Spinoff: what's the line to determine teen abusers?

amother

Lawngreen

Sun, Oct 01 2017, 5:15 pm

English is my 2nd language so I will try to do my best Smile

There isn't treatment for p (that I know of )

There is treatment for children who are acting out s; this includes abuse but also includes any s behavior that is not age appropriate or socially appropriate.

Many children who are exposed to p under the age of nine (my filter is blocking the study -I will post it when I am on a different computer) AND do not have an adult who can help them process the information AND have weak boundaries may act out without having the characteristics of a "abuser" and can very easily learn healthy expression of s .
This is not true for the typical predator- there is a very specific דפוס of a predator (we have had a few of those as well unfortunately)

petiteruchy

Sun, Oct 01 2017, 9:05 pm

I'm extremely bothered by this line of reasoning and discussion. Older boys or girls using their power or age to manipulate or take advantage of young children for s-xual purposes are abusers. They are also children, and need to be protected and supported in their recovery, but they are abusing someone else.

There are plenty of very sticky situations where it's not immediately clear who is in the wrong or how bad the damage is.... if child abuse by children was simple to understand and fix, it wouldn't be so devastating.

It is not that different from rape and s-xual assault as we're coming to understand it now. It used to be that unless you were dragged into the bushes by a masked stranger and nearly killed in the attack, it wasn't "really" rape. We are starting to clarify the very difficult and messy situations people find themselves in, and realizing that relations without consent is assault. There are still tricky situations, particularly where the attacker is not convicted or even charged, but we still want to believe and support the victim. How much harder is it to clarify then, when we're dealing with two minors, and the abuse seems minor or easily explained away?

Basically, I think what I'm trying to say is this... there is a HARD line here... s-xual acts coerced or attempted to be coerced by an older child on a younger child IS abuse. Is the older child a hardened criminal to be spit upon and thrown in jail? No! But do we help anyone by arguing about whether a 15 year old attempting to coerce a young child into a s-xual act is an abuser? We've only just emerged from an era when abuse was regularly swept under the rug and completely ignored! We're still there, in lots of ways.

An older child who has committed or attempted to commit abuse upon a younger child is a victim in their own way and needs help and support. But that doesn't make what they did not abuse, or their victim not a victim.

Also, let's just remember that we're talking 15 and 8 here, not 9 and 8. That was not the thread to get "concerned" over calling children abusers...

petiteruchy

Sun, Oct 01 2017, 9:20 pm

imasinger wrote:

But until then, let's just call them impulsive, hormone driven, dumb teens.

And give them a chance to grow out of it.

This line in particular is really bothering me. This is the line that lets high school boys get away with s-xually assaulting their female classmates or girlfriends.

Teens are definitely impulsive and hormone driven. This leads them to make poor choices. Sometimes their poor choices have devastating and life long consequences. Like when they "borrow" the family car and crash it into a barrier and end up paralyzed. That consequence thankfully only affects themselves and their families... but what about those same boys who crash into another family, killing everyone? How forgiving are you of their poor decision making and hormone driven behavior if it directly impacts your innocent family?

Again, does that mean anyone should be thrown in jail or written off for life? No. They are teens, they aren't adults with fully adult capabilities. But we don't help anyone, them or the people they've affected, by downplaying the seriousness of their actions.

mommy3b2c

Sun, Oct 01 2017, 10:08 pm

petiteruchy wrote:

Do you not realize that there is a difference between an act of "abuse" and an abuser?

And in the case of the other thread, he did not commit an act of abuse. He offered her a candy to pull down her underwear. Did he do something awful? Yes. Does he need help? Yes. But to label him an abuser based on that one action is ridiculous. And the way people were carrying on about the daughter needing therapy, and being scarred for life....
That scenario is highly unlikely. She sounds like a confident smart kid, who knew what to do and did it. Her mother believed her and was proud of her, and took measures to protect her. Acting like she was molested is just wrong.

imasinger

Sun, Oct 01 2017, 10:14 pm

petiteruchy wrote:

This line in particular is really bothering me. This is the line that lets high school boys get away with s-xually assaulting their female classmates or girlfriends

Don't set up a straw man. I never said that there shouldn't be consequences for poor choices. Obviously there needs to be.

But it needs to be a fair, logical consequence.

For instance, would be extremely short sighted to let the boy described in the first thread be alone with OP's DD, or other girls. At least until there is reason to think that she or they would be safe. Which might take a decade or more.

But on the other hand, the kid should not be locked up or branded as "no shidduch ever for this one.". Just educated and watched.

I'm advocating for reason.

How many teens in the world get in trouble for drunk driving? We don't say that they should never drive again. We put in consequences, but educate and allow them to regain trust.

How many teens spend money stupidly? How many of those grow into adults who shouldn't be trusted with money? Again, we impose consequences, educate, and allow a regaining of trust.

But I have seen plenty of people advocating that once a teen has done something that falls under the umbrella of abuse or molestation, yes, we should write them off for life.

And I think that is wrong.

We need more programs like the one that Lawngreen describes. And more parents who will educate their sons beforehand, so these situations happen less frequently. But if they do, to be ready to send them to programs like that if needed.

Without giving them the scarlet letter A.

amother

Red

Sun, Oct 01 2017, 11:08 pm

ITA with imasinger.

And does this mean no shidduchim ever for victims of abuse, since we all know that many of them turn around and perpetuate the cycle? Or better yet, if someone was abused, we should never trust them with kids?

Reish Lakish was a bandit, a highwayman, but he was given the chance to do teshuvah. But 15-year-olds who were never told the facts about abuse straight are irreparable. Maybe we should just give them the death sentence, or make them into the Ben Sorer Umoreh and have the parents carry it out, since they are obviously beyond all help.

BTW, IMO this is why abuse is covered up so much - because if someone screws up once, even if he regrets it sincerely and wants to go into therapy to make sure it never happens again, nobody will ever trust him again. So someone who did something once has no chance of a normal life.

LovesHashem

Mon, Oct 02 2017, 3:38 am

I agree with the other poster. Listen there really is a big difference between abuse and a abuser.

I was abused by my parents emotionally. But they aren't abusers.

Someone who lies isn't nessasarily a liar. Someone who steals isn't a robber. I'm the sense that yes they stole, they lied, they abused someone etc. But this isn't something that is a big part of them, not something the did consistensy. My parents made mistakes and were in bad places when raising me.

They abused me. Yes it's hard to forgive them. Yes what they did has ramifications and yes they hurt people. And yes it will never be okay. But no they are not abusers. They committed abuse.

You can commit a crime but that doesn't mean you are a criminal. You made mistake and you did something wrong. It will take a while to change and show people that's not who you are. But if someone commits one crime and is called a criminal that's not okay.

I am human. I make mistakes and a lie sometimes. I'm not a pathelogical liar or even a liar. I'm a human that lies and I will account for it. But it doesn't mean it's a part of me to define me as!!!!

Although I must say the fact that he knew he should threaten her, bribe her, and hide it makes me believe that either he learned this from someone or was abused himself.