the fact that not only did he do this without asking, but it caused damage, an abuser will imply that your anger is invalid and unwarranted, that you are ungrateful, (he was just trying to help!), and that there is nothing he can do about it now. The abuser learns and goes for the most sensitive "buttons" on his partner, so that he can get a response out of her. The abuser seeks ways to violate her boundaries through calculated "acts of kindess", and may resort to using her children, her personal belongings, her friends, or her personal space as tools.

In addition to favors which cause damage, the emotional abuser may do legitimately helpful "favors" for his partner, but again, ones that the partner never asked for. The problem is that the abuser never gives freely or unconditionally. He expects some kind of recompense in return, often without stating what that expectation is. This then gives him another opportunity to feel justified in punishing his partner when she doesn't live up to his unstated expectations of gratitude and reciprocation. When his partner stands up for herself, you may hear him using phrases like, "everything I did, I did for her", and "after all I did for her, THIS is how she treats me!". Abusers will often complain (especially to others outside the relationship) about how unappreciated they are/were, and how they gave and gave and gave, and got so little in return...

Another destabilizing tactic that the abuser may use is to reneg on a committment, or on a stated belief, catching you off-guard, possibly even putting you in a position where he can accuse you of "hurting" him because you didn't know his beliefs/principles/goals had changed. He will use the excuse that he "changed his mind" as a tool for keeping you off-balance. If you question his about-face, he will accuse you of not allowing him the right to change his mind. While people legitimately DO change their minds about things, abusers will do it often, and without warning, with maximum rug-yanking effect for their partners.

Emotional abusers will use the "mind change" tactic to set a partner up in a no-win situation. No matter what the partner does, the abuser will find a way to find fault with it - if the cat craps on his bed and she doesn't clean it up, she is uncaring and selfish. If she DOES clean it up, then she was invading his personal space.

Emotional abusers encourage their partners to do "self-indulgent" things that the abuser will later resent them for. It may be as simple as encouraging her to go out dancing with her friends, or to go visit her mother, or it may be as serious as encouraging her to take a job or go back to school. In many cases, his "encouragement" is part of the "if she really loves me" test - if she does what he encourages her to do, she is diverting her attention from him, and he will feel justified in hurting her as a result.

Once someone starts to detach from an abuser and refuses to play the games, he may go for the sympathy ploy. If his partner doesn't capitulate and refuses to pander to his emotional blackmail, she will be accused of being cold and heartless, in the hopes that THIS escalation of emotional blackmail will hurt her further.

Emotional abusers often display different personalities to other people in their lives - watch for a completely changed demeanor, behavior, body language and even tone of voice, when they are at work, or with a circle of friends. The abuser may claim that this is just different "facets" of his personality, but in fact, it is a warning sign that he puts on different personnas to suit the situation, and you will never know which one is the REAL person. It belies huge insecurities - the way children try to act like the crowd they are with in order to be accepted - and is an indication of the emotional immaturity of the typical abuser.

Emotional abusers, like physical abusers, can be exceedingly charming -that's why it's so hard for the victim of abuse - their friends only see the charming side, and don't see the discourtesy, lies, meanness, condescension and rudeness that happens inside the relationship.

Because abuse is about power and control, the abuser will often try to become "buddies" or friends with his partner's closest friends. If her female friends are attracted to him at all, he may even try to prey on that, so that if she has a conflict or a problem with him, she doesn't have a close supportive friend to turn to. Abusers will use things like stories of childhood abuse or trauma, lost friends or the death of relatives to get her friends to feel sorry for him. He will play up the "sensitive guy" role. If he can cozy up to her best friend, the friend will feel caught in the middle - which is exactly what the abuser wants - to cut off his partner from external support. If he can, he may even flirt heavily with her friends, have an affair with one of her friends, or become pals with one or more of her former friends as another way to hurt and attempt to shame her. As much as possible, he will perpetrate this behavior in front of his partner, so that he is exhibiting his control - going for maximum hurt to her through a blatant display of compassionless disrespect.

The emotional abuser often plays pushme-pullyou. He will indicate that his interest in his partner is waning, and when she begins to start separating from him, he will become attentive and interested again. He may even use sex as a weapon against her - by telling her that she isn't paying enough attention to him, spending enough time with him, or isn't initiating sex enough, but then will reject her advances when she tries to initiate.

Abusers are completely self-centered. They blame other people and seldom take responsibility for their own actions.

Abusers are self-righteous. They find ways to justify their behavior. As a result, he always focuses on her problems, and insists that she change to make the relationship better.

Emotional abusers hate apologizing - and if they DO apologize, they will only do the same thing again. They know this, and will even try to make it seem like any expectation of an apology is really an attempt to "blame" them. (Again, "blame" being that dirty word). For example, "You just want me to say I'm sorry and promise I'll never do it again, so that when I screw up again, you can point a finger and blame me and get angry with me and say, "See? You did it again and you promised you wouldn't!"" This is called "projection" - abusers do it all the time. They project THEIR issues onto their partner, and try to make it their partner's problem. They make it sound like the partner's is somehow wrong or attempting to set them up for "blame", for wanting some sign of compassion and remorse, and an indication of willingness to work on the behavior problem.

If you do get an apology out of an abuser, it is a quick-fix, not a long-term solution, because they will do the same behavior over again - that is why they are often so resistant to apologizing and saying that they will work on the behavior - because they KNOW they will repeat it at another time.

Abusers may, early in the relationship, in a moment of "opening up", tell you of their abusive or manipulative nature. At the time you may think that this is some kind of indication of a willingness to work on their past problems, or that somehow it will be different for you. In fact, what they are looking for is absolution in advance for behavior they will later inflict on you. They may even go so far as to say, "I told you this is how I am."

Emotional abusers often grow OLD without growing UP. They are emotionally stunted and immature. Emotional abusers are self-preoccupied, and demonstrate a passive-aggressive interpersonal style.

Emotional abusers may do seemingly loving, kind and considerate things, that actually convey a subtle message that you aren't "perfect", that you aren't quite good enough. For example, it may seem very sweet that he rubs cream into your hands before bed, but then you remember that he also didn't like you touching him if your hands were the least bit dry or rough - it "hurt" his skin, so you always had to have hand cream to make your hands soft before you touched him. Sadly, the REAL message behind the seemingly loving act of rubbing cream in your hands is that you aren't perfect, you aren't living up to his needs and expectations, NOT that he loves you... In their own subversive way, these "messages", couched in "loving" acts, eat away and erode your sense of self-worth.

Emotional abusers deny that they have any problems and/or project their problems onto their partner, often accusing their partners of abuse - especially AFTER the partner has woken up and called the abuser on his behavior. At this point he will be sure to tell as many *mutual* friends as will listen, that she is controlling and abusive to him, in an attempt to further undermine any support she might get.

In order to gain sympathy, the abuser will share convincing stories of his burdens, including stories of how he was abused as a child, or how he witnessed his mother being assaulted by his father.

An emotional abuser demonstrates little capacity to appreciate the perspective of another person when his own interests are at stake. Emotional abusers often flip between being a martyr and a self-absorbed ******* - there is no middle ground, and they use the martyrdom as an excuse for their behavior when they are in self-absorbed ******* mode ("I was just doing something for *me*. I'm tired of you making me feel bad about myself."). However, that "something" often winds up breaking a relationship agreement, a promise, or involves him being condescending, ignoring, or rude.

An emotional abuser sees himself as a blameless victim, and denies his own provocative behavior, even going so far as to bemoan the fact that a partner left him, or threw him out, "after all the things I did for her"... The emotional abuser will play up the "pathos" in an attempt to garner sympathy, all the while, continuing to stalk his ex, making jokes about things he could do to upset her, and invading her personal space and boundaries at social functions.

Like physical abusers, emotional abusers will often stalk their former partners. The stalker's objective is often to control her through cultivating fear rather than making direct or specific threats, or confronting the her. Sometimes this stalking can take the form of simply moving into the same neighborhood as a former partner, and letting her know, through friends, where he is living. His move into her neighborhood will be "justified" by him for some specious reason, but the reality is, he can't let go and is still trying to control her and inflict pain on her after the relationship is over. This is a subtle form of terrorism, because abuse victims are often very emotionally (if not physically) afraid of their abusers once they wake up. She will know that she might run into him at the local convenience store, gas station, supermarket, or on a walk. He is, in effect, pissing on her boundaries (something abusers have no respect for) and trying to make them his own. He may even begin dating someone who lives very close to her, so that he has an excuse to go by her house, or park his car nearby.

Ex-partners of abusers will often express fear of their abuser, and will have no desire to be anywhere near the abuser. On the other hand, the abuser may try to appear as if he is calm, rational, and still supportive of his ex-partner, despite the fact that he will also express the opinion that he believes she is quite unstable. He will make statements such as saying that he "bears her no ill-will", etc., but then will show no respect for her boundaries or her requests for him to stay away from her. The abuser will still inquire with friends as to how she is doing, implying that his inquiry is because he cares about her - he does care - about retaining those last vestiges of control, even after the breakup. What he really wants to know is if she is suffering or doing badly, because that feeds his sick ego. He feels best when he puts other people in as much pain as he is in.

People in relationships have conflicts. But there is a right way and a wrong way to resolve them, and no matter what the other person does, no matter what a person's "issues" are, abuse is the wrong way. Emotional cruelty and abuse are choices. A man can choose to be abusive or choose to be non-abusive; he can choose to be honest and straightforward, or passive-aggressive and covert, and no matter how hard a man tries to blame his partner, there is no justification for abuse.

If you are a victim of emotional abuse, you have to wake up to the fact that this person *does not love you* and probably hasn't loved you for a very long time, if ever. Because the truth of the matter is, someone who can be emotionally cruel, malicious, and compassionless with people who have given him their love and their trust, is so absorbed in self-hate that he is incapable of loving himself, much less anyone else. What the abuser feels is obsession, not love.

If you find that you are having to explain the basics of respect and courtesy to a partner - if you are finding that he just DOESN'T SEEM TO GET IT, when you try to explain why his behavior or actions were disrespectful - run far and run fast. People who are capable of maintaining and contributing to a loving, supportive, healthy relationship, DON'T need to constantly have the concepts of respect, compassion, and consideration explained to them.

Just because he admits his behavior (and WATCH - some abusers are VERY good at acknowledging they did something without apologizing, or admitting there was anything WRONG with the behavior.), does NOT mean he is willing to change it, that he will not repeat the behavior, nor that he even believes he did anything unacceptable, hurtful or wrong. DO NOT take admission of an act as a sign of integrity, acceptance of responsibility, a show of remorse, or an indication of genuine caring, unless you see EXPLICIT behavior that demonstrates it.

It is NOT wrong, or unhealthy to want someone to love and care about you and care for you, and to want to reciprocate. It is only through this kind of openness that we can acheive true intimacy with another individual. And two emotionally healthy people, CAN do this without becoming co-dependent. Unfortunately, abusers violate the trust that this kind of relationship requires, and are incapable of true intimacy. They want you to be dependent. People who ARE capable of genuinely loving you in a healthy and safe way, DON'T WANT TO HURT YOU, and do not DELIBERATELY DO THINGS TO HURT YOU. They don't play on your insecurities and they don't wage psychological warfare on you. They don't blame YOU for all the relationship problems, and they don't fabricate problems just so you can be the scapegoat.

People who love you will treat you with respect, consideration, courtesty, honesty and compassion. If you are with someone who matches the abusive behavior in this article, get help. The sooner you wake up to the fact that the relationship is unhealthy, and move on, the sooner your life will improve.

Remember: Safe People are people who draw you closer to who you were meant to be spiritually, emotionally, mentally and physically. They encourage you to be your most loving, growing self.

As I've written in the past, put yourself out there if you want help. It still sounds like you want sympathy. The courts WOULD NOT order a Restraining Order unless your family's safety was in question. IMHO, you are still hiding things.

Okay ... I admit I do not know RobertC's background, but what Newly said regarding needed reasons for a restraining order just are not true, at least for my State (Washington) they're not.

When I went to my attorney regarding my divorce, as a normal procedure my attorney asked if I wanted a restraining order placed on my STBX (it was even in his in-take paperwork for me to fill out).

I was surprised and answered "no" to filing one. My attorney explained to me that filing one is most times SOP (standard operating procedure) when divorcing. No needed reason other than to keep the STBX at bay.

Just thought I would offer my divorce experience regarding ROs.

Jo

<small>[ February 20, 2003, 05:05 PM: Message edited by: Resilient ]</small>

Robert, unlike others, I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt and I would advise you to hire an attorney and fight for your rights as a father. There is no reason why you should lie down and take this form of 'abuse' from your WW. Find an attorney that will truly fight for you and not one that will just want you to settle for less than what you deserve. Contact any of the father's rights organizations for referrals.

Many WW's have resorted to perjury (false accusations) in order to get what they want (read EverlastingCompassion's latest posts regarding his exWW child support perjury on Petvet's thread titled 'Tough Love'), and many times the law just seems to just shrug and say 'oh well, tough, get over it' to the men whose lives have been royally screwed (their children taken away and their hard earned financial resources wiped out) by their unfaithful wives.

Good luck.

Resilient,
From my experience, filing for an RO is different than actually getting one. First comes a TRO (which is typically automatic), but for a continued RO, cause is usually necessary.
My local cops were certain I could get a TRO, but not a full RO.

I agree with the post on the abuser. But is we all look at ourselves, at one point in oor relationships all of fit one part of that post.
When emothions run high we all make mistakes and just because we do this doesn't make us an abuser.
Sure if we do these things over and over again, then yes thats what we are. But if everyone really thinks about it , not one of us can say that we haven't tried diffrent things at one point or another to try and get or partners in life to understand us, that fall into that catagory.

So in some ways I guess it is my oppinion that it is our nature as humans to make these mistakes, But the key here is not to keep making them, when we see that they are wrong.
I guess what i am saying is that at one piont in our lives we have all tried to control some sort of situation.

Here's an article I found regarding RO's:

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">

Hitting below the belt.

Easy to get, hellish to deal with, restraining orders have become the ultimate weapon in domestic disputes.

by Cathy Young.

Oct. 25, 1999 One day three years ago, Harry Stewart, a lay minister in Weymouth, Mass., and a divorced father of two, was bringing his 5-year-old son back from a scheduled visit. He walked the boy to the front door of the mother's apartment building and opened the door to let him in.

For this offense, 44-year-old Stewart is now serving a six-month sentence in the Norfolk House of Correction.

Stewart was convicted in June of violating a restraining order that prohibited him from exiting his car near his ex-wife's home. He got a suspended sentence conditional on completing a batterers treatment program, in which participants must sign a statement taking responsibility for their violence.

That was something Stewart refused to do. He has never been charged with spousal assault and insists that the only violence in his marriage was by his ex-wife against him. (While his former wife told reporters that Stewart was dangerously unstable, her examples -- that he had watched "prison movies" with his 8- and 6-year-old sons and promised to send them some live caterpillars to grow into butterflies -- seem shocking only in their innocuousness.) On Aug. 18, he appeared in Quincy District Court and again declared that he was not a batterer and would not enroll in any program that required him to admit to being one. Stewart was ordered to start serving his jail term immediately.

The Stewart case has become a rallying point for fathers' rights activists, some of whom picketed the courthouse that day. For years, fathers groups have argued that orders of protection, intended as a shield for victims of domestic violence, often are misused by unscrupulous pseudo-victims and overzealous courts. Their claims are now getting some attention, with Massachusetts as the epicenter of what is (depending on whom you listen to) either an attempt by angry men to roll back women's gains or a civil rights battle for our times.

In May, the Judiciary Committee of the Massachusetts legislature held a hearing on the abuse of domestic restraining orders. In September, six divorced men, along with the statewide Fatherhood Coalition, filed a federal lawsuit alleging gender bias and violations of constitutional rights by domestic relations courts, with a special emphasis on restraining orders.

To battered women's advocates, and to feminists such as Boston Globe columnist Eileen McNamara, gripes about the restraining-order system are merely an anti-female backlash. At times, some men in the fathers groups can indeed lapse into angry rhetoric that smacks of hostility to women. But it is equally true that many women's advocates (who, unlike the divorced dads, have a good deal of influence in the legal system) seem to have a "women good, men bad" mentality that colors their view of family conflict.

What's more, the grievances of the fathers' rights activists have support from unexpected quarters, such as Elaine Epstein, former president of the Massachusetts Women's Bar Association. In 1993 Epstein, then head of the Massachusetts Bar Association, wrote a column in the association newsletter titled "Speaking the Unspeakable," which charged that the "frenzy surrounding domestic violence" had paralyzed good judgment.

"The facts have become irrelevant," she wrote. "Everyone knows that restraining orders and orders to vacate are granted to virtually all who apply, lest anyone be blamed for an unfortunate result ... In many [divorce] cases, allegations of abuse are now used for tactical advantage."

Sheara Friend, a Needham attorney who testified before the Massachusetts Legislature in May, concurs. "I don't think there's a lawyer in domestic relations in this state who doesn't feel there has been abuse of restraining orders," she says. "It's not politically correct -- lawyers don't want to be pegged as being anti-abused women, but privately they agree."

There are stories of attorneys explicitly offering to have restraining orders dropped in exchange for financial concessions. Friend says that this has happened to her on two occasions; but she believes that more discreet negotiations are actually far more common.

Even feminist activists are willing to allow that restraining orders can be misused as a "coercive tool" -- by men. In 1995, in Somerville, Mass., Stephen Gruning broke into the apartment of his ex-girlfriend, Rhonda Stuart, and went on a shooting rampage, wounding her and killing her brother and her new boyfriend. When press reports revealed that Gruning had earlier obtained two temporary restraining orders against Stuart, women's advocates were quick to point out that such orders were very easy to get, "regardless of the facts."

In the 1970s and '80s, growing public awareness of domestic violence spurred laws such as the 1978 Abuse Prevention Act in Massachusetts, which made restraining orders (usually prohibiting any contact with the complainant) easily available against current or former spouses or cohabitants. More recently, many states have moved to strengthen this legislation, extending eligibility to people who had dated but not lived together, and introducing tough measures against violators.

In Massachusetts, as in most other states, a temporary no-contact order can be issued ex parte -- without the defendant being present or notified, let alone informed of the specific charges -- and solely on the word of the complainant. "I think judges grant the restraining orders without asking too many questions," said former state Rep. Barbara Gray, an original sponsor of the Abuse Prevention Act, in a 1995 interview.

Gray, who is now retired, rather nonchalantly allowed that the system could be manipulated, but she felt that nothing could be done differently without endangering women: "You [would be] saying to a judge: On an emergency basis, you have to look at this woman and see whether you think she's telling the truth."

True or false, the charges can be surprisingly trivial. A 1995 study by the Massachusetts courts showed that fewer than half of all restraining orders involved even an allegation of physical abuse. Epstein recalls "affidavits which just said that someone was in fear, or there had been an argument or yelling, but not even a threat."

While the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled in 1990 that a simple claim of fear was not a sufficient basis for a restraining order -- and set a threshold of "reasonable" fear of "imminent serious physical harm" -- courts routinely ignore this standard.


The normal rules of evidence do not apply.

Once a temporary order is granted, a hearing must be held within 10 days to determine whether it should be vacated or extended for a year. That's when the defendant gets a chance to defend himself -- in theory. The hearing, however, is usually limited to a he said/she said exchange in which, many lawyers say, the defendant is given little credit. (Of course, the accused is not always a he; about 18 percent of restraining orders issued in the state last year were granted to men.) The normal rules of evidence do not apply; hearsay is commonly allowed, while exculpatory evidence can be kept out.

A defendant who insists on a full evidentiary hearing can be forced to wait for months. In one case, the transcript shows, the judge denied an attorney's request to call witnesses who would dispute the complainant's story, saying, "I don't need a full-scale hearing ... I don't care about that." The judge also declared that the issue was not even "who's telling the truth," only whether he felt the woman was genuinely fearful.

While a restraining order is a civil remedy, its target is subject to criminal sanctions -- up to two and a half years of imprisonment -- for conduct that is not only normally legal but quite benign, like getting out of the car and holding the door for a child. (This includes contact that is clearly accidental, or even initiated by the purported victim: Even if you came over to the house at your ex-spouse's invitation, you don't have a legal excuse.)

Stewart has several other charges pending, mainly for failing to stay confined to his vehicle: for picking up the children on foot when his car had broken down, and for exiting his car during visitation exchanges, once when his son needed help with a package and another time when one of the boys stumbled and fell while running toward the car.

In 1994, in a somewhat similar case, Sal D'Amico, a father of three, was arrested and ordered into a batterers program because he got out of his car to pet the family dogs while picking up his kids for a visit. Five months later, he was fined nearly $600 for returning a telephone call from his son. (Like Stewart, D'Amico has never been criminally charged with assaulting his wife, whose claims of ongoing violent abuse were uncorroborated by any evidence.)

And those men are the lucky ones: Other fathers have been denied all contact with their children, or allowed to see them only in a supervised visitation center -- where, adding insult to injury, they must pay for the privilege.

In one of attorney Friend's recent cases, a woman claimed to be frightened by her ex-husband's search for real estate in the same town where she was moving with her children; the father, who previously had extensive visitation, was barred from all contact with the kids, even by telephone, for three weeks.

Boston-area therapist and hospital staff psychologist Abigail Maxton has a client who was not allowed to see his two children for about nine months after his ex-wife alleged, in the middle of divorce proceedings, that he had physically abused her and the children. ("The investigation consisted of a Department of Social Services worker talking to the wife and then talking to a neighbor who confirmed that she had heard loud voices," says Maxton.) The client could have only supervised visitation for the next two years, until the social worker who monitored the visits finally gave him a clean bill of health.

The situation in Massachusetts is not unique. In a 1996 column in Family Advocate, the journal of the family law section of the American Bar Association, Connecticut attorney Arnold Rutkin charged that many judges in his state approach protection orders as "a rubber-stamping exercise" and that the due process hearings held later "are usually a sham."

In Missouri, a survey of attorneys and judges for the Task Force on Gender and Justice in the early 1990s found many complaints that the "adult abuse" law was resulting in blatant disregard for due process and was commonly misused for "litigation strategy" and "harassment."

In New Jersey, appellate judges have expressed concern about frivolous restraining orders based on claims of verbal abuse: a man calling his estranged wife to tell her he would take "drastic measures" if she didn't pay the household bills -- by which he meant having the phone disconnected -- or a husband repeatedly saying to his wife that he no longer loved her and was going to get a divorce. After several such orders were overturned on appeal four years ago, the number of restraining orders issued statewide dropped by about 20 percent.

This trend, however, is likely to be reversed; the state Supreme Court overturned one of those appellate rulings in 1998, in Cesare vs. Cesare, and gave the trial courts broader latitude to rely on the complainant's subjective perception of a threat.

There also is some evidence to support the claims of fathers groups that courts show little regard for the civil rights of defendants when allegations of domestic abuse are involved. At a 1995 seminar for municipal judges, Judge Richard Russell of Ocean City, N.J., was caught on tape giving some startling advice.

"Your job is not to become concerned about the constitutional rights of the man that you're violating as you grant a restraining order," he said. "Throw him out on the street, give him the clothes on his back and tell him, see ya around ...The woman needs this protection because the statute granted her that protection ... They have declared domestic violence to be an evil in our society. So we don't have to worry about the rights."

Judge Russell's comments, printed in the New Jersey Law Journal, earned him a mild chiding from the Administrative Office of the Courts. By contrast, in Maine two years ago, Judge Alexander MacNichol was denied reappointment by Gov. Angus King after battered women's advocates complained that he was insensitive to women applying for restraining orders -- despite the lack of any evidence that his alleged insensitivity had put anybody in harm's way. Many court employees, male and female, who supported the judge said that he simply listened to both sides of the story.

But that is exactly what many battered women's advocates believe the courts shouldn't do. Some of them are quite candid about it.


An opportunity to make your ex very miserable.

In February, in the wake of several domestic murders in the Seattle area, two officials of the Washington State Coalition Against Domestic Violence wrote an article in the Seattle Times urging judges "to believe every woman who expresses fear of an intimate partner" and to deny accused men all contact with their children. (The advocates also tend to embrace extremely broad and vague definitions of abuse that have also found their way into official domestic violence intervention programs -- not only physical assaults but verbal putdowns, "criticizing you for small things," "making you feel bad about yourself," "threatening to leave," even "denying you sex.")

The notion of women falsely crying abuse is anathema to domestic violence activists; for many feminists, talk about spiteful, manipulative ex-wives sets off a misogyny alarm. Yet to recognize that such acts are possible, one need not see women as uniquely vindictive or devious, only as human. The advantages of a restraining order to the complainant -- exclusive possession of the home (with the alleged abuser often required to continue paying the rent or mortgage), temporary and probably permanent sole custody of the children -- can be tempting. So can, let's face it, the opportunity to make your ex very miserable.

Indeed, while fathers' rights activists undoubtedly have a point when they say that men claiming to be victims of domestic abuse are generally viewed with far more skepticism, it's certainly not just women who have taken advantage of the system.

One of the witnesses testifying at the recent legislative hearing in Massachusetts was Myra Dunne, a nurse who was thrown out of her house on her husband's complaint during divorce proceedings. One New Jersey woman was hit with a restraining order because she vocally disapproved of her estranged husband's cohabitation with a girlfriend. She violated the order by berating him during a visitation exchange for bringing "that slut" to a birthday party for one of the children, and was sentenced to six months probation and community service.

Those who pooh-pooh claims of widespread restraining-order abuse are fond of citing an analysis of public records in Massachusetts showing that 54 percent of men named in domestic restraining orders in 1992-93 had a history of drug or alcohol offenses, 48 percent had been charged with a violent crime (though not necessarily convicted) and one in four had been in jail or on probation before the order was granted.

Yet these numbers hardly refute claims that the targets are frequently non-abusive men. It is entirely possible for most of the defendants to be a bad lot and for a sizable minority to be wrongly accused.

Friend believes that 40 to 50 percent of restraining orders are strategic ploys. This rather inflammatory estimate is echoed by Dorothy Wright, a New Jersey lawyer and a former board member of a battered women's shelter. Supporters of the law insist that at most 4 or 5 percent may be obtained under false pretenses. But even that adds up to more than 1,500 a year in Massachusetts alone. That's hardly a trifle when it's a question of people being kicked out of their homes, cut off from their children, sometimes jailed and effectively branded as criminals without the safeguards of a criminal trial.

Public officials typically brush off concerns about the misuse of restraining orders by saying that protecting women must be the top priority. "Given the number of women killed in domestic abuse cases, we have a crisis on our hands,'' Jean Haertl, executive director of the Governor's Commission on Domestic Violence, told the Boston Herald recently.

The specter of mortal danger hovers over the debate on restraining orders, often making rational discussion impossible. It's hard not to seem callous if you question whether an average of 20 women slain annually by husbands, ex-husbands and boyfriends in Massachusetts, which has a population of over 6 million, amounts to an emergency that warrants the suspension of civil rights (any more than the nearly 200 non-domestic homicides that take place in the state every year).

"How you balance [due process] with a real victim's need for protection is a tough issue," says Friend, whose clientele has included abused women and men as well as disenfranchised parents. Even when there has been no physical violence and there are no overt threats, she says, a woman's fear can be based on real but subtle danger signals. Or it can be a paranoid response to media sensationalism that makes it look like slaughtering the wife and the kids is a fairly typical male response to divorce. Or it can be a convenient "abuse excuse." Without mind-reading, it is often impossible for the courts to make those distinctions. But the "better safe than sorry" approach can turn into something disturbingly akin to presumption of guilt.

The tension between preventing future harm to victims and protecting the rights of the accused is a notoriously thorny problem. Some of the same dilemmas are posed by recent measures against sex offenders who have completed their sentence -- though they, at least, have been actually convicted of a crime.

But do the tough restraining-order policies help victims? A man who is ready to kill a woman and either take his own life or face a murder rap surely won't be deterred by a charge of violating a court order. Virtually all the research -- and, most recently, two studies included in the 1996 book "Do Arrests and Restraining Orders Work?" edited by University of Massachusetts-Lowell criminologists Carl and Eve Buzawa -- concludes that the orders have little if any protective effect, except perhaps for women who were not severely victimized in the first place. If so, peddling these orders to people in real danger is like giving cancer patients a drug that cures the common cold.

University of Rhode Island sociologist Richard Gelles, a leading authority on domestic violence, also cautions that the more the legal system is bogged down in trivial pursuits, the less likely it is to single out the serious cases that do require urgent intervention.

Nor is there any evidence that an effort to curb frivolous restraining orders will endanger lives. When the courts in New Jersey began to issue fewer restraining orders as a result of appellate rulings that tightened the definition of domestic violence (excluding verbal abuse without persistent harassment or threats), an outcry from battered women's advocates was quick to follow -- but a rise in the domestic homicide rate was not.

Nevertheless, at least for now, efforts to reform restraining-order legislation in ways that would provide more protection for defendants are given little chance to succeed. Perhaps because the war on domestic violence is a more politically correct cause than the war on crime, the plight of people abused by restraining orders has not attracted the sympathy one can usually expect for casualties of prosecutorial and judicial zeal. The American Civil Liberties Union has stayed mum on the subject. Until recently, the media has ignored it as well, and remains uneasy with it. The issue largely continues to be seen (despite a growing number of women on the receiving end of restraining orders) in terms of men trying to snatch back the power newly gained by women.

Perhaps, for this attitude to change, we would have to start seeing women and men as truly equal. Then we would recognize that women, no less than men, are capable of abusing the power they're given, and that the protection of women does not justify the surrender of civil rights any more than the protection of men.

Then we might even recognize that the sympathy due a woman who lives in fear of her abusive ex-husband should also be extended to the father who can be hauled off to jail if he makes a phone call to wish his daughter a happy birthday.

</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">

My understanding to get an restraining order is all that one has to have is fear.
Well I guess that makes sense for if I were to file an r/o against my spouse, get them kicked out of the house, keep their kids away from them,and move someone new into the spouses place, I guess I might be in fear too, of what my spouse would do to me if I did all these things.
Willow I hope you didn't have to write out that column on abuse, hopefully you just had to plug that into your response.
Cause the situation is ( and now I'm getting mad not sad ) that is what my wife has/is doing to me.
Seems that in last 2 weeks, and this is what I hear from my 9 year old ( wife refuses to talk to me ) New man is taking my wife and kids to movies, fixing them dinner, going to breakfast, spending lots of time in my home with my famliy
I am not allowed even into my own neighborhood. I even called some friends that lived across the street from my house to see if they could tell me what the hell was going on, they didn't want to be "a source of information" and to leave them alone.
So I am in the dark, I can't even go to my daughter's schools, and if you recall I am the one that has been both a father and a mother to my 2 girls.

This new guy can have my wife for all I care, I just want my kids, I have seen them a total of 4 days over the last month.
I am seeing evil like I never would have thought possible.
Thanks
Robert

My understanding to get an restraining order is all that one has to have is fear.
Well I guess that makes sense for if I were to file an r/o against my spouse, get them kicked out of the house, keep their kids away from them,and move someone new into the spouses place, I guess I might be in fear too, of what my spouse would do to me if I did all these things.
Willow I hope you didn't have to write out that column on abuse, hopefully you just had to plug that into your response.
Cause the situation is ( and now I'm getting mad not sad ) that is what my wife has/is doing to me.
Seems that in last 2 weeks, and this is what I hear from my 9 year old ( wife refuses to talk to me ) New man is taking my wife and kids to movies, fixing them dinner, going to breakfast, spending lots of time in my home with my famliy
I am not allowed even into my own neighborhood. I even called some friends that lived across the street from my house to see if they could tell me what the hell was going on, they didn't want to be "a source of information" and to leave them alone.
So I am in the dark, I can't even go to my daughter's schools, and if you recall I am the one that has been both a father and a mother to my 2 girls.

This new guy can have my wife for all I care, I just want my kids, I have seen them a total of 4 days over the last month.
I am seeing evil like I never would have thought possible.
Thanks
Robert

I have to agree with needtounderstand, that desription could fit about anyone at some time. That sometime could even last for several months or years depending on the circumstances. That doesn't make everyone an abuser. It simply says that life and relationships are hard. They descrition given could have been most people I have had in my life at own time or another, my children, co-workers, parents, and even friends.Most of us have life and relationships
all mesed up. If we truly look at our selves we will find that we also have done some of these very things.

The good news for me has been Jesus. Once I ask Him into my life, my relationships wiht everyone has changed. Most of my so called friends were not around any more. God replaced them with many true friends. I still have to deal with what has been labled an "abuser" everyday in some way. But I have good friends that are grounded in Christ to support me in my trails. I too slip back into old behaviors. Praise God I don't have to live under a lable. I try not to lable others. I go to the Lord with all my raltionships and trust He is going to do what is best for me and the others involoved.

gentle