We will help you get your mom off drugs!

For a biology project to do over the Easter holidays my class had to create a presentation on the dangers of a chosen drug. I decided to do a short film, with a story depicting the dangers of smoking. This video was created sometime in March 2009. It wasnt always a silent film, it used to have music and a dialogue, but it got removed for copyrights. It was about 15 minutes long. At least I got to show it to my class. So I edited the film and got rid of all the talking and sound, and cut out a whole scene. So now its silent. Synopsis: The film follows a 14 year old boy addicted to cigarettes. With his careless mum and her boyfriend on holiday, he is left on his own with lots of money. He manipulates an alcoholic to by him cigarettes with the temptation of money for an extra pint. His eating habits, social life, physical and mental health decay as he collapses into a spiral of addictive carcinogenic toxins. Directed, written and edited by 14 year old, Orson. Filmed by Emma, Orson and Esme. Starring: Orson as Boy Emma as Alcoholic If you enjoyed the video, please tell your friends, email it around and/or put it on any webpage you may have. If you have a youtube account, please feature it on your channel, favourite it, rate it 5 stars, and/or leave a comment. Thank you. Thanks for watching the video, I hope you enjoyed it.

*Four Months Later* I stood back stage wearing this: www.polyvore.com I was going on the Oprah show to promote my book and talk about being a mom, wife and recovering drug addict. Oprah: So please welcome Brooklyn Jonas-Kagasoff. -*walks out onto stage**hugs Oprah**sits down* Oprah: So you started out early this morning? -Yeah. *smiles* But its worth it. *pushes back hair* Oprah: So youre a new mom right? -Yes. Oprah: And how old is she? -4 months. Oprah: And how is it being a Mom? -Stressful, wonderful, tiring, amazing. I have a lot of help and Im lucky I do because of my situation. Oprah: And you recently wrote a book correct? -Yes. Its called My Song. Its basically about my childhood memories and the teen years and then all the stuff thats happened in the last year. Oprah: And you have been through a lot. Drug addiction, alcohol addiction, your party girl phase. -Yeah and it hurts to know that while I was hurting myself, I was also hurting people I love in the process. I gave up my old friends and I became very distant towards my brothers. I would NEVER talk to them. And I could see it was killing them not knowing why I was so strung out all the time. Oprah: In your book though you talk about forgiveness and how lucky you are they forgave you. -Yeah I totally am. They couldve just been like Screw you! Youre on your own! and I wouldve had to find another way to support myself. Oprah: Do you blame your party girl phase on why you got pregnant? -In a way yes. Ive always said if I had never gone to that first club that one night I wouldve never met Chris. And then if I hadnt gone to that first party we wouldnt have made out and then gotten a record deal. But in another way I know that we probably wouldve crossed paths some other way. So I cant totally blame my party girl lifestyle on it. Oprah: So lets fast forward from you partying. You and Chris break up. Youre depressed. When do you think youre pregnant? -I had been throwing up A LOT lately. And I had recently blamed my missed period to the pills and to the fact I was so stressed about the break up and everything. But then I began to put two and two together. So I went to the doctor and sure enough I was. Oprah: And did all of the things youd been doing flow back? -Yeah. We had broken up 2 months ago so I was thinking, the baby will be born with complications or shell be still born. And my doctor was sure of that too. But she checked for complications and she said By some miracle its fine. And I felt so happy. But I knew I had to stop. Oprah: The audience today is teen moms or young moms and teenagers that are dealing with drug and/or alcohol addiction or are recovering from So you still stand by God? -Yes. Every day I thank him for everyone. My brothers, my mom, Daren, Chris, Melody, my best friend Selena, my career. Everything. I dont think I couldve gone through this without him. Oprah: Selenas in the audience today. How involved is she in Melodys life? -Very. Shes over almost every day with Nick. Shes a great godmother. She plays with her and feeds her and changes her. Oprah: And Selena is it fun for you? Selena: Yes it is. Its great to know that she would consider me a good enough friend to be Mels godmother. Oprah: And whos her godfather? -Trey Songz. We chose him because hes always been there for Chris and me. Oprah: And how are your brothers towards Melody? -They lover her so much. Kevin and Nick dont live at home anymore since they moved in with their fiancés, but they are still there for her. She is SO close to Nick. She cant say his name, but shell go NNNN. Like shes trying to say Nick. Its so cute. Oprah: So you had a photo shoot with People magazine. And one of the pictures is this. On the screen was a picture of Melody. Kissing one of her cheeks was Chris, kissing the other was Daren. Oprah: So is she close to both? -Yes. She knows that Chris is her Daddy, but she also knows that Daren is her Daddy too and he loves her just as much. We actually have that picture in black and white and framed. I think its so cute. Oprah: Now you know I have to talk about this. Youre Dad.

sexual abuse. To this day, she has been unable to live a normal life, suffering from frequent panic attacks, and never truly feeling she can trust someone. But now, with Steve’s help, she’s finally ready to confront her biological mother Tonda, and get the answers she’s been searching for! … steve wilkos show pedophile child abuse dad mom drug addict molester confront love rehab jail police officer marine loud mouth moron free television lie setector bell rubber family help racist …

Attachment Facilitating Parenting

Arthur Becker-Weidman, Ph.D.

Center For Family Development

Many adopted and foster children have had very difficult and painful histories with their first parents. These children have experienced chronic early maltreatment within a caregiving relationship. Such a history can lead to the development of Complex Trauma (Cook et. al., 2003; Cook et. al., 2005), disorders of attachment, and Reactive Attachment Disorder. Children with histories of maltreatment, such as physical and psychological neglect, physical abuse, and sexual abuse, are at risk of developing severe psychiatric problems (Gauthier, Stollak, Messe, & Arnoff, 1996; Malinosky-Rummell & Hansen, 1993). These children are likely to develop Reactive Attachment Disorder (Greenberg, 1999; Lyons-Ruth & Jacobvitz, 1999). Approximately 2% of the population is adopted, and between 50% and 80% of such children have attachment disorder symptoms (Carlson, Cicchetti, Barnett, & Braunwald, 1995; Cicchetti, Cummings, Greenberg, & Marvin, 1990). Many of these children are violent (Robins, 1978) and aggressive (Prino & Peyrot, 1994) and as adults are at risk of developing a variety of psychological problems (Schreiber & Lyddon, 1998) and personality disorders, including antisocial personality disorder (Finzi, Cohen, Sapir, & Weizman, 2000), narcissistic personality disorder, borderline personality disorder, and psychopathic personality disorder (Dozier, Stovall, & Albus, 1999). Therapeutic Parenting is often necessary to help these children heal (Becker-Weidman, A., & Shell, D., 2005/2008). This approach to parenting is often not familiar to most parents and requires a significant amount of work and preparation. Attachment facilitating parenting is grounded in attachment theory and is based on a set of principles that include:

Sensitivity
Responsiveness
Following the child’s lead
The sharing of congruent intersubjective experiences
Creating a sense of safety and security

The effective implementation of these principles requires parents who:

Are strongly committed to the child.
Have well developed reflective abilities
Have good insightfulness
Have a relatively secure state of mind with respect to attachment

This type of parenting is consistent with Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy, which is an evidence-based and effective treatment for children with trauma and attachment disorders (Becker-Weidman & Hughes, 2008). Many foster and adoptive parents find their children’s behaviors strange, frightening, disturbing, and upsetting. They often don’t understand why their child behaves as the child does; “after all, my child is now safe, doesn’t he get it?” It can be difficult to appreciate the depth and pervasiveness of the damage caused by earlier maltreatment.

Therapeutic parenting based on Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy relies of helping parents understand what is causing the child’s behaviors. Looking deeper in order to understand what is motivating the child. All behavior is adaptive and functional; however sometimes the behaviors that were adaptive in one environment are ill-suited for the new home. If your first parents were neglectful, unreliable, and inconsistent so that you were often hungry and left alone for long periods of time, hoarding food, gorging, and going to “anyone” for help is adaptive. When that child is placed in a foster or adoptive home with caring, responsive, sensitive parents, that same behavior is no longer adaptive. By understanding what is driving the behavior and appreciating the child’s fear, anxieties, shame, and anger, the new parent will be better able to respond to the emotions driving the behavior rather than the surface behavior or symptoms. Unless the underlying emotions are addressed with sensitivity and within a safe, unconditionally loving, and supportive home, the behavior or symptoms are not likely to stop…they may change into other problems, but if the underlying cause remains, then the problems will surface again and again.

Let’s discuss the principles required. These principles are more fully elaborated elsewhere (Becker-Weidman & Shell, 2005; Becker-Weidman, 2007)

SENSITIVITY. Because children with trauma and attachment disorders are often unable to describe their internal states, emotions, or thoughts, it becomes the job of the parent to do this with and for the child so that the child learns to do this. Of course, this is precisely what one does with a newborn, toddler, and child. We often help children manage their internal states by doing that with them. When a baby cries, we pick up the baby, comfort the child, and by so doing, regulate the child’s level of arousal. Over time the infant becomes increasingly proficient at doing this independently. The parent of a foster or adopted child must be sensitive to the internal states of their child so that the parent can respond to the underlying emotions driving behavior.

RESPONSIVENESS. Once the underlying emotion is identified, the parent must respond to this need or emotion, with sensitivity. By meeting the child’s need (to feel safe, loved, cared about, for food, drink, joy, etc) the child will internalize new and healthier models of relationships and parents.

FOLLOWING THE CHILD’S LEAD. By this I mean that the parent will need to respond to the child and follow the child’s lead in the sense of providing what the child is needing (comfort, affection, support, structure, etc) and at the child’s pace. It is very important to move at the child’s pace to create the necessary sense of safety and security that these children need.

THE SHARING OF CONGRUENT INTERSUBJECTIVE EXPERIENCES. Intersubjectivity refers to shared emotion (also called attunement), share attention, and share intention. You can understand this if you think of playing a board game with your child. When you are playing some game together and enjoying the experience, you are sharing emotions (joy and a sense of competence), sharing attention (focusing on the game), and sharing intention (playing by the rules, both trying to win, having fun, etc.). Or another example, when talking about the death of the child’s loved grandparent, you both may share the same emotions (grief), both are recalling memories of the grandparent (shared intention and attention). It is the sharing of congruent intersubjective experiences, experiences in which all three elements are the shared, that helps the child heal and learn about intimacy and relationships.

CREATING A SENSE OF SAFETY AND SECURITY. Safety comes first. Unless the child is physically, emotionally, and psychologically safe, healing cannot occur. So, it is the job of the parent to create safety and security for the child. This then allows for the exploration of underlying feelings, thoughts, and memories. Without an alliance there can be no secure base. Without a secure base there can be no exploration. Without exploration there can be no integration. Without integration there can be no healing.

Unless the child feels safe, exploration is not possible.

So, what sort of parent is needed? We know form extensive research, that one of the best predictors of placement stability is the parent’s commitment to the child (Dozier, Grasso, Lindhiem, & Lewis, 2007). Therefore, building or rebuilding parental commitment is an important first step. Unless there is strong commitment, the child cannot feel safe and, as discussed above, safety is the most important first step in helping a hurt child heal.

Reflective capacity is also vital to placement stability and to the healing of adopted and foster children. The parent must be able to reflect on the child’s underlying emotions, how the past may be re-enacted in the present, and what in the parent’s own past is being triggered by the child. A well developed reflective function is necessary if the parent is to respond to the child in a healthy and healing manner. We all have buttons. The job of the therapeutic parent is to understand one’s buttons so that these can be disconnected so that when pushed, nothing happens.

Insightfulness (Koren-Karie, Oppenheim, Dolev, Sher, & Etzion-Carasso, 2002; Oppenheim, Koren-Karie, & Sagi, 2001; Oppenheim, & Koren-Karie, 2002; Oppenheim, Goldsmith, & Koren-Karie, 2005) is related to reflective capacity.

A parent’s state of mind with respect to attachment is the best predictor of the child’s. (Main, & Cassidy, 1988; Main, & Hesse, 1990). If the parent has a Secure state of mind with respect to attachment, then the adopted or foster child is more likely to develop a healthy and secure pattern of attachment and heal (Steele, Hodges, Kaniuk, Steele, Hillman, & Asquith, 2008). We know that when young children are placed in a foster home, the child will begin to develop a pattern of attachment that is the same as the foster parent’s state of mind with respect to attachment (Dozier, Stovall, Albus, & Bates, 2001). Obviously, in older children, this is a more difficult task. In the general population, about 60% of the adults have a secure state of mind with respect to attachment. For parents who have an insecure state of mind with respect to attachment, they can still learn to parent effectively with help (Becker-Weidman, A., & Shell, D., 2005/2008; Bick & Dozier, 2008).

USEFUL RESOURCES FOR PARENTS

Becker-Weidman, A., (2007). Principles of Attachment Parenting. 3-set DVD. Williamsville, NY: Center for Family Development.
Becker-Weidman, A., & Shell, D., (Eds.) (2005/2008) Creating Capacity for Attachment, Oklahoma City, OK: Wood N Barnes/ Williamsville, NY: Center For Family Development.
Golding, K., (2008). Nurturing Attachments. London: Jessica Kingsley.
Hughes, D. (2006) Building the Bonds of Attachment, 2nd edition, Jason Aronson, Lanham, MD. .
Siegel, D., & Hartzell, M., (2003). Parenting from the Inside out. Tarcher.

REFERENCES

Becker-Weidman, A., & Shell, D., (Eds.) (2005, 2008). Creating Capacity for Attachment, Oklahoma City, OK: Wood N Barnes & Williamsville, NY: Center for Family Development.

Becker-Weidman, A., (2007). Principles of Attachment Parenting. 3-set DVD. Williamsville, NY: Center for Family Development.

Becker-Weidman, A., & Hughes, D., (2008) “Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy: An evidence-based treatment for children with complex trauma and disorders of attachment,” Child & Adolescent Social Work, 13, pp.329-337.

Bick, J., & Dozier, M., (2008). Helping Foster Parents Change. In H. Steele & M. Steele (Eds.), Clinical Applications of the Adult Attachment Interview (pp. 452-471). NY: Guilford.

Carlson, V., Cicchetti, D., Barnett, D., & Braunwald, K. (1995). Finding order in disorganization: Lessons from research on maltreated infants’ attachments to their caregivers. In D. Cicchetti & V. Carlson (Eds.), Child maltreatment: Theory and research on the causes and consequences of child abuse and neglect (pp. 135–157). NY: Cambridge University Press.

Cicchetti, D., Cummings, E. M., Greenberg, M. T., & Marvin, R. S. (1990). An organizational perspective on attachment beyond infancy. In M. Greenberg, D. Cicchetti & M. Cummings (Eds.), Attachment in the preschool years (pp. 3–50). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Cook, A., Blaustein, M., Spinazolla, J. & van der Kolk, B. (2003) Complex Trauma in Children and Adolescents. White Paper from the National Child Traumatic Stress Network Complex Trauma Task Force. National Center for Child Traumatic Stress, Los Angeles, CA.

Cook, A., Spinazzola, J., Ford, J., Lanktree, C., Blaustein, M., Cloitre, M. et al. (2005) Complex trauma in children and adolescents. Psychiatric Annals, 35, 390–398.

Dozier, M., Stovall, K., Albus, K., & Bates, B. (2001). Attachment for infants in foster care: The role of caregiver state of mind. Child Development, 72, 1467-1477.

Dozier, M., Grasso, D., Lindhiem, O., & Lewis, E., (2007) “The role of caregiver commitment in foster care,” in D. Oppenheim & D. Goldsmith, (Eds.) Attachment Theory in Clinical Work with Children. NY: Guilford.

Dozier, M., Stovall, K. C., & Albus, K. (1999). Attachment and psychopathology in adulthood. In J. Cassidy & P. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment (pp. 497–519). NY: Guilford Press.

Finzi, R., Cohen, O., Sapir, Y., & Weizman, A. (2000). Attachment styles in maltreated children: A comparative study. Child Development and Human Development, 31, 113–128.

Gauthier, L., Stollak, G., Messe, L., & Arnoff, J. (1996). Recall of childhood neglect and physical abuse as differential predictors of current psychological functioning. Child Abuse and Neglect, 20, 549–559.

Greenberg, M. (1999). Attachment and psychopathology in childhood. In J. Cassidy & P. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment (pp. 469–496). NY: Guilford Press.

Koren-Karie, N., Oppenheim, D., Dolev S., Sher, E., & Etzion-Carasso, E. (2002). Mothers’ insightfulness regarding their infants’ internal experience: Relations with maternal sensitivity and infant attachment. Developmental Psychology, 38, 534-542.

Lyons-Ruth, K., & Jacobvitz, D. (1999). Attachment disorganization: Unresolved loss, relational violence and lapses in behavioral and attentional strategies. In J. Cassidy & P. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment (pp. 520–554). NY: Guilford Press.

Main, M., & Cassidy, J. (1988). Categories of response to reunion with the parent at age six: Predictable from infant attachment classifications and stable over a one-month period. Developmental Psychology, 24, 415–426.

Main, M., & Hesse, E. (1990). Parents’ unresolved traumatic experiences are related to infant disorganized attachment status. In M. T. Greenberg, D. Ciccehetti & E. M. Cummings (Eds.), Attachment in the preschool years: Theory, research, and intervention (pp. 161–184). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Malinosky-Rummell, R., & Hansen, D. J. (1993). Long-term consequences of childhood physical abuse. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 68–69.

Oppenheim, D., Koren-Karie, N., & Sagi, A. (2001). Mothers’ empathic understanding of their preschoolers’ internal experience: Relations with early attachment. International Journal of Behavioral Development., 25, 16-26.

Oppenheim, D. & Koren-Karie, N. (2002). Mothers’ Insightfulness Regarding their Children’s Internal Worlds: The capacity underlying secure child-mother relationships. Infant Mental Health Journal, 23(6), 593-605.

Oppenheim, D., Goldsmith, D., & Koren-Karie, N. (2005). Maternal Insightfulness and preschoolers’ emotion and behavior problems: Reciprocal influences in a day-treatment program. Infant Mental Health Journal.

Prino, C. T., & Peyrot, M. (1994). The effect of child physical abuse and neglect on aggressive withdrawn, and prosocial behavior. Child Abuse and Neglect, 18, 871–884.

Robins, L. N. (1978). Longitudinal studies: Sturdy childhood predictors of adult antisocial behavior. Psychological Medicine, 8, 611–622.

Schreiber, R., & Lyddon, W. J. (1998). Parental bonding and current psychological functioning among childhood sexual abuse survivors. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 45, 358–362.

Steele, M., Hodges, J., Kaniuk, J., Steele, H., Hillman, S., & Asquith, K., (2008). Forcasting Outcomes in Previously Maltreated Children. In H. Steele & M. Steele (Eds.), Clinical Applications of the Adult Attachment Interview (pp. 427-452). NY: Guilford.

When Michael Jackson unexpectedly passed away last week, the world was stunned by the death of the fifty-year-old entertainer who left an indelible mark on pop culture. He was preparing for a world tour that was advertised as his fans’ last opportunity to see the King of Pop perform on stage. Whether motivated by a desire to sing again or by undeniable financial problems, the tour that would have brought hundreds of thousands into arenas will never happen. Along with his amazing legacy of music and a sorted legal history, Michael Jackson also leaves behind an endless number of questions surrounding his unusual personality and life. What exactly was the cause of his death? An official pronouncement from the coroner has been postponed pending toxicology reports, but rumors are rampant concerning his addiction to prescription drugs and the courts want the opportunity to speak with his various doctors. Will we now learn more about the plastic surgeries and other alterations he chose to endure? Finally, there is a question that likely will be answered in a California courtroom over the weeks and months to come. What is to become of Michael Jackson’s children? In the middle of all of the chaos and media frenzy, I hope we all remember these three innocent participants in the family drama.

Michael Jackson leaves behind three children whose new home is yet to be determined—Prince Michael, age twelve, Paris Katherine, age eleven, and Prince Michael II (also known as Blanket), age seven. The first two kids are the product of his marriage with the former nurse for Mr. Jackson’s dermatologist, Debbie Rowe, which lasted from 1996 to 1999. Ms. Rowe originally gave up all custodial rights when the two terminated their marriage, but successfully appealed to have parental rights restored following Jackson’s arrest in 2003 on child molestation charges. The youngest boy was born to a surrogate mother who has never been identified. In fact, official documentation lists “None” in the space indicated for the birth mother. So, the California courts are left with two birth mothers who have had little or no contact with their children. What are the possible options at this point?

California law considers several issues when determining child custody cases, using the guiding factor of the “best interest of the minor child” as the overriding influence in such decisions. First, the courts examine the best environment for a child’s safety, health, and welfare. They also check for a history of physical abuse or violent crimes committed by any of the parties seeking to share in the custody. The stability and continuity of an environment is critical in the eyes of the court. Children need to have established bonds and patterns with the person who is deemed to be the primary caretaker. Unless there are circumstances that require otherwise, such as specific health or educational needs, all efforts will be made to keep siblings living together. Finally, the court must give “due weight” to the wishes of the children in this difficult situation, assuming that their ages and reasoning ability allow them to express such a preference.

Earlier this week, Michael Jackson’s mother, Katherine Jackson, was granted temporary guardianship of all three children. In a will written by Michael Jackson in 2002 and released the day after Mrs. Jackson received temporary custody, the courts revealed that this placement was in accordance with Jackson’s last wishes. However, Mr. Jackson does not necessarily have the final say in where his children will live until they reach adulthood. The well-known celebrity attorney Gloria Allred said about the situation, “”If he did indicate a preference, that will be given great weight, but that will not be determinative. Children are not property, they cannot be willed to another person.” So far, however, Katherine Jackson is the only possible guardian who has expressed an outright and definitive interest in caring for the children. She has a long-standing relationship with all three of the kids and is surrounded by other grandchildren of the Jackson family. This environment could prove the most stable and loving for Prince, Paris, and Prince Michael II. Charlotte Goldberg, a family law professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, said that in all child custody cases, “It’s really a balance between continuity and stability and a biological relationship.”

Where does the current state of affairs leave Debbie Rowe? Experts believe that she has the strongest legal claim to the two oldest children, if she should choose to assert her parental rights. As this article is being written, Ms. Rowe has just requested and won a delay in the upcoming custody hearing as she decides whether or not she wants to pursue her rights to raise her two children. This legal move today was the first communication that Ms. Rowe has offered since the death of Michael Jackson a week ago. If she does decide to move herself to the front of the custody line, which would likely be her legal prerogative, Ms. Rowe would need to undergo an evaluation by the court to determine if she is the best person to care for the children.

Whether a celebrity or someone who has never found herself on the cover of a tabloid magazine, the emotional issues involved with child custody situations are always difficult. Above all else, it should the desire of the courts and all parties involved to make the decision that is in the best interest of the children. Where will the children feel most secure and loved while working through a painful life transition? Who is surrounded by the best support network when extra assistance is needed with the children? Who can provide the most solid financial support? If you are seeking custody of precious children in your life whose circumstances are changing for reasons ranging from divorce to death, you should seek the assistance of a family law attorney who has the experience needed to be sensitive to the heightened emotions that are involved. If you also happen to be in the public eye, you will want to find legal representation that brings knowledge of how to navigate through the magnified issues of celebrity law. While it may be difficult to focus on these practical needs when you are caught up with tending to a family in pain, making these decisions early will make for an easier road ahead.

The Bribed or Manipulated Child: Handling Your Child Custody Case  in 2008 Barry Bricklin, Ph.D. and Gail Elliot, Ph.D.

Dr. Bricklin and Dr. Elliot are nationally-known child custody experts. They have written many publications offering help and guidance for mothers, fathers, and grandparents involved in child custody issues.  Their publications can be found at http://www.custodylibrary.com

 One of the saddest and most frustrating situations occurs when a child has been bribed or manipulated to turn against one of the parents. The child might previously have had a wonderful relationship with the so-called “target parent.” Manipulations can range from very subtle, like the parent who looks sad and distressed when the child goes off to visit the other parent, right on through the entire spectrum to the other extreme, where the parent actively damns and condemns the target parent. The parent will say things like, “It’s all his fault; he deserted us,” right on through to saying that the target parent has all kinds of drug problems or alcohol problems or that he or she left us to run off with some low-life.

 Unfortunately, subtle forms of bribing or manipulating a child will work as well as the more blatant strategies. In fact, the subtle ways work best, because even a savvy child, who might recognize (and better deal with) blatant alienation, will not recognize more subtle forms. It might be a mother, for example, who says: “Well you know you’re father; he has a drinking problem. He tries, but he really is just an alcoholic.” Or the father who says, “You know your mom; she means well but is just so uptight you can’t have any fun around her.” These kinds of subtle strategies might work every bit as well as the more blatant ones.

 First of all, the target parent must learn to recognize situations that look like a bribed or manipulated child, but in actuality is not. It is frequent for older children, for example, say from twelve years of age and up, to basically want to have one home. It simply is a matter of convenience for them. They want to be around the friends with whom they socialize.

 Also, a child of older years may simply want to switch from where he or she already lives to the other house, based on the-grass-is-always-greener-on-the-other-side-of-the-street. This is the child who believes the “other house” is the place where he or she can stay up later, where there is less discipline, less insistence on cleanliness, less insistence on chores or homework.

 Regardless of the cause of a child’s not wanting to see you, the core skill needed is what we call non-adversary communication. This is a skill which we also teach to businesses. It is a very powerful tool, but very subtle in its power. It will sound simple enough when we run the rules by you, but it will take a little bit of dedicated practice to use it well.

 First, you must see the value in using it. It brings two main benefits. One benefit is that it will make your own communications more powerful. Second, it is tremendously self-therapeutic. It would take us too far off point to explain this fully right here, but the fact is that any piece of “output behavior,” an angry face, tight vocal-cord muscles, a tense body, accesses in you your worst and most fearful memories at an unconscious level, memories of times you felt helpless and scared. You are unwittingly hurting yourself.

 The first principal is that whatever the issue is you are dealing with, you immediately seek a solution.

 This next point is extremely hard for most people to implement. It simply states that you never blame or make the other person wrong, not even in the slightest way. No matter how angry, hurt, or vindictive you feel, you do not use a time where some problem needs a solution to air your anger. There are not only blatant ways of making the other person wrong e.g., “You idiot! You never understand anything!” There are also subtle ways. The use of the word “but” is subtly making the other person wrong. If you tell me your position, and if I answer you, even in a very gentle and warm voice, with a phrase that starts with the word “but,” you know that shortly thereafter I am going to make your position “wrong.”

 Suppose one of my children says to me: “You always talk to me in a loud voice.”

 Suppose I answer: “But honey, it is so hard to get your attention.”

 The third point is to learn to not give more than one (short) explanation of your own position. To do so is not only strategically ineffective, but self-damaging. When you spend a lot of motor-output time trying to justify your position, that is, trying to get the other person to accept the wisdom of your explanation, you are accessing in yourself, at an unconscious level, all of the memories of when you felt helpless, vulnerable, misunderstood and “on the carpet.” Here are some brief examples of non-adversary statements. Instead of saying “You’re late every time you drop Mary off,” (making the other person wrong), say: “What can we do to make drop-offs and pick-ups work better for all of us?”

 We absolutely know your thinking at this point: “You don’t know my ex. He wants to hurt me! He doesn’t care about solving anything!” We know this might very well be true. But what you don’t know, and we do, is the subtle, cumulative power of the strategies we want to share with you. Give us a chance. Master them, and try them before judging how you think they will work. Further, our purpose here is to teach you how to use these skills with your children, especially those from whom you may have been alienated.

 This skill of non-adversarial communication is necessary to make most of the other strategies that you might use work better. It is an amazingly powerful tool when used the ways we will describe. It is so subtle that the other person might not even consciously know you are using it. But it definitely moves people off of aggressive or hostile positions. Here are some other examples. Take the, child who complains the parent speaks too loudly.

 The parent might respond to such an accusation with: “You may be right. Help me to find better ways to get your full attention.” Now, since the child has no position to bother defending (which would have been the case had the parent said, “You don’t pay attention,” to which the child would have said, “Yes, I do,” and the conversation would go nowhere), the child can begin wondering what options the parent may have to get his or her attention without yelling. As long as anyone has to defend a position, no creative thinking goes on. As soon as you make someone wrong, all they will do is endlessly explain to you why they’re not; we are genetically engineered, one might say to “defend our territory.” It is an almost irresistible urge.

 The final strategy, but one which we recommend you do not use until you have thoroughly tried the others is to seek help through the legal system. This is something you definitely would like to avoid, unless there are no other options available. You will have to initiate these steps through your attorney. There are two important pieces of information you may need, since not all attorneys are aware of the mental health options that may be available and not all options will be available in every state.

Dr. Bricklin and Dr. Elliot are nationally-known child custody experts. They have written many publications offering help and guidance for mothers, fathers, and grandparents involved in child custody issues.  Their publications can be found at http://www.custodylibrary.com

 Authors:

Dr. Barry Bricklin is a psychologist in private practice, Adjunct Associate Professor at Widener University and has previously served on the faculty of Jefferson University and of Hahnneman University. He is past president of the Philadelphia Society for Personality Assessment and the Philadelphia Society of Clinical Psychologists. He has authored books and articles many topics related to custody evaluations. For over 25 years, Dr. Bricklin has developed various data-based approaches to the decisions which must be made when parents divorce. He is the Chair of the Executive Operating Committee of the Professional Academy of Custody Evaluators (PACE).

 Dr. Gail Elliot is Head, Child Development and Family Processes Research, Bricklin Associates, the Vice Chair of the Professional Academy of Custody Evaluators and a psychologist in private practice. She has served as a consultant to public and private schools and coordinated multidisciplinary treatment plans. She has authored and researched numerous works related to custody evaluation.

—————————————————

Dr. Bricklin and Dr. Elliot are nationally-known child custody experts. They have written many publications offering help and guidance for mothers, fathers, and grandparents involved in child custody issues.  Their publications can be found at http://www.custodylibrary.com

If one parent consents the the emancipation of a minor child and the other does not can the minor child still become emancipated?

This is my situation …. any other advice would be greatly appreciated.

I am about to turn 16 on July 21. I have been bounced around between my mother, father and other friends and relatives for as long as I can remember. My father does not want me never has and my mother has been in and out of drug rehabilitation for several years. I mostly lived with my father but he put me off on friends every chance he got. When I was 11 years of age my mother got joint custody of me in my parents divorce. My mother and her boyfriend (now my stepfather) got full custody of me a short time later. He is very controlling and abusive and drinks all the time not as much as he used to but I hate it and just want to get away. He used to beat me until I got too old and started to fight back then he started going after me emotional
ly/mentally instead and I’m sick of it. He constantly makes me feel like crap and says I’m worthless and calls me all sorts of derogatory terms on a regular basis. My mother does nothing about it. He is very controlling over both of us. I do not want to be there anymore. I talked my mother into letting me stay the summer in Arizona with my uncle and his family and they do not plan on letting me go back. They want to try to get parental rights over me which I know is going to be a huge fight between my mom and uncle and I want to get emancipated so i can go back to Oregon and live with two of my friends who are getting an apartment together. I do not particularly care for AZ and want to go home to Or. I recently just got back in contact with my father on facebook and I’m wondering do I need his consent to get emancipated seeing as he has not been involved in my life at all the past four years and if I can get his consent and my mother refuses can I still get emancipated? I do not really want to take everything to court and make light of the whole situation I have been trying to hide the abuse for a number of years now and am afraid of my stepfather and just want to make a clean get a way from the whole situation and I have a baby half sister who has cancer to think about I do not want her to get taken away because I know my mother would never forgive me also I do not want to put her through the same thing I went through having to be bounced around from home to home. What do I do? Any advice would be helpful. Thank you.

CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT:

Effects on child development, brain development, psychopathology, and interpersonal relationships

Neglect, physical abuse, and sexual abuse (broadly termed, child maltreatment) have profound and long-term effects on a child’s development. The long-term effects of chronic early maltreatment within a care-giving relationship (also called Complex Post Traumatic Stress Disorder) of a child can be seen in higher rates of psychiatric disorders, increased rates of substance abuse, and a variety of severe relationship difficulties. Child maltreatment is an inter-generational problem. Most frequently the perpetrators of abuse and neglect are profoundly damaged people who have been abused and neglected themselves.

There are clear links between neglect and abuse and later psychological, emotional, behavioral, and interpersonal disorders. The basis for this linkage is the impact that abuse and neglect have on brain development. Daniel Siegel, medical director of the Infant and Preschool Service at the University of California, L.A., has found important links between interpersonal experiences and neurobiological development (The Developing Mind: Toward a Neurobiology of Interpersonal Experience. Daniel J. Siegel, Guilford Press, 1999.)

We know that a child uses the parent’s state of mind to regulate the child’s own mental processes. It is through a sensitive, responsive, and caring relationship with a primary care-giver that a child develops self-regulation abilities, emotional control, behavioral regulation, and such cognitive abilities as cause-effect thinking, among others. The child’s developing capacity to regulate emotions and develop a coherent sense of self requires sensitive and responsive parenting. The National Adoption Center found that 52% of adoptable children have attachment disorder symptoms. In another study, by Cicchetti, & Barnett[2], 80% of abused or maltreated infants exhibited attachment disorder symptoms. The best predictor of a child’s attachment classification is the state of mind with respect to attachment of the birth mother. A birth mother’s attachment classification before the birth of her child can predict with 80% accuracy her child’s attachment classification at six years of age. That is a remarkable finding. Finally, recent research by Mary Dozier, Ph.D.[3] found that the attachment classification of a foster mother has a profound effect on the attachment classification of the child. She found that the child’s attachment classification becomes similar to that of the foster mother after three months in placement. These findings strongly argue for a non-genetic mechanism for the transmission of attachment patterns across generations.

Children who have been sexually abused are at significant risk of developing anxiety disorders (2.0 times the average), major depressive disorders (3.4 times average), alcohol abuse (2.5 times average), drug abuse (3.8 times average), and antisocial behavior (4.3 times average)[4].

Generally the left hemisphere of the brain is the site of language, motor activity on the right side of the body, and logical thought based on language. The right hemisphere of the brain is responsible for motor activity on the left side of the body, context perceptions, face recognition, interpersonal and emotional processing, and holistic perception. The orbito-frontal cortex (the part of the brain directly behind the eyes) is responsible for integrating emotional responses generated in the limbic system with higher cognitive functions, such as planning and language, in the cerebral cortex’s prefrontal lobes. The left orbito-frontal cortex is responsible for memory creation while the right orbito-frontal cortex is responsible for memory retrieval. Healthy functioning requires an integrated right and left hemisphere. A substantial number of synaptic connections among brain cells develop during the first year of life into the middle of the second year of life. An integrated brain requires connections between the hemispheres by the corpus callosum. Abused and neglected children have smaller corpus callosum than non-abused children. Abused and neglected children have poorly integrated cerebral hemispheres. This poor integration of hemispheres and underdevelopment of the orbitofrontal cortex is the basis for such symptoms as difficulty regulating emotion, lack of cause-effect thinking, inability to accurately recognize emotions in others, inability of the child to articulate the child’s own emotions, an incoherent sense of self and autobiographical history, and a lack of conscience.

The brains of maltreated children are not as well integrated as the brains of non-abused children. This helps explain why maltreated children have significant difficulties with emotional regulation, integrated functioning, and social development. Conscience development and the capacity for empathy are largely functions of the orbito-frontal cortex. When development in this area of the brain is hindered, there are important social and emotional difficulties. It is very interesting that the orbito-frontal cortex is sensitive to face recognition and eye contact. Maltreated children frequently have disorders of attachment because of their birth-parents lack of sensitive responsive interactions with the child.

Early interpersonal experiences have a profound impact on the brain because the brain circuits responsible for social perception are the same as those that integrate such functions as the creation of meaning, the regulation of body states, the regulation of emotion, the organization of memory, and the capacity for interpersonal communication and empathy. Stressful experiences that are overtly traumatizing or chronic cause chronic elevated levels of neuroendocrine hormones. High levels of these hormones can cause permanent damage to the hippocampus, which is critical for memory.[5] Based on this we can assume that psychological trauma can impair a person’s ability to create and retain memory and impede trauma resolution.

Abused and neglected children exhibit a variety of behaviors that can lead to any number of diagnoses. However, the effect of early abuse and neglect on the child can be seen in several critical areas of development. These areas include emotional regulation, behavioral regulation, attachment, biology, response flexibility, a coherent integrated sense of self across time, the ability to engage in affect attunement with significant others (empathy and emotional connectedness), self-concept, cognitive abilities and learning, and conscience development.

The effects of early maltreatment on a child’s development are profound and long lasting. It is the impact of maltreatment on a child’s developing brain that causes effects seen in a wide variety of domains including social, psychological, and cognitive development. The ability to regulate emotions and become emotionally attuned with another depends on early experiences and the development of specific regions of the brain. Early maltreatment causes deficits in the development of these brain regions, primarily the orbito-frontal cortex and corpus callosum, because of the toxic effects of stress hormones on the developing brain.

These findings strongly suggest that effective treatment requires a sensitive affectively attuned relationship. Siegel stated, “As parents reflect with their securely attached children on the mental states that create their shared subjective experience, they are joining with them in an important co-constructive process of understanding how the mind functions. The inherent feature of secure attachment – contingent, collaborative communication – is also a fundamental component in how interpersonal relationships facilitate internal integration in a child.”[6] This has implications for the effective treatment of maltreated children. For example, when in a therapeutic relationship the client is able to reflect upon aspects of traumatic memories and experience the affect associated with those memories without becoming dysregulated, the client develops an expanded capacity to tolerate increasing amounts of affect. The client learns to self-regulate. The attuned resonant relationship between client and therapist enables the client to make sense (a left-hemisphere function) out of memories, autobiographical representations, and affect (right hemisphere functions).

Effective treatments, such as Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy, can have important positive effects on later development.

[2] Cicchetti & Barnett, 1991.

[3] “Attachment for Infants in Foster Care: The Role of Caregiver State of Mind,” Child Development, vol. 70, pp. 1467-1477, 2001.

[4] MacMillian, H.L., et. al., “Childhood Abuse and Lifetime Psychopathology in a Community Sample,” American Journal of Psychiatry, vol. 158 # 11, pp 1878-1883, November 2001.

[5] McEwen, B., “Development of the cerebral cortex XIII: Stress and brain development – II” Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 38, 101-103, 1999.

[6] Siegel, 1999. p. 333.

During the entire time I was reading “A Child Called It’ , I couldn’t help but draw correlations between David Pelzer’s mother (Catherine Roerva Christen Pelzer) and Borderline Personality Disorder. After I was finished reading the book, I started my search to see what mental illness Catherine had suffered. All I have managed to find was that she was mentally ill and an alcoholic. No details have emerged of what type of mental illness she suffered. So, with the facts about Catherine from “A Child Called It” and professional resources about BPD, I will pose case that Catherine suffered from Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD).

Dave Pelzer paints the picture of a seemingly normal childhood until his mother’s behavior changed radically. He describes his mother as a “wicked witch” on (pg 30), which hit the nail on the head. She exhibits the behavior of the prototypical BPD Witch. “The darkness within the borderline Witch is annihilating rage. Her inner experience is the conviction of being evil, and her behavior evokes submission… She is filled with self-hatred and may single out one child as the target of her rage. The Witch’s message to her child is: Life is war” (pg 38) Lawson.

WOW. Catherine was most certainly filled with rage. Every page of that book, Catherine was filled with rage that she took out on her son day in and day out. Her inner experience is the conviction of being evil, where she even speaks of it on (pg 41) of Pelzer’s book, “Now it’s time I showed you what hell is like!” Throughout all of her abuse, her behavior was to evoke submission from David. She was constantly beating him down mentally, emotionally, and physically. He says that his soul was consumed in a black void from the intense abuse by his mother (pg 132). She certainly was filled with self hatred as indicated by her alcoholism, not taking care of herself (“Her once beautiful, shiny hair is now frazzled clumps. As usual, she wears no makeup. She is overweight, and she knows it. In all, this has become Mother’s typcial look” pg 5), and being so filled with annihilating rage. And, the fact that the BPD Witch singles out one child as a target of her rage is so revealing because Catherine singled out David. For years he was the only child abused. When David was put into foster care, the younger brother was then singled out as the target of her rage.

David was without a doubt the “no-good child”; however, remarkably he didn’t turn-out to be what Lawson identified as the lost child (pg 171). His mother, Catherine, called him a “bad boy”, and an entire chapter is devoted to the “bad boy” David.

Catherine had David look in the mirror and recite, “I’m a bad boy” repeatedly (pg 31). Even though he was successful with school, his mother told him he was a “bad boy” and held him back in the 1st grade (pg 36). David was left out of Christmas due to Santa only bringing “good boys and girls” toys (pg 38). His mother accuses David of making her life a “living hell” (pg 41) and talks to the other siblings saying how she didn’t have to worry about them becoming like David, “a bad boy” (pg 43). Even when David was awarded the honor of naming the school newspaper, Catherine says, “There is nothing you can do to impress me! Do you understand me? You are a nobody! An IT! You are nonexistent! You are a bastard child! I hate you and I wish you were dead. Dead! Do you hear me? Dead!” (pg 140).

As mentioned above, the BPD Witch’s message to her child is that life is war. David recieved that message pretty early into the story as he states on (pg 43), “For the first time, I had won! Standing alone in that damp, dark garage, I knew, for the first time, that I could survive. I decided that I would use any tactic I could think of to defeat Mother or to delay her from her grizzly obsession.” Catherine put David in the middle of an all out war with her, even making him sit in the prisoner of war position (pg 50, 84, 111, 114, 123) by sitting on his hands with his head thrust backward. Lawson states (pg 125), “The Witch’s children feel like prisoners of a secret war.”

In Lawson (pg 137), rejection triggers the desperate fear of sinking into the cold, dark abyss of abandonment, a fate the BPD Witch feels worse than death. Catherine was an alcoholic who had been drinking from the age of 13. Brought up in the Mormon community of Salt Lake City, she would hide in the outhouse during Prohibition to wince down bootleg whiskey. Her parents were divorced, which made them outcasts in that religious community, and Catherine was frequently locked in a closet, denied food, and told how despicable she was. Catherine primarily appears as a Witch, which a BPD who primarily appear as a Witch is filled with self-hatred as a result of surviving a childhood that required complete submission to a hostile or sadistic caregiver (pg 131) Lawson.

The BPD Witch is sadistically controlling and punitive with her children where they fear their survival. The Witch’s children are forced to submit to her control and may be victims of sadistic emotional, physical, or sexual abuse. Lawson explains, “Therapists hear horrifying stores of child abuse that never make the headlines… Some children may not survive simply because they are too young to get away” (pg 122). David Pelzer is VERY fortunate that he survived his horrifying ordeal with his mother.

Throughout the book, David speaks of being able to survive his mother’s abuse. He made a promise to himself when the discipline drastically turned to punishment out of control, “I knew, for the first time, that I could survive. I decided that I would use any tactic I could think of to defeat Mother… I knew if I wanted to live, I would have to think ahead… I could never give in to her. That day I vowed to myself that I would never, ever again give that bitch the satisfaction of hearing me beg her to stop beating me” (pg 43). He later refers back to that promise when he was stabbed by his mother, “I wanted to lie down and quit, but the promise I made years ago kept me going. I wanted to show The Bitch that she could beat me only if I died, and I was determined not to give in, even to death” (pg 91). He was a survivor from the start through his determination of thought. References of survival also include:

He also talks about that “water was my only means of survival” (pg 104) as his mother starved him for ten consecutive days. Later, when his mother used chlorine gas while locking him in the bathroom, David relates that “to survive her new game, I had to use my head” (pg 108). He started to lose his instinct for survival when his mother had him sit in POW style on a 1 inch diameter of rocks, stating “all my efforts for mere survival seemed futile. My attempts to stay one step ahead of Mother were useless. A black shadow was always over me” (pg 111).

Because the Witch emerges when the mother and child are alone, no witnesses can verify the child’s experience (pg 125) Lawson. Catherine typically abused David when no one else was around, making sure to cover up the abuse if and when family members returned to the house. David says on pg 42, “I knew Mother never acted his bizarre when anyone else was in the house.”

When Ron came home, Catherine ceased to attempt to burn David further on the stove (pg 42). When Catherine tried to have David eat the dirty diapers, the abuse stopped when Ron, Stan, and David’s father returned to the vacation cabin (pg 57). David always noted that he appreciated when his father was home, calling him his protector, as the abuse was not as prevalent. (pg 101). When he would come home from school and his brothers weren’t home, David knew that his mother’s “game” would be full force. After Ron and Stan went go to bed, Catherine ordered David upstairs to feed him ammonia (pg 73). David even devotes an entire chapter to “When Father is Away”, starting the chapter with, “When he was home, Mother only did about half the things that she did when he was gone” (pg 101).

The BPD Witch can be cruel to the target of her rage; however other children may not perceive her as a Witch if they do not possess qualities that trigger her rage. With the information contained in Pelzer’s book, Catherine did not treat the older two or younger baby abusively. They were immune to her physical abuse. Being cruel, the BPD Witch may make a statement such as “I’m going to make your life a living Hell” or “I’m going to kill you” (pg 137) states Lawson. Catherine said both of these statements to David: (pg 41) “Now it’s time I showed you what hell is like!” and (pg 85) “If you don’t finish on time, I’m going to kill you.” David continues by saying that she said that same statement over and over for almost a week (pg 86).

The need for power and control over others is important to the BPD Witch as well as the need to elicit a response of fear and shock. Catherine certainly illustrated how she needed each of these. She exerted power over David, reducing him to a “slave” (pg 50, 84, 126), an “it” (pg 140), and “the boy” (pg 50). She controlled every part of his life down to what he ate (or rather, what he didn’t eat). He was controlled through having to “work” constantly around the house with only being allowed to attend school. Her pathological “needs” resulted in David viewing his home as a “madhouse” (pg 104) and “hell house ” (pg 137), as well as his existance as a “morbid life” (pg 116). He felt as if his soul was consumed in a “black void” (pg 132).

She used fear and shock throughout her abuse. He was relegated to the basement on a cot, not knowing when he would be fed, allowed to see sunlight, or beat (ten rounders (pg 111), whipped with dog chains (pg 116), broom handle blows to the backs of legs (pg 117)). He was often intense with fear: shaking, unable to concentrate, heart skipping beats, and startled. He was put though tremendous shocking situations such as being fed ammonia, subjected to chlorine gas, submerged under cold water for long lengths of time, burned on a gas stove, arm dislocated, stabbed in the abdomen, smashed into the counters breaking his teeth, forced to eat dirty diapers & rancid food, and so much more.

Children who resist the control face worse punishment. David did not resist her control. He knew the rules & punishments to his mother’s “game”: (1) if he took too long to do his chores, his mother would withhold food (2) if he looked at one of his siblings without permission, he was slapped (3) if he was caught taking food, he was subjected to hideous punishment (pg 83).

David did not resist control. He would do everything in his power to get his work done under her strict time restraints. He says (pg 50) during the time when he had to stand until summoned to perform chores, “It was made very clear that getting caught sitting or lying down in the basement would bring dire consequences. I had become my Mother’s slave.” Without putting up a fight, he took his “punishments”: remaining in the chlorine gas filled bathroom, submerged under cold water & then forced to sit outside on rocks 1 inch in diameter (Bathtub and Backyard Treatment pg 114), and skating in icy cold weather without appropriate clothing (pg 120). Additionally, he would sit for extraordinary lengths of time on the bottom step standing and in POW position as she instructed. Once when he decided to not “take anybody’s crap anymore” (pg 142), the results were a stomping from his brothers and Mother, a special batch of chlorine gas in the bathroom, and a choking.

Destroying valued objects and being intentionally withholding, the BPD Witch may intentionally withhold what their children need. David’s mother withheld food from David, severely starving him. He only had his brother’s left-overs from breakfast on occasion, a P&J sandwich with a few carrot sticks for lunch, and rarely any dinner. Due to the obsession to find food, David resorted to taking other kid’s lunches, (pg 48), food from the grocery store (pg 59), frozen cafeteria food (pg 63), begging for food (pg 69), and frozen from from his basement (pg 79). He also would eat scraps from his garbage can after his family ate (pg 62) until his mother started to add ammonia to the waste or planting rotten food so that he would get sick (pg 63). She also would tease the starving boy by putting food in front of him then taking it away (Two Minute Game pg 105 -107). When she found out about his eating of frozen cafeteria food, she forced him to vomit it up by forcing her finger down his throat, scooping the vomit out of the toilet, and then eating the vomit later that evening (pg 66 – 68).

Along with withholding food, Catherine also intentionally withheld proper hygiene and clothes for David. Kids made fun of him for how he smelled calling him David Pelzer-Smellzer, and teachers not used to his smell wave their hands in front of their face. He was consistently in tattered and worn clothes, even if new clothes existed in the home for him.

David says, “Because my Mother had me wear the same clothes week after week, by October my clothes had become weathered, torn, and smelly” (pg 47). He continues further in the chapter, “In September, I returned to school with last year’s clothes” (pg 57). He indicates that his mother had newer clothes for him but withheld them: “One Sunday during the last month of summer … Mom let me put on new clothes that I had received last Christmas” (pg 123). By the time he was rescued, “My long sleeve shirt has more holes than Swiss cheese. It’s the same shirt I’ve worn for about two years. Mother has me wear it every day as her way to humiliate me. My pants are just as bad, and my shoes have holes in the toes. I can wiggle my big toe out of one of them” (pg 6).

The BPD Witch organizes a “campaign of denigration”, enlisting others as allies against the target of her rage. “She may seek out friends, family members (including siblings and children), and co-workers of her victim in whom to confide fabricated stories designed to discredit her enemy” (pg 141) says Lawson. David’s mother, Catherine, denigrated David by turning family against David including his father and other siblings. She also had the school turned against him, pegging him as a thief and “bad boy”. She told neighbors negative things about David, further denigrating him. Many believe the allegations because of the intensity of emotion. When the ability to enlist allies disrupts and divides groups, such as neighbors and the school system, that could actually help him.

The Witch does not recognize boundaries and exploit the child’s trust by denying right to privacy and humiliating & degrading the child.

Catherine stripped off David’s clothes having him stand naked, where he “shook from a combination of fear and embarrassment” (pg 40). For months, David was forced to sleep under the breakfast table next to a cat litter box with newspapers as his covers (pg 68). After his mother made David drink dish-washing soap, David needed to use the bathroom and begged his mother to use the bathroom, and she refused. David “stood downstairs, afraid to move, as clumps of the watery matter fell through my underwear and down my pant legs, onto the floor. I felt so degraded; I cried like a baby. I had no self respect of any kind… I felt lower than a dog” (pg 77). While lying naked in the tub submerged as his mother instructed, his brothers would come into the bathroom, glare at him, shake their heads, and turn away (pg 113). After all the humiliation he endured, he talks about how he ate like a homeless dog, grunted to communicate, didn’t care if he was made fun of, and nothing was below him (pg 132). At one point, his morale became so low that he hoped to be killed (pg 141).

The BPD Witch seeks and marries a “Fisherman”, someone she can dominate and control, which is EXACTLY who Catherine married. Stephen Pelzer was completely dominated and controlled by Catherine. He was a subservient partner who relinquished his will at her command (pg 179), as Lawson describes the Fisherman. Further, this type of husband has little or no self-esteem and see himself as a loser. He also fails to protect his children from abuse. All of these characteristics fit Stephen who does not step in to stop the abuse (pg 50, 58):

When David was first deprived of food, Stephen gives David scraps of food and tries to get Catherine to change her mind about feeding David. Catherine and Stephen begin to fight, and as the arguments between them became more frequent, the Stephen began to change– he is not around for David. When David was forced to eat his own vomited hot dog, his father “stood like a statue”and watched him eat something “a dog wouldn’t touch” after unsuccessfully “trying to talk Mother out of her demand” (pg 66 -67) David’s father stood by as David’s mother refused to let David use the bathroom but instead had to use a five-gallon bucket to relieve his diarrhea (pg 77). David’s father started to help David with the dishes. Catherine stopped this, as well as she said that Stephen gave David too much attention. After that, David notes that his father “gave up” (pg 101 -102). When David was stabbed by his mother, David’s father didn’t even look at David when David reported the incident.

David said, “I knew that Mother controlled him like she controlled everything that happened in her house… All my respect for my Father was gone” (pg 90 – 91). Stephen gave up on David without a fight and started not even staying at home on his days off. One day he told David that he was sorry (pg 103) and eventually left the family all together (pg151), leaving David at the hands of his terribly abusive mother, Catherine. David said that he was fully aware of his father’s lack of courage to rescue him, and he hated him for it (pg 134).

Marsha Linehan, in her book Cognitive Behavioral Treatment of the Borderline Patient, describes the normalcy that BPD’s present to others. When people around the BPD mother hear her complaining about her child, the assumption is that the child is troubled rather than the mother. Further in social settings, the BPD mother may be engaging, gracious, and endearing.

David talks about how when his mother was a den mother for the Cub Scouts, the kids commented how they wished their mother was like Catherine (pg 39). She snowed the school administration by showing up with her infant son in her arms and agreeing to cooperate with the school regarding David (pg 53). Additionally, he notes that in the presence of neighbors, his mother “played the role of the loving, caring parent– just as she had when she was a Cub Scout den mother” (pg 122). Catherine also painted a different picture of their home life when David’s Grandmother came for the holidays (pg 126).

Lawson points out that “children have faith in their parents and believe in their greater wisdom. No child wants to believe that his mother is capable of brutality” (pg 273).

After stabbing David, he accepted his mother’s increased compassion towards him. He hoped that she was trying to make up to him and hoping that he was back into the “family fold” (pg 94). Later that night, when he goes to bed with the large laceration, he goes so far to say “I felt safe knowing she was nearby to watch over me” (pg 95). Before a visit from Social Services, Catherine manipulates David into thinking that his ordeal was over and that she will “try to be a good mother” (pg 123). He even starts calling her “Mom” at this point. Near the end of the book, David is called an “It” by his mother, and he reveals, “I gave all that I could to accomplish anything possible for her recognition. But again, I failed. Mother’s words were no longer coming from the booze; they were coming from her heart” (pg 141).

So, even through the devastating and intense abuse, David still held onto the hope that his mother loved him and that she would return to being a nurturing and caring parent.

Through and through, I believe that Catherine suffered from Borderline Personality Disorder. She illustrates the maternal functioning of a Borderline Mother, including:

Confusing her child Not apologizing for or remember inappropriate behavior Expects to be taken care of Punishes or discourages independence Envies, ignores, or demeans her children’s accomplishments Destroys, denigrates, or undermines self-esteem Expects children to respond to her needs Frightens and upsets children Disciplines inconsistently or punitively Feels left out, jealous, or resentful if child is loved by someone else Uses threats or abandonment (or actual abandonment) to punish the child Does not believe in her children’s basic goodness Does not trust her children

Catherine fully qualifies for each of these points. Further and more specifically, as the Witch BPD mother, she sent the following messages to David:

I could kill you You will be sorry You won’t get away with this You deserve to suffer I’d be better off without you You’ll never escape my control It’s my right as your parent to control you I’m going to make you pay

The Witch’s child is raised in a hopeless situation– and David made it out with his resolve, smart thinking, and strong will. The Witch’s words can be vile, her heart cold as stone– thankfully David survived the vile words and the heartless mother to become a highly successful man and an inspiration for all.

During the entire time I was reading “A Child Called It’ , I couldn’t help but draw correlations between David Pelzer’s mother (Catherine Roerva Christen Pelzer) and Borderline Personality Disorder. After I was finished reading the book, I started my search to see what mental illness Catherine had suffered. All I have managed to find was that she was mentally ill and an alcoholic. No details have emerged of what type of mental illness she suffered. So, with the facts about Catherine from “A Child Called It” and professional resources about BPD, I will pose case that Catherine suffered from Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD).

Dave Pelzer paints the picture of a seemingly normal childhood until his mother’s behavior changed radically. He describes his mother as a “wicked witch” on (pg 30), which hit the nail on the head. She exhibits the behavior of the prototypical BPD Witch. “The darkness within the borderline Witch is annihilating rage. Her inner experience is the conviction of being evil, and her behavior evokes submission… She is filled with self-hatred and may single out one child as the target of her rage. The Witch’s message to her child is: Life is war” (pg 38) Lawson.

WOW. Catherine was most certainly filled with rage. Every page of that book, Catherine was filled with rage that she took out on her son day in and day out. Her inner experience is the conviction of being evil, where she even speaks of it on (pg 41) of Pelzer’s book, “Now it’s time I showed you what hell is like!” Throughout all of her abuse, her behavior was to evoke submission from David. She was constantly beating him down mentally, emotionally, and physically. He says that his soul was consumed in a black void from the intense abuse by his mother (pg 132). She certainly was filled with self hatred as indicated by her alcoholism, not taking care of herself (“Her once beautiful, shiny hair is now frazzled clumps. As usual, she wears no makeup. She is overweight, and she knows it. In all, this has become Mother’s typcial look” pg 5), and being so filled with annihilating rage. And, the fact that the BPD Witch singles out one child as a target of her rage is so revealing because Catherine singled out David. For years he was the only child abused. When David was put into foster care, the younger brother was then singled out as the target of her rage.

David was without a doubt the “no-good child”; however, remarkably he didn’t turn-out to be what Lawson identified as the lost child (pg 171). His mother, Catherine, called him a “bad boy”, and an entire chapter is devoted to the “bad boy” David.

Catherine had David look in the mirror and recite, “I’m a bad boy” repeatedly (pg 31). Even though he was successful with school, his mother told him he was a “bad boy” and held him back in the 1st grade (pg 36). David was left out of Christmas due to Santa only bringing “good boys and girls” toys (pg 38). His mother accuses David of making her life a “living hell” (pg 41) and talks to the other siblings saying how she didn’t have to worry about them becoming like David, “a bad boy” (pg 43). Even when David was awarded the honor of naming the school newspaper, Catherine says, “There is nothing you can do to impress me! Do you understand me? You are a nobody! An IT! You are nonexistent! You are a bastard child! I hate you and I wish you were dead. Dead! Do you hear me? Dead!” (pg 140).

As mentioned above, the BPD Witch’s message to her child is that life is war. David recieved that message pretty early into the story as he states on (pg 43), “For the first time, I had won! Standing alone in that damp, dark garage, I knew, for the first time, that I could survive. I decided that I would use any tactic I could think of to defeat Mother or to delay her from her grizzly obsession.” Catherine put David in the middle of an all out war with her, even making him sit in the prisoner of war position (pg 50, 84, 111, 114, 123) by sitting on his hands with his head thrust backward. Lawson states (pg 125), “The Witch’s children feel like prisoners of a secret war.”

In Lawson (pg 137), rejection triggers the desperate fear of sinking into the cold, dark abyss of abandonment, a fate the BPD Witch feels worse than death. Catherine was an alcoholic who had been drinking from the age of 13. Brought up in the Mormon community of Salt Lake City, she would hide in the outhouse during Prohibition to wince down bootleg whiskey. Her parents were divorced, which made them outcasts in that religious community, and Catherine was frequently locked in a closet, denied food, and told how despicable she was. Catherine primarily appears as a Witch, which a BPD who primarily appear as a Witch is filled with self-hatred as a result of surviving a childhood that required complete submission to a hostile or sadistic caregiver (pg 131) Lawson.

The BPD Witch is sadistically controlling and punitive with her children where they fear their survival. The Witch’s children are forced to submit to her control and may be victims of sadistic emotional, physical, or sexual abuse. Lawson explains, “Therapists hear horrifying stores of child abuse that never make the headlines… Some children may not survive simply because they are too young to get away” (pg 122). David Pelzer is VERY fortunate that he survived his horrifying ordeal with his mother.

Throughout the book, David speaks of being able to survive his mother’s abuse. He made a promise to himself when the discipline drastically turned to punishment out of control, “I knew, for the first time, that I could survive. I decided that I would use any tactic I could think of to defeat Mother… I knew if I wanted to live, I would have to think ahead… I could never give in to her. That day I vowed to myself that I would never, ever again give that bitch the satisfaction of hearing me beg her to stop beating me” (pg 43). He later refers back to that promise when he was stabbed by his mother, “I wanted to lie down and quit, but the promise I made years ago kept me going. I wanted to show The Bitch that she could beat me only if I died, and I was determined not to give in, even to death” (pg 91). He was a survivor from the start through his determination of thought. References of survival also include:

He also talks about that “water was my only means of survival” (pg 104) as his mother starved him for ten consecutive days. Later, when his mother used chlorine gas while locking him in the bathroom, David relates that “to survive her new game, I had to use my head” (pg 108). He started to lose his instinct for survival when his mother had him sit in POW style on a 1 inch diameter of rocks, stating “all my efforts for mere survival seemed futile. My attempts to stay one step ahead of Mother were useless. A black shadow was always over me” (pg 111).

Because the Witch emerges when the mother and child are alone, no witnesses can verify the child’s experience (pg 125) Lawson. Catherine typically abused David when no one else was around, making sure to cover up the abuse if and when family members returned to the house. David says on pg 42, “I knew Mother never acted his bizarre when anyone else was in the house.”

When Ron came home, Catherine ceased to attempt to burn David further on the stove (pg 42). When Catherine tried to have David eat the dirty diapers, the abuse stopped when Ron, Stan, and David’s father returned to the vacation cabin (pg 57). David always noted that he appreciated when his father was home, calling him his protector, as the abuse was not as prevalent. (pg 101). When he would come home from school and his brothers weren’t home, David knew that his mother’s “game” would be full force. After Ron and Stan went go to bed, Catherine ordered David upstairs to feed him ammonia (pg 73). David even devotes an entire chapter to “When Father is Away”, starting the chapter with, “When he was home, Mother only did about half the things that she did when he was gone” (pg 101).

The BPD Witch can be cruel to the target of her rage; however other children may not perceive her as a Witch if they do not possess qualities that trigger her rage. With the information contained in Pelzer’s book, Catherine did not treat the older two or younger baby abusively. They were immune to her physical abuse. Being cruel, the BPD Witch may make a statement such as “I’m going to make your life a living Hell” or “I’m going to kill you” (pg 137) states Lawson. Catherine said both of these statements to David: (pg 41) “Now it’s time I showed you what hell is like!” and (pg 85) “If you don’t finish on time, I’m going to kill you.” David continues by saying that she said that same statement over and over for almost a week (pg 86).

The need for power and control over others is important to the BPD Witch as well as the need to elicit a response of fear and shock. Catherine certainly illustrated how she needed each of these. She exerted power over David, reducing him to a “slave” (pg 50, 84, 126), an “it” (pg 140), and “the boy” (pg 50). She controlled every part of his life down to what he ate (or rather, what he didn’t eat). He was controlled through having to “work” constantly around the house with only being allowed to attend school. Her pathological “needs” resulted in David viewing his home as a “madhouse” (pg 104) and “hell house ” (pg 137), as well as his existance as a “morbid life” (pg 116). He felt as if his soul was consumed in a “black void” (pg 132).

She used fear and shock throughout her abuse. He was relegated to the basement on a cot, not knowing when he would be fed, allowed to see sunlight, or beat (ten rounders (pg 111), whipped with dog chains (pg 116), broom handle blows to the backs of legs (pg 117)). He was often intense with fear: shaking, unable to concentrate, heart skipping beats, and startled. He was put though tremendous shocking situations such as being fed ammonia, subjected to chlorine gas, submerged under cold water for long lengths of time, burned on a gas stove, arm dislocated, stabbed in the abdomen, smashed into the counters breaking his teeth, forced to eat dirty diapers & rancid food, and so much more.

Children who resist the control face worse punishment. David did not resist her control. He knew the rules & punishments to his mother’s “game”: (1) if he took too long to do his chores, his mother would withhold food (2) if he looked at one of his siblings without permission, he was slapped (3) if he was caught taking food, he was subjected to hideous punishment (pg 83).

David did not resist control. He would do everything in his power to get his work done under her strict time restraints. He says (pg 50) during the time when he had to stand until summoned to perform chores, “It was made very clear that getting caught sitting or lying down in the basement would bring dire consequences. I had become my Mother’s slave.” Without putting up a fight, he took his “punishments”: remaining in the chlorine gas filled bathroom, submerged under cold water & then forced to sit outside on rocks 1 inch in diameter (Bathtub and Backyard Treatment pg 114), and skating in icy cold weather without appropriate clothing (pg 120). Additionally, he would sit for extraordinary lengths of time on the bottom step standing and in POW position as she instructed. Once when he decided to not “take anybody’s crap anymore” (pg 142), the results were a stomping from his brothers and Mother, a special batch of chlorine gas in the bathroom, and a choking.

Destroying valued objects and being intentionally withholding, the BPD Witch may intentionally withhold what their children need. David’s mother withheld food from David, severely starving him. He only had his brother’s left-overs from breakfast on occasion, a P&J sandwich with a few carrot sticks for lunch, and rarely any dinner. Due to the obsession to find food, David resorted to taking other kid’s lunches, (pg 48), food from the grocery store (pg 59), frozen cafeteria food (pg 63), begging for food (pg 69), and frozen from from his basement (pg 79). He also would eat scraps from his garbage can after his family ate (pg 62) until his mother started to add ammonia to the waste or planting rotten food so that he would get sick (pg 63). She also would tease the starving boy by putting food in front of him then taking it away (Two Minute Game pg 105 -107). When she found out about his eating of frozen cafeteria food, she forced him to vomit it up by forcing her finger down his throat, scooping the vomit out of the toilet, and then eating the vomit later that evening (pg 66 – 68).

Along with withholding food, Catherine also intentionally withheld proper hygiene and clothes for David. Kids made fun of him for how he smelled calling him David Pelzer-Smellzer, and teachers not used to his smell wave their hands in front of their face. He was consistently in tattered and worn clothes, even if new clothes existed in the home for him.

David says, “Because my Mother had me wear the same clothes week after week, by October my clothes had become weathered, torn, and smelly” (pg 47). He continues further in the chapter, “In September, I returned to school with last year’s clothes” (pg 57). He indicates that his mother had newer clothes for him but withheld them: “One Sunday during the last month of summer … Mom let me put on new clothes that I had received last Christmas” (pg 123). By the time he was rescued, “My long sleeve shirt has more holes than Swiss cheese. It’s the same shirt I’ve worn for about two years. Mother has me wear it every day as her way to humiliate me. My pants are just as bad, and my shoes have holes in the toes. I can wiggle my big toe out of one of them” (pg 6).

The BPD Witch organizes a “campaign of denigration”, enlisting others as allies against the target of her rage. “She may seek out friends, family members (including siblings and children), and co-workers of her victim in whom to confide fabricated stories designed to discredit her enemy” (pg 141) says Lawson. David’s mother, Catherine, denigrated David by turning family against David including his father and other siblings. She also had the school turned against him, pegging him as a thief and “bad boy”. She told neighbors negative things about David, further denigrating him. Many believe the allegations because of the intensity of emotion. When the ability to enlist allies disrupts and divides groups, such as neighbors and the school system, that could actually help him.

The Witch does not recognize boundaries and exploit the child’s trust by denying right to privacy and humiliating & degrading the child.

Catherine stripped off David’s clothes having him stand naked, where he “shook from a combination of fear and embarrassment” (pg 40). For months, David was forced to sleep under the breakfast table next to a cat litter box with newspapers as his covers (pg 68). After his mother made David drink dish-washing soap, David needed to use the bathroom and begged his mother to use the bathroom, and she refused. David “stood downstairs, afraid to move, as clumps of the watery matter fell through my underwear and down my pant legs, onto the floor. I felt so degraded; I cried like a baby. I had no self respect of any kind… I felt lower than a dog” (pg 77). While lying naked in the tub submerged as his mother instructed, his brothers would come into the bathroom, glare at him, shake their heads, and turn away (pg 113). After all the humiliation he endured, he talks about how he ate like a homeless dog, grunted to communicate, didn’t care if he was made fun of, and nothing was below him (pg 132). At one point, his morale became so low that he hoped to be killed (pg 141).

The BPD Witch seeks and marries a “Fisherman”, someone she can dominate and control, which is EXACTLY who Catherine married. Stephen Pelzer was completely dominated and controlled by Catherine. He was a subservient partner who relinquished his will at her command (pg 179), as Lawson describes the Fisherman. Further, this type of husband has little or no self-esteem and see himself as a loser. He also fails to protect his children from abuse. All of these characteristics fit Stephen who does not step in to stop the abuse (pg 50, 58):

When David was first deprived of food, Stephen gives David scraps of food and tries to get Catherine to change her mind about feeding David. Catherine and Stephen begin to fight, and as the arguments between them became more frequent, the Stephen began to change– he is not around for David. When David was forced to eat his own vomited hot dog, his father “stood like a statue”and watched him eat something “a dog wouldn’t touch” after unsuccessfully “trying to talk Mother out of her demand” (pg 66 -67) David’s father stood by as David’s mother refused to let David use the bathroom but instead had to use a five-gallon bucket to relieve his diarrhea (pg 77). David’s father started to help David with the dishes. Catherine stopped this, as well as she said that Stephen gave David too much attention. After that, David notes that his father “gave up” (pg 101 -102). When David was stabbed by his mother, David’s father didn’t even look at David when David reported the incident.

David said, “I knew that Mother controlled him like she controlled everything that happened in her house… All my respect for my Father was gone” (pg 90 – 91). Stephen gave up on David without a fight and started not even staying at home on his days off. One day he told David that he was sorry (pg 103) and eventually left the family all together (pg151), leaving David at the hands of his terribly abusive mother, Catherine. David said that he was fully aware of his father’s lack of courage to rescue him, and he hated him for it (pg 134).

Marsha Linehan, in her book Cognitive Behavioral Treatment of the Borderline Patient, describes the normalcy that BPD’s present to others. When people around the BPD mother hear her complaining about her child, the assumption is that the child is troubled rather than the mother. Further in social settings, the BPD mother may be engaging, gracious, and endearing.

David talks about how when his mother was a den mother for the Cub Scouts, the kids commented how they wished their mother was like Catherine (pg 39). She snowed the school administration by showing up with her infant son in her arms and agreeing to cooperate with the school regarding David (pg 53). Additionally, he notes that in the presence of neighbors, his mother “played the role of the loving, caring parent– just as she had when she was a Cub Scout den mother” (pg 122). Catherine also painted a different picture of their home life when David’s Grandmother came for the holidays (pg 126).

Lawson points out that “children have faith in their parents and believe in their greater wisdom. No child wants to believe that his mother is capable of brutality” (pg 273).

After stabbing David, he accepted his mother’s increased compassion towards him. He hoped that she was trying to make up to him and hoping that he was back into the “family fold” (pg 94). Later that night, when he goes to bed with the large laceration, he goes so far to say “I felt safe knowing she was nearby to watch over me” (pg 95). Before a visit from Social Services, Catherine manipulates David into thinking that his ordeal was over and that she will “try to be a good mother” (pg 123). He even starts calling her “Mom” at this point. Near the end of the book, David is called an “It” by his mother, and he reveals, “I gave all that I could to accomplish anything possible for her recognition. But again, I failed. Mother’s words were no longer coming from the booze; they were coming from her heart” (pg 141).

So, even through the devastating and intense abuse, David still held onto the hope that his mother loved him and that she would return to being a nurturing and caring parent.

Through and through, I believe that Catherine suffered from Borderline Personality Disorder. She illustrates the maternal functioning of a Borderline Mother, including:

Confusing her child Not apologizing for or remember inappropriate behavior Expects to be taken care of Punishes or discourages independence Envies, ignores, or demeans her children’s accomplishments Destroys, denigrates, or undermines self-esteem Expects children to respond to her needs Frightens and upsets children Disciplines inconsistently or punitively Feels left out, jealous, or resentful if child is loved by someone else Uses threats or abandonment (or actual abandonment) to punish the child Does not believe in her children’s basic goodness Does not trust her children

Catherine fully qualifies for each of these points. Further and more specifically, as the Witch BPD mother, she sent the following messages to David:

I could kill you You will be sorry You won’t get away with this You deserve to suffer I’d be better off without you You’ll never escape my control It’s my right as your parent to control you I’m going to make you pay

The Witch’s child is raised in a hopeless situation– and David made it out with his resolve, smart thinking, and strong will. The Witch’s words can be vile, her heart cold as stone– thankfully David survived the vile words and the heartless mother to become a highly successful man and an inspiration for all.

I make a number of assumptions when conducting a substance use evaluation as part of a litigation process: 1) the individual’s use is usually not less than the individual reports, but it might often be more (or much more); 2) inaccurate accusations of substance abuse are common because there is usually little negative consequence for inaccurate accusations; 3) the parties to the litigation, and those connected with them, may provide biased and inaccurate information. Therefore outside corroboration of their reports is essential for determining the extent and consequences of substance use.

As a practical matter, getting outside corroboration (information from sources not connected with the litigation) is difficult because such information may simply not exist, or obtaining it would require work performed by other professionals (such as private investigators) rather than by psychologists. That work would be outside the scope of the psychological evaluation the individual has consented to. An evaluation that obtained outside corroboration could be conducted at great expense, but would require weeks to months of effort and at best would only establish the history of substance problems (or lack of them). Such an evaluation would be appropriate when litigation is only concerned with history and not with the future (as it is in child custody litigation).

In my typical evaluation I document what is reported by the parties, conduct basic psychological and addiction testing, review documentation, and interview collaterals, as appropriate to each case. In some cases I am able to identify reports that are unlikely or impossible (e.g., consuming only 2 beers would not result 90 minutes later in BAL of .22). In some cases the information I obtain allows me to offer a firm diagnostic opinion. However, in most cases I will not have a firm diagnostic opinion, because I will not have sufficient firm evidence.

Even with a firm diagnostic opinion, the prediction of future substance use is problematic. An individual’s substance use can change, suddenly, dramatically and without treatment or support group attendance, in response to changes in the environment. Litigation often produces substantial environmental changes, and therefore has the potential to lead to significant decreases (or increases) in substance use. The diagnostic manual (DSM-IV-TR, page 221) recognizes that “some individuals (perhaps 20% or more) with Alcohol Dependence achieve long-term sobriety even without active treatment.”

Consequently, if the litigation has a future focus, my normal recommendation is to obtain substance testing on a continuous basis. I will monitor the results of this testing if the court requests it. Random testing might work in some cases, but it allows a significant potential for delay in discovering problems. Such delay is unacceptable when the best interests of children are involved. Depending on the substances of concern, testing involves the individual stopping at a drug testing facility two to three times per week to provide a urine sample. Modifications to the basic plan need to be made if the individual tested is a reportedly moderate drinker, but in some instances such individuals are willing to abstain completely for the sake of eliminating suspicions about their having alcohol problems.

I normally recommend that the testing be paid for by the other party, and continued as long as the other party feels it is worth paying for. Solomon knew that the true mother would only want what was best for her child. Even Solomon did not try, simply based on the reports he received, to determine which mother was telling the truth.

During the entire time I was reading “A Child Called It’ , I couldn’t help but draw correlations between David Pelzer’s mother (Catherine Roerva Christen Pelzer) and Borderline Personality Disorder. After I was finished reading the book, I started my search to see what mental illness Catherine had suffered. All I have managed to find was that she was mentally ill and an alcoholic. No details have emerged of what type of mental illness she suffered. So, with the facts about Catherine from “A Child Called It” and professional resources about BPD, I will pose case that Catherine suffered from Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD).

Dave Pelzer paints the picture of a seemingly normal childhood until his mother’s behavior changed radically. He describes his mother as a “wicked witch” on (pg 30), which hit the nail on the head. She exhibits the behavior of the prototypical BPD Witch. “The darkness within the borderline Witch is annihilating rage. Her inner experience is the conviction of being evil, and her behavior evokes submission… She is filled with self-hatred and may single out one child as the target of her rage. The Witch’s message to her child is: Life is war” (pg 38) Lawson.

WOW. Catherine was most certainly filled with rage. Every page of that book, Catherine was filled with rage that she took out on her son day in and day out. Her inner experience is the conviction of being evil, where she even speaks of it on (pg 41) of Pelzer’s book, “Now it’s time I showed you what hell is like!” Throughout all of her abuse, her behavior was to evoke submission from David. She was constantly beating him down mentally, emotionally, and physically. He says that his soul was consumed in a black void from the intense abuse by his mother (pg 132). She certainly was filled with self hatred as indicated by her alcoholism, not taking care of herself (“Her once beautiful, shiny hair is now frazzled clumps. As usual, she wears no makeup. She is overweight, and she knows it. In all, this has become Mother’s typcial look” pg 5), and being so filled with annihilating rage. And, the fact that the BPD Witch singles out one child as a target of her rage is so revealing because Catherine singled out David. For years he was the only child abused. When David was put into foster care, the younger brother was then singled out as the target of her rage.

David was without a doubt the “no-good child”; however, remarkably he didn’t turn-out to be what Lawson identified as the lost child (pg 171). His mother, Catherine, called him a “bad boy”, and an entire chapter is devoted to the “bad boy” David.

Catherine had David look in the mirror and recite, “I’m a bad boy” repeatedly (pg 31). Even though he was successful with school, his mother told him he was a “bad boy” and held him back in the 1st grade (pg 36). David was left out of Christmas due to Santa only bringing “good boys and girls” toys (pg 38). His mother accuses David of making her life a “living hell” (pg 41) and talks to the other siblings saying how she didn’t have to worry about them becoming like David, “a bad boy” (pg 43). Even when David was awarded the honor of naming the school newspaper, Catherine says, “There is nothing you can do to impress me! Do you understand me? You are a nobody! An IT! You are nonexistent! You are a bastard child! I hate you and I wish you were dead. Dead! Do you hear me? Dead!” (pg 140).

As mentioned above, the BPD Witch’s message to her child is that life is war. David recieved that message pretty early into the story as he states on (pg 43), “For the first time, I had won! Standing alone in that damp, dark garage, I knew, for the first time, that I could survive. I decided that I would use any tactic I could think of to defeat Mother or to delay her from her grizzly obsession.” Catherine put David in the middle of an all out war with her, even making him sit in the prisoner of war position (pg 50, 84, 111, 114, 123) by sitting on his hands with his head thrust backward. Lawson states (pg 125), “The Witch’s children feel like prisoners of a secret war.”

In Lawson (pg 137), rejection triggers the desperate fear of sinking into the cold, dark abyss of abandonment, a fate the BPD Witch feels worse than death. Catherine was an alcoholic who had been drinking from the age of 13. Brought up in the Mormon community of Salt Lake City, she would hide in the outhouse during Prohibition to wince down bootleg whiskey. Her parents were divorced, which made them outcasts in that religious community, and Catherine was frequently locked in a closet, denied food, and told how despicable she was. Catherine primarily appears as a Witch, which a BPD who primarily appear as a Witch is filled with self-hatred as a result of surviving a childhood that required complete submission to a hostile or sadistic caregiver (pg 131) Lawson.

The BPD Witch is sadistically controlling and punitive with her children where they fear their survival. The Witch’s children are forced to submit to her control and may be victims of sadistic emotional, physical, or sexual abuse. Lawson explains, “Therapists hear horrifying stores of child abuse that never make the headlines… Some children may not survive simply because they are too young to get away” (pg 122). David Pelzer is VERY fortunate that he survived his horrifying ordeal with his mother.

Throughout the book, David speaks of being able to survive his mother’s abuse. He made a promise to himself when the discipline drastically turned to punishment out of control, “I knew, for the first time, that I could survive. I decided that I would use any tactic I could think of to defeat Mother… I knew if I wanted to live, I would have to think ahead… I could never give in to her. That day I vowed to myself that I would never, ever again give that bitch the satisfaction of hearing me beg her to stop beating me” (pg 43). He later refers back to that promise when he was stabbed by his mother, “I wanted to lie down and quit, but the promise I made years ago kept me going. I wanted to show The Bitch that she could beat me only if I died, and I was determined not to give in, even to death” (pg 91). He was a survivor from the start through his determination of thought. References of survival also include:

He also talks about that “water was my only means of survival” (pg 104) as his mother starved him for ten consecutive days. Later, when his mother used chlorine gas while locking him in the bathroom, David relates that “to survive her new game, I had to use my head” (pg 108). He started to lose his instinct for survival when his mother had him sit in POW style on a 1 inch diameter of rocks, stating “all my efforts for mere survival seemed futile. My attempts to stay one step ahead of Mother were useless. A black shadow was always over me” (pg 111).

Because the Witch emerges when the mother and child are alone, no witnesses can verify the child’s experience (pg 125) Lawson. Catherine typically abused David when no one else was around, making sure to cover up the abuse if and when family members returned to the house. David says on pg 42, “I knew Mother never acted his bizarre when anyone else was in the house.”

When Ron came home, Catherine ceased to attempt to burn David further on the stove (pg 42). When Catherine tried to have David eat the dirty diapers, the abuse stopped when Ron, Stan, and David’s father returned to the vacation cabin (pg 57). David always noted that he appreciated when his father was home, calling him his protector, as the abuse was not as prevalent. (pg 101). When he would come home from school and his brothers weren’t home, David knew that his mother’s “game” would be full force. After Ron and Stan went go to bed, Catherine ordered David upstairs to feed him ammonia (pg 73). David even devotes an entire chapter to “When Father is Away”, starting the chapter with, “When he was home, Mother only did about half the things that she did when he was gone” (pg 101).

The BPD Witch can be cruel to the target of her rage; however other children may not perceive her as a Witch if they do not possess qualities that trigger her rage. With the information contained in Pelzer’s book, Catherine did not treat the older two or younger baby abusively. They were immune to her physical abuse. Being cruel, the BPD Witch may make a statement such as “I’m going to make your life a living Hell” or “I’m going to kill you” (pg 137) states Lawson. Catherine said both of these statements to David: (pg 41) “Now it’s time I showed you what hell is like!” and (pg 85) “If you don’t finish on time, I’m going to kill you.” David continues by saying that she said that same statement over and over for almost a week (pg 86).

The need for power and control over others is important to the BPD Witch as well as the need to elicit a response of fear and shock. Catherine certainly illustrated how she needed each of these. She exerted power over David, reducing him to a “slave” (pg 50, 84, 126), an “it” (pg 140), and “the boy” (pg 50). She controlled every part of his life down to what he ate (or rather, what he didn’t eat). He was controlled through having to “work” constantly around the house with only being allowed to attend school. Her pathological “needs” resulted in David viewing his home as a “madhouse” (pg 104) and “hell house ” (pg 137), as well as his existance as a “morbid life” (pg 116). He felt as if his soul was consumed in a “black void” (pg 132).

She used fear and shock throughout her abuse. He was relegated to the basement on a cot, not knowing when he would be fed, allowed to see sunlight, or beat (ten rounders (pg 111), whipped with dog chains (pg 116), broom handle blows to the backs of legs (pg 117)). He was often intense with fear: shaking, unable to concentrate, heart skipping beats, and startled. He was put though tremendous shocking situations such as being fed ammonia, subjected to chlorine gas, submerged under cold water for long lengths of time, burned on a gas stove, arm dislocated, stabbed in the abdomen, smashed into the counters breaking his teeth, forced to eat dirty diapers & rancid food, and so much more.

Children who resist the control face worse punishment. David did not resist her control. He knew the rules & punishments to his mother’s “game”: (1) if he took too long to do his chores, his mother would withhold food (2) if he looked at one of his siblings without permission, he was slapped (3) if he was caught taking food, he was subjected to hideous punishment (pg 83).

David did not resist control. He would do everything in his power to get his work done under her strict time restraints. He says (pg 50) during the time when he had to stand until summoned to perform chores, “It was made very clear that getting caught sitting or lying down in the basement would bring dire consequences. I had become my Mother’s slave.” Without putting up a fight, he took his “punishments”: remaining in the chlorine gas filled bathroom, submerged under cold water & then forced to sit outside on rocks 1 inch in diameter (Bathtub and Backyard Treatment pg 114), and skating in icy cold weather without appropriate clothing (pg 120). Additionally, he would sit for extraordinary lengths of time on the bottom step standing and in POW position as she instructed. Once when he decided to not “take anybody’s crap anymore” (pg 142), the results were a stomping from his brothers and Mother, a special batch of chlorine gas in the bathroom, and a choking.

Destroying valued objects and being intentionally withholding, the BPD Witch may intentionally withhold what their children need. David’s mother withheld food from David, severely starving him. He only had his brother’s left-overs from breakfast on occasion, a P&J sandwich with a few carrot sticks for lunch, and rarely any dinner. Due to the obsession to find food, David resorted to taking other kid’s lunches, (pg 48), food from the grocery store (pg 59), frozen cafeteria food (pg 63), begging for food (pg 69), and frozen from from his basement (pg 79). He also would eat scraps from his garbage can after his family ate (pg 62) until his mother started to add ammonia to the waste or planting rotten food so that he would get sick (pg 63). She also would tease the starving boy by putting food in front of him then taking it away (Two Minute Game pg 105 -107). When she found out about his eating of frozen cafeteria food, she forced him to vomit it up by forcing her finger down his throat, scooping the vomit out of the toilet, and then eating the vomit later that evening (pg 66 – 68).

Along with withholding food, Catherine also intentionally withheld proper hygiene and clothes for David. Kids made fun of him for how he smelled calling him David Pelzer-Smellzer, and teachers not used to his smell wave their hands in front of their face. He was consistently in tattered and worn clothes, even if new clothes existed in the home for him.

David says, “Because my Mother had me wear the same clothes week after week, by October my clothes had become weathered, torn, and smelly” (pg 47). He continues further in the chapter, “In September, I returned to school with last year’s clothes” (pg 57). He indicates that his mother had newer clothes for him but withheld them: “One Sunday during the last month of summer … Mom let me put on new clothes that I had received last Christmas” (pg 123). By the time he was rescued, “My long sleeve shirt has more holes than Swiss cheese. It’s the same shirt I’ve worn for about two years. Mother has me wear it every day as her way to humiliate me. My pants are just as bad, and my shoes have holes in the toes. I can wiggle my big toe out of one of them” (pg 6).

The BPD Witch organizes a “campaign of denigration”, enlisting others as allies against the target of her rage. “She may seek out friends, family members (including siblings and children), and co-workers of her victim in whom to confide fabricated stories designed to discredit her enemy” (pg 141) says Lawson. David’s mother, Catherine, denigrated David by turning family against David including his father and other siblings. She also had the school turned against him, pegging him as a thief and “bad boy”. She told neighbors negative things about David, further denigrating him. Many believe the allegations because of the intensity of emotion. When the ability to enlist allies disrupts and divides groups, such as neighbors and the school system, that could actually help him.

The Witch does not recognize boundaries and exploit the child’s trust by denying right to privacy and humiliating & degrading the child.

Catherine stripped off David’s clothes having him stand naked, where he “shook from a combination of fear and embarrassment” (pg 40). For months, David was forced to sleep under the breakfast table next to a cat litter box with newspapers as his covers (pg 68). After his mother made David drink dish-washing soap, David needed to use the bathroom and begged his mother to use the bathroom, and she refused. David “stood downstairs, afraid to move, as clumps of the watery matter fell through my underwear and down my pant legs, onto the floor. I felt so degraded; I cried like a baby. I had no self respect of any kind… I felt lower than a dog” (pg 77). While lying naked in the tub submerged as his mother instructed, his brothers would come into the bathroom, glare at him, shake their heads, and turn away (pg 113). After all the humiliation he endured, he talks about how he ate like a homeless dog, grunted to communicate, didn’t care if he was made fun of, and nothing was below him (pg 132). At one point, his morale became so low that he hoped to be killed (pg 141).

The BPD Witch seeks and marries a “Fisherman”, someone she can dominate and control, which is EXACTLY who Catherine married. Stephen Pelzer was completely dominated and controlled by Catherine. He was a subservient partner who relinquished his will at her command (pg 179), as Lawson describes the Fisherman. Further, this type of husband has little or no self-esteem and see himself as a loser. He also fails to protect his children from abuse. All of these characteristics fit Stephen who does not step in to stop the abuse (pg 50, 58):

When David was first deprived of food, Stephen gives David scraps of food and tries to get Catherine to change her mind about feeding David. Catherine and Stephen begin to fight, and as the arguments between them became more frequent, the Stephen began to change– he is not around for David. When David was forced to eat his own vomited hot dog, his father “stood like a statue”and watched him eat something “a dog wouldn’t touch” after unsuccessfully “trying to talk Mother out of her demand” (pg 66 -67) David’s father stood by as David’s mother refused to let David use the bathroom but instead had to use a five-gallon bucket to relieve his diarrhea (pg 77). David’s father started to help David with the dishes. Catherine stopped this, as well as she said that Stephen gave David too much attention. After that, David notes that his father “gave up” (pg 101 -102). When David was stabbed by his mother, David’s father didn’t even look at David when David reported the incident.

David said, “I knew that Mother controlled him like she controlled everything that happened in her house… All my respect for my Father was gone” (pg 90 – 91). Stephen gave up on David without a fight and started not even staying at home on his days off. One day he told David that he was sorry (pg 103) and eventually left the family all together (pg151), leaving David at the hands of his terribly abusive mother, Catherine. David said that he was fully aware of his father’s lack of courage to rescue him, and he hated him for it (pg 134).

Marsha Linehan, in her book Cognitive Behavioral Treatment of the Borderline Patient, describes the normalcy that BPD’s present to others. When people around the BPD mother hear her complaining about her child, the assumption is that the child is troubled rather than the mother. Further in social settings, the BPD mother may be engaging, gracious, and endearing.

David talks about how when his mother was a den mother for the Cub Scouts, the kids commented how they wished their mother was like Catherine (pg 39). She snowed the school administration by showing up with her infant son in her arms and agreeing to cooperate with the school regarding David (pg 53). Additionally, he notes that in the presence of neighbors, his mother “played the role of the loving, caring parent– just as she had when she was a Cub Scout den mother” (pg 122). Catherine also painted a different picture of their home life when David’s Grandmother came for the holidays (pg 126).

Lawson points out that “children have faith in their parents and believe in their greater wisdom. No child wants to believe that his mother is capable of brutality” (pg 273).

After stabbing David, he accepted his mother’s increased compassion towards him. He hoped that she was trying to make up to him and hoping that he was back into the “family fold” (pg 94). Later that night, when he goes to bed with the large laceration, he goes so far to say “I felt safe knowing she was nearby to watch over me” (pg 95). Before a visit from Social Services, Catherine manipulates David into thinking that his ordeal was over and that she will “try to be a good mother” (pg 123). He even starts calling her “Mom” at this point. Near the end of the book, David is called an “It” by his mother, and he reveals, “I gave all that I could to accomplish anything possible for her recognition. But again, I failed. Mother’s words were no longer coming from the booze; they were coming from her heart” (pg 141).

So, even through the devastating and intense abuse, David still held onto the hope that his mother loved him and that she would return to being a nurturing and caring parent.

Through and through, I believe that Catherine suffered from Borderline Personality Disorder. She illustrates the maternal functioning of a Borderline Mother, including:

Confusing her child Not apologizing for or remember inappropriate behavior Expects to be taken care of Punishes or discourages independence Envies, ignores, or demeans her children’s accomplishments Destroys, denigrates, or undermines self-esteem Expects children to respond to her needs Frightens and upsets children Disciplines inconsistently or punitively Feels left out, jealous, or resentful if child is loved by someone else Uses threats or abandonment (or actual abandonment) to punish the child Does not believe in her children’s basic goodness Does not trust her children

Catherine fully qualifies for each of these points. Further and more specifically, as the Witch BPD mother, she sent the following messages to David:

I could kill you You will be sorry You won’t get away with this You deserve to suffer I’d be better off without you You’ll never escape my control It’s my right as your parent to control you I’m going to make you pay

The Witch’s child is raised in a hopeless situation– and David made it out with his resolve, smart thinking, and strong will. The Witch’s words can be vile, her heart cold as stone– thankfully David survived the vile words and the heartless mother to become a highly successful man and an inspiration for all.

During the entire time I was reading “A Child Called It’ , I couldn’t help but draw correlations between David Pelzer’s mother (Catherine Roerva Christen Pelzer) and Borderline Personality Disorder. After I was finished reading the book, I started my search to see what mental illness Catherine had suffered. All I have managed to find was that she was mentally ill and an alcoholic. No details have emerged of what type of mental illness she suffered. So, with the facts about Catherine from “A Child Called It” and professional resources about BPD, I will pose case that Catherine suffered from Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD).

Dave Pelzer paints the picture of a seemingly normal childhood until his mother’s behavior changed radically. He describes his mother as a “wicked witch” on (pg 30), which hit the nail on the head. She exhibits the behavior of the prototypical BPD Witch. “The darkness within the borderline Witch is annihilating rage. Her inner experience is the conviction of being evil, and her behavior evokes submission… She is filled with self-hatred and may single out one child as the target of her rage. The Witch’s message to her child is: Life is war” (pg 38) Lawson.

WOW. Catherine was most certainly filled with rage. Every page of that book, Catherine was filled with rage that she took out on her son day in and day out. Her inner experience is the conviction of being evil, where she even speaks of it on (pg 41) of Pelzer’s book, “Now it’s time I showed you what hell is like!” Throughout all of her abuse, her behavior was to evoke submission from David. She was constantly beating him down mentally, emotionally, and physically. He says that his soul was consumed in a black void from the intense abuse by his mother (pg 132). She certainly was filled with self hatred as indicated by her alcoholism, not taking care of herself (“Her once beautiful, shiny hair is now frazzled clumps. As usual, she wears no makeup. She is overweight, and she knows it. In all, this has become Mother’s typcial look” pg 5), and being so filled with annihilating rage. And, the fact that the BPD Witch singles out one child as a target of her rage is so revealing because Catherine singled out David. For years he was the only child abused. When David was put into foster care, the younger brother was then singled out as the target of her rage.

David was without a doubt the “no-good child”; however, remarkably he didn’t turn-out to be what Lawson identified as the lost child (pg 171). His mother, Catherine, called him a “bad boy”, and an entire chapter is devoted to the “bad boy” David.

Catherine had David look in the mirror and recite, “I’m a bad boy” repeatedly (pg 31). Even though he was successful with school, his mother told him he was a “bad boy” and held him back in the 1st grade (pg 36). David was left out of Christmas due to Santa only bringing “good boys and girls” toys (pg 38). His mother accuses David of making her life a “living hell” (pg 41) and talks to the other siblings saying how she didn’t have to worry about them becoming like David, “a bad boy” (pg 43). Even when David was awarded the honor of naming the school newspaper, Catherine says, “There is nothing you can do to impress me! Do you understand me? You are a nobody! An IT! You are nonexistent! You are a bastard child! I hate you and I wish you were dead. Dead! Do you hear me? Dead!” (pg 140).

As mentioned above, the BPD Witch’s message to her child is that life is war. David recieved that message pretty early into the story as he states on (pg 43), “For the first time, I had won! Standing alone in that damp, dark garage, I knew, for the first time, that I could survive. I decided that I would use any tactic I could think of to defeat Mother or to delay her from her grizzly obsession.” Catherine put David in the middle of an all out war with her, even making him sit in the prisoner of war position (pg 50, 84, 111, 114, 123) by sitting on his hands with his head thrust backward. Lawson states (pg 125), “The Witch’s children feel like prisoners of a secret war.”

In Lawson (pg 137), rejection triggers the desperate fear of sinking into the cold, dark abyss of abandonment, a fate the BPD Witch feels worse than death. Catherine was an alcoholic who had been drinking from the age of 13. Brought up in the Mormon community of Salt Lake City, she would hide in the outhouse during Prohibition to wince down bootleg whiskey. Her parents were divorced, which made them outcasts in that religious community, and Catherine was frequently locked in a closet, denied food, and told how despicable she was. Catherine primarily appears as a Witch, which a BPD who primarily appear as a Witch is filled with self-hatred as a result of surviving a childhood that required complete submission to a hostile or sadistic caregiver (pg 131) Lawson.

The BPD Witch is sadistically controlling and punitive with her children where they fear their survival. The Witch’s children are forced to submit to her control and may be victims of sadistic emotional, physical, or sexual abuse. Lawson explains, “Therapists hear horrifying stores of child abuse that never make the headlines… Some children may not survive simply because they are too young to get away” (pg 122). David Pelzer is VERY fortunate that he survived his horrifying ordeal with his mother.

Throughout the book, David speaks of being able to survive his mother’s abuse. He made a promise to himself when the discipline drastically turned to punishment out of control, “I knew, for the first time, that I could survive. I decided that I would use any tactic I could think of to defeat Mother… I knew if I wanted to live, I would have to think ahead… I could never give in to her. That day I vowed to myself that I would never, ever again give that bitch the satisfaction of hearing me beg her to stop beating me” (pg 43). He later refers back to that promise when he was stabbed by his mother, “I wanted to lie down and quit, but the promise I made years ago kept me going. I wanted to show The Bitch that she could beat me only if I died, and I was determined not to give in, even to death” (pg 91). He was a survivor from the start through his determination of thought. References of survival also include:

He also talks about that “water was my only means of survival” (pg 104) as his mother starved him for ten consecutive days. Later, when his mother used chlorine gas while locking him in the bathroom, David relates that “to survive her new game, I had to use my head” (pg 108). He started to lose his instinct for survival when his mother had him sit in POW style on a 1 inch diameter of rocks, stating “all my efforts for mere survival seemed futile. My attempts to stay one step ahead of Mother were useless. A black shadow was always over me” (pg 111).

Because the Witch emerges when the mother and child are alone, no witnesses can verify the child’s experience (pg 125) Lawson. Catherine typically abused David when no one else was around, making sure to cover up the abuse if and when family members returned to the house. David says on pg 42, “I knew Mother never acted his bizarre when anyone else was in the house.”

When Ron came home, Catherine ceased to attempt to burn David further on the stove (pg 42). When Catherine tried to have David eat the dirty diapers, the abuse stopped when Ron, Stan, and David’s father returned to the vacation cabin (pg 57). David always noted that he appreciated when his father was home, calling him his protector, as the abuse was not as prevalent. (pg 101). When he would come home from school and his brothers weren’t home, David knew that his mother’s “game” would be full force. After Ron and Stan went go to bed, Catherine ordered David upstairs to feed him ammonia (pg 73). David even devotes an entire chapter to “When Father is Away”, starting the chapter with, “When he was home, Mother only did about half the things that she did when he was gone” (pg 101).

The BPD Witch can be cruel to the target of her rage; however other children may not perceive her as a Witch if they do not possess qualities that trigger her rage. With the information contained in Pelzer’s book, Catherine did not treat the older two or younger baby abusively. They were immune to her physical abuse. Being cruel, the BPD Witch may make a statement such as “I’m going to make your life a living Hell” or “I’m going to kill you” (pg 137) states Lawson. Catherine said both of these statements to David: (pg 41) “Now it’s time I showed you what hell is like!” and (pg 85) “If you don’t finish on time, I’m going to kill you.” David continues by saying that she said that same statement over and over for almost a week (pg 86).

The need for power and control over others is important to the BPD Witch as well as the need to elicit a response of fear and shock. Catherine certainly illustrated how she needed each of these. She exerted power over David, reducing him to a “slave” (pg 50, 84, 126), an “it” (pg 140), and “the boy” (pg 50). She controlled every part of his life down to what he ate (or rather, what he didn’t eat). He was controlled through having to “work” constantly around the house with only being allowed to attend school. Her pathological “needs” resulted in David viewing his home as a “madhouse” (pg 104) and “hell house ” (pg 137), as well as his existance as a “morbid life” (pg 116). He felt as if his soul was consumed in a “black void” (pg 132).

She used fear and shock throughout her abuse. He was relegated to the basement on a cot, not knowing when he would be fed, allowed to see sunlight, or beat (ten rounders (pg 111), whipped with dog chains (pg 116), broom handle blows to the backs of legs (pg 117)). He was often intense with fear: shaking, unable to concentrate, heart skipping beats, and startled. He was put though tremendous shocking situations such as being fed ammonia, subjected to chlorine gas, submerged under cold water for long lengths of time, burned on a gas stove, arm dislocated, stabbed in the abdomen, smashed into the counters breaking his teeth, forced to eat dirty diapers & rancid food, and so much more.

Children who resist the control face worse punishment. David did not resist her control. He knew the rules & punishments to his mother’s “game”: (1) if he took too long to do his chores, his mother would withhold food (2) if he looked at one of his siblings without permission, he was slapped (3) if he was caught taking food, he was subjected to hideous punishment (pg 83).

David did not resist control. He would do everything in his power to get his work done under her strict time restraints. He says (pg 50) during the time when he had to stand until summoned to perform chores, “It was made very clear that getting caught sitting or lying down in the basement would bring dire consequences. I had become my Mother’s slave.” Without putting up a fight, he took his “punishments”: remaining in the chlorine gas filled bathroom, submerged under cold water & then forced to sit outside on rocks 1 inch in diameter (Bathtub and Backyard Treatment pg 114), and skating in icy cold weather without appropriate clothing (pg 120). Additionally, he would sit for extraordinary lengths of time on the bottom step standing and in POW position as she instructed. Once when he decided to not “take anybody’s crap anymore” (pg 142), the results were a stomping from his brothers and Mother, a special batch of chlorine gas in the bathroom, and a choking.

Destroying valued objects and being intentionally withholding, the BPD Witch may intentionally withhold what their children need. David’s mother withheld food from David, severely starving him. He only had his brother’s left-overs from breakfast on occasion, a P&J sandwich with a few carrot sticks for lunch, and rarely any dinner. Due to the obsession to find food, David resorted to taking other kid’s lunches, (pg 48), food from the grocery store (pg 59), frozen cafeteria food (pg 63), begging for food (pg 69), and frozen from from his basement (pg 79). He also would eat scraps from his garbage can after his family ate (pg 62) until his mother started to add ammonia to the waste or planting rotten food so that he would get sick (pg 63). She also would tease the starving boy by putting food in front of him then taking it away (Two Minute Game pg 105 -107). When she found out about his eating of frozen cafeteria food, she forced him to vomit it up by forcing her finger down his throat, scooping the vomit out of the toilet, and then eating the vomit later that evening (pg 66 – 68).

Along with withholding food, Catherine also intentionally withheld proper hygiene and clothes for David. Kids made fun of him for how he smelled calling him David Pelzer-Smellzer, and teachers not used to his smell wave their hands in front of their face. He was consistently in tattered and worn clothes, even if new clothes existed in the home for him.

David says, “Because my Mother had me wear the same clothes week after week, by October my clothes had become weathered, torn, and smelly” (pg 47). He continues further in the chapter, “In September, I returned to school with last year’s clothes” (pg 57). He indicates that his mother had newer clothes for him but withheld them: “One Sunday during the last month of summer … Mom let me put on new clothes that I had received last Christmas” (pg 123). By the time he was rescued, “My long sleeve shirt has more holes than Swiss cheese. It’s the same shirt I’ve worn for about two years. Mother has me wear it every day as her way to humiliate me. My pants are just as bad, and my shoes have holes in the toes. I can wiggle my big toe out of one of them” (pg 6).

The BPD Witch organizes a “campaign of denigration”, enlisting others as allies against the target of her rage. “She may seek out friends, family members (including siblings and children), and co-workers of her victim in whom to confide fabricated stories designed to discredit her enemy” (pg 141) says Lawson. David’s mother, Catherine, denigrated David by turning family against David including his father and other siblings. She also had the school turned against him, pegging him as a thief and “bad boy”. She told neighbors negative things about David, further denigrating him. Many believe the allegations because of the intensity of emotion. When the ability to enlist allies disrupts and divides groups, such as neighbors and the school system, that could actually help him.

The Witch does not recognize boundaries and exploit the child’s trust by denying right to privacy and humiliating & degrading the child.

Catherine stripped off David’s clothes having him stand naked, where he “shook from a combination of fear and embarrassment” (pg 40). For months, David was forced to sleep under the breakfast table next to a cat litter box with newspapers as his covers (pg 68). After his mother made David drink dish-washing soap, David needed to use the bathroom and begged his mother to use the bathroom, and she refused. David “stood downstairs, afraid to move, as clumps of the watery matter fell through my underwear and down my pant legs, onto the floor. I felt so degraded; I cried like a baby. I had no self respect of any kind… I felt lower than a dog” (pg 77). While lying naked in the tub submerged as his mother instructed, his brothers would come into the bathroom, glare at him, shake their heads, and turn away (pg 113). After all the humiliation he endured, he talks about how he ate like a homeless dog, grunted to communicate, didn’t care if he was made fun of, and nothing was below him (pg 132). At one point, his morale became so low that he hoped to be killed (pg 141).

The BPD Witch seeks and marries a “Fisherman”, someone she can dominate and control, which is EXACTLY who Catherine married. Stephen Pelzer was completely dominated and controlled by Catherine. He was a subservient partner who relinquished his will at her command (pg 179), as Lawson describes the Fisherman. Further, this type of husband has little or no self-esteem and see himself as a loser. He also fails to protect his children from abuse. All of these characteristics fit Stephen who does not step in to stop the abuse (pg 50, 58):

When David was first deprived of food, Stephen gives David scraps of food and tries to get Catherine to change her mind about feeding David. Catherine and Stephen begin to fight, and as the arguments between them became more frequent, the Stephen began to change– he is not around for David. When David was forced to eat his own vomited hot dog, his father “stood like a statue”and watched him eat something “a dog wouldn’t touch” after unsuccessfully “trying to talk Mother out of her demand” (pg 66 -67) David’s father stood by as David’s mother refused to let David use the bathroom but instead had to use a five-gallon bucket to relieve his diarrhea (pg 77). David’s father started to help David with the dishes. Catherine stopped this, as well as she said that Stephen gave David too much attention. After that, David notes that his father “gave up” (pg 101 -102). When David was stabbed by his mother, David’s father didn’t even look at David when David reported the incident.

David said, “I knew that Mother controlled him like she controlled everything that happened in her house… All my respect for my Father was gone” (pg 90 – 91). Stephen gave up on David without a fight and started not even staying at home on his days off. One day he told David that he was sorry (pg 103) and eventually left the family all together (pg151), leaving David at the hands of his terribly abusive mother, Catherine. David said that he was fully aware of his father’s lack of courage to rescue him, and he hated him for it (pg 134).

Marsha Linehan, in her book Cognitive Behavioral Treatment of the Borderline Patient, describes the normalcy that BPD’s present to others. When people around the BPD mother hear her complaining about her child, the assumption is that the child is troubled rather than the mother. Further in social settings, the BPD mother may be engaging, gracious, and endearing.

David talks about how when his mother was a den mother for the Cub Scouts, the kids commented how they wished their mother was like Catherine (pg 39). She snowed the school administration by showing up with her infant son in her arms and agreeing to cooperate with the school regarding David (pg 53). Additionally, he notes that in the presence of neighbors, his mother “played the role of the loving, caring parent– just as she had when she was a Cub Scout den mother” (pg 122). Catherine also painted a different picture of their home life when David’s Grandmother came for the holidays (pg 126).

Lawson points out that “children have faith in their parents and believe in their greater wisdom. No child wants to believe that his mother is capable of brutality” (pg 273).

After stabbing David, he accepted his mother’s increased compassion towards him. He hoped that she was trying to make up to him and hoping that he was back into the “family fold” (pg 94). Later that night, when he goes to bed with the large laceration, he goes so far to say “I felt safe knowing she was nearby to watch over me” (pg 95). Before a visit from Social Services, Catherine manipulates David into thinking that his ordeal was over and that she will “try to be a good mother” (pg 123). He even starts calling her “Mom” at this point. Near the end of the book, David is called an “It” by his mother, and he reveals, “I gave all that I could to accomplish anything possible for her recognition. But again, I failed. Mother’s words were no longer coming from the booze; they were coming from her heart” (pg 141).

So, even through the devastating and intense abuse, David still held onto the hope that his mother loved him and that she would return to being a nurturing and caring parent.

Through and through, I believe that Catherine suffered from Borderline Personality Disorder. She illustrates the maternal functioning of a Borderline Mother, including:

Confusing her child Not apologizing for or remember inappropriate behavior Expects to be taken care of Punishes or discourages independence Envies, ignores, or demeans her children’s accomplishments Destroys, denigrates, or undermines self-esteem Expects children to respond to her needs Frightens and upsets children Disciplines inconsistently or punitively Feels left out, jealous, or resentful if child is loved by someone else Uses threats or abandonment (or actual abandonment) to punish the child Does not believe in her children’s basic goodness Does not trust her children

Catherine fully qualifies for each of these points. Further and more specifically, as the Witch BPD mother, she sent the following messages to David:

I could kill you You will be sorry You won’t get away with this You deserve to suffer I’d be better off without you You’ll never escape my control It’s my right as your parent to control you I’m going to make you pay

The Witch’s child is raised in a hopeless situation– and David made it out with his resolve, smart thinking, and strong will. The Witch’s words can be vile, her heart cold as stone– thankfully David survived the vile words and the heartless mother to become a highly successful man and an inspiration for all.

Infertility specialists and fertility management Australia are involved day and night in research and development to discover infertility drugs, which can cure infertility problems of couples. The problem or the cause of infertility can be divided into- 

• Male infertility

• Female infertility 

There are hundreds of reasons behind male and female infertility and their treatment depends upon the type of the problem. Few of the common causes of infertility among men are- 

• Smoking

• Alcohol

• Drugs

• Genetic disorders

• Environmental factors

• Less semen formation

• Age, etc. 

However reasons behind female infertility are much more complex in nature. Some common female infertility problems are 

• Blockage in fallopian tube

• Uterine fibroid

• Urine infection

• Poor diet and nutrition

• Genetic problem 

The number of causes of infertility are countless and excessive research and tests are done on the patients by the doctors to know the exact reason due to which they are not getting pregnant. Sometimes even after a series of medical tests for infertility, doctors fail to discover or understand the exact reason of their patient’s infertility problem. This condition is medically termed as unexplained infertility problem. This situation is very stressful for the patient and sometimes causes depression in them. In female the cases of unexplained infertility increase with their age say after 35 years of age and above. It has been seen that women who delays their pregnancy treatment for a long period have a low chance of getting pregnant. 

There are a number of treatment procedures available for couples facing infertility problems. Some of the most important ones are 

• IVF treatment and IVF diagnosis

• Natural fertility treatment

• Traditional Chinese medicine

• Surrogate mothers

• Pregnancy treatment

• Infertility acupressure

• Chinese infertility medicine 

Among all these treatments IVF treatment is the most costly and advanced one. Couples who are not able to have a baby through other possible treatments go for IVF treatment and IVF preparation. And we can consider it as the final option of infertility treatment. 

Chinese infertility medicine and herbs have proved beneficial for infertility treatments and their success ratio is approximately70%. Infertility acupuncture treatments are also proving benefit to the patient as it helps them in getting relaxed during the treatment procedure and thus increase their chances of conceiving. You can choose a reputed acupuncture, clinic which specializes in acupuncture pregnancy and infertility acupressure. 

Australia is also a good destination for couples seeking good treatment. Infertility management Australia provides latest technologies and medication for infertility treatment.

If a mom shows up to pick up her child and smells of alcohol, what is the responsibility of the child care provider? This is the 2nd time in a few weeks when the mom has smelled like she’s been drinking. She is not acting intoxicated, but her breath does smell as if she’s been drinking.
I have no proof, of course, that she’s been drinking. I’m just going by what I smell. I don’t really want to accuse a mom of drinking and driving with her son if she hasn’t been – but I certainly don’t want to ignore it if she has.
I’ve been put in a horrible position here. Any advice would be helpful.

A mother was addicted to heroin while pregnant and the baby might have a chance of being addicted.
Are there any centers that can help treat the baby?
Oh sorry,
United states
Philadelphia,PA

Should children be placed back with a mom who has been thru rehab 4 times and is currently in rehab, admitted to using meth, and fractured an 8 month old babies skull, lied to DHR, and asked for an open marriage?

I would like informatin on drug and alcohol rehabilitation centers for a mother who would like her three month old child with her. Any listings for California and possibly the closest to Redding California. It is not a court ordered situation just a person wanting rehabilitation and to find her right path in life.She is a Native American Indian so if there are Native American Indian Rehabs we would like that information also.

My best friend (not anymore) of 12 years recently moved out of my apartment (where she had a bedroom with a crib) to her mother’s apartment where she and the 16 month old sleep on a leather sofa in the living room. Mom smokes weed and cigarettes, gets drunk often, takes esctacy (a street drug – mdma…) and any other prescription type pills she can get her hands on and spends her “child support” money, and her Welfare benefits on her habits – including new tattoos, drugs and alcohol. Is this considered child abuse? Should I report it? I live in Oregon.
In this apartment also lives her 17 year old little brother, her new best friend and her 2 year old daughter and her mom with her 24 year old boyfriend. All of whom participate in affore mentioned illicit activities.