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
© 2025 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 All![Law Journal Column on Marital Residence Sales in Pending Divorces Puts 'Misplaced' Reliance on Two Cases Law Journal Column on Marital Residence Sales in Pending Divorces Puts 'Misplaced' Reliance on Two Cases](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/53/eb/cfc83eb0427cbf949fd645ca1306/joel-brandes-hp105-767x633.jpg)
Law Journal Column on Marital Residence Sales in Pending Divorces Puts 'Misplaced' Reliance on Two Cases
8 minute read![Supporting Our Supreme Court Justices in the Guardianship Part Supporting Our Supreme Court Justices in the Guardianship Part](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/30/a1/b391557746f7a6422ddfa59135ab/gail-prudenti-767x633.jpg)
![A Time for Action: Attorneys Must Answer MLK's Call to Defend Bar Associations and Stand for DEI Initiatives in 2025 A Time for Action: Attorneys Must Answer MLK's Call to Defend Bar Associations and Stand for DEI Initiatives in 2025](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://images.law.com/newyorklawjournal/contrib/content/uploads/sites/404/2023/03/LBJ-MLK-1966-A2133-10-767x633.jpg)
A Time for Action: Attorneys Must Answer MLK's Call to Defend Bar Associations and Stand for DEI Initiatives in 2025
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1NBA Players Association Finds Its New GC in Warriors Front Office
- 2Prenuptial Agreement Spousal Support Waivers: Proceed With Caution
- 3DC Circuit Keeps Docs in Judge Newman's Misconduct Proceedings Sealed
- 4Litigators of the Week: US Soccer and MLS Fend Off Claims They Conspired to Scuttle Rival League’s Prospect
- 5Litigator of the Week Runners-Up and Shout-Outs
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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