THE PSYCHOLOGY OF ENABLERS

Both are wrong.

This is essentially the current view of most of the Connecticut lawyers I've spoken to about what goes on in a high conflict divorce.

No matter how it may look, no matter what incidents are reported, no matter what gets said, and no matter what gets done, the bottom line is that both of the parties in a divorce are wrong.

According to this kind of reasoning (which is a lot of psychobabble as far as I am concerned), even if one party in the marriage looks like the perpetrator or the other looks like the victim, that is simply an illusion. The bottom line is that the parties in the divorce have a hidden understanding where either could change roles at any time. So don't let the victim sucker you into sympathizing, because deep down he or she could be asking for it, actively setting themselves up to be in the role, or getting some kind of perverted satisfaction out of it.

So the reasoning goes.

Along with that is the national conversation about "victimhood", the sense of disgust many commentators feel about the American obsession with victimhood. "When is it going to stop?" ask these commentators? Before we know it, everyone is going to be claiming they are a victim one way or another.

During my divorce, I went to a well known local psychologist, and when I began to talk about the abuse I'd experienced his immediate response was "Don't talk like you are a victim." I ended up feeling condemned for daring to have the nerve to complain about the fact that I was being abused. What this psychologist did, as did people like him, was to advocate for tolerating the abuse and allowing it to continue, all in the name of there must have been something you did to deserve it or desire it. And anyway, even if you didn't, there is nothing you can do about it, so you might as well put up with it.

Both are wrong.

But I wasn't the one lying. I wasn't the one stealing. I wasn't the one hurting the children. Couldn't they tell the difference? Well, the fact was there was a kind of boys will be boys attitude towards my ex taking our marital assets and hiding them. There was always a way to excuse something my ex did as not really that bad when it came down to it.

Also, I could see how it could look tit for tat. At one point I told the judge that my ex had lied to the custody evaluator and called me crazy. His response was to say, well, what did you call your ex husband. I had called him a psychopath. But, in my case, I was telling the truth because that is exactly what the psychologist determined as a result of testing whereas my ex was lying and test results determined I wasn't crazy. Still, it did seem "he said, she said" granting the way the judge put it.

The bottom line is that if your lawyer refuses to acknowledge abuse, he or she enables it. If the custody evaluator or the GAL doesn't condemn abuse, he or she enables it. If the court system pretends it isn't there, then it is enabling abuse also.

As far as we are concerned, we, the victims of high conflict divorce, both parents and chidlren, we are victims, and we shouldn't have to feel ashamed to say it. This doesn't mean we are going to stay victims. It simply means that we didn't do anything wrong. We are not guilty of any crimes, and there was nothing that we said or did to deserve the pain and suffering which we have endured.

No. Both are not wrong. The perpetrator is wrong. The abuser is wrong, enablers are wrong and they should be brought to justice.