While there are no sure-proof ways to avoid exploitive partners (short of entering the monastery), we can reduce our risk of getting too deeply involved with them. Why do I say too deeply? Because if getting involved with an exploiter at all isn’t bad enough, getting in too deeply is the disaster we hope to avoid.
One of the best (and most under-utilized) strategies to protect yourself is to properly“vet” your prospective (or new) partner. What I have to say ahead is especially applicable if you’ve been burned by a sociopath previously, and even moreso if you suspect in yourself a tendency to enter relationships with bad-news characters.
What do I mean by “vetting” your partner? I mean, of course, getting to know him as thoroughly as possible before deepening your investment in him. But here’s the rub: it’s the getting to know him through others.
By others I mean his friends, family, relatives and, indeed, anyone in his social orbit from whom you stand a chance to learn, or confirm, something meaningful about him.
And so while we can agree that no strategy alone guarantees protection against exploitation, I’d propose that vetting your partner intelligently increases your protection, and is much wiser than depending exlusively on him (especially if he’s exploitive) to furnish a candid history of himself.
In other words, your partner’s history of himself will be much less informative than, and dangerously incomplete without, others’ complementary history of him.
How exactly do you vet a prospective partner? It’s true you could take any number of draconian measures—like hiring a team of private investigators—to assist you in the process and, indeed, there may be circumstances where you feel this is necessary.
However, I’m going to restrict myself in this discussion to vetting strategies that might be described as “natural—”meaning, you have access to them in the natural course of your evolving relationship.
And it begins with several absolutes: for instance, you absolutely must meet his family. You must meet his friends. And if he has kids, you must meet them, too.
Really, your aim to meet anyone and everyone in his life from whom it’s feasible to derive, piece by piece, a more complete, validating (or invalidating) profile of him.
If he has no family with whom he’s in contact, and no friends, or, if he has them but discourages you from meeting them, or, worse, is unwilling to let you meet them, well then”¦Houston, we have a problem.
If his parents are in fact deceased (and he hasn’t killed them), there’s nothing doing there. But what about his siblings? And other relatives? And, I repeat, his kids (whether younger or older)? And vitally, his friends!?
My point is that it’s on you to ensure that you neither confine yourself, nor let him confine you, into discovering him within an informational vacuum. I can’t stress this point enough: you absolutely must not allow yourself to be confined, in your discovery of who he is, within an informational vacuum.
Translation, and again at the risk of repeating myself: sooner than later, you’ll want to meet as many people as possible in his life, past and present, who, collectively, can shed light on who your partner is.
Then, if he stonewalls you; if in anyway he restricts or censors your access to feeback through the human beings who’ve comprised, and comprise, his social network, well then”¦I repeat, Houston, we’ve got a very serious problem.
And so, for instance if, in your efforts to move the vetting process forward at a natural, efficient pace, he strings you along and is saying, week after week, I’ll introduce you to my family, just not quite yet, baby”¦I’ll know when the time’s right, trust me”¦.this portends disaster.
Similarly, if he says, ostensibly to protect you, “Trust me, baby, you don’t want to meet my family. They’re a bunch of lunatics,” trust me: you’ll want to meet them. He may be right—they may be lunatics, but you’ll want to meet them to assess the risk that he’s one, too.
Because when his brother Billy Bob, who’s had a few too many pops, tells you on an unscheduled tour of the family property, “Phil tell you how me and him used to set them cats on fire and watch ’em burn to a crisp? Damn, them was the good old days,” this feedback just might not square with Phil’s having told you what an animal lover he was as a kid?
In other words, even dysfunctional, unhinged family and friends can cough up really IMPORTANT information.
Like this, from his mentally challenged, but not necessarily delusional, sister, Crystal: “Good luck with Harold. You seem nice, honey. Maybe now he’s got a girlfriend, he’ll keep his hands off me.”
Okaaay, Crystal”¦thanks for the blessing.
And please, if he has no longterm friendships, do yourself a favor: Don’t rationalize this. Ask yourself, say, hmmm”¦why?
Why does this 40-year-old man have no longterm friendships? What could explain the fact that he has no contact with anyone from his past? (Incidentally, “They’re dead to me,” isn’t a reassuring explanation, especially when a lot of people, it seems, are dead to him.)
It’s probably unncessary to get mired down in defining precisely how far back you’ll want to mine his past? Maybe it’s unnecessary to go all the way back to elementary school? Or even junior high? But what about high school? College? Old colleagues? Cousins? Hell, even old prison buddies (sorry, I know that’s not funny).
Speaking of prison, here’s a concept I ask you to entertain: if you should happen to establish, through your due diligence, that your Romeo has a prison record, how can I say this diplomatically? Remember the books See Dick RUN! See Jane RUN!
Well this circumstance—a prison history—dictates that, just like Dick and Jane, you run! Because it’s amazing what a good, smart, well-timed flight can protect you from!!
Back to the longterm friendship matter: If, in the course of the vetting process, you discover that, alas, your new partner has, indeed, maintained friendships since childhood, or made and maintained solid friendships as an adult, this is a good, positive sign. Is it certification of his integrity and authenticity? Of course not. But it belongs in the plus column of your assessment. It’s the kind of discovery, among others, you’re glad to make.
Let’s say your new partner’s alleged best friend and, for that matter, all his important “peeps,” allegedly live scattered across the country, thereby, he laments, complicating your opportunities to meet them face to face. What now?
Well, where geography deters you from breaking bread with them in person, technology to the rescue! Use skype! Talk to them, see them, interact with them on the computer! At the very least, talk to them on the phone!
There are plenty of feasible ways, in other words, in this technology-enabling world, to connect with those in his life whose geographical situations make for impractical face to face meetings. And so, if he keeps you at arms’ length from them, he’s telling you something very ominous that you need to heed carefully and proactively.
Let me stress: you aren’t just evaluating the dish you get on him from those who’ve known, and know, him (ostensibly) best; you are also evaluating the dishers! You are evaluating the evaluators!
Who are those who comprise his social network? What are their values? What’s their integrity level, as best your instincts tell you? Do they strike you as—even if not admirable in their own right—credible character references?
The answers to these questions matter a lot. It may be nice that Don, his best buddy since third grade, swears on his own family’s life that your boyfriend’s character and integrity are beyond reproach. But if Don’s done time for armed robbery, the credibility of his glowing reference suffers.
You are also evaluating how your new partner relates within his social circle. Does he maintain his “integrity” around them? Does he treat you with a consistent level of attentiveness and respect regardless of the audience? Conversely, does he become a different person around different people, revealing unexpected, disarming sides of himself?
Again, please remember: The vetting process I’m suggesting needn’t be, or seem, formal or contrived; rather, it should be entirely unforced, entirely natural. And your new partner should enable this process by welcoming you into the lives of those with whom he’s shared, and shares, his life!
If he doesn’t make this process natural and seamless—if he filibusters or stonewalls you—this is, I repeat, a serious problem.
What are you looking for in all of this? You are looking to confirm that, by and large, others’ history and experience of him line up with yours! Because if they don’t align, that’s a fatal sign. (Yes, I’m channeling my inner Johnny Cochrane!) If they don’t align, that’s a fatal sign.
So what do you with reasonably unfettered access to these valuable, potential Judas figures in his life? At the risk of overkill, you listen to them, listen to their stories of him. As we’ve established, they will tell you stories. And if they don’t tell you stories, you can ask for stories. And when he says, glowering at his buddy, “Let’s not go there, Al,” you know that’s a place you want to go.
And when he says, even more sinisterly, “I’m not f’ing kidding, Al. Let’s not go there,” you know that’s exactly one of the many places you may need to go.
Sometime the stories aren’t verbalized, they’re just implicit; and sometimes the stories come in the form of questions, like, why doesn’t Tom have relationships with any of his kids?
Listen for the excuses and heed their meanings. Their mother poisoned them against me. Even worse, their mothers poisoned them against me.
In other words, if he’s been married more than once, and hates all his ex’s, and all his ex’s hate him, and all his kids hate him, then 2+2 doesn’t equal he, poor guy, has been repeatedly victimized.
Beware of the partner who’s a lousy parent. While it’s not a guarantee he’ll be a lousy partner, it’s a warning that the same self-centeredness that corrupted his relationships with his kids will surface in his relationship with you.
More generally, beware of the partner who has a history of discarding others in his life. You want to assess this history very carefully, because this is a history that will repeat itself, you can be quite sure of that.
You may be the passion flavor of the month, or year, even five years, but when the edge of his passion fades, watch out. He will cast you off as he’s cast off the sundry others in his life, perhaps even his kids from an earlier first marriage.
Do not be fooled for one second into believing that you are who he’s been looking for all his life. He may delude himself, again and again, with this fantasy, but it’s your obligation to yourself not to collude in this delusion.
(I thank Lovefraud poster Silvermoon, who, while she may or may not subcribe to my ideas, sparked my thinking for this article with her extremely stimulating feedback. As always, my use of male gender pronouns in this article was for convenience’s sake, and not to suggest that females are exempted from the attitudes and behaviors discussed. This article is copyrighted © 2010 by Steve Becker, LCSW.)
Dancing,
Let your lawyer do his job and quit talking to the ex. All negotiations go through your attorney and that is the simple end to that.
No contact, no kidding. You know what you are dealing with. Your guts are screaming and your head is full of mental noise and anxiety. The point of hiring representation is so you DON”t have to deal with your soon to be ex in that state and someone who knows the law and how to negotiate for you can.
If you don’t know your family assets, then you need to and you have the right to find out. Period. That can be handled by your attorney. A divorce is a simple divison of assets and debts and a settlement of custody. It ain’t that hard.
If the assets are not disclosed, they can not be fairly divided. End of story. You should be required to file a sworn statement of income and posessions and debts which become the basis for the proerty settlement. The child support is by a formula which is based on your incomes and Alimony is up for grabs. The negotiation is to get less alimony and more property settlement because from a tax perspective that is usually the advantageous position. Double check with your tax people to make sure.
There is no secret back door opportunity to have better success. You are still inclined to believe in the “you and me against the world promise” and it isn’t real because it doesn’t include you.
You have NO reason to continue any dialog with the man who you are trying to divorce. Divorce means ITS OVER BABY!
Be conscious of your time with the attny. It does cost. Ask him what his strategy is and listen. He will be succinct. The more time you spend telling him what you don’t know, the more it will cost.
Your question is: how do I get my best deal the fastest and get this over and done without having personal contact with the guy. Then LISTEN.
If any of it involves direct contact with you in the negotiating chair, the answer is HELL NO. Not just I don’t think so.
Nothing less.
Of course he isn’t fair and square. Look at who and what you know him to be.
If the attny says email him to get the info and you say YOU EMAIL HIM because YOU REPRESENT ME you are square in your court.
You tell your attny this man has abused you and you do not wish nor are willing to subject yourself to the risk of further abuse and being cheated or taken advantage of. Period.
Your husband or soon to be ex is a cluster-b guy and he isn’t nice, he doesn’t hurt and he is playing for his advantage not yours.
Don’t meet him, don’t talk to him on the phone and don’t open up an email dialog. NO CONTACT. NONE. THAT IS THE MESSAGE.
Your lawyer needs to understand what you are dealing with and that this guy frightens you enough to make you shrivel. And for good reason!
Uh, uh. Put his damn nose to the ground and keep it there. Get your lawyer to do what he is supposed to and let the process work.
Stand your ground. Stay the course and if you need to be very,very clear with your attorney do it without making a confession of it.
My two cents and I learned the hard way…..
DancingWarrior:
silvermoon gives you very good advice. I am concerned that your attorney doesn’t seem to be your advocate. While the clock runs every moment he picks up the phone or types an email, he still should not, in my opinion, be putting you in the position of of dealing with your soon to be S-ex. If you don’t have confidence in his representation of you, than you may need to consider replacing your chosen counsel.
If you choose to stay with your counsel, then you two need to get on the same page regarding the scope of his representation, and, more to the point, what your expectations of his representation of you is supposed to be.
silvermoon is right in that a divorce involves a division of property, and where applicable, appropriate support. As hard as it is, and I know from personal experience how hard it is, you have got to turn off your emotions with your soon to be S-ex and treat this divorce as strictly business. The sad reality is your whole relationship boils down to numbers on a page. If you don’t get the numbers right now, you will be the one paying the price in the end. I suspect your soon to be S-ex doesn’t want to produce the financial disclosure statements because — HELLO– if he lies and its found out — the judge can hold him in contempt of court.
If our soon to be S-ex even approaches you and starts with the guilt, pity play, the “how could you”s, etc, you have to take the approach that “This is strictly business. Nothing personal, just business.” This does not, however, mean that you should “do business” with him directly. That is our attorney’s job. It is his job to advocate for you. He is required under the canon of ethics to do that for you. If he cannot do that, then as I said, you need to consider whether to proceed with this attorney.
As far as practical advice goes regarding your settlement, I suggest taking cash up front, even if it is discounted to present value, because otherwise you will be chasing him from now til the end of the earth for every dollar. Also, I would tell my lawyer to ask the judge to, in advance of the final decree, to order the parties to prepare the QDROs (qualified domestic relation orders) and have them executed in court before he hands down the decree. Trust me on this one. I did the straight boy thing and went through an incredibly messy divorce. After 3 years of chasing my ex to execute the QDROs, I finally had to haul her back into court. The judge was so fed up with her antics that the judge ordered her to not only sign them on the spot or else the judge would hold her in contempt of court and order her locked up until she signed them, but actually awarded me legal fees and ordered her to write a check on the spot. See, even an attorney can get steamrolled in a divorce.
DancingWarrior:
When I first posted on this site in early December 2008, I remember saying what I had to do to finally drive the S-ex out of my life. I said “to get rid of a sociopath, become a sociopath.” That means turning off your emotions regarding the S completely. You turn off the guilt. You turn off the compassion. You turn off the love. You turn off the responsibility. You turn all of it off.
You have got to view this as a fight for scarce resources. If you can’t do this for yourself, then view it as your fighting for your kids. That made it easier for me to do what I had to do to take care of business in the aftermath of the S-ex. Nailing him with the IRS over money he owed me and some other unfinished business.
Wow, Matt, I can’t believe you’ve been here a year and a half almost!
Dancing, Matt is a great attorney, Listen to his advice. He isright to, whatever you get up front is all yo0u willl get as any he “owes” you, you will have to CHASE forever and still probably not get!
Dancing Warrior:
If your attorney senses your self doubt like I do, and like you have even stated in your 5:20 p.m. post, then maybe he’s allowing you to speak to your husband in hopes of a reconciliation.
Maybe he senses your apprehension about following through with this divorce, and he’s giving you plenty of room to reconcile with your husband.
To be honest, from what I am reading, I can see that you are having MAJOR doubts about what you are doing.
And if I can sense it just from reading your posts, I am sure your lawyer can sense it, too.
These are just my thoughts about what I’ve been reading.
You know your situation better than anybody.
And if you are not ready to follow through with this divorce, then don’t do it.
I know I am probably in the minority here, but you should do what is right for YOU.
And if that means taking some time and thinking this through a little more, so be it.
Either way, you will be supported here.
~I am not suggesting that you go running back to your husband, either. Just give yourself a breather so you can get your bearings.
It seems like you are overwhelmed by the situation right now, and it is very difficult for anyone to make sound decisions in that frame of mind. Take your time.
Dancing – sweetie, i agreed with silver and matt – let your lawyer do the talking. do not talk with your husband. you had determined not to awhile ago, so follow through with it. your lawyer needs to step up, and you need to be firm with him about what your expectations are.
there is nothing your husband has to offer you. he is not going to magically become someone you can trust and rely on; so really what are you hoping might happen that you would risk this for? I think there might be something to what Rosa says; you might not be quite there yet. But i also don’t think that we have to listen to all our inner voices and fears about letting go.
take a look at why you are divorcing, why you think you would be better off without him, and think through, or feel through why you might consider talking to him, what you think you may get from it – and weigh that probability against what you have already gotten.
and if your thought to talk to him is only based in some FOG and because you are acquiescing to the lawyer, SNAP OUT OF IT! you don’t have to talk to any damn person you don’t want to.
i am wishing you the best. keep going!
DancingWarrior,
I know what it’s like, wanting to have a husband that you can rely on, but like one_step_at_a_time say’s,, “he is not going to magically become someone you can trust and rely on,” still trying to absorb this truth myself. I would love to have a husband that I could depend on, but I’m realizing that he’s incapable of changing, that my husband is never looking out for my well-being (in the long run). He’ll do nice things for me occasionally, but he’s already thrown me under the bus (many times) by the stunts that he’s pulled in the past. I personally am going to take my time, getting my head sorted out, liking Rosa’s advice “to do what is right for you”.
I think my L is taking husband at face value. In response to my report of his email that “our lives are in atty’s hands and I have another option, for you and only you”, my L said,
“I don’t know him. Maybe he doesn’t like lawyers. Maybe he’d rather talk to you. You might at least find out what he proposes”
Matt, I wanted to ask you what exactly I can tell this lawyer about the lack of rapport and HOW exactly I want to get on the same page?
Yes, I am emotionally involved and know H’s underhanded traits, and that’s why I need the help of a lawyer. And he’s not my therapist and doesn’t care about our marital issues.
But if he disregards what I tell him…how do I get him to listen to me?
I’ve told him husband is aggressive, told him history of marriage initially, even a personality disorder diagnosis.
I’ve told him he’s harassing me by phone and email and I had to change cell #, and that I’m afraid when I get his messages.
And still he thinks I should email him to see what he has to say.
I feel that Husband could have already said in the email what he proposed. I know he’s not honest. And I know he knows my buttons and how exactly to push them. But I don’t necessarily want to involve all this drama with the lawyer.
Thanks silver for the advice about no contact and making the lawyer do all that for me.
I would like to know from Matt if I meet w/lawyer tomorrow, what exactl to tell him to convey I am very uncomfortable with how little he hears my concerns about relating with husband.
Thank you.
There is only one thing you can say Dancing and that is:
You’re fired!~
{{{DancingWarrior}}} He’s still playing the game with you, my dear. No contact means just that: no contact via email, text messaging, telephone, or carrier pigeon! Each time we “talk” to them, we are snapping at whatever bait they’re laying out there. Whether it’s child support, visitation, dential appointments, or birthday gifts, it’s all used to toy with us.
The soon-to-be-ex-spath is perpetuating the drama and that’s what your attorney is being paid to manage for you! So that you don’t have to involve yourself in more bullshit headgames, let your attorney earn his/her fees!
Brightest blessings!