Approximately 700,000 children are abused in the United States each year. In 2018, 76% of child abuse perpetrators were a parent to their victim.
Contrary to the abusive father stereotype, statistics clearly show that mothers commit child abuse at a higher rate than fathers. According to the 2018 annual U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services Child Maltreatment report, nearly 40.0 percent (39.4%) of child abuse victims are abused by a mother acting alone versus 21.5 percent who are abused by their father.
Maternal Parental Abuse
States provide data for the Child Maltreatment report through the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System (NCANDS), and these figures are not something new. Data from the 2001- 2006 Child Maltreatment reports show that 70.6% of children were abused by their mothers, whereas 29.4% were abused by their fathers.
It’s a scenario that has played out for years, often right under our noses.
Your mother is exactly such a person. parental alienation is child abuse. Love Papa.
Leon is one of the most important psychologists of the 20th century.
He demonstrated with experiment below how people LIE to themselves to protect their brain from exploding with fear. It is called Cognitive Dissonance. Most humans will lie to themselves rather than face an unconfortable reality that challenges their belief system.
Brave people do not LIE to themselves. BeBrave. Love Papa.
Your papa has been falsely accused like Alfred Dreyfus. Help me – this TED talk explains everything about how your mother creates false narratives, and uses allies to destroy your father. A single scout-minded person can recover sanity and justice.
Brig, Soren and Reidar- France is defending liberty. Bravo. BeBrave too. Love Papa
La France sera toujours la France !
Retrouvez :
👉 Présidentielle américaine : nos conseils à l'heureux élu 👉 Reportage : quand la circoncision part en couilles 👉 IVG en Pologne : l'Europe regarde ailleurs…
Brig, Soren and Reidar- It is very important that you understand the risks you face. It can happen in Sweden, and after what your mother did to our family, she is capable of doing this to you.
DO NOT LET HER KEEP YOU FROM LEAVING THE HOUSE WHEN YOU ARE AN ADULT. 16 YEARS+.
I will support you and protect you. Do not be let her keep you at home until you are 40 years old. I love you Papa.
Stockholm mother arrested ‘after keeping son for decades in flat’
Swedish police have arrested an elderly woman suspected of having kept her son confined to their flat in a Stockholm suburb for up to three decades.
She denied false imprisonment and grievous bodily harm after the son, now aged about 40, was found injured and living in squalor.
It seems he was only discovered by a relative on Sunday after his mother fell ill and was taken to hospital.
He is now undergoing surgery in hospital for his injuries.
Police have sealed off the apartment in Haninge, a southern suburb of the capital, to conduct their investigation and are seeking witnesses as they try to piece together what happened.
The woman, who is aged 70, is expected to remain in police custody while the investigation continues. If she is found guilty of false imprisonment, police say she could face up to ten years in jail.
How was the son found?
The unnamed relative went to the flat on Sunday evening with her partner after hearing that the mother was in hospital, she told Expressen newspaper.
It had been about 20 years since she last visited, she said, after trying in vain when she was younger to raise the alarm over the welfare of the child, who had been removed from school when he was aged 11 or 12.
Opening the unlocked door, she found the flat in darkness and reeking of urine, decay, dirt and dust. There was no answer when she shouted “hello” so she went in, picking her way through mounds of clutter.
Hearing a sound from the kitchen, she saw the man sitting in a dark corner, lit by a lamp on the street outside. Sores covered his legs up to his knees.
When he saw her, he stood up and whispered her name again and again. He had lost almost all his teeth and his voice was slurred, she told the paper.
Somehow, she said, he had recognised her after all the time that had passed and he was not afraid of her.
When the man was taken to hospital, doctors alerted the police and the mother was detained.
Stockholm prosecutor Emma Olsson told Reuters news agency the man had required surgery, without giving further details.
“The only comment on the time that person has been kind of ‘imprisoned’ by his mother is: we are sure that it has been for a long period of time,” police spokesperson Ola Österling told BBC News.
“We don’t estimate how many years. That’s a part of our investigations now, to get the detailed information about the exact amount of time.”
Until a few years ago, I spent my entire life being a feminist.
It was part of my ethos growing up in a very liberal and progressive area. Absorbing the feminist ideology through osmosis was natural for me, and I played these ideas out until about three years ago when I reached my early 30s.
What Feminism Means to Me
My definition centered on the benign idea that men and women should have equal opportunities, and I found no reason to assume that girls and boys wouldn’t pursue the same things and do exactly the same things (equal outcomes).
My mindset regarding my life was that I would have my career in science (biology), reach the top of my field, and eventually have children — once a career was taken care of. In order to do this, I had to make sure that I never let a man stop me from pursuing “my dreams” — with a special emphasis on the word “my.” These were my dreams and I must pursue them independently. In many ways, I felt that I had to prove that I was smart and capable and could reach amazing heights without a man. I was also under the impression that children would “get in my way,” and therefore I must achieve my career goals first and foremost.
I had to make sure that I never let a man or children stop me from pursuing “my dreams.”
So, I played out this ideology. Yet, as my life continued, I saw how many aspects of my mindset and choices were either misguided or flat out wrong. Not all of these realizations happened at once, but I will piece together the most influential observations and experiences I had as I went through my 20s that caused the armor protecting my worldview to eventually fall apart.
I Realized Men and Women Have Different Interests
First, I began to piece together how young women make different choices than young men. I started noticing this most strongly in college. Most of the girls I knew were majoring in education (to teach kids) or nursing (to nurture people). I had a lot of female friends in my major (biology), but I realized that almost no women in STEM were majoring in things like physics or engineering, even though there were scholarships and posters everywhere encouraging girls to join those fields.
Yet, when I looked for answers, feminist ideology framed these outcomes as proof that women were discouraged from some fields. While I allowed room for that argument, a crack in the armor began to form because something didn’t add up… It seemed that another very plausible explanation was that girls and women on average might simply not be as interested in some fields (some did and that’s fine too!) and are naturally very interested in others. I wondered why it felt almost taboo to even discuss that as a possibility, and secretly I wondered why we felt compelled to force all the same percentages of men and women in every field.
Women on average might simply not be as interested in some fields and are naturally very interested in others.
As I looked more into it, I found that little girls and boys on average innately choose different toys to play with (girls choosing more people-focused toys and boys choosing more things-focused toys), which is a trend found very early in life (under one year old) and is also found in baby primates. Furthermore, women were now exceeding men in multiple areas, such as college attendance and doctoral degrees, so the idea that we’re held back started to fall apart. A plausible biological argument based on evidence and my observations had presented itself. The crack in the armor was there, but I continued to ignore it.
My Rising Career Wasn’t Fulfilling
Second, I found out the hard way that a career is not nearly as fulfilling as I was told it would be when I was younger, when it was portrayed as “my dreams.” This realization took a lot of time and energy to figure out. Growing up, I was very driven academically and excelled in school. I received a Master’s degree and began pursuing a Ph.D. I worked various jobs in my field — each one seemed like a “dream job” when applying, but ended up being, well…just a job.
Each one seemed like a “dream job” when applying, but ended up being, well…just a job.
By the time I was halfway through my Ph.D. work, I realized that I was making myself crazy, had very little joy in my life, and was experiencing declining mental and physical health. I was working an intense schedule in a field I truly loved and meeting all the career milestones (awards, publications, presentations, etc.). Yet, I wasn’t fulfilled. I understand that struggle is part of the achievement process, but this went deeper than that.
Careers can take their toll on relationships.
During this time, I had a meeting with a highly accomplished biologist whose work I had known for a long time, and I asked her how she handled her family life and work. She broke down in front of me and told me that she and her husband couldn’t make it work and were divorcing. I was heartbroken for them because it looked like the quintessential “she has it all” life from the outside, but the truth was very different. I started to wonder if she was experiencing similar stress to what I felt and perhaps this put a big strain on the relationship. I started to consider priorities, and another crack in my armor began.
I continued with my research, but I still couldn’t figure out what was wrong for quite some time. It took me about a year to even entertain the idea that an intense career might just not provide me meaning in a deep and lasting way. Who wants to accept that what they have devoted their life to isn’t actually fulfilling? Who wants to backtrack on the choices they’ve made? It took a lot of soul-searching to realize that I didn’t have to break the glass ceiling I was always told about. I didn’t have to “prove women can do it, too.” I could simply choose to pursue what’s in my heart.
Who wants to accept that what they have devoted their life to isn’t actually fulfilling?
And when I listened quietly and carefully, I found that a family was what I wanted most, yet it was what I had put on the back burner. None of this other stuff mattered much in the end. I didn’t have to “have it all” by someone else’s definition. I could have what was important to me and realize that I am only human, I only have so much time in a day, and at the end of it, we have to make choices on how to fill that time.
I Did Want To Share My Life with a Man
Third, I had to admit to myself that I did indeed want a man to share my life with and that being “strong and independent” wasn’t fulfilling. It took a swallowing of my pride to realize that in my selfish desire to set my career as the top priority of my life, I was deprioritizing my relationship(s). That wasn’t fair to my boyfriend, and in the end, it hurt me as well. When I had a difficult breakup during my Ph.D., I was immediately reminded of my conversation with the accomplished career woman.https://embed.actionbutton.co/widget/widget-iframe.html?widgetId=SPK-QkZERA==
I Realized Feminism Is Marxist at Its Core
Finally, I started to see that feminism at its core is Marxist. Marxism is a worldview built on dividing people by an oppressor class and an oppressed class. Under traditional Marxism, these classes are the bourgeoisie (ruling class/oppressors) and proletariat (working class/oppressed). Under feminism, men are the oppressors and women are the oppressed, and I saw every situation or statistic framed in this way. This worldview seeped into me, and looking back, I remember feeling skeptical and victimized in even the smallest and most benign of interactions with men, which became utterly exhausting to me.
I found myself at a Women’s March in January 2016 and experienced some of the most intense cognitive dissonance of my life. I saw protest signs and heard slogans that plainly bashed men and called them useless. I knew I was supposed to go along with this anti-male narrative, but I just couldn’t bring myself to do so.
The majority of men in my life had always been supportive of me, no matter what path I wanted to pursue.
I wrote a Twitter thread in February 2019 after these accumulated realizations hit me hard. I had been talking with my boyfriend about my current life situation, which was the product of my choices, and how my trajectories had happened. Here’s the beginning of that thread:
This first tweet was my alarm call to all girls that yes, you can pursue science and career if you want, but it’s cruel to tell every single girl to do that without simultaneously considering that the overwhelming majority of us will want a family, which requires its own planning and prioritization. When I surveyed my life, I realized that my entire mindset trained me to reject family because I got the message that it would hold me back. So I put family on the back burner, even though truthfully it was a choice I wish I had pursued earlier. I probably would have if I hadn’t centered my life on “my” dreams and instead focused on a “unified” goal with another person for a bigger and more meaningful goal than just mine alone.
I concluded that feminism did a disservice to that which is innately feminine — the desire to have a family.
This was the nail in the coffin as I concluded that feminism did a disservice to that which is innately feminine — the desire to have a family. Many women (including myself) consider being a wife and mother as a vital part of a good and fulfilling life. Now that I’m honest with myself, I feel free.
Looking back, I see that feminism had been a cancer on my mind, engulfing true parts of me and enforcing its ideological frame on my life. The tumor was removed, but I had to rebuild with my own cells, forming my own tissue, fueled now by my own heart, rather than an ideology. It’s been an exhilarating process.
Closing Thoughts
Feminists say men and women don’t have equal opportunities in the West, but we do. And the pandering to this myth creates division between the sexes which is ultimately bad for everyone. My work as a scientist has taught me that alternative hypotheses need to be explored, and one that feminists often fail to consider is that women and men are simply different and on average may have different desires leading to different pursuits, even if there is overlap.
This is not only fine, it’s beautiful and necessary. Our strengths are generally complementary, not competitive. If we listen to ourselves, rather than an ideology, we might just find the true desires of our heart. I’m so happy I left the divisive ideology of feminism and found myself again.
Find more from Rachel on her Twitter and pre-order her book on Gumroad.
Brig, Soren and Reidar- I am so sorry you have to endure this, but the more you understand your situation as a pawn, the better you will be able to cope with it, and emerge stronger. #BeBrave Love Papa.
Pathologically narcissistic people are generally disastrous parents. There’s just no other way to say it. This type of personality was not designed to be a caretaker. The needs of other people don’t matter to them and the feelings of others are nonexistent. They are callous, selfish, cruel and indifferent. Children raised by narcissistic parents are haunted by the idea that they are not good enough and that they must be perfect in order to be loved. They are plagued by the idea that people will abandon them and that nobody can be trusted. They are allowed no security, no safety, no boundaries. They are simply tools for the narcissistic parent to use in whatever manner they deem necessary.
How the narcissistic parent treats the child or children depends on what they are using the child for. For example, children that exist to showcase what a wonderful parent the narcissist is will often seem to be treated very well in public or in front of people, and there will be pressure on these children to perform perfectly in front of others. Performing badly or making mistakes will usually be taken very personally by the narcissist, and the child is often accused of embarrassing the narcissistic parent on purpose. Children that exist to provide unconditional love and acceptance to the narcissistic parent are treated like dolls on a shelf, to be used only when the narcissist needs them and ignored the rest of the time. Most children perform both of these functions and many others as well, all in the service of the narcissistic person’s ego.
The child’s needs, personality and identity are often ruthlessly stomped out in an attempt to replace it with the narcissist’s own. The child is not allowed to have boundaries or to be their own person. They exist only to service the narcissistic parent’s ego and have no other use. This applies to spoiling the child, too, by the way. Children are usually spoiled for the same reason they are beaten: because the parent has a need that they are satisfying by using the child to do it, and it cannot be said enough that spoiling a child is abuse. Narcissistic parents may alternately spoil and ignore a child, which may leave the child unable to ascertain what behavior is appropriate, with difficulty understanding consequences, feelings or how to relate to other people because the reactions they receive are widely inconsistent.
Now, it is not uncommon to hear people say things like, “My wife was a wonderful mother at first,” or “My brother was good to his children when they were babies.” This is because it is easy for a pathologically narcissistic person to have positive feelings for something that does not challenge, threaten or contradict them, something that cannot reject or abandon them. This is why many narcissistic people seem to have positive feelings for animals, for instance. Children are easy to control. Animals are easy to control. They don’t assert their own needs in a threatening way and for a time will love you unconditionally, no matter what you do to them. When the child gets older and starts to assert their independence and individuality or starts challenging the narcissistic parent, this will often change. The parent feels rejected by the child and offended by the child’s individuality. If they blame the other parent, they will accuse the parent of turning the child against them somehow. They will often do what they can to control the child and try to turn the child against the other parent, in the misguided and toxic belief that they will win the competition they believe they are in for the child’s love and admiration. If they blame the child, they will often shame, humiliate and abuse the child as punishment.
This can be devastating to a child, especially because sometimes this happens when the child is still a toddler or very young. The child – who is still little more than a baby – is used to all of the parent’s attention and love but now gets ignored, pushed away and denied.
Consider the situation with a narcissistic mother who always said she “loved babies” and had one every two years or so until she had 5 children. Without fail, the child that was around 2 years old was emotionally abandoned immediately for the new baby. Literally, all the attention was focused on the current 2 year old until the day – the very day – that whatever new baby was born and then the 2 year old was pushed out and ignored along with the rest of the older children, who had to take care of themselves while the mother spent all her time shut in the room with her new baby. As you would expect, none of those children ever really emotionally recovered from that horrific abandonment. How could they?
The golden child/scapegoat dynamic often comes in to play around the time independence shows up if there is more than one child, with the less difficult or less disappointing child being cast as the golden child. This is the child chosen to represent the narcissistic person’s triumphs and successes. This child often seems to be treated very well. The child that is more difficult or disappointing somehow will often be cast as the scapegoat. This is the child that is forced to take the blame for everything that goes wrong. This child is generally treated very badly, sometimes by the entire family at the narcissist’s direction. It’s important to remember too that a narcissist can feel rejected by the child at any time, even when the child is a baby. A baby that cries too much or that needs too much can inspire resentment and rejection in a narcissistic parent. A narcissistic parent that pictured themselves angelically rocking their sweet bundle to sleep to the adoration of others can be very upset and disappointed in a screaming, shrieking, needing baby that does not love them as they imagined.
There is also the issue that narcissistic parents often do not understand that there is a difference between themselves and a child, regardless of the child’s age. They may compare themselves to children, even very young children, and say things like it isn’t fair that the three year old doesn’t get yelled at for being careless but they do, or that the four year old gets more consideration than they do, or that you are treating the 10 year old better than you treat them. They often don’t seem to understand that the expectations for children and adults are different. They may believe they are being treated unfairly because of this, or they may expect children to behave like little adults and punish them if they do not do so. This is the kind of thing that really makes people wonder if there is something wrong with this person and the answer is yes. There is.
When there is a narcissistic parent, the child will never matter any more than the narcissist wants them to matter. They are inconsequential if the narcissist needs something that does not involve them. If children are considered to be in the way by a narcissistic parent, they may even be in danger. Consider the cases of Susan Smith and Diane Downs, who killed their children because they believed the children were preventing relationships with the men they wanted to date. Consider the unborn child of Scott Peterson, who was killed because he wanted to be rid of his wife and did not want to be bothered with the way a child would complicate that.
Consider the words of Casey Anthony, who faced trial for the murder of her 2 year old daughter Caylee. While in jail, Casey was recorded speaking to someone who was trying to reassure her that her friends and family were on her side. Casey’s words were, “No, they’re not. They just want Caylee back. That’s all they’re worried about, is getting Caylee back.” Anyone interested in a very clear portrait of a pathologically narcissistic person should look into that case. Casey Anthony is, in many ways, a text book example.
In the end, sad as it is, the way narcissistic people relate to children is no different than how they relate to anybody else. Their children exist to fulfill their needs and for nothing else. If the child does not succeed in this task or has needs of their own that the narcissist is threatened by, they will be abused, punished and even discarded by the narcissist without a second thought. No one is safe from a pathologically narcissistic person. They are disastrous parents and abusive, neglectful caretakers.
Brig, Soren and Reidar, please listen to Kemi Badenoch discuss Critical Race Theory, and #BLM.
Critical Race Theory is a dangerous, and will lead to incredible violence in our society- it divides people into groups. Stand up to this theory in school and with your friends, and denounce it- it is dangerous and harmful. Do not let the #BLM mob force you into compliance. #BeNotAfraid I am here to support you and guide you. You are nto alone. Love Papa.
‘This has been a long, heartbreaking and expensive set of events for you to endure. I am truly sorry’
Judge Stephen Wildblood, Bristol’s top family court judge (Image: BBC Inside Out West)
A dad has given up trying to see his children after their mum “demonised” him for years, a judge has said.
Judge Stephen Wildblood QC, Bristol’s leading family courtjudge, described the father’s eight-year legal battle for his children as “heartbreaking and expensive”.
The judge said the children would suffer “significant and long-term emotional harm”, adding “the cause of that harm lies squarely with this mother”.
Judge Wildblood found the “intelligent” dad “plainly loves his children”, but deemed their mum to have alienated them from him without justification, in a September ruling.
The family cannot be identified for legal reasons, and we cannot reveal the number of children involved or their ages, but Judge Wildblood says the public should be made aware of the case.
He described it as “an example of how badly wrong things can go and how complex cases are where one parent – here the mother – alienates children from the other parent”.
The dad initiated a private law application for rights to see his children in 2011, but has now given up the battle because they “will have nothing to do with their father”.
The legal fight involved 36 court hearings, including one in 2014 when an order was made barring the dad from direct contact with the children.
Judge Wildblood believes there were failures in the handling of the case before he became involved.
Judge Stephen Wildblood QC
He said: “At no point prior to my involvement in 2017 was there a full hearing on evidence to determine what was going on in this family.”
The judge added: “No professional has suggested that there is anything about this father that renders him unsuited to have contact with his children.
“There have been consistent recommendations throughout the eight-year history of these proceedings from a wide spectrum of professionals that contact should take place between the father and the children.
“All professionals involved in this case have concluded that the mother has alienated the children from the father.”
Judge Wildblood pointed to the children refusing to acknowledge their dad’s messages and having “false memories” of his behaviour towards them.
“The father’s letters, cards and presents were being sent by him into a home environment where he was demonised,” he added.
‘I am truly sorry’
The judge ruled two years ago the children should live with their father for seven weeks, without seeing their mum.
“In my opinion, the handover went badly wrong,” he said. “The children were extremely distressed and resistant to the attempts to place them with the father.”
The children ran away several times, refused to eat and showed “extreme distress”.
They returned to live with their mum less than a month after the ruling hearing and have not seen their father since.
The judge argued the mother was responsible for the children’s hostility, adding: “Whatever may be her difficulties, she is an adult and a parent with parental responsibility for her children.
“That parental responsibility, which she shares with the father, requires her to act in the best interests of her children.
“It also required her to promote the relationship between these children and their father. She has failed to do so.”
Judge Wildblood told the man: “This has been a long, heartbreaking and expensive set of events for you to endure. I am truly sorry.”
