A victim of emotional abuse says, 'I'm staying in the marriage for the kids' sake.' How do you respond?
Here are the responses of some very experienced family law attorneys and mental health professionals.
October 14, 2021 at 10:00 AM
7 minute read
In 2020, according to the National Domestic Violence Hotline, 96% of contacts stated they were experiencing emotional abuse. Emotional abuse comes in many forms: Constant criticizing, humiliation, put-downs, being dismissive, threatening, insulting, controlling, gaslighting—the list goes on. Often, there is no physical abuse, but the emotional abuse has been going on for years. When this is the case, and your client says she or he is staying in the marriage "for the kids' sake," what do you tell them? Here are the responses of some very experienced family law attorneys and mental health professionals.
Bari Weinberger, Esq., New Jersey. Domestic abuse relies on entrenched patterns of manipulation and control. In too many cases, emotional abuse has been going on for years or even decades and the survivor simply has no way of understanding how to escape these patterns. It's not their fault. When I work with a client in this situation, it's my duty to educate the client about real and practical ways to create a secure new life. Legal measures such as temporary alimony and temporary child support can provide economic stability for starting over. Because financial abuse often goes hand in hand with emotional abuse, a survivor understanding their rights to support can be a game changer. If the client makes the decision to divorce, we can also use their asset settlement as a tool for rebuilding. At the same time, we'll look at custody options that prioritize children's emotional health. Depending on the situation, pursuing a restraining order may also be applicable. Once survivors can say, "I can do this, I can get out and get my children out, and the abuse can end," making the decision to take that first step suddenly becomes much easier.
Chip Mues, Esq., Ohio. Having been a practicing divorce lawyer for over 40 years, I have this conversation all too often with my clients. It can be a sticky subject! The client wants to be praised for being a warrior and continuing to put up with the abuse to simply make life better for the kids. Of course, I want to be supportive of their notion of self-sacrifice. But I will share with them that the literature I have read (as well as feedback from former clients) indicates that such a "protect the kids" approach doesn't usually benefit the kids' in the long term. Nor does it usually last too long. Abusive relationships tend to escalate, not diminish with time. Having an "abuse free" loving nurturing environment is going to hugely benefit everyone much more than continuing living in a home with chronic emotional abuse. Don't worry, kids are generally very resilient and they will adjust to moving out.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrade Secret Litigation: How Will AI Innovations Likely Be Litigated?
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250