DOCSLIB.ORG

Confronting the Epidemic of Mental Illness in the Legal Profession

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Confronting the Epidemic of Mental Illness in the Legal Profession The Other Silent Killer: Confronting the Epidemic of Mental Illness in the Legal Profession Presented by James P. Carlon, Esq. 1 The Roadmap Identify the problem and its general causes Identify and analyze the particular issues of the legal profession as a causative factor Identify solutions CAUSES OF MENTAL ILLNESS • Hereditary Factors • Physical Trauma • Environmental Factors* Source WebMD https://www.webmd.com/mental-health/mental- health-causes-mental-illness#1 3 Symptoms Changing normal routine (i.e. eating and sleeping) Self-isolation* Mood swings Feeling trapped and hopeless about a situation Cognitive dysfunction Source: Mayo Clinic www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/suicide-symptoms Common Risk Factors • 1. Family History • 2. Stressful life situations* • 3. Alcohol or drug use • 4. Social Isolation and Lack of Relationships • 5. Traumatic Experiences Source: Mayo Clinic 5 Why are lawyers at such high risk for Mental Illness? Profession Specific Issues Vulnerable Population Preponderance of Common Risk Factors Lack of Emphasis on Mental Health and Wellness Toxic Policies Toxic People Lawyer Vulnerabilities Perfectionism Highly competitive Pessimism Validation seeking Client-focused life 8 Preponderance of Risk Factors Higher than average stress (1990 Johns Hopkins University Study examining more than 100 occupations showed lawyers 3.6 x more likely to be depressed than other occupations studied). 21% of licensed, employed lawyers qualify as a problem drinker(2016 Study-Hazelton Betty Ford Foundation and the American Bar Association) 9 Fear. Obligation. Guilt 10 Lack of Attention and Emphasis on Mental Health Problem of stigma exacerbated by business concerns Lack of readily accessible, or on-site counseling to employees and staff Seen as an outside problem Choose language Toxic Policies Toxic: “ Causing or capable of causing death or illness if taken into the body” Source: www.Meriam-Webster.com 12 The Prime Directive for Young Lawyers “Don’t focus on business development. Focus on doing excellent work for the partners that you’re working for. The firm is your client”. 13 The Bad Candy Bar “We don’t have a system in place to compensate associates for business generation but, don’t worry, it will be factored into your compensation”. 14 COVID-19 Issues De Facto Mandatory Attendance Policy Layoffs & Compensation Adjustments Disproportionate Impact 15 Other Toxic Policies • Arbitrary and capricious promotion policy (i.e. picking winners and losers) • Lack of regular and consistent enforcement of firm policies and standards • Non-interventionist policies for rule breakers • Broken leadership model Identifying Toxic People Judgmental Charming Inconsistent Jaded Confident Lack empathy Competent Entitled Charismatic Unstable Condescending Connected Tactics of Toxic People Apply different standards to different people Nitpicking and moving the goal posts Delegate with no instruction; then criticize Bait and Switch (emotional dysregulation) Praise then devalue Aggressive jabs disguised as jokes Blame everyone else Gaslighting Shaming Control Triangulation Criticize you for being too sensitive Source: Shahida Arabi: Power: Surviving and Thriving After Narcissistic Abuse 18 The Lifecycle of Toxic Abuse Discard Idealization Devaluation 19 Effect of Toxic Policies and Toxic People Direct impact on the physical, mental and emotional health of lawyers and staff (Green Kryptonite and Red Kryptonite) Cause excessive turnover substantially increasing recruitment spend Makes recruitment difficult Diminish character and reputation of a practice group department; business unit and firm Impact on continuity affecting client relations and your bottom line Potential legal exposure for emotional abuse in the workplace 21 Why are toxic policies and toxic people so prevalent in our Profession? Because they work (until they don’t) Business concerns Relationships with people in charge Lack of a negative incentive The “adynamic duo” Excuse Makers 23 Followers 24 A WORD ABOUT SUICIDE 25 National Suicide Rate (U.S.) From 1999-2017, the U.S. suicide rate increased from 10.5 to 14 suicides per 100,000 people. Suicide is the 4th leading cause of death for people ages 35-54 Suicide is the 10th leading cause of death overall Source: National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS Brief No. 330, November 2018) Common Risk Factors Previous suicide attempts Stressful life events Substance abuse Underlying psychiatric condition (i.e. anxiety and depression) Family history Chronic medical disease Source: Mayo Clinic www.mayoclinic.org/diseases- conditions/suicide-causes Change is Happening ADOPTED AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION ABA WORKING GROUP TO ADVANCE WELL-BEING IN THE LEGAL PROFESSION COMMISSION ON LAWYER ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS STANDING COMMITTEE ON PROFESSIONALISM NATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF BAR COUNSEL REPORT TO THE HOUSE OF DELEGATES RESOLUTION RESOLVED, That the American Bar Association supports the goal of reducing mental health and substance use disorders and improving the well-being of lawyers, judges and law students; and FURTHER RESOLVED, That the American Bar Association urges all federal, state, local, territorial, and tribal courts, bar associations, lawyer regulatory entities, institutions of legal education, lawyer assistance programs, professional liability carriers, law firms, and other entities employing lawyers to consider the recommendations set out in the report, The Path to Lawyer Well-Being: Practical Recommendations for Positive Change, by the National Task Force on Lawyer Well-Being. Law firms are taking action Some U.S. law firms are tackling mental-health issues head-on. They’re offering on-site psychologists, training staff to spot problems and incorporating mental-health support alongside other wellness initiatives. “We’re trying to eliminate some of the stigma around these issues,” said Tracee Whitley, the U.S. chief of operations at global law firm Norton Rose Fulbright. The firm has trained 20 U.S. employees to be mental-health first-aid responders, who can spot warning signs of addiction or mental-health concerns and offer assistance.” Source: Staci Zaretsky, “Some Law Firms Try to Eliminate Stigma from Attorney Struggling with Mental Health Issues” (https://abovethelaw.com/2017/05/some-law-firms-try-to-eliminate-stigma- from-attorneys-struggling-with-mental-health-issues/) May 22, 2017 On site resources The Therapist Down the Hall Cole Finegan was quoted in Law Week Colorado's article "The Therapist Down the Hall," which looks at the Hogan Lovells on-site counseling program. Read More: The Therapist Down the Hall Change is not universally applauded or adopted • Joseph Andrew, the global chairman of Dentons, said that while he applauded Hogan Lovells for having an on-site psychologist, the fear of offering such a service is that “our competitors will say we have crazy lawyers.” • Source: Staci Zaretsky, Some Law Firms Try to ‘Eliminate Stigma’ from Attorneys Struggling with Mental Health Issues, ABOVETHELAW.COM, May 22, 2017. The Healthy Workplace Bill −+ • 30 States and 2 Territories have introduced some form of The Healthy Workplace Bill. • Creates a negative incentive. • Helps make the business case for change. New York State Bill No. A03250 THE LEGISLATURE HEREBY DECLARES THAT LEGAL PROTECTION FROM ABUSIVE WORK ENVIRONMENTS SHOULD NOT BE LIMITED TO BEHAVIOR GROUNDED IN A PROTECTED CLASS STATUS AS REQUIRED BY EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION STATUTES. N.Y.S. Bill No. A03250, cont’d. EXISTING WORKERS' COMPENSATION PROVISIONS AND COMMON LAW TORT LAW ARE INADEQUATE TO DISCOURAGE SUCH MISTREATMENT OR TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE REDRESS TO EMPLOYEES WHO HAVE BEEN HARMED BY ABUSIVE WORK ENVIRONMENTS. N.Y.S. Bill No. A03250, cont’d. THE PURPOSE OF THIS ARTICLE SHALL BE TO PROVIDE LEGAL REDRESS FOR EMPLOYEES WHO HAVE BEEN HARMED PSYCHOLOGICALLY, PHYSICALLY OR ECONOMICALLY BY DELIBERATE EXPOSURE TO ABUSIVE WORK ENVIRONMENTS; AND TO PROVIDE LEGAL INCENTIVES FOR EMPLOYERS TO PREVENT AND RESPOND TO ABUSIVE MISTREATMENT OF EMPLOYEES AT WORK. N.Y.S. Bill No. A03250, cont’d • “ABUSIVE CONDUCT" MEANS ACTS, OMISSIONS, OR BOTH, THAT A REASONABLE PERSON WOULD FIND ABUSIVE, BASED ON THE SEVERITY, NATURE, AND FREQUENCY OF THE CONDUCT, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO: REPEATED VERBAL ABUSE SUCH AS THE USE OF DEROGATORY REMARKS, INSULTS, AND EPITHETS; VERBAL, NON-VERBAL, OR PHYSICAL CONDUCT OF A THREATENING, INTIMIDATING, OR HUMILIATING NATURE; OR THE SABOTAGE OR UNDERMINING OF AN EMPLOYEE'S WORK PERFORMANCE. • IT SHALL BE CONSIDERED AN AGGRAVATING FACTOR IF THE CONDUCT EXPLOITED AN EMPLOYEE'S KNOWN PSYCHOLOGICAL OR PHYSICAL ILLNESS OR DISABILITY. N.Y.S. Bill No. A03250, cont’d A SINGLE ACT NORMALLY SHALL NOT CONSTITUTE ABUSIVE CONDUCT, BUT AN ESPECIALLY SEVERE AND EGREGIOUS ACT MAY MEET THIS STANDARD. "ABUSIVE WORK ENVIRONMENT" MEANS AN EMPLOYMENT CONDITION WHEN AN EMPLOYER OR ONE OR MORE OF ITS EMPLOYEES, ACTING WITH INTENT TO CAUSE PAIN OR DISTRESS TO AN EMPLOYEE, SUBJECTS THAT EMPLOYEE TO ABUSIVE CONDUCT THAT CAUSES PHYSICAL HARM, PSYCHOLOGICAL HARM OR BOTH. 39 What Can Firms Do? Institutionalize mental health awareness; end the stigma Identify and eliminate toxic policies Identity and eliminate toxic people (or neuter them) Adopt a strict, zero tolerance anti-bullying policy and reporting system Provide onsite, confidential resources to employees What can individuals do if they suspect someone is in trouble? Learn to spot the signs and symptoms of anxiety and depression in others. Walk up
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Gaslighting, Misogyny, and Psychological Oppression Cynthia A
    The Monist, 2019, 102, 221–235 doi: 10.1093/monist/onz007 Article Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/monist/article-abstract/102/2/221/5374582 by University of Utah user on 11 March 2019 Gaslighting, Misogyny, and Psychological Oppression Cynthia A. Stark* ABSTRACT This paper develops a notion of manipulative gaslighting, which is designed to capture something not captured by epistemic gaslighting, namely the intent to undermine women by denying their testimony about harms done to them by men. Manipulative gaslighting, I propose, consists in getting someone to doubt her testimony by challeng- ing its credibility using two tactics: “sidestepping” (dodging evidence that supports her testimony) and “displacing” (attributing to her cognitive or characterological defects). I explain how manipulative gaslighting is distinct from (mere) reasonable disagree- ment, with which it is sometimes confused. I also argue for three further claims: that manipulative gaslighting is a method of enacting misogyny, that it is often a collective phenomenon, and, as collective, qualifies as a mode of psychological oppression. The term “gaslighting” has recently entered the philosophical lexicon. The literature on gaslighting has two strands. In one, gaslighting is characterized as a form of testi- monial injustice. As such, it is a distinctively epistemic injustice that wrongs persons primarily as knowers.1 Gaslighting occurs when someone denies, on the basis of another’s social identity, her testimony about a harm or wrong done to her.2 In the other strand, gaslighting is described as a form of wrongful manipulation and, indeed, a form of emotional abuse. This use follows the use of “gaslighting” in therapeutic practice.3 On this account, the aim of gaslighting is to get another to see her own plausible perceptions, beliefs, or memories as groundless.4 In what follows, I develop a notion of manipulative gaslighting, which I believe is necessary to capture a social phenomenon not accounted for by epistemic gaslight- ing.
    [Show full text]
  • V. 2.1 Gaslighting Citizens Eric Beerbohm and Ryan Davis1
    v. 2.1 Gaslighting Citizens Eric Beerbohm and Ryan Davis1 [L]eaders...have argued that if their followers or subjects are not strong enough to stick to the resolution themselves, they—the leaders—ought to help them avoid contact with the misleading evidence. For this reason, they have urged or compelled people not to read certain books, writings, and the like. But many people need no compulsion. They avoid reading things, and so on. — Saul Kripke, “On Two Paradoxes of Knowledge” Politics invariably involves disagreement—some of it, unreasonable. If deep enough and fundamental enough, disagreement might be taken as a sign not only that one of the opposing disputants must be incorrect, but that someone may be somehow failing to respond to the available evidence in a minimally rational way. So begins a much sharper allegation: that one’s opponent is not just mistaken, but crazy. In a partisan world, the rhetorical force of this accusation is easily weaponized. If one’s opponents lack basic epistemic capacities, one does them no wrong by ignoring them, and encouraging others to ignore them as well. “Gaslighting”—or attempting to cause people to doubt their own attitudes or capacities—has quickly gained popularity as an explicitly political charge.2 Antagonists on the right and left both mutually accuse each other of gaslighting. They define the term similarly, so the disagreement looks substantive.3 But the opposing outlooks may share little besides the concept. This essay aims to understand gaslighting as a political phenomenon. It proceeds in six parts. First, we will sketch the concept of gaslighting as it has been developed in the philosophical literature.
    [Show full text]
  • The Sociology of Gaslighting
    ASRXXX10.1177/0003122419874843American Sociological ReviewSweet 874843research-article2019 American Sociological Review 2019, Vol. 84(5) 851 –875 The Sociology of Gaslighting © American Sociological Association 2019 https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122419874843DOI: 10.1177/0003122419874843 journals.sagepub.com/home/asr Paige L. Sweeta Abstract Gaslighting—a type of psychological abuse aimed at making victims seem or feel “crazy,” creating a “surreal” interpersonal environment—has captured public attention. Despite the popularity of the term, sociologists have ignored gaslighting, leaving it to be theorized by psychologists. However, this article argues that gaslighting is primarily a sociological rather than a psychological phenomenon. Gaslighting should be understood as rooted in social inequalities, including gender, and executed in power-laden intimate relationships. The theory developed here argues that gaslighting is consequential when perpetrators mobilize gender- based stereotypes and structural and institutional inequalities against victims to manipulate their realities. Using domestic violence as a strategic case study to identify the mechanisms via which gaslighting operates, I reveal how abusers mobilize gendered stereotypes; structural vulnerabilities related to race, nationality, and sexuality; and institutional inequalities against victims to erode their realities. These tactics are gendered in that they rely on the association of femininity with irrationality. Gaslighting offers an opportunity for sociologists to theorize under-recognized,
    [Show full text]
  • Diversion Tactics
    Diversion Tactics U N D E R S T A N D I N G M A L A D A P T I V E B E H A V I O R S I N R E L A T I O N S H I P S Toxic people often engage in maladaptive behaviors in relationships that ultimately exploit, demean and hurt their intimate partners, family members and friends. They use a plethora of diversionary tactics that distort the reality of their victims and deflect responsibility. Abusive people may employ these tactics to an excessive extent in an effort to escape accountability for their actions. Here are 20 diversionary tactics toxic people use to silence and degrade you. 1 Diversion Tactics G A S L I G H T I N G Gaslighting is a manipulative tactic that can be described in different variations three words: “That didn’t happen,” “You imagined it,” and “Are you crazy?” Gaslighting is perhaps one of the most insidious manipulative tactics out there because it works to distort and erode your sense of reality; it eats away at your ability to trust yourself and inevitably disables you from feeling justified in calling out abuse and mistreatment. When someone gaslights you, you may be prone to gaslighting yourself as a way to reconcile the cognitive dissonance that might arise. Two conflicting beliefs battle it out: is this person right or can I trust what I experienced? A manipulative person will convince you that the former is an inevitable truth while the latter is a sign of dysfunction on your end.
    [Show full text]
  • The Sound of Silence ​By Maury Brown
    The Sound of Silence by Maury Brown ​ Number of players: Minimum: 2, Maximum: 12 ​ 2 players: storyteller and silencer are opposite each other. 3 players: storyteller is the point of a triangle and silencers are at 10 and 2 o’clock facing each other. 4-6 players (optimal): storyteller at center, silencers circle around them; storyteller turns to face each as they speak. 7+ players: two storytellers, in groups of 2-6 configured as above. Background: This is a game about communication and trying to be heard. Players will play the roles of people trying to tell their stories,​ and of people responding in various ways that oppress or silence the storyteller, sometimes in well-meaning ways. It’s an exploration of privilege, agonistic rhetoric, and the Enlightenment separation of emotion from reason. It codifies emotional abuse into a set of mechanics that are used strategically against the storyteller. Many of you will play the roles of authority figures and abusers who use manipulative and domineering tactics to control conversations and silence dissent. They do so for the purpose of maintaining the status quo, a position they vigorously defend as best for society (if not themselves). The result is to keep those who are oppressed or marginalized in their place. This may feel very uncomfortable and difficult. We will debrief following the game to discuss how it felt to be both silenced and the silencer. Setup: the game is played in rounds, where the role of the storyteller(s) switches until each player has been both a storyteller and​ a silencer.
    [Show full text]
  • Gaslighting at Work Examples
    Gaslighting At Work Examples Kalle usually emasculating hostilely or prescribing mayhap when unpopulated Tyler interdigitate pungently and nosily. Is Gideon always shattered and undistilled when king some laxative very transversally and prissily? Which Pyotr roughen so terribly that Theobald stencilling her Natalia? Have worked with examples. What are experiencing gaslighting at gaslighting work examples could pack up the next day, are master of power and writing and do you down the gaslighting dynamic, warping their fight? What is at work and examples is my intention for example, who try to unpack these quotes. Gaslighters work in patterns whether people realize it use not. Gaslighting How few Recognize cast and comply to service When it Happens. I've heard examples of true sabotage in the workplace like files being deleted from computers and managers changing performance. What Is Gaslighting and How Does anger Manifest In Parenting. Gaslighting Wikipedia. Signs You're Being Gaslighted At Work & How To twenty It. Gaslighting at the Workplace Examples of Gaslighting in the Workplace include Gossiping Some folks leverage gossip around a way and gain ammunition. How any Deal With Gaslighting at Work Andie & Al. Gaslighting in the Workplace Part report What Is Gaslighting and. Other Words from gaslight More Example Sentences Learn talk about gaslight. There are you out these fields must first steps that works to working together they will need to shame, and how adorable he talks all but. She works with examples. Gaslighting Examples Effects and splendid to Confront police Abuse. Can Gaslighting be unintentional? Gaslighting At Work 13 Examples & What award Do feed It.
    [Show full text]
  • Institutional Betrayal and Gaslighting Why Whistle-Blowers Are So Traumatized
    DOI: 10.1097/JPN.0000000000000306 Continuing Education r r J Perinat Neonat Nurs Volume 32 Number 1, 59–65 Copyright C 2018 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved. Institutional Betrayal and Gaslighting Why Whistle-Blowers Are So Traumatized Kathy Ahern, PhD, RN ABSTRACT marginalization. As a result of these reprisals, whistle- Despite whistle-blower protection legislation and blowers often experience severe emotional trauma that healthcare codes of conduct, retaliation against nurses seems out of proportion to “normal” reactions to work- who report misconduct is common, as are outcomes place bullying. The purpose of this article is to ap- of sadness, anxiety, and a pervasive loss of sense ply the research literature to explain the psychological of worth in the whistle-blower. Literature in the field processes involved in whistle-blower reprisals, which of institutional betrayal and intimate partner violence result in severe emotional trauma to whistle-blowers. describes processes of abuse strikingly similar to those “Whistle-blower gaslighting” is the term that most ac- experienced by whistle-blowers. The literature supports the curately describes the processes mirroring the psycho- argument that although whistle-blowers suffer reprisals, logical abuse that commonly occurs in intimate partner they are traumatized by the emotional manipulation many violence. employers routinely use to discredit and punish employees who report misconduct. “Whistle-blower gaslighting” creates a situation where the whistle-blower doubts BACKGROUND her perceptions, competence, and mental state. These On a YouTube clip,1 a game is described in which a outcomes are accomplished when the institution enables woman is given a map of house to memorize.
    [Show full text]
  • Developing the Covert Traumatic Experience Scale (Cotes)
    DEVELOPING THE COVERT TRAUMATIC EXPERIENCE SCALE (COTES): A RETROSPECTIVE EARLY PSYCHOSOCIAL TRAUMA ASSESSMENT TOOL by Tiffany E. Vastardis A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of The College of Education in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Florida Atlantic University Boca Raton, FL December 2019 Copyright 2019 by Tiffany E. Vastardis ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The journey to the completion of this project was certainly not one that was treaded alone. Many individuals have contributed to this process, and the fostering of the personal growth, development, and fortitude necessary to accomplish this feat. I would like to take this opportunity to recognize those of who have served pivotal roles in this pursuit. First, I would like to acknowledge my family, Mom and T.J. Whether it is the case that we are as similar as three completely different people could possibly be, or that we are as different as three extremely similar people could possibly be; the reality remains that, no matter what, we have always stood together to bear the brunt of each storm that we have been forced to face. Things have not always been easy; however, I shall forever be proud of both of you, and grateful for how far that we have all come. In addition, I would also like to thank a more recent addition to our clutch, Michael, as your sustained encouragement and enthusiasm have served as guiding lights at times during which I began to question my aptitude and endurance. On the note of family, I would like to take a moment to recognize those who have proven that “the blood of the covenant” can, indeed, be “thicker than the water of the womb”, namely, The Barrs, The Perrys, and all of my loved ones in the Bahamas.
    [Show full text]
  • Cultural Gaslighting
    Forthcoming in Hypatia. Please cite final version Cultural Gaslighting Elena Ruíz Michigan State University <1> This essay frames systemic patterns of mental abuse against women of color and Indigenous women on Turtle Island (North America) in terms of larger design-of-distribution strategies in settler colonial societies, as these societies use various forms of social power to distribute, reproduce, and automate social inequalities (including public health precarities and mortality disadvantages) that skew socioeconomic gain continuously toward white settler populations and their descendants. It departs from traditional studies in gender-based violence research that frame mental abuses such as gaslighting—commonly understood as mental manipulation through lying or deceit—stochastically, as chance-driven, interpersonal phenomena. Building on structural analyses of knowledge in political epistemology (Dotson 2012a; Berenstain 2016), political theory (Davis and Ernst 2017), and Indigenous social theory (Tuck and Yang 2012), I develop the notion of cultural gaslighting to refer to the social and historical infrastructural support mechanisms that disproportionately produce abusive mental ambients in settler colonial cultures in order to further the ends of cultural genocide and dispossession. I conclude by proposing a social epidemiological account of gaslighting that a) highlights the public health harms of abusive ambients for minority populations, b) illuminates the hidden rules of social structure in settler colonial societies, and c)
    [Show full text]
  • Testimonies of Coordinated Stalking by Multiple Persons from California Residents and Former California Residents
    Testimonies of Coordinated Stalking by Multiple Persons from California Residents and Former California Residents Testimonies of 90 persons include: • Results of reporting the crimes to law enforcement • Results from visits to mental health professionals • Net results on victim’s lives as a result of the crimes !1 Date: 7/17/19 Your Full Name: Ilona Gazarova City: San Francisco Zip Code: 94103 Please write a brief summary of your experience with coordinated stalking only: I'm systematically subjected to organized stalking, surveillance and harassment by people in my neighborhood and countless individuals whenever I leave my home. I am followed on the streets, to stores, parks, restaurants, public restrooms, doctor appointments, and every other place I go to. I was under surveillance and bullied at three different places of employment. I am also stalked by perpetrators in vehicles. Tracking appears to be accomplished with the help of devices the perpetrators carry in backpacks, by watching, and use of cell phones which they always have in hand and often point in my direction. When going places I looked up online or mentioned in a phone conversation, there will be people standing around that place when I arrive, all looking directly at me, with cellphones in hand. If I'm walking into a building, two to three of those waiting, will walk in with me. These perpetrators often make eye contact to let me know I'm being watched. I have constant interference with normal flow of daily life, making almost every task difficult or impossible. Perpetrators can access all of my online communication, bank and credit card statements, my online medical record, pharmacy prescriptions, cell phone texts, and listen to all conversations.
    [Show full text]
  • Emotional Abuse
    IDENTIFYING EMOTIONAL ABUSE Shelba Waldron Director of Education and Training USA Gymnastics “Slowly over time, my thoughts became silent and my dreams were only shared with myself. After a while, I started to believe that there were no choices and it just became easier to stay compliant. Heaven forbid I told anyone.” What the Brain Says The Traumatized Brain Victims of children who were severely bullied were found to have significant shrinkage in the corpus collosum. This makes it difficult for victims to process and respond. Stress hormone cortisol is higher in bullied boys, meaning that their stress reaction system is in overdrive, while the girls cortisol is below normal hampering their stress responses. Defining Emotional Abuse Repetitive, non-contact/possibly contact based experience meant to induce fear by exposing the victim to ongoing attacks, meant to belittle or humiliate, and must include an imbalance of power. Power, Control, and Fear Sustained Abuse of Power Criteria for Abuse ■ Imbalance of Power “You’re worthless.” ■ Repetition ■ Intent to induce psychological harm “You’re a waste of my time." ■ Unsolicited/unwelcome ■ Acts meant to intimidate “You don’t get it dear, because you just aren’t ■ Underlying threat of harm to body, social, financial or career status that smart.” ■ Intent to create fear “You’re too sensitive “My words were to coach.” SEXUAL taken out of context.” N E F IO MO orc ds AT TI ed ee ID Humiliation O T N N ra ic IM Mind games A in s T Unecessary screaming L in a Ignoring g B IN Threatens career o s
    [Show full text]
  • Forms of Abusive Behavior
    Forms of Abusive Behavior Physical Pulling hair, punching, slapping, kicking, biting or choking Harming children Forbidding eating or sleeping Abandoning the victim in unfamiliar places Using weapons to threaten to hurt Driving recklessly or dangerously with the victim in the car Preventing calling the police or seeking medical attention Forcing use of drugs or alcohol Psychological Constant name calling, insulting or criticizing Gaslighting – manipulating the victim to question his/her own sanity Isolating the victim from friends and family Acting jealous or possessive Monitoring all phone calls, actions and whereabouts Refusing to trust the victim Threatening to hurt the victim, his/her children, family or pets Cheating or accusing the victim of cheating Blaming the victim for the abuse Attempting to control the victim’s appearance Humiliation Sabotaging the victim’s relationship with his/her children Sexual Forcing sex by manipulation Involving other people in sexual activities Engaging in violent sex – using weapons or dangerous objects Forcing the victim to watch pornography Using insulting, unwanted sexual names Purposefully trying to pass on a sexually transmitted disease Reproductive Refusing to use a condom or other type of birth control Monitoring menstrual cycles Forbidding, removing or sabotaging birth control methods Forcing or preventing pregnancy or abortions Economic Controlling how all resources are spent Ruining credit score Preventing access to bank accounts Stealing money Forbidding
    [Show full text]