BPD is grounds for termination of parental rights in 36 states

September 10, 2010

While doing some research on child abuse law in my specific state I came across

some suprising (to me lol) information: Parental mental

illness/deficiency--including BPD-- actually *is* grounds for termination of

parental rights in most states.

In some states it is not,like New Mexico and Michigan.But in Arizona it

is,so if you were born just on the other side of the state line,hey kid,you're

outta luck.I really think there needs to be a national standard for what would

constitute terminating parental rights since the laws vary (IMHO unreasonably)

from state to state.

For example,in Nebraska:

" Subsection (5) of this section authorizing termination of parental

rights for mental illness or mental deficiency means only those mental illnesses

or mental deficiencies which render the parents unable to discharge their

parental responsibilities. In re Interest of B. et al., 258 Neb. 545,

604 N.W.2d 405 (2000).

Under subsection (5) of this section, when a natural parent suffers from a

mental deficiency and cannot be rehabilitated within a reasonable period of

time, the best interests of the child require that a final disposition be made

without delay. A " mental deficiency " , as used in subsection (5) of this section,

includes an impairment in capacity such that a parent is unable to profit from

instruction and acquire parenting skills. Under subsection (5) of this section,

the State must show that termination of parental rights is in the best interests

of the children. In re Interest of Natasha H. & Sierra H., 258 Neb. 131, 602

N.W.2d 439 (1999).

When a natural parent suffers from a mental deficiency and cannot be

rehabilitated within a reasonable period of time, the best interests of the

children require that a final disposition be made without delay. In re Interest

of D.A.B. and J.B., 240 Neb. 653, 483 N.W.2d 550 (1992).

A borderline personality disorder is a mental illness or deficiency for purposes

of statute. In re Interest of B.M., 239 Neb. 292, 475 N.W.2d 909 (1991 "

http://law.justia.com/nebraska/codes/s43index/s4302092000.html

Or this case from Alaska, " Termination of the parental rights of a mother

with Borderline Personality Disorder and Chronic Depression who was absent at

trial and was found to have deliberately delayed trial and not to have remedied

the causes and conditions that resulted in substantial risk of harm to her

daughter " ...Needs to be read to be believed--the " mother " also sounds like a

narcissist (hint: she claimed to be on vacation in Mexico at the time of the

trial as the " reason " for her lack of attendance):

http://www.jaapl.org/cgi/content/full/36/3/418

I was personally heartened to learn that children in the United States

are being rescued from the predations of their personality disordered

" parents " .Perhaps some progress is being made after all.In one case in Alabama

which I didn't save and now annoyingly can't find,the judge ruled that the

mother's occasional displays of affection towards her children and her habit of

giving them cheap gifts didn't make up for her severe parenting deficits and

ruled to have her children removed from her " care " permanently.Alabama is

another state that recognizes mental illness as grounds for termination.

Perhaps some of you here would disagree,since totally and permanently

terminating parental rights is so final and radical.I wish so fervently myself

that I had been removed from my " home " as a child; that my case could have come

up in the courtroom of a judge who got why my nada would never be able to parent

me.But in my case,I would have been better off: I had an infanticidal Witch

nada.That's material for debate,though: How bad does it have to be for a

nada/fada to permanently lose their rights to their child? I'm interested in

your thoughts on the subject if anyone wants to chime in.But I'm not wanting to

start a contentious debate!!!!

At any rate,here is another link to a website that has the grounds for

termination of parental rights by state and which ones include parental mental

illness--scroll down to the bottom of the page then click on the state you're

interested in:

http://deltabravo.net/custody/termination.php

--

September 10, 2010

,

That's interesting, especially Nebraska law, since that's where my four

littlest siblings are. The one I called CPS for. The sad part that makes it

harder to enforce this law are people who put on a good show for the public.

It's all about appearances w/ my fada, so it would be pretty hard to prove

that he is incomepetent because of mental illness

Still, it's good to know. Thanks for sharing your find!

On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 4:55 AM, christine.depizan <

christine.depizan@...> wrote:

>

> While doing some research on child abuse law in my specific state I came

> across some suprising (to me lol) information: Parental mental

> illness/deficiency--including BPD-- actually *is* grounds for termination of

> parental rights in most states.

>

> In some states it is not,like New Mexico and Michigan.But in Arizona it

> is,so if you were born just on the other side of the state line,hey

> kid,you're outta luck.I really think there needs to be a national standard

> for what would constitute terminating parental rights since the laws vary

> (IMHO unreasonably) from state to state.

>

> For example,in Nebraska:

>

> " Subsection (5) of this section authorizing termination of parental rights

> for mental illness or mental deficiency means only those mental illnesses or

> mental deficiencies which render the parents unable to discharge their

> parental responsibilities. In re Interest of B. et al., 258 Neb.

> 545, 604 N.W.2d 405 (2000).

>

> Under subsection (5) of this section, when a natural parent suffers from a

> mental deficiency and cannot be rehabilitated within a reasonable period of

> time, the best interests of the child require that a final disposition be

> made without delay. A " mental deficiency " , as used in subsection (5) of this

> section, includes an impairment in capacity such that a parent is unable to

> profit from instruction and acquire parenting skills. Under subsection (5)

> of this section, the State must show that termination of parental rights is

> in the best interests of the children. In re Interest of Natasha H. & Sierra

> H., 258 Neb. 131, 602 N.W.2d 439 (1999).

>

> When a natural parent suffers from a mental deficiency and cannot be

> rehabilitated within a reasonable period of time, the best interests of the

> children require that a final disposition be made without delay. In re

> Interest of D.A.B. and J.B., 240 Neb. 653, 483 N.W.2d 550 (1992).

>

> A borderline personality disorder is a mental illness or deficiency for

> purposes of statute. In re Interest of B.M., 239 Neb. 292, 475 N.W.2d 909

> (1991 "

>

> http://law.justia.com/nebraska/codes/s43index/s4302092000.html

>

> Or this case from Alaska, " Termination of the parental rights of a mother

> with Borderline Personality Disorder and Chronic Depression who was absent

> at trial and was found to have deliberately delayed trial and not to have

> remedied the causes and conditions that resulted in substantial risk of harm

> to her daughter " ...Needs to be read to be believed--the " mother " also sounds

> like a narcissist (hint: she claimed to be on vacation in Mexico at the time

> of the trial as the " reason " for her lack of attendance):

>

> http://www.jaapl.org/cgi/content/full/36/3/418

>

> I was personally heartened to learn that children in the United States are

> being rescued from the predations of their personality disordered

> " parents " .Perhaps some progress is being made after all.In one case in

> Alabama which I didn't save and now annoyingly can't find,the judge ruled

> that the mother's occasional displays of affection towards her children and

> her habit of giving them cheap gifts didn't make up for her severe parenting

> deficits and ruled to have her children removed from her " care "

> permanently.Alabama is another state that recognizes mental illness as

> grounds for termination.

>

> Perhaps some of you here would disagree,since totally and permanently

> terminating parental rights is so final and radical.I wish so fervently

> myself that I had been removed from my " home " as a child; that my case could

> have come up in the courtroom of a judge who got why my nada would never be

> able to parent me.But in my case,I would have been better off: I had an

> infanticidal Witch nada.That's material for debate,though: How bad does it

> have to be for a nada/fada to permanently lose their rights to their child?

> I'm interested in your thoughts on the subject if anyone wants to chime

> in.But I'm not wanting to start a contentious debate!!!!

>

> At any rate,here is another link to a website that has the grounds for

> termination of parental rights by state and which ones include parental

> mental illness--scroll down to the bottom of the page then click on the

> state you're interested in:

>

> http://deltabravo.net/custody/termination.php

>

> --

>

September 10, 2010

Holly,you did a brave and good thing for your younger siblings by reporting your

fada to CPS.No matter what happens in the immediate,they will know someday that

you did that for them and that you cared.I truly believe it makes a healing

difference even after the fact to know that somebody saw the reality of what was

happening to you and tried to help you.I had a ballet teacher who tried to help

me and was thwarted but just remembering that she CARED is such a shot in the

arm to me now.

In your case,it would be down to the people at CPS to whom you reported

the abuse to bring the matter forward to the attention of the investigating

authorities.I do think that if your fada was evaluated by a psychologist who had

been told he was a suspected BPD that he wouldn't be able to fool them,even

though I know how tricky these types can be and how easily they can fake their

way through an initial investigation by a caseworker.

Still,your report was based on legal grounds in your state and you

absolutely did the right thing.

Take care and bless you for having the courage to report your fada.

>

> ,

> That's interesting, especially Nebraska law, since that's where my four

> littlest siblings are. The one I called CPS for. The sad part that makes it

> harder to enforce this law are people who put on a good show for the public.

> It's all about appearances w/ my fada, so it would be pretty hard to prove

> that he is incomepetent because of mental illness

>

> Still, it's good to know. Thanks for sharing your find!

September 10, 2010

,

Thanks for the encouragement I still feel sad for my siblings, but

hopefully CPS will do something that helps. Even if they only *tried* to

help, like your ballet teacher, I'm glad to know that such an effort makes

such a difference!

I'm grateful for this group, even though I'm mostly a lurker. Just knowing

that other people are going through or have gone through the same recovery I

am, is a HUGE help whenever I think that I might be the crazy, in the wrong,

person. Seeing the other stories reminds me that it's not the case!

Holly

On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 5:32 AM, christine.depizan <

christine.depizan@...> wrote:

>

> Holly,you did a brave and good thing for your younger siblings by reporting

> your fada to CPS.No matter what happens in the immediate,they will know

> someday that you did that for them and that you cared.I truly believe it

> makes a healing difference even after the fact to know that somebody saw the

> reality of what was happening to you and tried to help you.I had a ballet

> teacher who tried to help me and was thwarted but just remembering that she

> CARED is such a shot in the arm to me now.

>

> In your case,it would be down to the people at CPS to whom you reported the

> abuse to bring the matter forward to the attention of the investigating

> authorities.I do think that if your fada was evaluated by a psychologist who

> had been told he was a suspected BPD that he wouldn't be able to fool

> them,even though I know how tricky these types can be and how easily they

> can fake their way through an initial investigation by a caseworker.

>

> Still,your report was based on legal grounds in your state and you

> absolutely did the right thing.

>

> Take care and bless you for having the courage to report your fada.

>

> >

> > ,

> > That's interesting, especially Nebraska law, since that's where my four

> > littlest siblings are. The one I called CPS for. The sad part that makes

> it

> > harder to enforce this law are people who put on a good show for the

> public.

> > It's all about appearances w/ my fada, so it would be pretty hard to

> prove

> > that he is incomepetent because of mental illness

> >

> > Still, it's good to know. Thanks for sharing your find!

>

September 10, 2010

Holly,I know what you mean about it being a recovery process,but just let me

say: You are NOT crazy and you are NOT wrong.You are a *righteous* big sister

One of these days the rest of society will catch up with what we know;

until then we have the support of this message board to give us the validation

we so sorely need.

I'm so sorry you're having to feel this sadness for your siblings.I can

only imagine how hard it must be for you.

But you are in the *right* here and that will be your legacy to them.

>

> ,

>

> Thanks for the encouragement I still feel sad for my siblings, but

> hopefully CPS will do something that helps. Even if they only *tried* to

> help, like your ballet teacher, I'm glad to know that such an effort makes

> such a difference!

>

> I'm grateful for this group, even though I'm mostly a lurker. Just knowing

> that other people are going through or have gone through the same recovery I

> am, is a HUGE help whenever I think that I might be the crazy, in the wrong,

> person. Seeing the other stories reminds me that it's not the case!

>

> Holly

September 11, 2010

Hi,Joe...I think the X's on the chart indicate that the form of abuse marked by

an X is grounds for termination of parental rights in that state and the blank

spaces aren't.For example in the state of NJ (where my abuse occurred),sexual

abuse on its own isn't grounds for termination--something I find deeply

dismaying because I'm a sexual abuse survivor and I thought for sure as a kid

that if anyone believed my disclosures (which were incredibly hard due to shame

and self blame for me to make) that I would be " rescued " from that home and here

it turns out that wouldn't have been " enough " for my parents' rights to be

terminated.Argh!!!! If I had been placed into foster care at all it would have

been with a views towards returning me to them,even after THAT.

Yes,in all the cases I read where the parent's mental illness was cited

as grounds for termination this followed a court ordered psychological or

psychiatritc evaluation that resulted in a professional diagnosis of BPD.The

court has to determine that the parent is mentally ill at the *time* of the

termination proceeding and that they would be unable to profit from further

parenting skills instruction.In all of the cases the parent/s were court ordered

to take parenting classes and to receive counseling and their behavior was

monitored during supervised visits with their children.In one case in Oregon

where the mother regularly attended her counseling sessions (but refused to read

any of the parenting skills books/hand outs that were given to her because

according to her even after having her child removed from her home, " I already

know this stuff and I don't need it " ),the social workers who observed her

interactions with her daughter were pretty keyed in to the subtleties of her

dysfunctional parenting: they noted the mother had told her daughter she didn't

want her to cut her hair when the daughter mentioned wanting to do so because

the mother " liked " her with her hair long,she said.Or that the mother had gone

ahead and named the puppy she got for her daughter (as a sort of bribe to make

her daughter want to come home to her so she could " have " the puppy) " Casey "

when the daughter had asked for him to be named " Max " because SHE wanted to name

him " Casey " .I mean,they were able to appreciate how this kind of habitual

disregard for her daughter's wishes and feelings would have a cumulative effect

on her self esteem over time and recommended that the mother's rights be

terminated.The fact of the mother's BPD was central to the court's decision to

terminate her rights even though she hadn't displayed any overtly aggressive or

hostile behavior to her daughter during their supervised visits.

Unfortunately that decisison was over turned on appeal by the mother

and I don't know what happened to that little girl.The appeals court totally

flubbed it when the social worker and psychologists who had treated the mother

and the judge who made the termination ruling all apprehended that this mother

was completely incapable of putting her child's needs before her own.In the

appeals ruling in the mother's favor the little girl is repeatedly referred to

as " he " so it makes you wonder if it that judge even knew which case he was

referring to.Basically the first group of informed individuals who dealt with

the case totally got it and then an ignoramus (or subjectively biased) judge

sold that kid down the river--even though her foster parents had been approved

to adopt her and very much wanted to.But that is the only case I read where the

BPD mother prevailed--the judges in the other cases really seemed to understand

that the BPD is simply incapable of parenting and to truly take that fact on

board in all its complexity when making their rulings to terminate.

What I noticed in these cases was that once a court ordered

psychological evaluation had taken place that the professionals involved were

seeing through the BPD's devoted parent act.One judge in Alabama ruled that the

BPD mother's claim of " loving " her children wasn't enough to compensate for her

inadequate parenting because she allowed her children to be exposed to instances

of domestic violence between herself and her husband although she wasn't

personally beating on her kids.She had been given assistance to leave her

violent husband along with supportive counseling.She resettled elsewhere with

her children for a few months then changed her mind and went back to him and

took the kids with her.

If there is no diagnosis of BPD there would be no grounds to terminate

parental rights on that basis.The BPD mother in Alabama had fooled CPS and the

court that she was capable of assuming responsibility for herself and her

children but because she was being monitored at the time she eventually revealed

by her own behavior that this was not the case.Having the BPD parent monitored

over time seems to be the key to getting their children rescued from their

" care " --they have a tendancy to " prove " their lack of parental fitness *over

time* simply because they cannot maintain their facade for *that long*.

Which dovetails with your experience--it took you a few months to see

through your SIL.The courts initially give these parents a chance to

rehabilitate themselves while their children are in care but if they refuse to

do so they are not given unlimited opportunities to screw up their childrens'

lives.And it often takes the court a while to ascertain just how unfit the

parent is.

The " golden standard " in these evaluations is the test of : is

this parent capable of placing his/her needs before the needs of their child? I

noticed when reading these cases that the BPD was unable to fool the evaluators

*over time* because somehow or some way they revealed that *their* needs took

precedence over the needs of their children.What I wanted to point out with this

topic is that this emerging " golden standard " represents a significant (IMO)

societal paradigm shift from the assumption that a parent *always* has the best

interests of their children at heart merely by dint of being the parent and that

this should not ever be questioned--the old standard-- and that this is

gradually being replaced by another more objective reality based standard that

makes rational adjustments to the fact of--and the negative consequences of--a

parent happening to have a personality disorder/being mentally unstable/being

abusive; that not all parents have their children's best interests at heart

simply *because* they are the parent and that the behavior of those parents

NEEDS to be questioned.The system is far from perfect,as is shown by the appeals

ruling in Oregon,but it is generally tending more and more in the direction of

taking the existence of personality disordered parents into account,I think.The

recognition by the courts of BPD as an illness serious enough to prevent a

parent from functioning as a parent and to have that on the books in many states

as a legal precedent by which to rule for termination of parental rights is to

me on the order of a burgeoning paradigm shift-- gradually coming to terms as a

society with the awareness that personality disordered parents exist and what

they actually ARE and that their children have a RIGHT not to be harmed by them

or left in their non care.

In the meantime,yes,children in urgent need of help will continue to

fall by the wayside.The personality disordered will continue to fool CPS staff

unless ongoing psychological evaluations/counseling is ordered.Judges will

continue to make subjectively based rulings according to their own personal

biases and personal issues.Real change is not going to happen overnight.On the

road to progress there is always a long trail of needless suffering (such as we

have experienced ourselves,the members of this message board) and it has always

been a tragedy that human society only ever lurches haltingly towards

progressive change.And,yeah,that sucks for emotionally abused children who need

a brighter day NOW.It truly does.But a paradigm shift is underway for tomorrow.

I'd like to see a day when assisting an abused child isn't only

incumbent upon the courts which only have a limited number of foster homes to

send abused children to (and so must usually give priority to cases where the

children are at immediate risk of life and limb),but when a broad spectrum of

society is involved in ensuring that all children have a dignified quality of

life.I really like Annie's idea of " mental hygiene " classes to empower children

to know the difference between healthy/constructive and unhealthy/abusive

behavior.I think that all aspiring school teachers,guidance counselors,school

principals and school sports coaches should have to take and pass a thorough

course in Axis 2 personality disordered parents/child abuse issues/dynamics and

how they affect childrens' functioning so that they can recognize the signs of

abuse *in order to* obtain their degree or maintain their license.I disclosed my

abuse to my second and fifth grade teachers.My second grade teacher laughed it

off and my fifth grade teacher blamed ME for it,traumatizing me further--but I

think that if they had been empowered with information to recognize my nada's

symptoms as a bona fide disorder (and my assertions about her psychological

abuse as real and valid--as well as my generalized anxiety and distress as

issuing NOT from my personality but from my environment) and how to offer me

moral support,that would have made an enormous lasting difference to me.Instead

their invalidation of my abuse/my feelings piled on yet another layer of trauma

that I did NOT need.And certainly all clergy of every demonination should have

to take and pass the same course in order for their institution to continue to

qualify for non profit status...It's not removal from the home or removal from

the offending parent--but-- receiving comprehending assistance from an adult can

make the difference between an emotionally abused child (for example) shattering

from the isolation or cohering from receiving some vitally needed support and

positive encouragement.I don't mean having these adults say: " Yes,kid,your

mother/father is an abusive sh*thead " or having them practice intensive

counseling but having them trained as an essential function of their duties to

engage all children and to offer positive regard and confident faith in every

child's inherent good qualities; to be a benevolent and nurturing authority

figure--and even more so when a child is exhibiting the signs of being abused by

a PD parent which they would have been trained to specifically recognize...The

required course would also instruct these adults when suspected abuse by PD

parents necessitates a report to the proper authorities and why (and what the

penalties are for failing for report them).They would also be trained as a

condition for receiving their degree or license in the importance of continuing

to offer benevolent general support to a child even IF the suspected abuse was

not substantiated by CPS.Not that school personnel aren't already supposed to

know when and how to report suspected abuse--but it would be nice if *having* to

know that was a condition for their degree or license in the first place,across

the board.And every two years they'd have to acquire CEUs in child abuse

awareness/prevention/reporting and pass another exam in order to keep their

jobs.

>

> thanks for the information!

>

> that is great to know. I clicked on NC and I am not sure how to read the

chart, some of the things have X's by them and some don't...I am sure the ones

that don't have X's by them are grounds because they are things like 'sexual

abuse', 'failure to maintain contact' etc, so I am not sure if I am reading the

chart right. Either they think that sexual abuse is grounds for termination, or

they don't, I am pretty confused by this chart.

>

> I guess in all these cases the parent was diagnosed prior to the court hearing

or whatever, I wonder what they do in cases where there is no diagnoses (and

never will be since the bpd is such a huckster at fooling people...she fooled me

for months and months)

September 11, 2010

Thanks for these very informative posts, . I too think that our

society/culture finally seems to be lurching in an more enlightened direction RE

recognizing that personality disorder, particularly the Cluster B group, is a

severe mental illness and can put the children of such individuals at great risk

for emotional, physical and sexual abuse.

That is indeed a huge paradigm shift in awareness: understanding that just

having given birth to a child doesn't automatically make one a good parent who

is able to put the child's needs first, and that bpd, npd, and aspd *are*

severe, chronic disorders that take years of intense therapy to overcome, if the

sufferer agrees to undergo therapy at all.

When I finally started realizing that something wasn't right with my mom (not

very many years ago, sadly) and started researching and came across the concept

of " personality disorder " , when I first read the diagnostic criteria for bpd

from the DSM-IV, the most immediate thought I had was, " Holy Freaking Cow, a

person with these symptoms and behaviors should NOT be raising children! "

It seemed to me that the diagnostic criteria for bpd (and npd and aspd) are

*exactly the opposite* of being a " good enough " parent.

So to me its kind of a miracle that parental emotional abuse is now, slowly but

steadily (it would appear) being recognized by more and more states as being

toxic and scarring for kids. Its so heartening to know that we're moving in the

right direction, albeit slowly, at last.

I agree that more education on child abuse symptoms is needed for any

professional who works with kids. I like the idea of making courses in abnormal

psychology and in recognizing and handling child abuse situations a requirement

for earning a degree or certification to work with kids.

And I think recognizing that its court monitoring and testing *over time* of the

parent-child relationship when the parental rights are at stake, that is a huge

step in the right direction. That is awesome.

Thanks,

-Annie

> >

> > thanks for the information!

> >

> > that is great to know. I clicked on NC and I am not sure how to read the

chart, some of the things have X's by them and some don't...I am sure the ones

that don't have X's by them are grounds because they are things like 'sexual

abuse', 'failure to maintain contact' etc, so I am not sure if I am reading the

chart right. Either they think that sexual abuse is grounds for termination, or

they don't, I am pretty confused by this chart.

> >

> > I guess in all these cases the parent was diagnosed prior to the court

hearing or whatever, I wonder what they do in cases where there is no diagnoses

(and never will be since the bpd is such a huckster at fooling people...she

fooled me for months and months)

>

September 14, 2010

thanks so much for this thoughtful post. I think 'emotional abuse' is the

perfect word for what is happening to my nephew. The one year old, who resembles

her from when she was a child, is sometimes a target of aggression from the two

year old, which only makes her more hostile toward the two year old. It's a

vicious cycle. I am starting to think there is already emotional damage that has

been done to the two year old. I am exasperated by my parents' tolerance of it

in their home. It's beyond frustrating. I am going to try to find a counselor in

the area with experience with bpd to see if they can tell me what if anything

can be done in this situation. I see very little demonstration of her putting

their needs before hers...the children have never had set meal times, set times

to go to bed (she has always had them up until 9:30 or 10 at night, I think

because she likes to sleep late and thinks that they will sleep later that way).

They have never had any structure in their lives at all. Mealtimes could be at

any time of the day. She was extremely innattentive to the hunger of the older

child, my mother had to constantly point out to her and my brother when they

first moved in with them that the reason that the two year old was acting out

and frustrated was because he was hungry. And of course there is the constant

mess and unsanitary conditions they live in. Another example of her putting her

needs to never clean before their need for a sanitary environment.

I continue to hit brick walls with people I have contacted in pointing out this

pattern of emotional abuse of the older child. Plus it's just me saying it so

it's 'he said she said'. I really do not want to live with knowing that I was

called upon to act on behalf of this child and I didn't do so. To make it worse

my brother is super religious and a fan of the Dobson type discipline

which does nothing but send this child into a meltdown every time. It's really

heartbreaking to watch.

> >

> > thanks for the information!

> >

> > that is great to know. I clicked on NC and I am not sure how to read the

chart, some of the things have X's by them and some don't...I am sure the ones

that don't have X's by them are grounds because they are things like 'sexual

abuse', 'failure to maintain contact' etc, so I am not sure if I am reading the

chart right. Either they think that sexual abuse is grounds for termination, or

they don't, I am pretty confused by this chart.

> >

> > I guess in all these cases the parent was diagnosed prior to the court

hearing or whatever, I wonder what they do in cases where there is no diagnoses

(and never will be since the bpd is such a huckster at fooling people...she

fooled me for months and months)

>

September 16, 2010

Joe,what you are describing is definitely heart breaking and must be so hard for

you to witness.I think you have a very good idea about searching for a counselor

in your area to see what if anything can be done.It sounds like it also would be

helpful for you if you had someone like that to speak with about the

situation.Or perhaps contacting a children's advocacy non profit to get some

feedback from them.Have you spoken to a CPS caseworker in your county to see

what they have to say?

I agree with you that what's going on here is emotional abuse.Living in

a completely unstructured and unsanitary environment is also abuse,as in

neglect.It sounds like both of these kids are going to have some major problems

when they get into a school setting.

What is Dobson type discipline? The name sounds familiar.Is that

" spare the rod and spoil the child " corporal punishment?

It's got to be beyond frustrating to be the only one in that household

who clearly sees the situation for what it is.That must also be triggering.

Is your two year old nephew developmentally delayed in any way? That

could be something to report that could lead to the mother also being

evaluated,if her two year old has delays that require intervention and the

mother has done nothing to address them with her pediatrician.Just a thought.

I'm so sorry both you and your nephews are going through this.

>

> thanks so much for this thoughtful post. I think 'emotional abuse' is the