Saturday, June 15, 2013

Advice to avoid the delusional ex

Sometime I am going to make a list of disorders that ought to be in the DSM-5. One would be the crazy delusional vindictive ex, as typified by this letter:
Dear Annie: My son's ex-wife has reported him to child protective services six times and to the police for various things she's invented over the past three years. Due to her false accusations, he has been arrested three times. He has been found innocent of all charges, but she persists.

She charged him with violating a restraining order and appeared in court last week flanked by bodyguards supplied by victim services. This charge was thrown out. My son has never touched her, but she has convinced many people that he is dangerous. She is such a good liar that she actually believes her own stories, which makes her even more convincing.

My son has become so paranoid, he barely leaves his house. He is so depressed that he can barely function and is unable to work. She is slowly killing him. Is there anything he can do besides continue to defend himself? The lawyers' costs have become a nightmare for our whole family. There must be something more we can do besides waiting for her next dramatic step. — Worried Family Members
When a woman gets crazy enough to believe her own lies, she becomes more dangerous, because her friends and counselors will be impressed by her apparent sincerity.

Unfortunately, there is no good answer for this poor man. If the woman is crazy enough, maybe she will do something to get herself arrested or committed. But our society has a very high tolerance for these women, and they are likely to continue to make trouble.

Another crazy ex-wife was the one who framed her husband for mailing ricin lettere:
At this time, a providential break in the case occurred: a New Boston woman named Shannon Richardson walked in to the FBI in Shreveport, LA, and fingered her husband, Nathaniel, as the mailer. Nathaniel was dangerous. He had lots of guns. He didn’t like the President. He was a combat wounded veteran, and he was employed in the defense industrial base (these are all things the FBI has been directed to consider warning signs). The FBI swarmed him at work.
His arrest was all over the news. She is going to prison.

I got some comments in defense of the crazy Stanford professor mom who fled to Hawaii. As usual, she is innocent until proven guilty. But her defender said the dad is child molester and also a Stanford professor, and that she had to flee in order to deny him his supervised visitation.

These allegations only persuade me that the mom is a malicious nut. As far as I know, Stanford professors do not molest their own kids. If there were any hard evidence of it, the dad would be charged with a serious crime. Instead the accusation was used to limit his visits to being supervised. But if the visitation was supervised, then surely the alleged molestation could not have been a concern. If the mom is so far gone as to refuse supervised visitation, then she is quite likely to be crazy or vindictive. If she believes her own lies, then she is dangerous.

5 comments:

lisa said...

in regards to the mom who ran to Hawaii.

First, let's pretend that the father is a molester and abuser of the worst kind. What she did was stupid and provided cover and assistance to the abuser.

Second, let's pretend that she believes the above premise, true or not. What she did was stupid and MAY HAVE provided cover and assistance to an abuser.

lisa said...

anyone who is siding with the mom in the abduction to hawaii case, has simply lost their way.

if the court has put supervised visits in place, and you decide that more needs to be done AND decide violating a judicial order and taking the law into your own hands is okay. its not and you will be punished for doing so or be extremely lucky.

you might as well just punch the judge (who wrote up the order granting the supervised visits) in the face and call his mother a whore.

If you cannot see this mom and the dad who stole a boat as two sides of the same coin, you are not objective about these cases.

This isnt a mother/father issue, these cases are
1. im going to do something crazy and impulsive and dont have an exit strategy
2. i have no respect for the power a court of law has. (note that this is not the same as respect for a court of law).

George said...

Yes, violating court orders is a sure way to get into worse trouble.

Anonymous said...

In response to lisa who wrote, "anyone who is siding with the mom in the abduction to hawaii case, has simply lost their way."

It's fine to have friends and colleagues who value one's friendship and professional skill, but those attributes don't necessarily make someone a good parent, law-abiding, or even sane. Remember the reference letter Gen. Petraeus wrote saying a woman acquaintance was "a good mother." That court properly ignored his attempted character reference.

I agree that the particular mom and dad you mentioned are two sides of the same coin. (But remember he's been in jail since he got off the boat while she's been footloose and fancy free since posting bail.) Maybe one reason some "have no respect for the power a court of law has" is because courts usually don't enforce their own orders by sanctioning parties.

lisa said...

Anyone sticking up for their friend or family, love them. But they failed her, friends and family talk people out of self-destructive acts.

The mom, i assume was "free" because she made bail.

The dad committed more crimes, and has plead guilty to more crimes than the mom is being charged with (so far) but they both violated a court order and both lost their way.