Shattered peace
Domestic abuse is an unpleasant reality for more families than we would care to acknowledge. Although women are most likely to be the victim, this is not necessarily always the case. In the first of two articles looking into domestic abuse, Sandy Calleja Portelli delves into the psyche of the male abuser.
The notion that domestic abuse "happens abroad" and is "not really a problem here" has probably never reflected the reality of many women's lives. Today, the issue of domestic abuse is no longer swept under the carpet; on the contrary Appoġġ is doing sterling work to raise awareness of this heartbreaking reality. The agency works with family members to help them come to terms with their situation, empowering them to choose the solution that is best suited to them as individuals.
The common perception of the male abuser is possibly of the man who, unable to control his temper, lashes out at his partner whenever she does something to raise his ire. For a man who is likely to settle most disputes with his fists, his wife, partner or child is simply another person he has a dispute with.
"Although a violent man is likely to perpetrate domestic abuse against his family, this is not the only, or indeed most common kind of abuser we meet," explains Lauren Agius, coordinator of the Perpetrators' Services within Appoġġ. By far the most common motive for domestic abuse is a desire to control.
The dominator
Jack* and Jill* are the perfect partnership; she is a devoted wife and mother while he is the perfectly solicitous husband and father. That, however, is just the public façade - the situation behind closed doors is far from idyllic.
When Jack comes home from work he expects Jill to have his dinner ready; the house spotless and the children settled. Although he regularly goes out socially in the evening, Jill rarely leaves the house without him except to run daily errands and ferry the children around.
She hasn't visited her mother for over a month as she does her best to avoid the rows that always ensue when she does. Soon after they were married, Jack decreed she didn't need to wear make up any more; he chooses her hairstyle and clothes and tells her what to wear when they go out together.
Over the years, Jack has denigrated Jill's capabilities in all aspects of her life; she is an inadequate wife and mother, a lousy cook and terrible housekeeper. She has no sense of style and is too stupid to go back to work. The comments were initially veiled as jokes but the jovial veneer has long since been dropped and Jill's self esteem is non existent.
After 20 years of this life Jill "knows" Jack's assessment of her is correct and is convinced that if she didn't mess things up so badly, so often, her husband would have no cause to hit her. When he does settle their disputes with his fist, Jack is always careful to avoid leaving any marks and these days prefers to hit her around the head.
Convinced of her incompetence, aware that her work skills are sadly outdated, Jill has no income and sees no way of earning one. She believes she has no way of proving that she is being abused and is afraid of losing her children if she strikes out on her own.
Jill is, in effect, trapped in a living hell; and her husband has total control.
It is Ms Agius's experience that a desire to control one's partner is at the root of all domestic abuse. Often unaware of this underlying desire, most abusers will cite a variety of reasons for abusing their partners.
The possessive man
Peter* has always been possessive of Jane* and at the beginning of their courtship, Jane took this as a sign of his love for her. Once they were married, however, Peter's possessiveness became more extreme and Jane soon found herself accounting for every move she made.
"At our wedding reception, he said 'I can't believe you're all mine' and I thought he meant it in a romantic way. In fact, he meant it quite literally; as far as Peter was concerned I now belonged to him," reminisces Jane.
Even in the early days of their marriage, Peter demanded to know exactly who she was with even at work. Social functions became a minefield; even the briefest exchange between Jane and a man was guaranteed to send Peter into a rage. "After one wedding we attended, I landed a black eye because he swore I'd been 'ogling' my brother-in-law," Jane is barely audible as she looks back at the darkest period of her life.
"The last straw for me came when Peter demanded I stopped working to reassure him that I didn't need any other man's company than his. I was actually considering his proposal when I suddenly realised I'd be giving up the last vestige of my independence."
That night Jane packed some essentials and moved back to live with her parents determined to end her marriage. Her husband, however, had different ideas.
The couple are now separated and Peter lives with his new girlfriend. This has not stopped him from stalking his estranged wife, regularly calling her at odd hours of the night and turning up at work just to see who she's talking to.
"The last time we left court, he turned to me and said: 'I told you, you're mine when we got married; no piece of paper will tell me otherwise. Just remember our wedding service - what God joined together let no man put asunder." Jane's hopelessness resonates in her voice and is evident in the slump of her shoulders.
Jack, Peter and men like them are not evil men, they are simply incapable of dealing with their partner on an equal footing. Ascertaining why this is so is as diverse as the men themselves. They come from all social and economic backgrounds; some are illiterate but others are highly educated, articulate men.
Most male abusers will initially struggle to understand that what they are doing is even wrong; they perceive the fault to lie solely at their partner's door. She may not do as she's told, drive him to violence with her constant nagging, be a spendthrift or any of a hundred different shortcomings. They see themselves as victims of the situation; what of their right for some peace and quiet after a hard day's work? Why should his wife fritter away the money he works so hard to earn? She doesn't have to talk to every man she meets, dress so provocatively, be such a frump etc.
For those of us who are looking at this problem from the outside, why victims of domestic abuse continue to live with their spouse or partner is something of an enigma. Shouldn't these women have the backbone to leave? Don't they owe it to their kids? Ms Agius smiles ruefully; the solution is not as clear cut as one may suppose.
"In these instances it is far more difficult for a woman to build a life for herself and her children than it is for a man. Family and friends often see the break-up of the marriage as the solution of the woman's problems and expect her to 'stand on her own two feet' but the reality is that she faces a totally new set of challenges," explains Ms Agius.
The practicalities of daily life after the separation can be daunting. In most cases the woman has not worked for a number of years before the split and consequently the jobs available to her are usually junior positions that do not come with a high wage packet. She will often have custody of the children, and although awarded child support by the court, this is often withheld by the estranged partner forcing her to resort to further costly, time-consuming litigation in an effort to force him to pay the maintenance due.
Often, the marital home will be sold as part of the separation settlement with the proceeds split equally between the partners, which this may seem fair on the face of it. The disparities between the couple's situation is further compounded if the woman, needing to make a home for her children, needs to fund a larger home than her estranged partner.
Where domestic abuse is the cause of the break-up, an end to the relationship does not necessarily coincide with an end to the abuse. A controlling partner, for example, will often try to continue exerting his control by threatening to sue for custody of the children. It is commonplace for a man who is now in a new relationship to continue in his attempts to dominate his estranged partner using the children to relay information about their mother's activities. Many women tell of ex-partners who bring the children home a couple of hours early from their access visits and threaten to leave them at the door if she is not back in time; calls at odd hours of the day and night ostensibly to ask about the children.
"It is not unusual to find that the mother, now living with her children and struggling to cope financially while still finding her feet back on the job market, is also living with the threat of being reported for child neglect. Hence, exhausted after a day's work, she must ensure that her children are fed up to her ex's standards and woe betide her if the children are not immaculately dressed all the time." Ms Agius has obviously seen it all.
Peaceful homes are, unfortunately, a myth for too large a number of families.
*Characters in this article are fictitious, used to illustrate real situations.
Next week's article views domestic abuse from the perspective of a male victim.
• Agenzija Appoġġ forms part of the Foundation for Social Welfare Services. More information may be obtained online: www.appogg.gov.mt or by phone on Supportline 179.
The common perception of the male abuser is possibly of the man who, unable to control his temper, lashes out at his partner whenever she does something to raise his ire. For a man who is likely to settle most disputes with his fists, his wife, partner or child is simply another person he has a dispute with.
"Although a violent man is likely to perpetrate domestic abuse against his family, this is not the only, or indeed most common kind of abuser we meet," explains Lauren Agius, coordinator of the Perpetrators' Services within Appoġġ. By far the most common motive for domestic abuse is a desire to control.
The dominator
Jack* and Jill* are the perfect partnership; she is a devoted wife and mother while he is the perfectly solicitous husband and father. That, however, is just the public façade - the situation behind closed doors is far from idyllic.
When Jack comes home from work he expects Jill to have his dinner ready; the house spotless and the children settled. Although he regularly goes out socially in the evening, Jill rarely leaves the house without him except to run daily errands and ferry the children around.
She hasn't visited her mother for over a month as she does her best to avoid the rows that always ensue when she does. Soon after they were married, Jack decreed she didn't need to wear make up any more; he chooses her hairstyle and clothes and tells her what to wear when they go out together.
Over the years, Jack has denigrated Jill's capabilities in all aspects of her life; she is an inadequate wife and mother, a lousy cook and terrible housekeeper. She has no sense of style and is too stupid to go back to work. The comments were initially veiled as jokes but the jovial veneer has long since been dropped and Jill's self esteem is non existent.
After 20 years of this life Jill "knows" Jack's assessment of her is correct and is convinced that if she didn't mess things up so badly, so often, her husband would have no cause to hit her. When he does settle their disputes with his fist, Jack is always careful to avoid leaving any marks and these days prefers to hit her around the head.
Convinced of her incompetence, aware that her work skills are sadly outdated, Jill has no income and sees no way of earning one. She believes she has no way of proving that she is being abused and is afraid of losing her children if she strikes out on her own.
Jill is, in effect, trapped in a living hell; and her husband has total control.
It is Ms Agius's experience that a desire to control one's partner is at the root of all domestic abuse. Often unaware of this underlying desire, most abusers will cite a variety of reasons for abusing their partners.
The possessive man
Peter* has always been possessive of Jane* and at the beginning of their courtship, Jane took this as a sign of his love for her. Once they were married, however, Peter's possessiveness became more extreme and Jane soon found herself accounting for every move she made.
"At our wedding reception, he said 'I can't believe you're all mine' and I thought he meant it in a romantic way. In fact, he meant it quite literally; as far as Peter was concerned I now belonged to him," reminisces Jane.
Even in the early days of their marriage, Peter demanded to know exactly who she was with even at work. Social functions became a minefield; even the briefest exchange between Jane and a man was guaranteed to send Peter into a rage. "After one wedding we attended, I landed a black eye because he swore I'd been 'ogling' my brother-in-law," Jane is barely audible as she looks back at the darkest period of her life.
"The last straw for me came when Peter demanded I stopped working to reassure him that I didn't need any other man's company than his. I was actually considering his proposal when I suddenly realised I'd be giving up the last vestige of my independence."
That night Jane packed some essentials and moved back to live with her parents determined to end her marriage. Her husband, however, had different ideas.
The couple are now separated and Peter lives with his new girlfriend. This has not stopped him from stalking his estranged wife, regularly calling her at odd hours of the night and turning up at work just to see who she's talking to.
"The last time we left court, he turned to me and said: 'I told you, you're mine when we got married; no piece of paper will tell me otherwise. Just remember our wedding service - what God joined together let no man put asunder." Jane's hopelessness resonates in her voice and is evident in the slump of her shoulders.
Jack, Peter and men like them are not evil men, they are simply incapable of dealing with their partner on an equal footing. Ascertaining why this is so is as diverse as the men themselves. They come from all social and economic backgrounds; some are illiterate but others are highly educated, articulate men.
Most male abusers will initially struggle to understand that what they are doing is even wrong; they perceive the fault to lie solely at their partner's door. She may not do as she's told, drive him to violence with her constant nagging, be a spendthrift or any of a hundred different shortcomings. They see themselves as victims of the situation; what of their right for some peace and quiet after a hard day's work? Why should his wife fritter away the money he works so hard to earn? She doesn't have to talk to every man she meets, dress so provocatively, be such a frump etc.
For those of us who are looking at this problem from the outside, why victims of domestic abuse continue to live with their spouse or partner is something of an enigma. Shouldn't these women have the backbone to leave? Don't they owe it to their kids? Ms Agius smiles ruefully; the solution is not as clear cut as one may suppose.
"In these instances it is far more difficult for a woman to build a life for herself and her children than it is for a man. Family and friends often see the break-up of the marriage as the solution of the woman's problems and expect her to 'stand on her own two feet' but the reality is that she faces a totally new set of challenges," explains Ms Agius.
The practicalities of daily life after the separation can be daunting. In most cases the woman has not worked for a number of years before the split and consequently the jobs available to her are usually junior positions that do not come with a high wage packet. She will often have custody of the children, and although awarded child support by the court, this is often withheld by the estranged partner forcing her to resort to further costly, time-consuming litigation in an effort to force him to pay the maintenance due.
Often, the marital home will be sold as part of the separation settlement with the proceeds split equally between the partners, which this may seem fair on the face of it. The disparities between the couple's situation is further compounded if the woman, needing to make a home for her children, needs to fund a larger home than her estranged partner.
Where domestic abuse is the cause of the break-up, an end to the relationship does not necessarily coincide with an end to the abuse. A controlling partner, for example, will often try to continue exerting his control by threatening to sue for custody of the children. It is commonplace for a man who is now in a new relationship to continue in his attempts to dominate his estranged partner using the children to relay information about their mother's activities. Many women tell of ex-partners who bring the children home a couple of hours early from their access visits and threaten to leave them at the door if she is not back in time; calls at odd hours of the day and night ostensibly to ask about the children.
"It is not unusual to find that the mother, now living with her children and struggling to cope financially while still finding her feet back on the job market, is also living with the threat of being reported for child neglect. Hence, exhausted after a day's work, she must ensure that her children are fed up to her ex's standards and woe betide her if the children are not immaculately dressed all the time." Ms Agius has obviously seen it all.
Peaceful homes are, unfortunately, a myth for too large a number of families.
*Characters in this article are fictitious, used to illustrate real situations.
Next week's article views domestic abuse from the perspective of a male victim.
• Agenzija Appoġġ forms part of the Foundation for Social Welfare Services. More information may be obtained online: www.appogg.gov.mt or by phone on Supportline 179.