Suffer the Children

November 13, 2015 1:33 PM

Suffer the Children: A long and heart-rending essay in The Monthly magazine about the Australian Family Law system's ugly response to allegations of child abuse in custody disputes.

Reading the early comments below the linked article suggests the problem is an international one. Referenced within, and previously on Metafilter: Luke Batty. A discussion of the type of domestic violence education in schools currently being planned.

posted by Coaticass (26 comments total)

Linked in the comments and worth a read: Frances Jones: The Family Law System.

Also on Domestic Violence in Australia- previously.
posted by Coaticass at 1:53 PM on November 13, 2015 [1 favorite]

Revolting.
posted by bq at 2:21 PM on November 13, 2015 [1 favorite]

I'm really glad this is being talked about. I am so hopeful something can be done about it.
posted by xarnop at 2:41 PM on November 13, 2015 [1 favorite]

I have a slight acquaintance with someone who was accused of sexually abusing his child. He denied it, but eventually pled guilty because he cared about that child and didn't want her subjected to cross-examination. Note, I don't know this guy very well and never met the kid, so I won't say I know what the truth is. But if it's true, it seems like a very loving thing to do, to take the pain onto yourself to save your kid.

Y'know the biblical story about Solomon settling a custody fight by suggesting the child be cut in half?

Well, if you were interpreting a parent's actions in light of how they might be influencing their children to lie to the court, and being all suspicious? A parent who is willing to put their child through that terrible cross-examination, over custody, when they're not even being threatened with prosecution for the abuse and there's no implication that the other parent is abusive? That parent looks an awful lot like the party who wants the baby cut in half.
posted by elizilla at 2:42 PM on November 13, 2015

The perfect victim myth goes on once more to fuck another generation.
posted by Talez at 2:49 PM on November 13, 2015 [3 favorites]

elizilla, I don't even know where to start with a response to your story except to say I would strongly reconsider your opinion on the guilt of your friend. Hopefully someone more eloquent and less full of rage can provide a more substantial response.

Seriously, the non-abusing parent is abusive for reporting abuse? Because cross-examination is worse than a child continuing to be subjected to abuse? Seriously?!
posted by Anonymous at 2:54 PM on November 13, 2015

I can't think of any more important lesson to impart to your kids than "don't be a goddamn martyr."
posted by prize bull octorok at 2:57 PM on November 13, 2015 [1 favorite]

(There was a very weird case in my extended family where there was a false accusation of sexual abuse in a very acrimonious custody battle. We know it was false because first the case fell apart on investigation (the child was just old enough to be verbal, so while the child's account contradicted the accuser's, the child's account was necessarily very vague owing to just barely talking) and then the accusing parent admitted that they had made it up to try to gain full custody. The accusing parent had some significant personal issues and failings that were the cause of the divorce. I say this only because while this type of thing is extremely rare, it does happen, and my extended family was very fortunate that the accusations fell apart.)
posted by Frowner at 3:30 PM on November 13, 2015 [4 favorites]

In his recommendations to the judge, the single expert advised that Lucy should continue spending regular weekends and half the school holidays with her father, and that Tina should get counselling to help her support the father–daughter relationship. The final recommendation doubled as a warning: “Should the mother not be able to support a relationship between the child and the father or if further spurious allegations of sexual abuse arise, then I would recommend that the mother have a close psychological assessment and that the child be placed in residence with the father.”

Tina was mortified. “This report writer shook our hands, looked my daughter in the eyes, and said, ‘We will help you.’” Her lawyer said that, in the face of such a definitive report, persisting with the allegations could mean losing custody of Lucy altogether. “I considered running away with her, but I had another young child at the time,” says Tina. On her lawyer’s advice, Tina signed consent orders granting Peter unsupervised overnight access.

Lucy was scared into silence for years. “The abuse obviously got worse. It went from being daddy’s little secret, to just full on … just awful abuse,” she says, tripping over her words. “It became very violent, and if I wouldn’t comply, it was brought up that I wasn’t allowed to speak about it, so maybe I should just shut up and let it happen, and no one would believe me anyway.

That's got to be one of the most horrifying things I've ever read that wasn't about wartime or national breakdown. It makes horror movies look like weak sauce. The personnel who enabled this - it's difficult to think of anything bad enough for them. This vile misogyny, this typical male rage, entitlement and violence, this disgusting solidarity among patriarchs! May the judged be their judges when they rot down in hell, indeed.
posted by Frowner at 3:42 PM on November 13, 2015 [14 favorites]

schroedinger, I'm sorry, I wasn't very clear. I'm angry at the abusers here too. What I was trying to say, is that if the court is going to be suspicious of either parent in a case like this, maybe they ought to be more suspicious of the parent who is accused of abuse and responds in this fashion, knowing their kids are going to suffer even more because of it. If these guys really wanted what's best for their kids, they'd back off instead of doubling down. The doubling down doesn't make them look innocent.

Like the guy in my story did. He said "I don't want my kid to have to testify" and he pled guilty, even though that sent him to prison. If you believe what he said, that's a very loving choice he made, and if you don't believe him, well, then at least he's in prison.

The guys in this article aren't facing prison, and supervised visits are still visits - if they're so innocent why are they dragging their kids through the courts, making them testify over and over, demanding that kids who don't want to be with them, get dragged back to their house over and over? These guys are not making themselves look good.
posted by elizilla at 5:01 PM on November 13, 2015 [1 favorite]

The guys in this article aren't facing prison, and supervised visits are still visits - if they're so innocent why are they dragging their kids through the courts, making them testify over and over, demanding that kids who don't want to be with them, get dragged back to their house over and over? These guys are not making themselves look good.

Well, for one thing (among many, many things here) they may not want custody to go to a parent who would lie about their child being molested.
posted by Drinky Die at 5:08 PM on November 13, 2015 [6 favorites]

It is extremely rare for a woman or a child to falsely allege sexual abuse of children.
Being in denial is far more common.
The bread-winner, the bringer home of the bacon gets what he wants because God forbid he have an affair. God forbid he leave or be the least bit inconvenienced. God forbid he leave.
A child won't give him an STD. A child before puberty can't get pregnant. A child is too weak to resist. A child may even not be able to describe what has happened.
The mothers who are not in denial, who do save their children are rare and are heroes.
These judges are scum.
posted by Katjusa Roquette at 7:06 PM on November 13, 2015 [7 favorites]

Katjusa Roquette: "It is extremely rare for a woman or a child to falsely allege sexual abuse of children. "

While I assume this is correct, it's common enough that both another person in this thread and both know of cases involving extended family or family friends (the one I know about was quite similar to the Frowner talks about above). I wonder if there are statistics?
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 8:45 PM on November 13, 2015 [1 favorite]

I think the 'if they were innocent then they'd just plead guilty to save the children' is not a particularly worthwhile derail to take.

I only got about half way through before I couldn't stand reading any more.

The old assumption that women are by default caregivers is sexist and unfair (to everyone), but to 'correct' that by leaping into this awful pit of MRA false accusation rubbish... it's sickening.
posted by twirlypen at 8:47 PM on November 13, 2015 [3 favorites]

My family went through this a decade ago. I was one of the kids. Having to watch your mother ponder the dilemma of sending a crying child for a weekend visit with an abuser or lose them is a terrible thing.

Happily the court felt it didn't matter if girl children had A Male Role Model or not so I never had to enjoy those visits. Yes, their logic is impeccable. Ratbags.
posted by chiquitita at 9:45 PM on November 13, 2015 [4 favorites]

Joakim, you probably know many divorced families, but the one with the false accusation of abuse sticks out. It's not that common. And if you're falsely accused, then there is a huge range of child's best interest options available beyond pushing for full custody with unsupervised access to the child.

The reliance on a single expert witness and no post-decision supervision is terrifying. That's a huge amount of power on a single person's opinion with no way to appeal. And from the account, in a city, there are very few people willing to take that job which means it would take just one expert witness who is crappy and biased to screw over hundreds of families because other better expert witnesses are unwilling to work in such a bad system.
posted by dorothyisunderwood at 10:03 PM on November 13, 2015 [1 favorite]

Not in Australia, but here in New York I know of at least two families currently going through this. In both cases the abusive fathers sought custody both to punish the mothers and to gain access to social services and housing programs that would have been unavailable to them without custody of the children.

(And though it's not really apropros, I have to tell this story because it's indicative of the underlying sexism. Both fathers stopped sending/taking the children to school, because getting them ready in the mornings was too much work. But one day one father took his kids to school because he was being observed, and he was promptly presented with a small trophy by the school. They were making an effort to encourage fathers to bring their children to school, but the mother took her children to school for years and no one gave her an award for her trouble. The abusive father takes his kids to school for one day and gets an award.)
posted by Soliloquy at 10:38 PM on November 13, 2015 [14 favorites]

The statistics I have seen are that anywhere between 3% and 10 % of accusations of sexual abuse of children by a male parent are false.
It seems like better investigation might be useful.
posted by Katjusa Roquette at 10:44 PM on November 13, 2015 [3 favorites]

There are statistics in the linked article, but I suppose it's too much to expect anyone commenting here beating the "moms make false allegations" drum to have read the article.

From the article: Forensic psychiatrist Carolyn Quadrio, a medico-legal expert on domestic violence and child abuse, says this popular belief is a myth: studies commonly show false abuse allegations comprise only 10% of the total. Furthermore, fathers are just as likely to make them.

From the article, a lot of the Australian single witnesses and judges seem to be making decisions based on the assumption that "parental alienation" is the worst crime a parent can perpetrate and that it's perpetrated by hysterical women. This, despite the fact that parental alienation was the brain child of Richard Gardner, who, as late as the 1990s was saying women should just be more amenable to their abusive male partner's sexual advances, so the male partner doesn't have to resort to raping their daughter for sexual release. Oh, and that pedophilia “has been considered the norm by the vast majority of individuals in the history of the world”.

There's a boy in the article who repeatedly runs from his abusive father who has custody, and is repeatedly returned to the father by the police, who have no power to protect him. This man's "two former wives had also separately accused him of sexually abusing their young children, both under five" but the Australian family court and the single witness decided Alex's mother was the actual problem.
posted by Squeak Attack at 7:45 AM on November 14, 2015 [8 favorites]

While I assume this is correct, it's common enough that both another person in this thread and both know of cases involving extended family or family friends (the one I know about was quite similar to the Frowner talks about above). I wonder if there are statistics?

Did you read the article? Because there are statistics in the article. There's actually quite a few studies out there. Most find 10% or less. But it's easier to dismiss allegations as the product of malicious harridans than believe Best Buddy Bro Bobby actually molested his kids, I guess.
posted by Anonymous at 1:20 PM on November 14, 2015

I had started reading the article, but not finished yet, because it's quite long, and I was more commenting on the discussion here. Sorry about that.

I guess this is a matter of definitions, but 10% fits my definition of "common", and also seems like a huge problem to me (although of course that means 90% of allegations are real, which is a much bigger problem).
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 1:05 AM on November 15, 2015

I guess this is a matter of definitions, but 10% fits my definition of "common"

Which is fine, since false positives can indeed be a problem, and should be addressed. A test that incorrectly says you have colon cancer 5% of the time can cause a great deal of stress and anxiety.

But I would like to suggest (broadly, and not specifically at you, Joakim Ziegler) that it's less of a problem than awarding sole custody to a 5-year-old girl's abuser because her mother is trying to protect her and no one could be bothered figuring out if these extremely serious accusations that are true 90% of the time are true this time.

Ignorance of the law is no excuse, so why the hell is ignorance of the research in this particular domain an excuse for doing such a completely shitful job?

"Well, gee, I just didn't know that false accusations are actually pretty rare, relatively speaking."
posted by But tomorrow is another day... at 2:02 AM on November 15, 2015 [3 favorites]

It is extremely rare for a woman or a child to falsely allege sexual abuse of children.

Seriously. Can we please stop giving it time of day here? It's rare enough to be noteworthy. "False accusations omg" is a classic MRA/professional misogynist talking point. Just, no.
posted by emptythought at 1:41 PM on November 15, 2015 [2 favorites]

Seriously. Can we please stop giving it time of day here? It's rare enough to be noteworthy. "False accusations omg" is a classic MRA/professional misogynist talking point. Just, no.

There is just one thing I do want to add, based on having the proven-false accusation thing in my extended family, where the accusing parent did in fact admit that they made it up to try to gain full custody: I think that there's a very, very tricky needle to thread, because while claims of "false accusations" are generally bullshit, when they do happen, they are so incredibly destructive to the accused person. I am never sure what to do with this, because I know that whenever I say "and this happened in my extended family, and the accuser said in court that they made it up, and there was other evidence that it was made up", a lot of people just aren't going to believe me. And I know it's much worse for the parent in question, who now has full custody.

On the one hand, I support deep skepticism about claims of "false accusations" and am usually myself deeply skeptical. On the other, it's just a real head trip when it's something in your actual family. I mean, when this first started, I assumed that the accused parent was guilty, absolutely.

And I feel like I don't know how to reconcile these two things - the need to believe survivors and to believe the parents who are protecting their children, and the fact that in some small percentage of cases, there is a parent who is using the worst lie they can think of to try to gain advantage. How to reconcile the fact that most people who are all "false accusations" are human garbage MRAs with the fact that there's this small number of people who really are completely innocent and who absolutely need to be able to assert that?
posted by Frowner at 6:26 AM on November 16, 2015 [1 favorite]

The way i reconciled it, despite having multiple cases of false accusations between my long time friend group and family is that i just... don't talk about it in general conversations when i don't know the makeup of the audience and scope of the discussion. I feel that it adds more negative than positive.

The "see, IT IS OUT THERE!!1!" outweighs the "Oh my god, i'm not the only one" to me. It feels like a needle that just doesn't get threaded 9 times out of 10 on the internet. It isn't about not being believed, it's about it being taken out of context by someone who wants to interpret it the wrong way.

Not that i'm saying mefi is full of MRAs or anything, just that i've decided that publicly putting that stuff out there or injecting it in to a general discussion about a specific case and its outcome is a net negative contribution to society. It just seems to be demonstrably true that there's a lot of people who nominally aren't MRA types, but are willing to believe that this is a bigger and much more common thing than it is and are sort of primed to buy in to that. Even otherwise reasonable people.

A lot of friends and acquaintances have disappointed me on this one, and it isn't limited to an age or gender. I've talked to people about it when i think the timing and conversation is right, but overall it just seems like not putting out there that this is a thing and trying to just let the meme die is the best course of action. Every time it's mentioned, there seems to be a lot of people who take it and go "omg, this is all over the place and it could happen anywhere! on any given sunday!". I'm hesitant to even go "oh yea, that happened to that person we both know too!" if someone brings up their own instance of it for fear of just reinforcing that trope.

MRAs might believe it happens more than real accusations or cases, but it seems like a lot of normal everyday Reasonable People think it's not necessarily that, but that it's like as common as car accidents. Ugh.
posted by emptythought at 9:27 AM on November 16, 2015

I understand the tendency to figure out the “false accusation rate” and use it to guess at what’s really happening, but I think it’s a waste of time to argue about it. Child abuse is often a messy, grey situation that can be incredibly difficult to evaluate from the outside, and people will seek out and cling to any bit of data they can use to make it less grey. The problem is that it stays grey underneath even if we whitewash it: we’ll never know the real rate until we come up with some universal, infallible (and good luck confirming that) truth serum. Even if we did know, would it really help? If we figure out that 90% are false and so we decide to treat all cases as false, 10% of the children involved are put in danger. If we figure out that 90% are real and act on that guideline instead, 10% of the parents involved are innocent but still lose access to their children. You might argue that one situation is worse than the other, but neither is a good outcome.

Making the wrong decision can be devastating; children may be ordered into the care of an abusive parent, or prohibited from seeing a safe and loving one.

This quote from the article sums up the problem really well. It’s often hard or even impossible to know whether a parent is abusive, particularly in non-physical forms. The situations described in the article are awful and I so empathize with the parents who feel like they need to disobey court orders to keep children away from abuse. It’s tricky to change those laws without risking going too far in the opposite direction, and cutting off parents who are non-abusive -- in some cases, even putting children into the sole hands of an abusive parent. That said, if the situations described in the article are typical rather than rare examples of poor judgement, we’re currently way too far on the side of “giving the accused the benefit of the doubt” and enough children are being harmed by it that a swing in the opposite direction would help more people than it would hurt.
posted by randomnity at 12:37 PM on November 16, 2015 [1 favorite]