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.)
I see.
🙁
I need to take care of this.
Warrior:
I’m gonna be firm”..you need to pick up your balls and use em!
Call on your friends in this case”.friends you keep hidden but NEED right now”..like your balls, your inner sociopath and your anger”..take em out for a nice talk and tell em you NEED them for the next year or so”..
Your NOT acting like your driving this bus”..get out of the wish wash.
Make clear decisions, because no one is gonna do it for you.
This is the beginning of your life of decision making.
The ’wish wash’ is what kept you with the spath so long”..if you don’t feel your attorney is ’cutting’ it”..interview others.
Do the research, go to legal aid ask for direction from them”..they know attorny’s and who is more generous with terms.
Charge the fees on a cc.
Do whatever you must to get this divorce done and in a fashion that benefits you.
If your gut is questioning your attorney”.it WON”T CHANGE!!!!
The more time you waste”the more money you waste.
Take the command, go out and find an attorney who ’connects’ with what YOUR dealing with”..(non emotional)”..but your gonna have to buck up and bring out your inner sociopath. Take a deep breath and you can do this!!!!
And a female wouldn’t hurt either.
Silver, going to meet with atty soon. I’ll tell you how it goes.
Don’t feel baracuda is my man–totally out of my league.
Dancing
“Advice may pour down from the stadium full, but only the matador faces the bull”.
DancingWarrior:
I just lost an entire post to you, so I’ll try again.
I have just logged on and seen the back-and-forth about your current representation. Let me tell you what I think.
I don’t know the dollar amount of assets in your divorce, nor the length you were married. However. the 125 buck an hour difference between the attorney you went to initially and whom you seem to trust and your current counsel you don’t is a small price to pay for both your future financial security as well as your peace of mind.
Most everything in life boils down to dollars and cents, so look at it this way. If the attorney who charges 375/hour has to spend 10 hours fighting for each 100 grand in assets, the difference you are talking about is 1250 bucks. You may not realize it now, but when you are 65 that 100 grand in assets is going to make a difference in how you spend the remainder of your life. And if your husband has a real pension which you can attach a piece of, then that 1250 is going to seem like chump change.
I am the first to admit that 1250 is not small potatoes. But, this is your LIFE we are talking about here. We all have to eat. And when we’re old, we all need some bucks in the bank to fall back on. If there are real assets here to fight over, then for God’s sake, don’t chintz out on ineffective counsel to save a few bucks. You will kick yourself in the end.
However, if your assets are in the bracket that you’re going to eat it up in lawyer’s fees, then I’d say stay with current counsel and drive this horse to the end and be done with it.
My rule of thumb is that if you suspect your ex has been hiding assets, he probably has. But, if you think you’ve had a pretty good idea of what has been going on all the years you were married, then you have to decide if it is worth staying with your current attorney or not.
From where I stand, you don’t have faith in this attorney. You are never going to be happy with his representation. Also, you said something that gave me pause — you said he was a family court mediator/hearing officer. That means his approach is going to be to get you to compromise. That works in an uncontested divorce. That is never going to work in a situation like yours. I don’t mean to disparage your attorney, but that is his approach and I don’t think it is going to work for you.
You have to make a decision here as to what is in your best interests. From where I am standing, I think you would be far better off calling the attorney you started with, ask him how he thinks this will play out, ask him if you have to reinvent the whole wheel or can he pick up where things are with your current attorney and then you make the decision. You have to make the decision fast — literally the clock is running — court dockets move ahead and your current attorneys clock is running.
dancing – you don’t need a lawyer to be nice and conciliatory like you are; you need a lawyer to be aggressive and no holds barred like your husband.
best,
one step
Thanks all for listening. Thanks Matt for the detailed point of view.
I’d like to say more about my tough choices.
First, I was SCARED to ask for a temporary separation from my husband. He intimidated me in the past so I never believed it could be done.
Second, I was scared separated under same roof, he in basement, refusing to move out. Thank GOD he agreed to go to therapy and this time we went to a no nonsense therapist that held his feet to the fire.
Even when he moved out three months later the whole separation didn’t seem REAL to me because I believed I had no RIGHT to kick him out, or even demand that he change his behavior. This was 06/08!
One year later, he doesn’t want to renew lease, just wants to move back in. I panic. Run to Atty.R, how do I stop him. He says file, file for motion for sole occupancy of house, and then change locks. I was TERRIFIED to do it–terrified of my husband. To change locks on him. To tell him he’d be served.
One year since filing–circus re. his not paying c.s. “to teach me a lesson”; me stupidly paying a mediator to persuade him to pay and avoid court motions; fearful of divorce; therapy again.
Atty.R. has this super posh office with Oriental carpets and mahogany desks, huge modern busness building. I don’t have a mansion nor huge assets. I am a teacher, he an average banker, with a basic middle class lifestyle. I would use up my savings in two days of court. Atty.R. made it clear he won’t work unless he is paid. I don’t have wealthy family to help. Mother is a refugee immigrant living meagerly. Realistically, he would NOT complete this in 20 hours ($8000). I had a strong sense that he was out of my price range.
Atty.J is in a different county, prices are lower, he’s experienced, excellent reputation, known in court, and experienced in this court. In my mind, I envisioned a polite divorce, and am quiet by nature. When he asked me about fault toward breakdown of marriage, I did not chomp at the bit foaming at the mouth, “NAIL HIS A$$!!” I was probably confused inside, numb, scared, and deeply sad.
I saw Atty.J today. First thing he said was he can get right on process of discovery as I don’t want a 4-way. I said go for it. Told him he missed April c.s. and lowered May c.s.. He said he can get a motion to resume same c.s.. I said DO IT. Then he said ok–sorry you had to come just for that. Then I said I am concerned we aren’t on the same page.
He got very attentive asked, “you and me?” I told him I’ve said before H is aggressive, he’s been counting on me caving in, but he is manipulative, underhanded, will put on a performance and a pity play. And I got emotional –angry–and he got serious and promptly admitted that I DID tell him, and he is hearning me now, that he WAS taling to him at court, and DID offer a 4 way. But he misread me. I told him you must have worked with people like this before, sociopaths. He nodded. I didn’t break down, but I did show strong emotion and told him I don’t want you to show compassion for HIM, I want you to represent ME and protect my and my child’s future because this man was, is, and will try to take advantage of me.
He got it immediately. Admitted he misread me before and I felt that he understands.
Yes silver, the matador faces the bull. That matador is me–I’m sure what you wanted to say.
Oh, and I told him I found notes from H’s interview about predicted bonuses, and a note from his dad gifting him treasury bonds which he did not mention in proposal. I said if you can catch him in a lie, then you should catch him in a LIE and not reveal that you know what I told you.
I cried driving home–from stress. I felt relieved bec. I think the tension cleared. I also don’t want to idealize lawyer as some kind of protector bec. I have to be that.
Daughter and I pulled up to an intersection, as I looked right a car pulls up next to us. The driver waves, I look, it’s husband, smiling.
He drove right we drove left.
The smile and wave hasn’t left me all day. While doing things though he should be here.
Feeling unsure. It feels so unreal.
Warrior:
Maybe Rosa is right….maybe your not ready for a divorce.
I suggest you go through your posts or journals (if you keep them) and re read your thoughts….see if this is truely how you want to be treated.
I found this helpful for myself…..re reading everything I wrote with my own hand/heart……whenever I waivered…..I quickly put the brakes on the waivering, after reading my own words.
I KNEW, when reminded, I was NOT going to put my kids or Myself through his torture.
I’ts only you who can make this decision…..
In relpy to the original post:My ex has a new “target”. I have warned her about him. She isnt going to listen because he is such a good lover. I , myself had to come to the conclusion that I would much rather have a man with a good heart than a good time in bed.