THE ENABLING PARENT
A while back, I jotted down some thoughts about a person I called “The Other Parent”. Since then, I’ve been collecting information and have concluded that there is a dearth of material on this subject. But I have expanded upon my initial ideas and hopefully this will lead to more research data in the future. These were my initial thoughts:
I’ve been experiencing a lot of counter-transference lately with my clients over “the other parent”; especially when the other parent is the mother. You may be wondering whom I’m referring to when I say the other parent. I’m referring to the parent who is not molesting their child in a household where a child is being molested. What about these parents anyway? Some of them really might not know, but if so, what planet are they living on? Most do know on some level but pretend not to. I’ll try not to sound too judgmental here; I’ll try and understand why this parent either has to look away and put up with the situation or else decides to in order to take the pressure off them. I realize that this other parent is missing something inside herself or himself that cleaves them to their mate. But regardless, I have an easier time empathizing with the molester whose compulsion drives them then with the pallid partner who is unable or unwilling to stand up for their child. It would be an oversimplification to say these other parents are weak and dependent. Perhaps many are. But I’m aware of some of them as being the rock in the household and/or the financial provider. And some of them pick their mates over their children even with the knowledge of what has taken place. I wish that I could come up with a diagnosis for “the other parent” so that I could find a way to understand them in my heart.
The more pressing need is to be able to meet my client emotionally in the place where they are; and usually what they want is to find some way to hold on to the other parent and justify their behavior. After all, that’s all they have left. I certainly understand that, but that is where my own counter-transference gets in the way. If I can’t find a way to understand the other parent, to find compassion for them, I can’t honestly guide my client along a path to reconciliation or co-existence. And what I really want to say is give up! I want to be your good other parent and help you move on. That isn’t usually what they want.
Sometimes the other parent makes my work clearer by their rejection of the client. But for the most part, the other parent doesn’t want to have to look at their own behavior; they want to get along with everyone and have the family continue on in what they consider a normal manner. Remember it is the victim who is usually viewed as the “identified patient”; no one else in the family really wants to do any work on themselves. I can only wait for my client to finally recognize that they have become too healthy to make an inherently dishonest situation work.
Since I wrote those thoughts I have come to recognize that the parent I was referring to has a more active participation in the family dynamic – she/he is not the other parent but the enabling parent. Not only do a large percentage of them know, they collude. By their tacit approval they provide a cover for the molester and a shield for themselves. In the process, many of them construct a scenario so that the victim becomes the ostracized family member, the troubled outsider. This becomes their rationalization. This child is crazy, is a liar, is difficult, is unstable. This child is not who I wanted him/her to be, does not behave the way I expected my child to behave. I cannot let this child tear my family apart.
Perhaps the enabling parent recognizes disowned parts of themselves in this child. Perhaps the enabling parent is playing out a familiar scenario from his/her own childhood. Regardless, the enabling parent is not another victim of the abuser; he/she is an integral part of the fabric of this family. The abuser married the type of individual who enables them to be who they are. This is the only partner they could choose. Because even though it probably wasn’t all consciously planned, it was what the abuser needed and the only outcome possible. We pick the partners we need – not necessarily the ones we want.
There are parents who truly don’t know that their children have been abused – but probably not if the child has been abused over an extended period of time. And the parents who truly don’t know, leave and take the child (children) as soon as they do find out. When dealing with survivors, I have found that it is important to help them understand the entire family dynamic – no matter how painful – in order for them to truly heal.
Roni Weisberg-Ross LMFT
2010
http://www.roniweisbergross.com
Showing posts with label sexual abuse. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sexual abuse. Show all posts
Monday, March 8, 2010
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
MOTHER LOVE Female Abusers Part I
“A Social Problem Does Not Exist For A Society Until It Is Recognized By That Society To Exist”
The following is the first of a three-part series beginning with what many regard as the most sensational taboo, “Mother-Son Incest”
Growing up I learned about something called the Oedipus Complex. This complex is defined as “a boy’s unresolved desire for sexual gratification through the parent of the opposite sex, especially the desire of a son for his mother”. When I was in college I saw a classic French film entitled “Murmur of the Heart” which took the Oedipal theme and played it out in a contemporary middle class setting. I viewed it as a clever film about the adored, sensitive son of a beautiful, tempestuous Italian mother who is ushered into manhood by her as he recovers from a heart murmur at a countryside sanitarium. The film had me believe that although mother and son both realized that they had crossed a forbidden line, neither was scarred by the experience, and that in fact the son was now able to go on and become a “real” man. At the time, I never questioned the implications of this theme.
Mothers have been idealized for thousands of years. So the notion that the most trusted figure in our lives – the Madonna - could betray and abuse us sexually is particularly hard to fathom. I would contend that that is the primary reason that this particular form of abuse has not been properly identified and addressed in our culture.
Some statistics set the record straight: A July 2000 Justice Department report found that “woman account for 4 percent of those who sexually abuse children under 18 years of age, and about 12 percent of those who molest children younger than six years of age.” And these types of studies do not even address more subtle but still damaging behaviors such as mothers sleeping with children, bathing and fondling them, dressing and undressing in front of them and making them touch them in inappropriate ways (i.e. fondling, sucking). Furthermore, it is believed that abuse by mothers is so grossly under-reported and under-identified that these statistics only reveal a fraction of the problem.
Why is abuse by mothers so much more underreported than abuse by fathers?
Because of the very nature of the relationship. Mothers are more trusted figures than fathers by professionals and even by the children themselves. Furthermore, a mother’s actions can be more confusing because of her traditional role as the primary physical caretaker and nurturer. And even if there was suspicion of abuse, there is likely not to be any physical evidence. More significantly,“in many cases, the child’s family includes only the mother. She may be the only one available to the child for love and support. What child will risk losing his/her only family?”
Society views sexual abuse as something violent or coercive and aggressive – and something that usually involves intercourse. But whether coercion is used or not, “if a child is introduced to a sexually stimulating behavior- which is inappropriate to his (or her) psychosexual and psychosocial developmental maturity – by a parent, it is incest and it is abusive”.
For male victims the situation becomes even more complicated. Boys are less likely to feel victimized and/or to report sexual abuse, especially mother-son incest, because they either see the abuse as something positive (mother love) or they believe that it is either consensual or they are to blame. While boys are more likely to internalize and not tell - in fact disclosure during childhood was the only sexual abuse variable that differentiated the genders in a study by Roesler & McKenzie (1994) – 31% vs. 61% - the long term symptomological response to childhood abuse among adult male and adult female victims was similar – in other words – abuse has profound negative long term effects for both sexes. This shatters another myth - that boys can handle it and may even welcome it as a right of passage.
The psychological consequences of mother/son incest are significant.
Because boys don’t tell, they experience a greater degree of shame, stigma and self-blame than girls. Especially in our current environment, where girls are encouraged to speak up, boys are left to hide something that cuts to the very core of their male hood. In his study on the Psychological Impact of Male Sexual Abuse, David Lisak says one of the most crucial aspects of the experience of male sexual abuse is “a fundamental loss of control: over one’s physical being, one’s sense of self, one’s sense of agency and self-efficacy, and one’s fate”. And yet, as one boy put it, “the thought of losing her was more frightening than her abuse of me.” Lisak refers to the helplessness, isolation and alienation boys experience as they grow up hiding their secret and “seeding the potential for a lifelong struggle with alienation from other people.”
In order to compensate for the feelings of victimization and helplessness that permeated their childhood, adult males abused as boys deal with their masculinity in one of two ways, they either become hyper-masculine and exhibit a lot of anger, especially in relationships with women, or they become passive caretaker types putting everyone else’s needs before their own and exhibiting little or no male ego. Either way they are fighting deeply ingrained feelings of masculine inadequacy. But possibly the most destructive long-term consequence of the abuse is the victim’s inability to trust and therefore to connect with other people. If you have been betrayed by the first and most important figure in your life, how can you ever trust anyone else?
The following is the first of a three-part series beginning with what many regard as the most sensational taboo, “Mother-Son Incest”
Growing up I learned about something called the Oedipus Complex. This complex is defined as “a boy’s unresolved desire for sexual gratification through the parent of the opposite sex, especially the desire of a son for his mother”. When I was in college I saw a classic French film entitled “Murmur of the Heart” which took the Oedipal theme and played it out in a contemporary middle class setting. I viewed it as a clever film about the adored, sensitive son of a beautiful, tempestuous Italian mother who is ushered into manhood by her as he recovers from a heart murmur at a countryside sanitarium. The film had me believe that although mother and son both realized that they had crossed a forbidden line, neither was scarred by the experience, and that in fact the son was now able to go on and become a “real” man. At the time, I never questioned the implications of this theme.
Mothers have been idealized for thousands of years. So the notion that the most trusted figure in our lives – the Madonna - could betray and abuse us sexually is particularly hard to fathom. I would contend that that is the primary reason that this particular form of abuse has not been properly identified and addressed in our culture.
Some statistics set the record straight: A July 2000 Justice Department report found that “woman account for 4 percent of those who sexually abuse children under 18 years of age, and about 12 percent of those who molest children younger than six years of age.” And these types of studies do not even address more subtle but still damaging behaviors such as mothers sleeping with children, bathing and fondling them, dressing and undressing in front of them and making them touch them in inappropriate ways (i.e. fondling, sucking). Furthermore, it is believed that abuse by mothers is so grossly under-reported and under-identified that these statistics only reveal a fraction of the problem.
Why is abuse by mothers so much more underreported than abuse by fathers?
Because of the very nature of the relationship. Mothers are more trusted figures than fathers by professionals and even by the children themselves. Furthermore, a mother’s actions can be more confusing because of her traditional role as the primary physical caretaker and nurturer. And even if there was suspicion of abuse, there is likely not to be any physical evidence. More significantly,“in many cases, the child’s family includes only the mother. She may be the only one available to the child for love and support. What child will risk losing his/her only family?”
Society views sexual abuse as something violent or coercive and aggressive – and something that usually involves intercourse. But whether coercion is used or not, “if a child is introduced to a sexually stimulating behavior- which is inappropriate to his (or her) psychosexual and psychosocial developmental maturity – by a parent, it is incest and it is abusive”.
For male victims the situation becomes even more complicated. Boys are less likely to feel victimized and/or to report sexual abuse, especially mother-son incest, because they either see the abuse as something positive (mother love) or they believe that it is either consensual or they are to blame. While boys are more likely to internalize and not tell - in fact disclosure during childhood was the only sexual abuse variable that differentiated the genders in a study by Roesler & McKenzie (1994) – 31% vs. 61% - the long term symptomological response to childhood abuse among adult male and adult female victims was similar – in other words – abuse has profound negative long term effects for both sexes. This shatters another myth - that boys can handle it and may even welcome it as a right of passage.
The psychological consequences of mother/son incest are significant.
Because boys don’t tell, they experience a greater degree of shame, stigma and self-blame than girls. Especially in our current environment, where girls are encouraged to speak up, boys are left to hide something that cuts to the very core of their male hood. In his study on the Psychological Impact of Male Sexual Abuse, David Lisak says one of the most crucial aspects of the experience of male sexual abuse is “a fundamental loss of control: over one’s physical being, one’s sense of self, one’s sense of agency and self-efficacy, and one’s fate”. And yet, as one boy put it, “the thought of losing her was more frightening than her abuse of me.” Lisak refers to the helplessness, isolation and alienation boys experience as they grow up hiding their secret and “seeding the potential for a lifelong struggle with alienation from other people.”
In order to compensate for the feelings of victimization and helplessness that permeated their childhood, adult males abused as boys deal with their masculinity in one of two ways, they either become hyper-masculine and exhibit a lot of anger, especially in relationships with women, or they become passive caretaker types putting everyone else’s needs before their own and exhibiting little or no male ego. Either way they are fighting deeply ingrained feelings of masculine inadequacy. But possibly the most destructive long-term consequence of the abuse is the victim’s inability to trust and therefore to connect with other people. If you have been betrayed by the first and most important figure in your life, how can you ever trust anyone else?
Female Sexual Abusers - Who Are They? Part III
There weren’t a lot of statistics, because no one thought it was a problem. But then in 1990, Ramsay–Klawsnick found that adult females were abusers of male adolescents 37% of the time and of female adolescents 19% of the time; and in six studies reviewed by Russell and FInkelhor, female perpetrators accounted for 25% or more of those abused. In 1996, The National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect conducted a widespread investigation on the maltreatment of children. Of the three million children investigated, more than one million were identified as victims of abuse and of the one million, 12% were sexually abused. The sexual abuse of children by women, primarily mothers, once thought to be so rare that it could be ignored, constituted 25% (approximately 36,000 children) of the sexually abused victims. Furthermore, all of these statistics are likely underestimated because victims of this type of abuse rarely disclose. Finally, there is an alarmingly high rate of sexual abuse by females in the backgrounds of rapists, sex offenders and sexually aggressive men – 59% (Petrovich and Templer, 1984), 66% (Groth, 1979) and 80% (Briere and Smiljanich, 1993).
Why haven’t we, as a society, been aware of this problem? Most probably because women have been idealized as mothers and nurturers. They haven’t been viewed as sexual aggressors. And because they are caretakers and are expected to be emotional, warm and physical with children, no one notices or suspects them. Sexual abuse by women is rarely reported because their victims usually are their own children - who are dependent on them. Furthermore, these children either do not understand what is happening to them or do not think anyone will believe them. And for male victims, there is additional embarrassment and denial – they must have wanted it – men (boys) can’t be raped!
But women can be sexual aggressors. And even though the abuse they are capable of doesn’t conjure up violent images of attack and penetration, surveys show that women are capable of a different type of violence toward their victims, sometimes physical and almost always psychological and verbal. This abuse can penetrate the psyches of their victims more deeply because they are the one person who was never supposed to betray them.
What type of woman would betray her own child or another person’s child in such a manner and why? A profile of a female sexual abuser looks something like this: She would probably be a person with low self-esteem who may have had a history of severe emotional and verbal abuse and/or been a victim of childhood sexual abuse herself. In fact, a study by Fowler et al in 1983 maintained that 80% of incest offenders had been sexually or physically abused as children. There would be feelings of alienation and isolation and possibly the loss of a spouse or other adult partner. She might have a history of drug or alcohol abuse and less often a history of indiscriminate or compulsive sexual activity. There might be arrested psychosexual development; there might be a need to have power and control in some aspect of her life. But the common perception that any woman who does this has to be mentally insane is false. Only a minority of female abusers do not pass reality-testing measures. How the abuse takes place and with who may differ, but the personality type can be constructed from the above profile.
David Finkelhor, who has written extensively on this subject, maintains that there is a Four Factor Model, or to put it another way, there are four components that contribute in different degrees to child molestation:
1. Emotional Congruence – a satisfaction of emotional needs through the abuse of a child that is due to either arrested psychosexual development, immaturity or low self-esteem.
2. Sexual Arousal – probably due to familial conditioning through their own childhood abuse or early fantasy reinforced by masturbation.
3. Blockage – Age appropriate sexual opportunities have been cut off by either a traumatic sexual experience with an adult, sexual dysfunction, limited social skills or a marital disturbance such as the loss of a spouse. The latter has been described as a “Theory of Loss” phenomenon precipitating abuse.
4. Disinhibition – due to poor impulse control either because of substance abuse, a chaotic family background or psychotic mental illness.
There are women who are pedophiles and simply pursue children for the sex, but the female abuser usually falls into one of three categories:
1. Predisposed Offender - the abuser was herself abused as a child and she continues the generational pattern by abusing her own children. It is thought that she becomes an offender in an effort to resolve her own childhood sexual trauma.
2. The Teacher/Lover - she generally becomes involved with an adolescent male with whom she relates to as a peer. She may be looking for non-threatening emotional intimacy.
3. The Male- Coerced offender – she is being led by an abusive male who she is extremely dependent upon. But she may eventually initiate sexual abuse on her own.
While the public is periodically shocked into awareness by sensational revelations of the second and third type of female abuser (i.e. Hedda Nussbaum,
Mary-Kay Latourneau), it is the first type that we have to finally give a face to – she is the one that is quietly victimizing thousands of young children who have nowhere to turn for safety. And the children ARE young. Studies have concluded that women abusers victimize younger children than male abusers – probably because of their role as caretakers. If current research is correct and more female than male children are sexually abused, then it is logical to conclude that more girls may grow up to be sexual offenders themselves and there may be a significantly larger number of female sexual abusers than we had previously imagined.
It is up to us to put aside deep-rooted myths about females, and more specifically mothers, in order to deal with the widespread problem of child abuse and more accurately expose all types of child sexual abusers.
Roni Weisberg-Ross 2010
http://www.roniweisbergross.com
Why haven’t we, as a society, been aware of this problem? Most probably because women have been idealized as mothers and nurturers. They haven’t been viewed as sexual aggressors. And because they are caretakers and are expected to be emotional, warm and physical with children, no one notices or suspects them. Sexual abuse by women is rarely reported because their victims usually are their own children - who are dependent on them. Furthermore, these children either do not understand what is happening to them or do not think anyone will believe them. And for male victims, there is additional embarrassment and denial – they must have wanted it – men (boys) can’t be raped!
But women can be sexual aggressors. And even though the abuse they are capable of doesn’t conjure up violent images of attack and penetration, surveys show that women are capable of a different type of violence toward their victims, sometimes physical and almost always psychological and verbal. This abuse can penetrate the psyches of their victims more deeply because they are the one person who was never supposed to betray them.
What type of woman would betray her own child or another person’s child in such a manner and why? A profile of a female sexual abuser looks something like this: She would probably be a person with low self-esteem who may have had a history of severe emotional and verbal abuse and/or been a victim of childhood sexual abuse herself. In fact, a study by Fowler et al in 1983 maintained that 80% of incest offenders had been sexually or physically abused as children. There would be feelings of alienation and isolation and possibly the loss of a spouse or other adult partner. She might have a history of drug or alcohol abuse and less often a history of indiscriminate or compulsive sexual activity. There might be arrested psychosexual development; there might be a need to have power and control in some aspect of her life. But the common perception that any woman who does this has to be mentally insane is false. Only a minority of female abusers do not pass reality-testing measures. How the abuse takes place and with who may differ, but the personality type can be constructed from the above profile.
David Finkelhor, who has written extensively on this subject, maintains that there is a Four Factor Model, or to put it another way, there are four components that contribute in different degrees to child molestation:
1. Emotional Congruence – a satisfaction of emotional needs through the abuse of a child that is due to either arrested psychosexual development, immaturity or low self-esteem.
2. Sexual Arousal – probably due to familial conditioning through their own childhood abuse or early fantasy reinforced by masturbation.
3. Blockage – Age appropriate sexual opportunities have been cut off by either a traumatic sexual experience with an adult, sexual dysfunction, limited social skills or a marital disturbance such as the loss of a spouse. The latter has been described as a “Theory of Loss” phenomenon precipitating abuse.
4. Disinhibition – due to poor impulse control either because of substance abuse, a chaotic family background or psychotic mental illness.
There are women who are pedophiles and simply pursue children for the sex, but the female abuser usually falls into one of three categories:
1. Predisposed Offender - the abuser was herself abused as a child and she continues the generational pattern by abusing her own children. It is thought that she becomes an offender in an effort to resolve her own childhood sexual trauma.
2. The Teacher/Lover - she generally becomes involved with an adolescent male with whom she relates to as a peer. She may be looking for non-threatening emotional intimacy.
3. The Male- Coerced offender – she is being led by an abusive male who she is extremely dependent upon. But she may eventually initiate sexual abuse on her own.
While the public is periodically shocked into awareness by sensational revelations of the second and third type of female abuser (i.e. Hedda Nussbaum,
Mary-Kay Latourneau), it is the first type that we have to finally give a face to – she is the one that is quietly victimizing thousands of young children who have nowhere to turn for safety. And the children ARE young. Studies have concluded that women abusers victimize younger children than male abusers – probably because of their role as caretakers. If current research is correct and more female than male children are sexually abused, then it is logical to conclude that more girls may grow up to be sexual offenders themselves and there may be a significantly larger number of female sexual abusers than we had previously imagined.
It is up to us to put aside deep-rooted myths about females, and more specifically mothers, in order to deal with the widespread problem of child abuse and more accurately expose all types of child sexual abusers.
Roni Weisberg-Ross 2010
http://www.roniweisbergross.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
