Psychopaths are good at draining our finances and leaving us emotionally wrecked. Since I am still going through my custody battle (and likely will for a long time), I constantly think about ways I can make this experience less painful. Dealing with the aftermath of having a child with someone who has a personality disorder is traumatic.
If I have learned one lesson this past year its how important it is to find peace in this sea of chaos. Even after instituting as much “no contact” as is possible my child’s psychopathic parent, I have come to realize that there are people who like to fuel the drama of a psychopath for either entertainment or financial reasons. These people don’t necessarily have a personality disorder themselves, but they have their own personal motivations to keep the psychopath’s drama train on the tracks and headed right toward their victim.In the past year, I have learned many hard (and expensive) lessons. I wish I had known about these “Psychopath drama fuelers” before getting into my custody war with Luc because I would have tried to avoid them (at least to the degree that I could).
Psychopaths keep lawyers, police, judges, social workers, etc employed because custody cases involving psychopaths seem to never end. Even if there isn’t a child in the mix, people with severe personality disorders always end up needing lawyers and coming into contact with police. In addition to financial predators, there are also those people who surround themselves by this drama because they, too, get some sort of sick pleasure out of watching us suffer at the hands of the psychopath.I am sure that for every example I give, many of you who are also recovering from a relationship with a psychopath could come up with several of your own. I never noticed these people before I met Luc, but after I found myself laying on the train tracks of chaos with a psychopath headed right for me – tons of people came out of the woodwork to support Luc to make sure he continued on his path of destruction. These people seem to be everywhere and always willing to help the psychopath by fueling his delusions and lying to support his stories (even folks who are supposed to be neutral). While it is sometimes impossible to control those the psychopath brings to court, you can identify those predators who will surround you in order to exploit your pain for financial gain and/or push your buttons in order to incite further drama. Here are the two categories of Psychopath drama fuelers I have been able to identify:
Those who fuel for entertainment: (Supervised Visitation “Professional”)
At the conclusion of the first custody trial, Luc was ordered supervised visitation for a few months (until an access review hearing). Not knowing better, I suggested that we just go with the woman who had been recommended by the court evaluator. She had been supervising visits for eight years and she was a retired police officer.
Looking back on it, I should have questioned what type of person enters into this sort of “side job” and made sure I got references from families vice just the court. While some people might do it for the extra cash or for some actual altruistic reason, I now suspect that our supervisor took this side job for entertainment value. Over the course of the supervised visitation period, it appeared as though this woman enjoyed chaos and would often attempt to make me feel worse about the situation (while trying to appear sympathetic). At first I didn’t want to accept that she could be playing both sides, but now I understand that its best to limit my interaction with this woman.
The first clue that she couldn’t be trusted was when she would lie about what occurred on the visits (we had a third party watching). The baby would cry the entire time and Luc would sometimes fall asleep on the ground in the play area while he was supposed to be watching the baby. After these visits, the supervisor would say things like, “he did a great job today. I know this is hard for you to take. He is very charming.” Even though the supervisor mentioned her concerns about how he made his money (had hundreds in his wallet each week) and the fact that she believed he was delusional (based on his outlandish stories that were not based in reality), she got on the stand during the trial and told the court she had no concerns about Luc. As she got off the stand, she turned to me and winked. I felt like she had stabbed me.
When Luc was awarded unsupervised visits, the supervisor called me and said she couldn’t believe the court would do such a thing given all the terrible things he had done. I wanted to jump through the phone and punch her, but instead I continued to listen. She went on to tell me that she was concerned that Luc would kill me someday and how she worried he would take off with the baby and never come back. The week of the first visit, she actually had the nerve to ask me if I thought Luc would kill baby boy for a life insurance policy. I finally asked her why in hell she didn’t mention these concerns on the stand. Her response was, “well I don’t have any solid proof.”
So why does she say these things to me and then clam up on the stand? Well, she enjoys seeing me freak out. She feels better about herself to watch someone in such a terrible position. I have stopped sharing information with her and I no longer fall into her drama traps. While the supervisor’s comments may not have been outside the realm of possibility, they served no purpose other than to upset me as she was not willing to say them on the stand.
Those who fuel for financial benefit:
I have gone through three different law firms in the past year. My theory is that lawyers can smell a woman (or man) who is devastated and in desperate need of protection against a psychopath (for herself and most importantly her child). When there is a child involved, they act like vultures swooping down on fresh roadkill. They all want a piece of the meat and they want to take you for all you have. Lawyers also love these cases because they know that you are likely to be a cash cow. Custody wars with psychopaths are like gushing wounds that never stop bleeding. I have learned that with lawyers they will fuel this fight on and on until you can no longer pay – then they will disappear fat and happy (only to resurface again when they think they can get more out of you). Even if its in the child’s best interest to have no contact with the psychopath parent, its my belief that many of these lawyers fight to keep you in a situation where you can be a continuous cash cow. They are not interested in setting precedent and doing what is right – they just want your money.
How to avoid these people (or how to treat them if you are stuck with them):
To a certain extent, I realize that I was bound to come into contact with these people at some point in my custody war with Luc. Knowing that they exist, however, is half the battle. My best advice is to try and identify the motivation behind a person’s actions and pay close attention to these actions in relation to what they are telling you.
With an entertainment seeking Psycho drama fueler, limit your exposure to this person. In my case with the supervisor (she is doing the visitation exchanges now), I treat her just as I would treat the psychopath himself – no contact. Someone else interfaces with her and I limit my communication to only what is necessary. I don’t let Luc send messages through her beyond voicing when he is going to cancel a visit. If I don’t play into her attempts to draw me into conversation, she won’t have the ability to provoke me. Each visit, she is met with another member of my family and it appears as though she is less vocal with her provocations when I am not there.
As far as lawyers are concerned, be your own advocate. These people are only worried about their finances. You are just a client to them. If you discover a way to make litigation less expensive or you want them to push for something in particular – do not take no for an answer. Consider searching for a law firm experienced in fighting for the rights of victims of domestic abuse. Even though Luc never slapped me or punched me in the face, I was still abused and I now realize that I deserved for my case to be presented to the court this way.
You are your child’s best defense against the psychopath. As soon as we identify these Psychopath drama fuelers, it is easier to turn the tables and get them to work for us instead of against us.
Cappuccino Queen – excellent observations. You are absolutely right.
Cappuccino Queen
I second Donna’s comment and would like to add how impressed I am by your ability to not only make such observations, put a fitting name to them and then go on to explain them so eloquently and clearly.
I think that so many times when we are in the “heat of the battle”, so raw with emotion, it is very hard to actually see what is going on.
You are helping a great many people with your articles, thank you.
Thank you Donna and Milo for your kind words. I can’t take all the credit for this concept as I didn’t really notice what was happening until I was speaking with Liane Leedom the other day. I was telling her what the supervisor was saying to me and how upset she continued to make me (while still unwilling to be honest with her assessments on the stand). Liane asked me if I believed this woman was getting enjoyment out of “fueling” the fire…of sorts.
After my conversation with Liane, I tried to step back from the situation and look at what was really going on and I tried to take out as much emotion as possible. When I did this, I realized that she was totally right. I think there are a lot of people like this. It’s almost natural for people to turn their heads to watch an accident…but these people seem to take it further and make sure that whatever train wreck they are viewing continues along its path of destruction.
I don’t know too much background about this supervisor’s personal drama, but I somehow suspect that her first relationship (she is divorced) may have been messy. It might make her feel better to watch someone who has a worse situation and for that she is emotionally vested in fueling this. Of course, this is just my theory as I don’t know her exact situation.
Hi cappucinoqueen,
You and I must be thinking along the same wavelength. The other day I posted a comment to another blog saying something similar.
It was a blog about the personalities of cult leaders, written by a former FBI agent. I knew of several people (in my earlier life) who became involved in cults, so this is something I’ve been interested in. My suggestion to the author was that profiling the leader was helpful for post-mortem diagnosis & profiling, but in order to help people avoid becoming targets what was needed was a profile of the ‘helpers’. For two reasons:
1) when the cult gets going it’s only the assistants who initially present themselves to potential targets to bring them in &/or they are the ones who ‘smooth’ out any fears in new members if they meet the cult leader.
2) I’m speaking of cults here, mind you, not your ordinary psychopath: a cult leader has NO power on his/her own – zip, zero, nada – unless and until they develop a coterie of followers/assistants/supporters. It’s only at that point that they become truly dangerous.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/spycatcher/201208/dangerous-cult-leaders
It’s been my POV for a couple of years now that it’s the psychopath’s ‘assistants’ (meaning the people who coddle, enable &/or encourage the disordered person – and generally live vicariously through them btw) who truly represent the threat. If no-one ever supported an aggressive disordered person they’d be pretty easy to deal with, for the most part. It’s the fact that most of humanity almost automatically side with the more powerful against any perceived target, or at least back away which amounts to the same thing, which allows them to thrive and aggress with impunity.
I think your other issue, which fortunately Dr. Leedom gave you a red flag about, is that almost entirely the general population AND the psychiatric and mental health professions have no clue about the differences between how males and females aggress. Both genders are equally deadly, but they *tend to* aggress in different manners – one directly, the other more obliquely. I’ve started to use the example of female serial killers. They never get talked about in society, so people think they don’t exist, and therefore have no clues to warn them when they may be in danger. Also, any potential witnesses are under the same delusions, so being amongst a group of people doesn’t help either. There are more male serial killers than female, but the discrepancy isn’t nearly as large as you’d think. However, the number of victims is much closer. On average, female serial killers kill in far larger numbers than males, partly because they are neither suspected nor apprehended thus are able to kill for far longer, and partly because female SKs as a rule pick more disadvantaged victims who are either considered to be more of a burden on society and won’t be missed &/or are more vulnerable and not able to communicate, and also partly because they use methods which are more indirect and less attributable to them personally: for instance poison, smothering (in ways that can be confused with natural death), overmedication in ways that appear to be ‘accidents’, and killing by proxy (using someone else to fire the weapon).
For some bizarre reason people think that women can’t be sadists, but from what I’ve been reading (and what my own therapist tells me) abusive women can in fact be more sadistic than most male abusers, because that’s what they can use to make for less physical strength. But their abuses are generally presented as ‘woops – silly me, how could I be so stupid’ ‘accidents’.
What you described from your supervisor – purposefully ratcheting up your fear like that, and then demurely testifying that way on the stand, and then WINKING AT YOU – for heaven’s sake – as she got off the stand sounds exactly what the women sadists I know would do. That could be the limit of what she’s capable of, which is just f***ing with your head. On the other hand, if she’s willing to present this face in public, which is already pretty aggressive, I’d be mindful of the things she’s capable of that you can’t see.
As an example of what I’m speaking about, and what you’ve written about, just look at the case going on in Belgium right now: Michelle Martin was just freed on parole. She ‘looks like’ an assistant, but it was she who let those two 8-year olds starve to death in her basement when her husband was in prison for 4 months. What isn’t mentioned in most of the coverage is that she had been convicted (in the 80’s) of multiple counts of kidnapping. And yet even now she’s still viewed as an ‘assistant’. Also look at the cases of Jaycee Dugard and Elizabeth Smart – the ‘wife’ in both cases could have stopped it, but actively participated. Wanda Barzee’s children broke their silence and went on Oprah to talk about their mother’s severe sadism long before she ever met Brian Mitchell, because they were so concerned that she was being portrayed as a victim.
We don’t ever seem to have a problem labelling Hitler or Mao as dangerous killing psychopaths, even though as far as I can ascertain they never actually killed anyone with their bare hands. But for some reason the not infrequent times when women act in the same way, and get others to commit the crimes they have initiated, we seem to always see them as being ‘assistants’.
My, I went off on a bit of a ramble there! What I’m trying to say is that, when you consider the differnt ways that aggression can present, and the more indirect tactics that more skillful predators often use, sometimes the seeming ‘assistants’ can be the hidden drivers who are too smart to get their hands dirty, and are able/willing to get their thrills vicariously via watching someone else commit the victimization they’ve orchestrated. Other times they are predators-in-training. So my motto has been for some time now, beware the assistants more than anyone else – especially the quiet ones.
C.Queen ~
It took Oxy to point out what the GAL from Hell got out of our situation. It was so simple, so clear. It was one of those – why didn’t I think of that !!!!
It is helpful to run things by others who are not “emotionally connected”.
ps, I’m still impressed
Cappuccinoqueen,
OMGosh! You are SO right. Why do people watch all the spath filled ‘reality’ TV? They love to see a train wreck. Love to see a ‘sucker’ (victim) get devastated. Love to see charm and ego win. I think for some of these folks, beyond financial and entertainment, it is a sense that as long as it is happening to someone else it can NEVER happen to them. They are too smart…..since they’ve watched someone else’s misery.
Of course this is ridiculous.
As a hospice nurse I never think that I will cheat death, just because I have a ringside seat to other people’s passing. But to me this is the kind of mental delusion these drama fuelers are living in. Maybe they are entertained and gain financially. But I think deeper than that they have a twisted sense of being made almost immune, if they are part of the drama, but not the object of the abuse.
Skylar talks about this on her blog, 180rule. It is about people needing ‘scapegoats’ to protect them. As long as heads are rolling down the bloody tilt of sacrifice, and it is not THEIR head, then all is right in the universe. It is downright ‘tribal’ and so unevolved. And it really saddens me. Because there are alot of people who still live in this kind of delusional superstition.
I certainly had people watching my sacrifice, and cheering it on. They envied me when I was ‘his’ girlfriend, because they see him as some kind of little god, they were downright jubilant when I was sacrificed and dumped. It was as if they then had a ‘chance’ (most of them are/were women, and his ‘students’) with him, and they were crazy enough to believe that I deserved to be mistreated, and he would never do the same to them.
Spaths have an awful way of convincing those on the sidelines that if they give the spath what they want, cheer him on, and not call him out, that the cheerleaders will never become the sacrificed.
The only way to stop this is to become fully aware of it. As you are. Not cooperating/interacting with these drama fuelers. Any more than one has to. And not buying into their self-protecting delusions.
Slim
Slimone,
“As long as heads are rolling down the bloody tilt of sacrifice, and it is not THEIR head, then all is right in the universe.”
Wow, beautifully said.
I think that crowd actually is two types: a) the ones who would like to stop it but are too fearful and glad it’s not them, and b) the ones who are too cowardly (or unskilled) but secretly wish they were the ones chopping off heads (the cheerleaders perhaps?).
Annie, you are very correct. There are lots of dangerous women out there. You are also right to question what this supervisor might be doing behind my back (or in private) since she is so vocal to my face.
With the supervisor, I think its interesting that Luc actually suggested she continue as a person for safe exchanges. At that point, I realized that she was likely a “double agent” if you will. That being said, she is still the devil I know and I would rather give her the stone face on transfers than deal with the danger of Luc.
I wonder, however, how long this will go on. Will we have to pay this woman to make exchanges forever? My guess is that eventually Luc will realize that without access to me…he is not getting the chance to fully capitalize on his terror. Especially when he realized that I am not giving the supervisor enough to report back to him.
Finally, the supervisor also serves as narcissitic supply for Luc. She claimed she didn’t allow him to talk to her, however, I know that’s not true as I watched him go on rants to her for the entire supervised visit as my son sat there looking around for an escape route. (or course she didn’t mention in court how he was so focused on getting her to sympathize with him that he forgot to interact with his child) My guess is that she not only listened, but she made him feel good and allowed him to continue along as the “victim”. To her…who cares if she really believed it right? She was simply along for the soap opera.
@cappucinoqueen,
As long as Luc has suggested she continue, sounds like the perfect setup to use a ‘backspath’ technique. Also, even if she is totally evil, as long as you can work out how she might be a potential threat and block those paths, then you’re ahead of the game.
Also, even if she is a full-on predator looking for vicarious thrills, it sounds like she and Luc are being drawn into each others orbit enough that your son isn’t in too much danger. Better to be ignored by a psychopath than elsewise, I say!
It took me a long time to get to this knowledge, but I finally realized about my mother that even if she still is dangerous (which I believe is true) she’s only dangerous in certain situations. Even, for example, the most proficient serial killers don’t kill EVERYONE they meet. If you can keep yourself outside of the preferred target area you can be OK. The more tricky thing – as you pointed out – is keeping out of the clutches of the ‘assistants’.
In your situation, do you think it’s more a case that the supervisor and Luc will just keep each other occupied in *drama* until one or the other gets bored and moves on?
Annie, I am not sure what is going on exactly with the supervisor. She did get to a point where she would read a newspaper for most of the visit. I really do think she believes he is delusional and deranged, she just enjoys watching the train wreck too much to put a stop to it.
Since she is no longer pushing my buttons, I am not sure what will happen next. I am perfectly happy sitting back and letting them feed off of each other. But at some point, some professional is going to need to come forward with some honestly.
There is another factor here as well. Most people in the courts who have been asked to make an honest assessment of Luc have been scared. Our court appointed custody evaluator said all the right things in her report, but had to bring police with her to the court room because she was so terrified of Luc. Then, she completely fell apart on the stand and was shacking throughout her testimony to the point where the judge didn’t take anything she said seriously.