Cold Response from BW

[Trimmer]

Just to be clear, if I thought a child was in imminent danger, there isn't a force on this earth that would stop me or scare me away from contacting the authorities.

Taking you at your own word, this means that if you really thought the child was in danger, you would have contacted the authorities long before this, yes? Which means that you're doing it as a tool of revenge. Nice. (Psycho? Add this to the list.)

 

If Child Protection Services investigated your home life then they had good reason.

You know, in a sharp, impeccable, professionally run agency, I might agree with you. However:

 

Yesterday I spoke with my friend at Family Services. Apparently there's a case worker assigned because the child complained in the school that they were "screaming a lot" and the father is pushing for custody.

This breach of confidentiality is the ultimate lack of professionalism, represents a pretty typical human failure, and therefore calls into question this agency's ability to do it's job properly. Therefore, I wouldn't have confidence that "any investigation is for a good reason."

[dreamingoftigers]

Taking you at your own word, this means that if you really thought the child was in danger, you would have contacted the authorities long before this, yes? Which means that you're doing it as a tool of revenge. Nice. (Psycho? Add this to the list.)

 

 

You know, in a sharp, impeccable, professionally run agency, I might agree with you. However:

 

 

This breach of confidentiality is the ultimate lack of professionalism, represents a pretty typical human failure, and therefore calls into question this agency's ability to do it's job properly. Therefore, I wouldn't have confidence that "any investigation is for a good reason."

 

For the record of anyone in this thread, my case started as a vindictive measure

By a terminated employee against my father. My parents periodically took care of my daughter and the complaint against my father was so serious, disgusting and downright wrong that I went and had it medically cleared to make 110% sure.

 

But due to the gravity of the allegation, my father was ordered out of his home (my sister was a minor at the time and living at home so he wasn't allowed to be there during that time.)

 

Also due to the gravity of the allegations, my husband was also screened and was restricted from even VISITING my daughter for two months.

 

Our assessor also blatantly perjured herself on the stand. However, I suspect that due to the seriousness of the allegations she wanted to have our daughter placed in custody until the risk factor had been 100% ruled out. Our daughter was even denied kinship placement with friends and family.

 

As soon as the risk assessments were cleared and finished, they sent her home much earlier than the average time span for a seizure. Less than 10% of cases.

 

Even though there were "open terms" that still required completion, which of course we did.

 

The woman in question claimed to be a nurse, witnessing systemic, sickening abuse. My father was abusive to me as a child, but nothing remotely even close or on the same plane as what was said. As for the last 20 or so years, he had been to anger management and extendible marital and personal counseling long before I ever considered sending my daughter to visit her grandparents. I had no doubt of their competence and have none to this day.

 

My mother has degrees in Psych and Applied Child Studies as well as Early Childhood Education. She once did not receive a promotion from her daycare for not standing kids in the corner back in the 80s because she believed it to be damaging to kids even back then.

 

The "nurse" said that my mother was a prescription drug junkie that purchased pills off the streets. So my mother paid out of pocket to have her hair analyzed and showed her prescription for anti-depressants that she had been on a low dose of for 10 years and a notorized letter from her MD. I actually laughed at the social worker when she suggested that my mother was a drug abuser. I told her that my mother hasn't done a drug since she was a teenager in the 60s. My mother is so anti-drug it's laughable. Having her to turn to as a term kept me drug, alcohol and smoke-free.

 

The "nurse" was also discovered not to be a nurse at all. No real credentials. So now she works at a Safeway Liquor Store. (Which is fine in and of itself, but come on!)

 

I got to see the system strip down my family first hand. My parents re-mortgaged their home that had been paid off to cover legal fees. And it can happen much more easily than one thinks.

 

My mental health record that was EIGHT years old,completely episode-free and treated since then was brought against me. I recovered from years before I even met my husband, much less before my daughter was even born. It was brought out in court and dragged, dragged, dragged through. And it was rather limited.

 

The trial date to even fight for the return of our daughter was booked for close to a year after her seizure date. That is simply not an acceptable way to run a service that is supposed to be PROTECTING children from abuse and disruption.

 

And yes, a 14-week domestic violence course is a practically mandatory term for every seized child. I went until completion with women who had been used like mops and others who had used their boyfriends/husbands like mops. Their dynamic was nothing like mine. Many we're suicidal, many were enraged. All I was was focused on my daughter's return. There was another two gitl who claimed that even though there were other factors with them or their relationship, domestic violence had nothing to do with anything going on their life or with their children, nothing to do with the allegations against them, but still they had to take the course. I believe them.

 

What you, W&P, are doing is setting the woman up for a year of Hell. Six months if she can afford the differing cost.

 

And you are behaving like so many in the "helping" professions. Using them to control, manipulate and cause damage to suit your own agenda.

 

It is people that behave like this that give helping professions a bad name (sometimes rightfully so).

 

I hope that you stop "helping" abused women and children because it would appear that your boundaries are not just poor, but damaging. You may very well not see the effect a generalized attitude like this does to people who need it the most. I doubt that you are "helping" as much as you are "volunteering."

[SidLyon]

...

 

I do. And I can tell you that if were in her shoes and I even thought for half a second you did something like that to MY child, I wouldn't stop until your entire life had been blown to smithereens. No way in hell you would get away with it unscathed.

 

I have a question about this and it can be answered by either BW or OW; anyone who's a mother really.

 

Just some background, I was a BW who contacted the son of the OW to let him know what his mother had been up to with my H while pregnant with his younger brother. This was more than 4 years ago now.

 

When I posted on LS to the effect that had done that, I got a number of responses to the effect of the above that I've bolded. In other words, OW in particular were suggesting that if the BW involved her children in some way then the BW would suffer some unspecified retribution. My question is what would this be, if it was the BW that involved the child?

 

To my mind, I was in fact attempting to "blow her life to smithereens" and ensure she didn't "get away with it unscathed" by exposing what she'd done. I did nothing illegal and there has never been any comeback on me from it. But I sometimes wonder what she could have managed had she been of a mind to go even further than she already had of "blowing my life to smithereens " for having the temerity to tell her son.

[wanting more]

I have a question about this and it can be answered by either BW or OW; anyone who's a mother really.

 

Just some background, I was a BW who contacted the son of the OW to let him know what his mother had been up to with my H while pregnant with his younger brother. This was more than 4 years ago now.

 

When I posted on LS to the effect that had done that, I got a number of responses to the effect of the above that I've bolded. In other words, OW in particular were suggesting that if the BW involved her children in some way then the BW would suffer some unspecified retribution. My question is what would this be, if it was the BW that involved the child?

 

To my mind, I was in fact attempting to "blow her life to smithereens" and ensure she didn't "get away with it unscathed" by exposing what she'd done. I did nothing illegal and there has never been any comeback on me from it. But I sometimes wonder what she could have managed had she been of a mind to go even further than she already had of "blowing my life to smithereens " for having the temerity to tell her son.

 

How old was her son?

[janedoe67]

I think there is a difference between exposing and affair and actively trying to disrupt a mother's relationship with her child by involving child services. The first is an attempt by a pregnant betrayed wife to get an OW out of her marriage. The second is.....the idea of someone cruel, narcissistic, and sociopathic.

[Trimmer]

I have a question about this and it can be answered by either BW or OW; anyone who's a mother really.

I'm going to answer in the role of a BH, and a father of kids. You don't have to be a mother to be protective of your children. You shouldn't even have to be a parent to understand the sensibility of keeping children out of affair dynamics, and to do everything you can to avoid having them become collateral damage.

 

Just some background, I was a BW who contacted the son of the OW to let him know what his mother had been up to with my H while pregnant with his younger brother. This was more than 4 years ago now.

I have the same question as wanting more: how old was the son? If his mother was pregnant with an older-brother-to-be, under most common circumstances, I would assume he was not a fully developed adult out making it on his own, but I'll try to keep an open mind until you confirm.

 

When I posted on LS to the effect that had done that, I got a number of responses to the effect of the above that I've bolded. In other words, OW in particular were suggesting that if the BW involved her children in some way then the BW would suffer some unspecified retribution. My question is what would this be, if it was the BW that involved the child?

 

OK, so let me just give my opinion, without even having to assign roles of "BS" and "OW" and whatever.

 

In an affair, children are innocent bystanders of a screwed up situation. As adults, regardless of our labels and our roles in that dynamic, and simply as human beings (and humane beings...) we must recognize that it should be our priority to try to ensure the least screwed-up path for a child as he or she moves forward through the developmental years toward adulthood.

 

Now, I can hear the common refrain: "well, the affair partners certainly weren't making that a priority when they had the affair." Essentially the "he started it first..." argument. I accept the point, but I reject it as a rationalization: it doesn't give you cover to further screw up a child by injecting yourself into his or her life.

 

Now, I can imagine a very narrow circumstance where you truly, credibly believed that you were saving the child from a specific harm, and benefitting the child in a specific way, but even in that wildly improbable scenario, it would be presumptuous - to the point of arrogance - for you to inject yourself directly into this child's life ahead of the other parent (the BS on the other side), who most likely has a more comprehensive perspective on the child's needs, and who may well already have a damage control plan reasonably well in hand, all things considered.

 

And given your comments, that doesn't sound like it was your motivation anyway, was it? Your goal was :

...I was in fact attempting to "blow her life to smithereens" and ensure she didn't "get away with it unscathed" by exposing what she'd done.

You weren't thinking about the child; you were using the contact with the child as a tool to hurt his mother. In fact, most likely hurting the child, to hurt the mother.

 

In your post-action review, did you consider the effect on the child? Let's take a look into your thought process:

I did nothing illegal and there has never been any comeback on me from it. But I sometimes wonder what she could have managed had she been of a mind to go even further than she already had of "blowing my life to smithereens " for having the temerity to tell her son.

No, your thoughts were all about justifying your actions by their legality, and the situation's effect on you, and what she might have done in response.

 

Any thoughts about the effect on the child you chose to use as a weapon?

 

I understand and acknowledge that you were betrayed. I understand and acknowledge that you felt wronged by the OW, and I understand and acknowledge your feeling of wanting to get back at her. Whether or not I align with every one of these, I empathize with you on all these points and I don't think any less of you for having these feelings and impulses.

 

But children should not be participants, and bringing them into that role to influence others in the affair dynamic is out of bounds, no matter what role you are in. Period.

Edited June 23, 2013 by Trimmer

[SidLyon]

Sorry I should have clarified. I haven't read the posts yet but I'll just answer the question about the age of the son.

 

The son of the OW was not legally a child when I told him, he was a young adult. Her first son was born when she was a teenager and her second son was born in her thirties. I didn't tell the older son until he was an adult, by which time the younger one was already as school.

 

Also I had assured the OW I wouldn't tell her older son because she was no longer contacting my H. After she contacted my H asking him to meet with her without telling me, I then contacted her older son.

 

Her BH had just died a few months earlier in a tragic accident while saving the lives of the OW and her sons (the younger of whom could be my fWH's son, as he was born about 8 months after the A started - he's now nearly 11 years old)

[SidLyon]

I'm going to answer in the role of a BH, and a father of kids. You don't have to be a mother to be protective of your children. You shouldn't even have to be a parent to understand the sensibility of keeping children out of affair dynamics, and to do everything you can to avoid having them become collateral damage.

 

 

I have the same question as wanting more: how old was the son? If his mother was pregnant with an older-brother-to-be, under most common circumstances, I would assume he was not a fully developed adult out making it on his own, but I'll try to keep an open mind until you confirm.

 

 

 

OK, so let me just give my opinion, without even having to assign roles of "BS" and "OW" and whatever.

 

In an affair, children are innocent bystanders of a screwed up situation. As adults, regardless of our labels and our roles in that dynamic, and simply as human beings (and humane beings...) we must recognize that it should be our priority to try to ensure the least screwed-up path for a child as he or she moves forward through the developmental years toward adulthood.

 

Now, I can hear the common refrain: "well, the affair partners certainly weren't making that a priority when they had the affair." Essentially the "he started it first..." argument. I accept the point, but I reject it as a rationalization: it doesn't give you cover to further screw up a child by injecting yourself into his or her life.

 

Now, I can imagine a very narrow circumstance where you truly, credibly believed that you were saving the child from a specific harm, and benefitting the child in a specific way, but even in that wildly improbable scenario, it would be presumptuous - to the point of arrogance - for you to inject yourself directly into this child's life ahead of the other parent (the BS on the other side), who most likely has a more comprehensive perspective on the child's needs, and who may well already have a damage control plan reasonably well in hand, all things considered.

 

And given your comments, that doesn't sound like it was your motivation anyway, was it? Your goal was :

 

You weren't thinking about the child; you were using the contact with the child as a tool to hurt his mother. In fact, most likely hurting the child, to hurt the mother.

 

In your post-action review, did you consider the effect on the child? Let's take a look into your thought process:

 

No, your thoughts were all about justifying your actions by their legality, and the situation's effect on you, and what she might have done in response.

 

Any thoughts about the effect on the child you chose to use as a weapon?

 

I understand and acknowledge that you were betrayed. I understand and acknowledge that you felt wronged by the OW, and I understand and acknowledge your feeling of wanting to get back at her. Whether or not I align with every one of these, I empathize with you on all these points and I don't think any less of you for having these feelings and impulses.

 

But children should not be participants, and bringing them into that role to influence others in the affair dynamic is out of bounds, no matter what role you are in. Period.

 

Hmm you are assuming the older son was legally a child I think and that he had a father. Even so I generally agree to keep children out of it.

 

The OW had a chance to avoid me telling her son, but for some reason she chose to contact my fWH anyway knowing fully that I planned to tell her older son, if she did. I had already respected my promise (not to tell unless she tried to insert herself back into my life) for some considerable time, so there was little risk that I would unilaterally change my mind.

 

When she realised my H was going to tell me of her contact, she practically begged him not to tell me. Quite possibly she understood the consequences. I would still reserve the right to interfere in this OW's family life if she ever inserts herself back into mine again.

 

My H and I have pretty well reconciled now. This all took place some years ago. My conscience is clear.

 

Anyway nobody has actually answered my original question as to what exactly an OW can "do" to a BW who for whatever reason does involve her children.

Edited June 24, 2013 by SidLyon

[wanting more]

I guess it would really depend on the situation. In my case, had the BW decided she would involve my child (early 20s) as a way of getting me out of her life, I could have outed the A to everyone, her family (I know her brother), her son, I had his email address, people he worked with (I know a few of them), his clients. One of the biggest concerns from her was "who knows". She made it quit clear she didn't want anyone to know. That's what I couldve done that would've blown her to smithereens (or whatever the phrase was)

 

But as I said that was in my case.

[SidLyon]

I guess it would really depend on the situation. In my case, had the BW decided she would involve my child (early 20s) as a way of getting me out of her life, I could have outed the A to everyone, her family (I know her brother), her son, I had his email address, people he worked with (I know a few of them), his clients. One of the biggest concerns from her was "who knows". She made it quit clear she didn't want anyone to know. That's what I couldve done that would've blown her to smithereens (or whatever the phrase was)

 

But as I said that was in my case.

 

Yes I guess exposure was the "weapon" I used. In my case the OW couldn't have effectively used this particular weapon against me because I didn't really care who knew. Exposure would have obviously been of her own role in inserting herself into a family. I suppose it could have had an adverse effect on my H too especially at work. It wouldn't have been my problem though.

 

This raises another issue of who fears exposure most? From reading LS I get the impression that it is the APs (ie the WSs and the OPs) who dislike it the most, and that many BSs don't fear it as much, although some obviously do.

Edited June 24, 2013 by SidLyon

[wanting more]

I always wondered about the exposure. I know here on LS it does seem that the majority of BSs say expose, expose, expose. Which I never understood. But as I said, the BS is my stitch, she asked xMM who knew, asked me who knew and told my BSO that's why she had not told him about the A after d-day 1 or d-day 2 is because she didn't want anyone to know.

 

I wonder what she would say if she knew that at least 10 people who have been around her over the last 10 months know about the A

[janedoe67]

If one is worried about people knowing about what one is doing, then perhaps one should not do things they would be ashamed for others to know....just saying...

[wanting more]

She was more worried about someone finding out. Not me.

[Spark1111]

She was more worried about someone finding out. Not me.

 

Well, I will say this: After DDAY, it is perfectly normal for a truly blind-sided BS to feel deep humiliation and paranoia.

 

You wonder what YOU did wrong? You agonize over it. You fear everyone knew but you. How could you have been so stupid? Will others perceive you as stupid or to blame for your WS wandering? Will you too be judged?

 

heartbreaking....

 

Not me.I exposed to the world and called the D attorney and threw him out and changed the locks and wished them well.

[wanting more]

Obviously it's each persons own decision on to expose or not. It was just eye opening to me when I first started here because hearing the BS in my stitch so adamant about no one knowing, then coming here and most people saying tell everyone.

[Snowflower]

Obviously it's each persons own decision on to expose or not. It was just eye opening to me when I first started here because hearing the BS in my stitch so adamant about no one knowing, then coming here and most people saying tell everyone.

 

I think this is because it is a highly personal decision. Some people are more private-and this goes for BS's too-and don't share much personal information with anyone besides close friends and family. Some BS's never tell another soul. Perhaps the BS in your sitch is like that.

 

Other BS's might feel more comfortable with telling more people about what has happened in their marriage. So there would be more exposure for the WS.

 

Some BS's in the shock and devastation of D-day might expose far and wide and then later regret it.

 

Yet other BS's will tell everyone who will listen as a way to get their WS to stop the affair or figure that since the marriage is ending anyway, that telling everyone doesn't matter, or for a multitude of other reasons.

 

It really just depends on the BS. I also don't think there is a wrong way or a right way to expose (or not expose). Everyone and their situation is so unique that there isn't (in my opinion) a blanket approach that is best.

[janedoe67]

Obviously it's each persons own decision on to expose or not. It was just eye opening to me when I first started here because hearing the BS in my stitch so adamant about no one knowing, then coming here and most people saying tell everyone.

 

 

I think that is because, honestly, the person who is morally entitled to decide who knows is the BS, in my opinion. The cheaters, who betrayed the BS, had ample opportunity not to be embarrassed by choosing NOT to commit adultery. If a BS wants to expose, that is their right. And if they want it private, I think they should get to make that call too. The person who knowingly invaded the marriage has already caused enough upheaval; their opinion about who knows should be the last on the list.

[PhoenixRise]

I exposed and didn't care who knew. I was devastated by the betrayal but not embarrassed by it.

 

 

But IMO it is important to note that W&P is not necessarily talking about exposing the affair. She kinda sorta told the wife (lied to the wife) but her main goal is to limit exposure to her own husband.

 

Sid posted about telling the adult son of the OW after she had already warned the OW she would do this if OW tried to contact her H again. The OW did. So Sid responded.

 

W & P is using a connection at Family Services to threaten the BS's child custody case. This is so many miles away from mere exposure it is not even on the same planet.

[wanting more]

I completely agree that involving family services just to be vindictive (which it sounds like for W&P) is different from exposing the A. That takes things to a new level of low and psycho.

[dreamingoftigers]

If one is worried about people knowing about what one is doing, then perhaps one should not do things they would be ashamed for others to know....just saying...

 

I noticed this about my husband and many waywards. They are so much more concerned about how people will re-act then how they are acting.

[krazikat]

I think this is because it is a highly personal decision. Some people are more private-and this goes for BS's too-and don't share much personal information with anyone besides close friends and family. Some BS's never tell another soul. Perhaps the BS in your sitch is like that.

 

Other BS's might feel more comfortable with telling more people about what has happened in their marriage. So there would be more exposure for the WS.

 

Some BS's in the shock and devastation of D-day might expose far and wide and then later regret it.

 

Yet other BS's will tell everyone who will listen as a way to get their WS to stop the affair or figure that since the marriage is ending anyway, that telling everyone doesn't matter, or for a multitude of other reasons.

 

It really just depends on the BS. I also don't think there is a wrong way or a right way to expose (or not expose). Everyone and their situation is so unique that there isn't (in my opinion) a blanket approach that is best.

 

Agreed! I am a BS who has only told 1 person...I wanted to figure out what I was going to do before putting him on blast...I didnt want opinions until the D was in process...but thats just me...and, I totally support any bs who wants to blast...you gotta do what you gotta do.

[krazikat]

Op better be VERY careful because I know what I would to someone who not only slept with my husband but meddled with my children. Most women who will put up with incredible amounts of crap draw the line at messing with their kids. My ex's OW assumed I was a blind coward because I didn't rear my head at the A. So she was shocked when I beat her up outside of her work once she messed with my daughter. To this day I will NEVER forgive her, she doesn't even look at me because she knows I will unhinge at the slightest glance after all she did. Some people can only be dealt with in that way.

 

Don't rattle a tiger's cage OP... Your penchant for drama is taking this to a very dangerous level and she just may do what I did (I passed out fliers at her church, work and residence too, with pictures of her smoking drugs.) if you don't stop your husband finding out may become the LEAST of your problems.

 

lmfao rotfl!

 

Seriously tho, yes! Messing with the kids in any way will take that anger up a notch, or ten notches, and you just might get a surprise visit...I dont know what I would have done if my kids got brought into it, heck even if she had been around my kids my head would have exploded I think....yikes. I already had to fight the urge after she talked crazy to me, yikes, just yikes.