Yes, it’s simply lovely for a child to grow up watching daddy whale the hell out of mommy. (or vice versa) :rolleyes:
Not all abuse is physical. You don’t think children growing up in an abusive household are not affected, even if no one lays a finger on them?
I didn’t hear the broadcast, but I’d like to think Dr. Laura did not understand the man left an abusive relationship. I’d like to think that.
One particular thing I hate about Dr. Laura: every now and then, for no obvious reason, she will “ambush” a caller, and just rip the caller apart. It’s really nasty, and I’ve heard it dozens of times (sigh… I know… Why do I listen to it if I hate it?)
Trinopus
I’m my neigbor kid’s mom.
And that bitch does NOT appreciate the pain and stretchmarks I went through for her!
The point, my dear, is that even if mommy was abusive to her husband, she may not be abusive to her child and so will not pose a danger to said child if mommy has custody after the divorce. This means that there is no real reason for hubby to reenter the abusive relationship for the sake of said child.:rolleyes:
The bottom line in any relationship, whether there are children or not, is that two people should be together because they respect one another and wish to be committed to one another.
Not because a sperm happened to meet an egg.
The best parent a child can have is a person who is self-actualized and living their values. If that means a single person or a re-married person, so be it.
The point is, that a parent who is emotionally unstable enough to abuse their own spouse, is not stable enough to raise a child. While they may not actually physically lay a hand on the child, the child is being raised by someone who thinks hitting your partner is acceptable. I agree, though, that going back into an abusive relationship for the sake of the child is not a good solution. The father needs to try to get that child away from the mother as much as possible, and teach her that abuse is not ok.
If the situation was reversed, I don’t think anyone would say it is a good idea to leave a child with a man who was abusive to his wife, even if he has not actually ever hit the child.
Well, as much as I can’t believe that I’m actually saying this:
I like Dr. Laura. Well, no. I don’t like Dr. Laura, but I like listening to her show. I can’t quite explain why, either.
It seems like most of the time, she gives pretty good advice. And then, just when your guard is down, and you’re thinking “Humm, she’s not really so bad.” a steaming pile of monkey crap comes out of her mouth.
The scary thing is that even though I’m about as liberal as you can be, lots of times I agree with her. For instance, I think it would be nice if it was possible/practical for more teen girls to carry babies to term and give them up for adoption. My cousin that was killed by a drunk driver before X-mas did this, and I think it was one of the most selfless things I’ve ever heard. However, I also recognize that this isn’t a particularly possible/practical solution for many girls/women.
On the other hand, Dr. Laura can take her hurtful, incorrect, gay-bashing crap, and shove it up her ass.
Bizarre, how regularly I tune in, actually.
I’ve noticed the same thing!
I’ll listen to her just for the entertainment value of it during a long road trip in the car. She has got to be the biggest witch in the history of radio.
I truly believe she is insane.
Is there anyone on this board who actually finds her knowledgable, respectable and interested in the well being of the people who call in?
She is a bad, bad person.
I think she truly is mentally ill. I mean literally, clinically ill. It’s amazing that som much of the “advice” she dishes out would actually land her in serious ethical trouble if she was a genuine mental health professional.
When I listened to her several years ago, she was OK. Cranky at times, I definitely disagreed with her at times, but OK.
I wasn’t all that bothered by her stance on gays in those days. She didn’t see what the big deal was. She was a “conservative” person (who would appeal to other “conservative” people), and she was preaching tolerance. Maybe she wasn’t encouraging a full-fledged embrace of all things gay, but definitely tolerance. Kind of like she was shrugging her shoulders and saying, “It’s no one else’s business what gay people do, as long as they are not abusive or hurtful.”
When she had some ultra-conservative caller say that they didn’t want their gay relative visiting because they might be a “bad influence” on the kids, Dr. Laura would ask, “What do you think this relative will do? Make out with their lover on the couch? Can’t they just sit and drink tea in front of your kid?” She did, IMO, help encourage some really uptight folks to loosen up about gay people. Maybe not get them to totally accept homosexuality, but at least to see how absurd they were being in getting so worked up about them. And maybe she helped such people to understand that it’s OK to leave gay people alone and realize that they just want to live their lives like everyone else.
She also had a fair amount of gay callers, and she often gave them decent advice. She could be really sweet at times, really giving love and encouragement to a gay caller. I heard it.
So to hear all this stuff about her now—it just blows my mind. I’ve never heard her say the homophobic stuff myself. I’ve missed all of that. So I can’t speak to what she’s actually said, or in the context that she’s said it. (And yes, context is important.)
Disclaimer: I don’t listen to Dr. Laura.
I had two reactions: First, she may be one of those people who think that physical abuse by a woman isn’t really all that bad.
Second, maybe she was “thinking about the child.” A report out today says:
Did she ignore the past abuse? Or did she at least say a reunion ought to be contingent on her getting counseling?
If I were this guy, I’d go back long enough to gain custody of my daughter. It can’t help if she’s being raised by an abuser.
Dr. Laura, the one we love to hate.
I listen to her in my car when I’m bored and channel surfing (I have a loooong commute). I usually change stations right after she says something that makes me start yelling “biiaatch!!” and getting spittle on my steering wheel and windshield.
She can be insightful at times, but mostly she seems to have the attitude that “You already know what the problem and solution are, you just don’t want to face facts. Develop a backbone.”
About Ender’s recitation of the call and Dr.L’s response: I imagine that her rationale was that their child’s well-being was paramount, and that any tiny chance that the hitting ex-wife could change would justify getting back together for the sake of the kid. Yes, she’s dreaming, and yes, I’m sure that if a female called and gave the exact same story, Dr.L wouldn’t have given the same advice.
One last thing: We’ve heard Dr.L and some of her listeners say “I am my kid’s mom” over and over. Have you ever heard Dr.L respond when a caller says that and then says her kids are in daycare while she’s at work? I’ve heard Dr.L go off on two callers who said this. Dr.L said that being your kid’s mom means staying at home with them, not putting them in someone else’s care; that you’re not a real mom if you do that. Hurtful, imbecilic, **unfeeling biiaatch!! **
Don’t you feel sorry for Dr. L’s kids? My God, imagine having that thing for a mom. :eek:
Pucky Schumer, with all due respect, I think studies like that need to take a closer look at factors that affect single-parent kids, other than the fact they have only one parent. Such as: Are single-parent families more likely to live in poverty? Because we all know that economic status has absolutely no relation to whether someone is likely to develop a substance abuse problem. :rolleyes:
Also, what are the circumstances under which the parent became single? Did the mother concieve as a result of sexual assault? Was she a prostitute? Is the father not in their life because no one knows who he is? I hardly think being born into any of those circumstances will lead to a life full of kittens and butterscotch candies. Was the family abandoned? Could the scars of abandonment lead to emotional problems later on in the child’s life?
What kind of social programs are there to mitigate the difference in household income when one parent leaves? How often are absentee parents obligated to pay child support?
Is there a social stigma attached to being a child from a single-parent household? Does the remaining parent have a strong support system in place, to assist them in the (often sudden) doubling of their responsibilities?
The issue is way more complicated than two parents = good life, one parent = bad life.
What are the odds that a spouse abuser, who has not physically abused the kids, will one day abuse the kids? Pretend that’s a general question - I don’t care about any ‘I feel…’ - I want cites.
If an abused spouse stays with (or reunites with) their spouse, can they protect the child(ren) from being abused? You’re never going to be with your spouse all the time. Does ‘being there to protect the kid’ have enough validity to justify it?
If I were concerned that the child might be abused, I’d make sure the kid had a way to contact me that my spouse couldn’t stop. And I’d live close by. But I’m not sure if living with the spouse again would do anything to protect the child.
I don’t think she ignored the past abuse. She did mention counselling twice in the response so she must have at least considered it, but it was clearly only of secondary concern to the “getting back together” part of her advice.
The courts granted custody to his wife which leads me to believe that the story might not be quite how he presented it. Nevertheless, it’s the only story we as the listener have to go on and certainly the only one Dr. Laura had to go on when giving out her advice. She didn’t press for more details like she oftentimes does and didn’t seem at all concerned that the child was living with a spouse abuser, which I found odd.
Dr Laura is living the 19th century trying to roll time to the imaginary perfection of the Victorian era. You know lots of good posture. Lots of ruffy sleeves. Lots of hat tipping. Everyone went to the same church on Sunday. The woman stayed home with her kids and her spinning wheel. Men did nothing but sing in barbershop quartets. Lets not forget everyone was a tea totaler. Life was happy and grand.
I agree with you about Dr. Laura and Dear Abbey, but Dr. Drew and Dr. Phil are actually doctors in the type of advice they give.
And after about 8 years of listening to Dr. Drew, I can’t remeber one time when he gave BAD advice. In fact, is advice is quite often to see a doctor in person, or to go to drug abuse counseling.
Sorry, I don’t have cites on whether spouse abuse is concurrent with other abuse. (I remember some group once trying to say that men who abuse pets are likely to also be wife beaters, but I’m not so sure they had the science on that down.)
But even if the abuser only abused another boyfriend/girlfriend, it’s pretty sick to be teaching a child that this is the way relationships are.
Dr. Laura is dangerous. She “appears” to be either a doctor of psychology or psychiatry, although she doesn’t actually make that claim. But she speaks with an authority that she has no right to.
The fact that her advice is often good could probably be said about most of us participate here. But many listeners and viewers would automatically think, “She’s the doctor and she should know.” Then she body slams someone with really bad advice. It doesn’t just affect the one person she is talking to. It has the potential for affecting many viewers/listeners in negative ways.
She appears to me to be very egotistical and basically hostile. Some of her closest relationships have been disasters. Why take advice from this woman who is not trained???
December, there is a big difference in living with an abuser and in living with someone who is mentally ill. Abusers may be emotionally disturbed but most people with mental illness would not lift a hand to anyone.