Showing posts with label After. Show all posts
Showing posts with label After. Show all posts

Saturday, August 27, 2011

Abusive Relationship Healing - 5 Tips For Lifting Depression After Your Abusive Relationship


It is common knowledge that when one is beaten down, they feel beaten down. So it's no wonder that domestic abuse survivors frequently suffer from depression. We see this in individuals living in an abusive relationship, and in those having left their abuser.

What is it that makes it possible for these people to heal their depression? The following actions to avoid, and steps to take, are essential to the resolution of depression for domestic abuse survivors.

1) Stop Negative self-talk

Even though you might be accustomed to hearing how you can't, you won't, you don't, you aren't, there is no need for you to pick up where s/he left off. Doing so only sustains the battering. Only difference is it's from the inside out.

2) Un-shoulder responsibility for battering

Un-shoulder any remnants of your shouldering responsibility for the abuse. Battering is fully owned, operated and controlled by the perpetrator and no one else. Your willingness to shoulder the responsibility for the abuse is part of what keeps the abuse dynamic going. Let it go! It's not yours.

3) Avoid self-deprivation

Self-deprivation may have been the norm in your former kingdom and that's where it must remain. One may be accustom to being consumed by, and preoccupied with, taking care of the needs of the "other" (a demanding perpetrator), rather than recognizing and caring for oneself. This keeps you in the "I am abused position." Instead, it is time to know, honor and nourish yourself in every way, shape and form that is physically possible for you.

4) Cultivate Self-compassion

When the blow hurts and the pain aches, embrace it. Running from it prevents it from resolving itself. Exercise self-compassion. Be with yourself just as you would be with a small child who is wounded in a playground.

5) Find and rekindle that which you love...that comes from within

"That comes from within" is the key to this one. Now this may be the hard one because so much time has been spent on not recognizing anything is within. It is of utmost importance that you find that which you love...that comes from within, and make this your primary focus. As you focus on it, it will expand. You know what you focus on expands. That which we bring energy to brings more of it onto us.

Bonus Tip: Focus on what you have; not what you don't have. You've been inundated with the message that you aren't enough...you're amiss in this, that and the other. Over time you develop the habit of seeing yourself as the half-empty cup. Shift your perspective and see yourself as the half-full cup. With this your cup will fill with more of what is right with you.

If you do all of these things, your depression will lift.




And under that you will discover the goodness that you are, the happiness you can be and your love of life again. For more domestic violence healing insights, claim your free Survivor Success Tips and eInsights. Dr. Jeanne King, Ph.D. helps people identify, end and heal abusive relationships.

© 2008 Jeanne King, Ph.D. PreventAbusiveRelationships.com




Thursday, January 27, 2011

Dating After Abuse


If you've been in an abusive relationship, dating again can be scary. You're tired of being lonely, but you're afraid of ending up with another abuser. It is normal for women to have these fears. Here are some tips to make the dating scene easier for you:

The most important point that I can make is to wait before you date. It's best to wait at least six months to a year so you can recover from the past abuse and get grounded before you find someone new. The reason for this is when you're just out of an abusive relationship, there's much stress and mixed emotions going on, and you're in no state of mind for dealing with another relationship. Relationships take a lot of time and energy to maintain. When you leave an abusive relationship, your focus and energy should be on getting your life together, not another man.

You may feel lonely at the time, but it's not smart to fill that loneliness with another man right away. Your judgment will be clouded due to the stress you're under, and you may make another poor choice. Wait until you have your head on straight before you make any major decisions like whom to date.

Now may also be a good time to speak with a therapist about your past abuse. A therapist can help you work through the trauma you've experienced, teach you better coping skills, and help you learn how to choose a better mate in the future.

Once you've decided that you're ready to date, start going to social functions where you can meet men. Church, special interest groups, and barbecues are good places to meet and socialize with eligible bachelors. Online venues such as dating sites and social networking sites can open the doors for you to meet people that you wouldn't meet otherwise. Avoid bars, unless you want an alcoholic for your next boyfriend.

When you start dating someone, take it slow. Don't get too serious when you don't know him that well. In the beginning, you won't know what you're getting into. Take time to get to know him first, and then decide whether to continue the relationship, end it, or just be friends. Give it at least three months before you begin to get serious.

Watch out for red flags, such as financial irresponsibility, substance abuse, and controlling or erratic behavior. If you see red flags, it's time to get out. The sooner you end the relationship, the easier it will be. If you hang on, even after you know that he's not the right one, breaking up with him will be harder to do. Don't stay with someone who isn't right for you, just to have a mate. You deserve a man who is responsible, kind, and respectful.








Christine Davis is an author who owns a blog about relationship abuse. Visit her blog at http://www.celebrateyourfreedom.com


Tuesday, January 11, 2011

Juan Williams gets two million by FOX after MTL dirt ... just political correctness has gone into effect. ...

Translate Request has too much data
Parameter name: request
Translate Request has too much data
Parameter name: request
Error in deserializing body of reply message for operation 'Translate'. The maximum string content length quota (8192) has been exceeded while reading XML data. This quota may be increased by changing the MaxStringContentLength property on the XmlDictionaryReaderQuotas object used when creating the XML reader. Line 1, position 14962.
I guess that you should not preach Juan...

Funny story but when I was in MN, I hung out with a dude named DD, my dude from way back.  We were hosting a small soiree at our pad and we hang out with Juan Williams’ son.  Needless to say, that dude liked to party, which made him aces in my book.

At our party, there were always all types at the party.  We didn’t discriminate based on politics, only on your party quotient.  If you brought something to the party, then we wanted you around.  At our spots, politics were not really discussed, so your political identity  normally got checked at the door, with the coats.

Looking at the Juan Williams situation, the terrorists have clearly won.  The inability to express your beliefs is the hallmark of a totalitarian regime.  If we can’t discuss our feelings, then covert racism will rule the day.

By Matea Gold

Tribune Washington Bureau

12:35 PM PDT, October 21, 2010

Reporting from Washington

As NPR weathered a storm of criticism Thursday for its decision to fire news analyst Juan Williams for his comments about Muslims, Fox News moved aggressively to turn the controversy to its advantage by signing Williams to an expanded role at the cable news network.

Fox News Chief Executive Roger Ailes handed Williams a new three-year contract Thursday morning, in a deal that amounts to nearly $2 million, a considerable bump up from his previous salary, the Tribune Washington Bureau has learned. The Fox News contributor will now appear exclusively and more frequently on the cable news network and have a regular column on FoxNews.com.

“Juan has been a staunch defender of liberal viewpoints since his tenure began at Fox News in 1997,” Ailes said in a statement, adding a jab at NPR: “He’s an honest man whose freedom of speech is protected by Fox News on a daily basis.”

The worst part about this is that it allows FOX to come off as the reasonable party here.  For once, I have to agree with FOX here.  While they are not really fair and balanced reporting in any sense of the phrase, the ability to paint a picture of intolerance to set up another, major point is necessary in discussion.  His beliefs are ones that others share and he was talking about how to combat and recognize that subconscious discrimination.

Meanwhile, conservative leaders lambasted NPR for firing Williams and called for cutting public funding for the media organization. By midafternoon Thursday, more than 4,900 comments had been posted on NPR.org, including many from people who said the media organization was bowing to political correctness and unfairly punishing Williams for expressing his personal opinions.

“In one arrogant move the NPR exposed itself for the leftist thought police they really are,” read one typical post. “After this November elections I hope one of the first things the new Congress does is to defund this poor excuse for public radio.”

NPR serves a public good, a necessary purpose.  I want them to re-examine their hiring practices, I want them to bow less to political correctness, but I want them on the radio.  Just like NPR overreacted to this situation, the public needs to take a step back, take a deep breath and then keep it moving.

The controversy kicked off Monday night when Williams, a Fox News contributor, made an appearance on “The O’Reilly Factor.” In a conversation with host Bill O’Reilly about how fear of terrorism affects perceptions of Muslims, Williams noted that he harbored some anxieties, even as an author of books about the civil rights movement.

“I mean, look, Bill, I’m not a bigot….But when I get on a plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they’re identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous,” Williams said.

He also noted that it was not fair to cast all Muslims as extremists.

On Wednesday, NPR told Williams it was terminating his contract, saying his remarks “were inconsistent with our editorial standards and practices, and undermined his credibility as a news analyst with NPR.”

The abrupt break came after years in which Williams’ role at Fox News caused internal tension at the public radio organization. Many NPR listeners registered complaints about comments he made on the cable news channel, particularly remarks last year in which he described First Lady Michelle Obama as having “this Stokely Carmichael in a designer dress thing going” and saying she could become “an albatross.”

In response, NPR executives asked Williams to request Fox News not identify him as an NPR analyst when he appeared on “The O’Reilly Factor.”

Dana Davis Rehm, NPR’s senior vice president for communications, said in an interview that Williams’ comments violated internal ethics policies that prohibit NPR journalists from going on other media and expressing “views they would not air in their role as an NPR journalist.” The guidelines also prohibit NPR journalists from participating in programs “that encourage punditry and speculation rather than fact-based analysis.”

Isn’t it a fact that Juan felt that way?  He is analyzing his personal beliefs and how that colors some of the things that he thinks about, and he even claims that approach is wrong.  NPR is really asking him to lie about what he thinks.  If it really is National Public Radio, then the some in the Public think the same things.  Exposure can only help, since it leads to discussion that might help people to recognize the other side and have more tolerance.

Rehm said Williams had been warned several times in the past about making personal comments that violated the policy.

“This wasn’t the first time where we felt Juan crossed the line in terms of what’s permitted for NPR analysts and journalists as a whole,” she said. “We felt we really didn’t have an alternative. And it was not without regret, and it was not a decision that was made lightly by any means. We do appreciate the work he has done.”

Williams told Fox News on Thursday that he was let go over the phone and taken aback that he wasn’t given a chance to defend himself.

“It’s not a bigoted statement,” he told Fox News in an interview the cable news network ran throughout the day. “In fact, in the course of this conversation with Bill O’Reilly, I said we have an obligation as Americans to be careful to protect the constitutional rights of everyone in our country and to make sure that we don’t have any outbreak of bigotry. But that there’s a reality. You cannot ignore what happened on 9/11, and you cannot ignore the connection to Islamic radicalism, and you can’t ignore the fact of what has even recently been said in court with regard to this is the first drop of blood in a Muslim war in America.”

Fox News made the most of the incident, rerunning a package about the controversy throughout the day. Williams was scheduled to appear on “The O’Reilly Factor” Thursday night to further address the issue and will guest host the program Friday.

In the meantime, NPR was slammed by conservative leaders such as Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin, who tweeted, “NPR defends 1st Amendment Right, but will fire u if u exercise it. Juan Williams: u got taste of Left’s hypocrisy, they screwed up firing you.”

NPR, if you really are defenders of the left, why would you give them this ammunition?

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, who hosts a show on Fox News, said he now plans to boycott NPR and decline its interview requests.

“NPR has discredited itself as a forum for free speech and a protection of the First Amendment rights of all and has solidified itself as the purveyor of politically correct pabulum and protector of views that lean left,” Huckabee wrote on his blog, adding: “It is time for the taxpayers to start making cuts to federal spending, and I encourage the new Congress to start with NPR.”

NPR receives no direct federal funding for its operations, but between 1% and 3% of its $160-million budget comes from competitive grants awarded by publicly funded entities such as the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and the National Endowment for the Arts. Since 2009, NPR has received $8 million in competitive grants from the CPB for technology development and journalism initiatives. It also received a one-time grant of $78 million between 2007 and 2009 to upgrade satellite technology.

Local NPR stations receive $90 million in annual appropriations from the CPB that amount to about 10% of their revenue, on average.

Rehm said it was inappropriate for politicians to interject the issue of federal funding into an editorial decision, adding that she hoped the controversy would not affect financial support for public radio. “Stations are in fund-raising season,  so it is unfortunate that this occurred at this time,” she said.

Filed in 2012 Election, Abusive Relationships, Authors, Diabolical Haters, Hater of the Week!, Media & Entertainment, Politics, That's the SHIT that got me MAD!, TV Shows ·Tags: Bill O Reilly, Dana Davis Rehm, Juan Williams, National Public Radio, Newt Gingrich, NPR, Sarah Palin, The O’Reilly Factor

View the original article here

Sunday, January 2, 2011

Cluster b of what to expect after the dissolution-Partii

Error in deserializing body of reply message for operation 'Translate'. The maximum string content length quota (8192) has been exceeded while reading XML data. This quota may be increased by changing the MaxStringContentLength property on the XmlDictionaryReaderQuotas object used when creating the XML reader. Line 2, position 8000.
Error in deserializing body of reply message for operation 'Translate'. The maximum string content length quota (8192) has been exceeded while reading XML data. This quota may be increased by changing the MaxStringContentLength property on the XmlDictionaryReaderQuotas object used when creating the XML reader. Line 1, position 8526.
Error in deserializing body of reply message for operation 'Translate'. The maximum string content length quota (8192) has been exceeded while reading XML data. This quota may be increased by changing the MaxStringContentLength property on the XmlDictionaryReaderQuotas object used when creating the XML reader. Line 1, position 15419.


In the first post we covered the need to go “no contact” or “limited contact” based upon whether the relationship involved marriage, long-term with investments, or an inter-personal relationship free of any such encumbrances. I shall begin with Marriage and long-term with investments.

I will have to cover much of this in generalities as divorce laws and joint investment laws vary from state to state. As an example, “no fault” divorce is simply a means by which to unclog the court system, thereby leaving fault as a non-issue. In other words, if “infidelity” were the issue for divorce, “no fault” states will not litigate “infidelity” and the judge will define and render a decision of  ”irreconcilable differences” instead. States that are NOT “no fault” WILL  litigate fault( i.e., “infidelity”) for months up to years in the court’s . Many times fault can go on longer than the division of property and investments. What’s worse, if you are dealing with a personality disordered mate, you can count on it getting nasty, especially where it concerns fault. Another reality in the dissolution process, women are still favored by most  judges. This of course is due in part to “female nurturing” being seen as integral to proper child-hood development.  Now, if the woman is the emotional, verbal, or physical abuser, the concern will be for the best interest of those children. YOUR personal concern, not the judges, unless concrete evidence is presented otherwise.  This is a sensitive area of debate and must be backed with solid evidence that her dysfunction could affect the overall well-being of your children. Covertly recording in home interactions (arguments) between you and/or interaction with the children. Emails are substantial, and are excellent forms of evidence widely accepted by the courts. Any arrest records, or legal actions that occurred during the relationship are important. Also any psychological treatments performed with full documentation.

Please do not misinterpret that I’m conveying a gender bias here in any way. What I am implying is the reality that the courts make egregious mistakes over and over by allowing the personality disordered woman to be a custodial parent when sufficient evidence is there and then not properly presented.  The man has to prove her dysfunctional condition and that this particular concern deserves consideration by the courts in support of the children’s future welfare. Same for women who are dealing with their male abuser, difference is though, a woman in such position will most likely be supported by the courts more readily. Judges look at issues of child abandonment, drug use, and  exposure of sexual activity to the children by the mother. A woman can count on the man getting the children if a judge rules one or more of these issues present.  Typically though,  it is less complicated for a woman to receive the status of being the custodial parent. In summary,  number one here is, the welfare of the children. Number two, these children do not deserve to be exposed to the likes of a personality disordered parent day in and day out. One last point that I personally feel strong about is whomever becomes the custodial parent, DO NOT convey hatred, discontent, or depreciate the x-spouse when communicating with the children. These children have a right to love both their parents. The custodial parent should mentor their children through their hard times with the dysfunctional parent. You are their only true salvation to a normal adult life, so lead by example.

In this day in time, women or men can be the “bread-winners” financially, yet, the courts still favor the women generally speaking. The two common areas of financial that can affect one for a lifetime are “alimony” and “pensions.” A personality disordered mate, despite gender, will milk these for everything it is worth to them. This is their ultimate opportunity for long-term  reparation, to push the emotional knife deeper. The best suggestions I can offer here is to research, talk to friends, and acquaintances about who is the best attorney you can find in “Family Law.” Everyone’s circumstances vary within a marriage or long-term relationship, not to mention,  laws vary from state to state. So it would behoove the abused to seek good counsel to protect themselves from financial demise. You may pay more up front for a better attorney, hence, preventing a lifetime of financial ruin.

Personal items create some of the most absurd and adversarial situations during divorce proceedings. Many times it takes court orders to retrieve some of the most ridiculous of personal items. For the abused, think long and hard about what is truly important and leave “principles” out of your mind. Don’t allow your X to engage or anger you about insignificant items. When separating, take what you know is rightfully yours, and if there are questions about anything else, attempt to negotiate. If they are not amenable to such negotiation, you have two choices. One, decide if it is something you can replace later and not worry about it. Two, if it has financial or sentimental value, let the court order these items be returned to you. If the courts award these items to your X instead, walk away and be done forever more.

Lastly, we delve into the emotional and post trauma of the dysfunctional relationship. If there were children involved, the abused must resolve to the fact that you will deal with one another until one or the other literally dies. Fact of life, accept it. As I mentioned earlier, the emotionally healthy parent, whether assigned as the custodial parent or not, must maintain emotional discipline and maturity. Practicing such discipline will always be an advantage in a few ways. First and foremost, it allows one to create a new and productive life, to understand the past and not make the same mistakes again, and have a more fulfilling future relationship. As well, if your x-abuser ended up being the custodial parent, I can assure you, their antics will continue. Record every possible public conversation (confer w/attorney on phone recordings), record your children’s conversations when they visit you, no openly, covertly. Emails once again, are solid forms of documentation in court. Always remain calm and mature, allowing your X to shoot themselves in the foot. This could offer an opportunity to get the children out of this dysfunctional environment.

For those of you that had long-term relationships, former engagements, etc., most of what I have written above still applies. Expect some craziness to continue, expect them to take claim to things that aren’t truly theirs, expect them to engage you via phone, emails, text, whatever! Don’t put any act of dysfunction past them, they are capable of most anything that will hurt you. Your present advantage is, you know what to expect, and you can always be a couple of steps ahead the game. Don’t forget too, never believe a damn thing they say!!  Lastly, remain “NO CONTACT” and stay emotionally disconnected,..believe me, you are much safer this way.

I will do a  Part III specifically on the personal side of emotions post relationship and what not to do when going back into the dating world.

Tags: better choices, BPD, compulsive liars, dysfunctional friendships, dysfunctional relationships, emotional infidelity, inter-personal relationships, life choices, NPD, verbal and emotional abuse


View the original article here

Sunday, August 29, 2010

In an Abusive Relationship - The Problem With Promises After Physical, Emotional and Verbal Abuse


We've all heard it happens and if you've ever been in an abusive relationship you know those promises like the back of your hand.

They seem so sweet in the first handful of rounds living in an abusive relationship. And all that happens in the relationship immediately after feels just the same...real sweet. HONEYmoon sweet.

You know there is a "but" coming here. I know you can feel it.

...But, when one yields to the promises, here's what happens.

A) For the Abuser

Abuser conditioning - Taking the person back after an assault (whether physical, emotional or verbal abuse), essentially sends a message that the abuser can "get away" with that level of abuse. This is part of how the stage is built for permission for the next altercation to magnify, to be more severe than the one before. Well, if I can get away with that one, then...

B) For the Abused

Breeds false hope for victim/survivor. Why? Because the promise in and of itself is not what changes battering behavior. The promise fails to take into account the etiology of the assault (again, whether verbal abuse, emotional abuse or an outright physical assault). More often it only, yet dearly says: I won't do that anymore. Things will be different.

C) For the Couple Entangled in an Abusive Relationship

It rekindles the status quo, while diverting attention from the real issues. So, in addition to complicating both parties individual understanding of the altercation, it keeps the couple "elephant under the carpet"...exquisitely covered so no one can see. Not those looking from the inside out, much less those looking from the outside in.

If you find yourself face-to-face with one of these promises, be mindful of all of the implications that go hand and hand with it. The more you know earlier on, the less likely you will be a consequence (a victim) of an abusive relationship spiraling out of control.








For a deeper understanding of what keeps emotional verbal abuse going and what stops it, visit http://www.PreventAbusiveRelationships.com Dr. Jeanne King, Ph.D. is founding director of nonprofit Partners in Prevention, dedicated to helping domestic abuse survivors and their advocates.

?2008 Jeanne King, Ph.D. - Domestic Abuse Prevention and Intervention