I said there is no reliable inventory for abusers. or at least one you have put forward.
As for respect, well frankly my dear I don't give a rat's ass. You've already shown what you are. and are appropriately killfiled. On 4/18/05, Dana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Whereas I think we should be very careful before we decide that > someone would be better off dead. Bottom line, is she better off dead > or is it just better for *him*? > > So when we are talking about a possibility like that and it is being > dismissed as unimportant I find it a little difficult to be > overconcerned about maligning somoene who runs around saying his > wife's brain is a bag of water. > > I don't have much respect for Larry's posts any more. You may have > noticed that I didn't bother asking him for a citation for his > assertion that there is no inventory for an abusive relationship, > because there is no such citation -- I speak as one who has been > through scholar.google.com pretty thoroughly -- and he won't bother to > answer because he can't and he never admits it when he is wrong. > > Look. There is a profile. Whether you choose to believe ot like it or > not. The assertion that there isn't is simply laughable. If you want > to see the numbers that go with it, read the studies I posted. If you > don't want to, quit complaining that the profile doesn't tell you that > there is a 51.25 percent chance that you are in an abusive > relationship. As in most things, reality is slightly different and > more complex. Some people have risk factors and overcome them. Some > people get help. Some people engage in denial and go there ::shrug:: > > Let's focus on what is important, you and I. The only reason this even > matters is that it goes to Michael Schiavo's credibilty as > spokesperson for Terri. It is possible for him to be both abusive and > truthful, sure. But a doubt would arise. > > Now, some of saying that he fits the profile assumes that certain > statements made by other people are accurate, sure. > > But let me see if I can get it all in one post without forgetting > anything. After that, if you would like to believe that there is no > such thing as domestic abuse, that Michael Schiavo is a great guy and > the Schindlers are neurotic fools, hey my friend, whatever floats your > boat. I have only persisted this long because you have struck me up to > this point as someone who gives osme thought to things. > > OK. > > a) What seems to be uncontested is that neither one of this couple had > much education and that neither had a terribly exciting job. There > were issues with money. All of this is typical of the background to > abuse but does not prove it existed. > > b) Where we start to fit a little more closely is that he chose a > woman who was younger and overweight, who was shy and did not have a > lot of self-confidence. She married the first guy she ever kissed. At > 20. This proves nothing in and of itself but is somewhat suggestive in > conjunction with a). > > c) This man is prone to rages when things are not to his liking. > Remember "nursing hime administrator's nightmare"? > > d) His wife lost weight, became more attractive and more outspoken, > and the marriage ran into difficulties. Could be coincidence but is > very classic especially against a background of a and b. > > e) She wound up in the hospital on the eve of leaving him. Does assume > that the woman saying this was telling the truth, but is almost > diagnostic if true. Men with power issues can't stand to be left. > > From here down we assume that certain people are telling the truth. > The fit with the profile depends on whether they are in fact telling > the truth of course. > > And there are things we will never know, such as whether he hit her, > but there *are* those unexplained injuries, which a radiologist said > in one of the links that I posted would be *required* to be reported > if seen in a child. I have not seen a better explanation than his. > > One of Terri's family -- I believe it was the sister -- said that > Michael attacked her the night Terri went to the hospital. > > According to the shrink who made the much-aligned original statement > that he fit the profile, he used to check her odometer to make sure > she wasn't going anywhere without his permission. Also very suggestive > of advanced power issues. > > According to Cindy Shook, an ex-girlfriend who may of course have her > own agenda, he used to stalk her. > > Also according to Cindy Shook, he was extremely jealous. > > Cindy Shook also said she was terrified of him and she did not come > forward until she was supoenaed because she was convinced he would > hurt her child. > > Cindy Shook investigated getting a restraining order. > > Cindy Shook said said that Shiavo blames Terri for ruining his life > and felt he was entitled to compensation (she was his girlfriend at > the time of the malpractice trial). She also said that he told her > they never discussed last wishes. > > I don't remember the name of the nurse, but there were affidavits to > the effect that Schiavo would call up and ask when the bitch was going > to die. > > I still see no good reason for not allowing the blinds to be opened. > > There are concerns from this period that would amount to neglect if > true, the wheelchair not being repaired, Terri not being allowed out > of bed, infections, etc. I don't know if these are among the > allegations that were dismissed as unfounded. > > Using her money would also qualify as abuse. > > Let's see, intimidatng, yes, a lot of people seem to decribe him that > way and I think some of the staff used the word abusive in their > affidavits; also, if true, he was very concerned about minor details > of her daily regimen like making sure her hands weren't bandaged. > > Let's see, withholding food water or medical treatment, trifecta there.... > > Abusing pets, hmm, he had her cats put to sleep... > > Minimizing the abuse, saying the abuse never happened, ayup...shifting > responsibility, yes, see above... > > Preventing the spouse from seeing family, isolating, yes.... > > Mock you or humiliate you, depends on whether you count being compared > to a table lamp.... > > :P > > I'm done with this topic. > > Dana > > On 4/17/05, Gruss Gott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Dana wrote: > > > So. We are left with the fact that my opinion hasn't changed, and > > > neither has yours :) I am glad that you don't have any stake in my > > > > I'm challenging you because you said, "he fits the profile." Based on > > your responses, what you meant was that he met your subjective opinion > > and not a objective probabilistic profile. > > > > The problem I have with that is in saying "he fits the profile" you > > imply that you have some expertise in such matters and are making an > > objective statement rather than an opinion - that's a lie of omission; > > maybe in your case it's due to exuberance, I dunno. > > > > If Larry's post if accurate, my suspicion is is right: there's a bunch > > of people that can't understand someone who's fighting for another's > > decision they wouldn't make so they try to make sense of it by > > inventing things to fit their fantasy rather than accepting what they > > see. > > > > The problem with that is that they're messing with someone's life and > > I think we should be very careful before we go doing that. > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support efficiency by 100% http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:154318 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
