Responding to abuse

[longtire]

I was going to post this on my long thread, but I though this might generate a lot of discussion, so I'm giving a life of its own.

I am having trouble reconciling these two viewpoints in my mind:
---
On one hand, when someone is verbally and/or emotionally abusive towards me, it leads me to feel hurt.
---
On the other hand, no one else can force me to feel anything, I choose to be hurt or stressed in these situations.
---

When someone is being abusive, basically they are denying our humanity or individuality.  We could choose not to hate, but to rise above.  However, by definition the abuse IS damaging regardless of our viewpoint.  It does have an effect.  It seems like this is enough to produce direct physical stress regardless of whether we buy into the abuse.  Whether I stress myself out or not.  Action and consequences.

A healthy reaction to abuse is to stand up for our rights and respect as human beings.  To affirm our self-value by not going along with the abuse.  Still, it seems that I need those feelings of hurt or stress to tell me that this is abuse in the first place.  Then, recognizing my feelings, I can decide how to stand up for myself.  It seems to me that these feelings are a natural reaction to abuse and not because I chose to feel that way about it.  At the same time, somthing abusive said to one person may hurt their feelings, while the same comment would be shrugged off or ignored by another person.

So it seems that these are natural human reactions to the situation.  But when I recognize these feelings, it is up to me to decide what to do.  I can stay in the situation and try to co-dependently "help" the one perpetrating the abuse (I don't recommend this one!), but will inevitably end up feeling "abused:"  hurt, denied, and devalued.  I can stay in the situation and confront the person and perhaps get them to back off around me or go elsewhere.  I can choose to leave the situation if the danger is too high or if it easier.  Honestly, I don't really like any of these approaches.

Being co-dependent appeals to me the least, since I have a lot of experience with this one.  This is giving into fear.  Fear of not being OK without that person, fear that you must change them to be OK yourself.  I don't see this ever resolving the abusive behavior because the person doing the abuse will alwyas have a "willing" audience in the coey.

Confronting actually seems like the best approach out of the three to me.  It is probably the hardest and requires a lot of confidence.  Ideally, confrontation would get that person's attention and they would see what they are doing and move to stop it on their own.  In reality, even an hour long confrontation is not likely to overpower a lifetime of justification and repeated behavior.  So the person is likely to avoid abusing the person who confronted and will simply transfer the abuse to another, easier target.  Sometimes this means the abuser leaves the situation and carries on in a new setting where the truth is not recognized yet.

On one hand it seems good to confront the abuse and stand up for our worth as human beings.  On the other hand, the most likely outcome is simply transferring the abuse off ourselves onto someone else who may not be able to defend themselves as well against it.  It a way, this seems selfish.  Still, no one wants to put up with abuse unless they are masochistic or a martyr.  As I said above, abuse takes a toll.  Even a martyr will crack in time.  At worst, when combined with secrecy, this approach could lead to just shuffling around the abuse to other people.  Like the way many pedophile priests were handled in the past.

The third option is to leave the situation.  Sometimes this is feasible, sometimes not.  I hate that this feels like running away to me.  However, if  you are in a situation with uneven power or where the abuse has worn you down to where you don't have the resources to stay any longer, then leaving is the best option.  Get out of the situation so you can heal and recover yourself from the damage done.

The most important thing is to take care of yourself first.  Once that safety and healing is obtained, then what?  Do we say, I'm glad I made it out and everyone else in on their own with this person.  Certainly to a degree that's true, we can't make choices for them any more than we could for the person committing the abuse.  Do we chase after the abuser and warn everyone about them?  That sounds like harassment, not to mention still being strongly connected to the abuser.

How do you see it?

[bunny as guest]

Wow, longtire. Very astute post. I don't really agree with the "nobody can force me to feel anything" idea. We are human and we react to provocation and aggression. The trick is how long we choose to stay in a persecuted emotional state or whether we'll choose a more proactive option after a reasonable time.

I choose avoidance and sidestepping abuse as my #1 choice. Confrontation runs a distant second. Most of the time confrontation accomplishes nothing or makes things worse. I would definitely pick my battles when it comes to confrontation. An abuser probably has more than one victim already. There's no way to save all the potential victims of a narcissist abuser. Warning people is useless; no one will heed it, and the warner will look like they have a chip on their shoulder.

Again, great post! thanks.


bunny

[Bliz]

I guess you can see from my posts I usually choose to confront my abusers.  NOt always at the time they are abusing me, which I think would really be the healthiest. Often I process things and wait until the next opportunity to fight back.  My experience has been trying to talk to your abusers in an impromptu time does not seem to go anywhere.  The abuse to them is history and they cant or wont remember it.  

It seems to work a little if I bring my ammo up the next time they are abusing.  I think I am having some success but there is always that awkward time between processing the last abuse and venting your spleen at a future date.

[vunil as guest]

I'm with Bunny.  I know it sounds so enlightened to say "we are responsible for our own feelings" and  I know a lot of people believe that, but I read it as meaning "so make sure you go places and do things that give you good feelings!"

To expect not to feel something when a button is pushed-- well, maybe the buddha could do that, but I am not the buddha, so I have to be a little more proactive and keep my buttons to myself.

Longtire, your post reminded me of a very N exboyfriend I had who used to be really awful to me, insulting me, calling me fat, whatever, and then when I cried and told him he had hurt me, he would say "that is not my responsibility!  We are all responsible for our own emotions!"

Somehow that example has always stuck with me, because I realized that my responsibility was LEAVING HIM, not trying to be ok with him yelling at me.

Just my 2 cents.  And as I said I am not the buddha

[P]

You got me thinking Longtire, thanks.

Do we say, I'm glad I made it out and everyone else in on their own with this person. Certainly to a degree that's true, we can't make choices for them any more than we could for the person committing the abuse. Do we chase after the abuser and warn everyone about them?

About ‘everyone else’. No-one is perfect, abuse can be partly in the eyes of the beholder. Someone with NPD might say ‘he deliberately humiliated me by losing his job’ and say that it’s abuse. And make up a tale of lies to support their view. But they believe it’s abuse and to them it is abuse. That’s why many abusers aren’t in prison, it isn’t illegal to have your own view of the world.

Do we warn others? If others are healthy, they won’t accept any abuse. If they’re not healthy, they’ll work it through themselves, or not. But as much as we might want to warn others, in effect we’re also making some subjective moral judgements about the abuser. Is that fair? Is our view the ‘right’ one?

Unless we consider children who have not yet reached legal independence. If they are being abused and there’s anything we can do to have other people intervene (authorities), then I believe we should. If the abuse isn’t covered by law, it’s much more difficult.  

I think that everyone is pretty much ‘on their own’. Sharing ideas and opinions helps but truthfully, we are on our own in our heads. Finding people who we perceive as sharing our opinions and ideas is wonderful, it makes us feel less alone. Thanks, Portia

[Brigid]

Longtire,
Since I have had long-term relationships (parental and marital) with several different n personalities, I can say that I have tried all of these approaches.  I don't think any of them worked particularly well, but  I would agree with Bunny that avoidance would be my first choice.

Confronting the offender gives some satisfaction at the moment, but the long-term effects are usually negligible IMO.  It serves to vent some anger, but the abuser is usually oblivious and scornful and won't process anything you say to improve themselves.

I have been very co-dependant in the past and this is the piece I must be careful of in the future.  There is a part of me that is attracted to broken individuals and the need to fix them.  Been there and done that and don't want to do it anymore.

I also don't think there is anything to be served by warning others.  The only people this may be useful for, would be my own children so they are not continually disappointed by a man who cannot stop lying or being unreliable.  But for the most part they are adults and they are going to have to figure that out for themselves.  Anyone else has to come to their own conclusions based on their own experiences.

I can't say for sure how I will react to my H as we move into the future.  I guess time will tell if we can be cordial to each other.  If he continues to remain uninterested in his children's lives, I probably won't need to worry about it much anyway.

Brigid

[Anonymous]

Hi all:

So it seems that these are natural human reactions to the situation. But when I recognize these feelings, it is up to me to decide what to do.(1) I can stay in the situation and try to co-dependently "help" the one perpetrating the abuse (I don't recommend this one!), but will inevitably end up feeling "abused:" hurt, denied, and devalued. (2)I can stay in the situation and confront the person and perhaps get them to back off around me or go elsewhere.(3) I can choose to leave the situation if the danger is too high or if it easier. Honestly, I don't really like any of these approaches.

(I added the 1,2 & 3).

I don't like these approaches either and imo there is another choice.

(4)Blocking the abuse (like a kung fu fighter!! heehee)--Not giving the abuser a satisfying reaction.

Honestly, this is not easy to do but it is doable.  After the first inkling that someone might hurt our feelings, (for lack of a better term), before the first real slug, or before that....if instinct/intuition warns.......it is possible to put up a barrier to the abuse and NOT LET IT IN.

The trick is developing a keen recognization of abusers.  Not an easy task.  Observing people, how they act toward others, their demenor, their chosen phrases, their body language, etc...can be big indicators.

The thing is.....sometimes people are experts at the shock technique and don't give much warning at all.

Still.....if we are able to put up a mental/emotional block--a rock/brick wall...immediately upon recognizing abuse, even if it is after the first good slug has knocked us off balance...it will help get us up on our feet again, and it will help us to protect ourselves from absorbing any more of it/feeling further hurt/insult/being damaged further etc.

After that......we can then choose 1, 2 or 3 or simply not react at all, ignor the abuser (if this is something we want---such as staying in a work situation/social event/even in a bad relationship, in order to help ourselves get strong enough to leave or whatever).  It's that making ourselves aware of the seemingly intended motives of our abusers that will ultimately protect us.  Those red flags, imo, are our real salvation but they aren't always easy to see.

Learning to trust those intuitions, instincts, and seeing the flags....that is the trick.   Certainly my goal to help me deal with abuse.

Warning others?  I don't know about that.  I guess it depends on each individual situation but generally....everyone has to go by their own perceptions, I think, unless it's life threatening, seriously dangerous for others.

GFN

[Stormchild Guesting]

Hi Longtire and everybody,

Just a quick post to address that prevailing fallacy that we "make" ourselves feel everything.

I can tell you don't believe it, and it looks like most of the rest of us here don't either, but I'd really like to sound off, because it is used sooooo often by narcissists and other moral cowards, as an excuse to invalidate the pain of others.

I have never understood why it is that people recognize the simple connection between physical damage and physical injury, but absolutely refuse to see the identical connection between emotional/spiritual damage and injury to the heart/soul.

Someone runs over my foot with a truck, do I CHOOSE to allow bones to break? Blood to run? Does my foot CHOOSE injury?

What a crock!

So... someone runs over my heart with a truck. And just because neither my heart nor their truck is visible in the physical world, it's OK to blame me for THIS injury, which is almost always far worse, harder to treat, and longer to heal than any physical damage.

again, with emphasis, WHAT A CROCK!

You will also observe that none of the clowns who try to foist this nonsense on you is either immune to their own emotional response to injury and abuse,

or possesses sufficient insight and empathy to realize that their own response proves that what they're telling you is... a crock.

That, of course, refers to the supposedly well-meaning ones. Teaching the victim of abuse to accept responsibility for being abused is also one of the earliest grooming moves that any abuser makes.

Watch out for this garbage. It's a red flag. Most people aiming it at you are likely to be very inventive pain inflicters. [The others are likely to be abuse victims who haven't gotten through their own brainwashing and denial yet, and don't want any of the other crabs getting out of the bucket they're stuck in.]

Whew. That feels better  

[mum]

Great, helpful post, Lontire.Thanks.
Everyone has such wisdom to share.

Since my abuser is the father of my minor aged children, his actions do indeed affect me.  I DO choose how I deal and react to it, but that never includes denying that he is a jerk and has pushed some pretty big buttons....I am human after all.   However, like Bunny said, I have learned enough coping mechanisms to decide how MUCH TIME I want to spend in reaction to his energy.

Portia also mentioned abuse of children that is not covered by law.  Very astute, P.  My kids are, IMO, psychologically abused by their father. But, they are fed, clothed and otherwise functioning fine, and no "authority" would care that they will have some serious issues later in life, based on thier father's N personality and controlling behavoirs.  I care, so I did what I could and can do: I left the b*****d and my kids get to see a different way to approach life.  Maybe this will give them tools to deal with dad....I sure hope so.

As far as "warning".....I'd love to warn my kids about thier dad.  I'd love to spell out what a selfish, mean person he is, what he does to people and (including them)  behind their backs, etc.   But I can't....talk about BACKLASH!
That's all my kids need is for me to ALSO badmouth the other parent.   I don't lie to them as in : "hey, your dad is the best father on the planet!", but I'm not going to add my running commentary to what they already KNOW and SEE (and tell ME) about the guy.  They need to come to their OWN conclusions....and they will only resent me for not letting them do that.

So, within those difficult parameters, I can only do what I can:
SEE where it is I do have influence, and stay within that.   I may have a greater area of concern, but if that concern is not also within my influence, then I am wasting precious energy, and that includes fighting a losing battle with someone whose "rules of engagement" change every time he feels like it!  Talk about futility!

[Stormchild Guesting Again]

Yarf, I knew I left something out...

I also think we can only choose our response to injury on a certain level. Physical analogy again. Can we consciously order our blood not to clot, our bones to knit - instantaneously? Not usually...

[BTW I have learned how to stop migraine attacks via biofeedback. But it still takes time. And the attacks still happen. I just know how to stop them. Sometimes. When I can apply the technique uninterruptedly, soon enough.]

But we can choose to call an ambulance, or get a friend to take us to the ER, etc., and we can choose to take care of ourselves and hasten our recovery.

Same with emotional injuries - imo. Part of the response is automatic and just as fundamental as platelet aggregation. But there is a part that we can choose, and that is where the great teachings apply. Not that we are to pretend imperviousness and make ourselves numb, which is glorified denial and a lie... but that we can, recognizing full well the injury we have sustained, both choose to heal from it and choose to deal with it constructively.

Now, that's transcendence.

[Anonymous]

Kicking up quite a storm here, Stormy!!

I just want to say that I believe we don't have to "pretend  imperviousness", I think we can actually become incapable of being affected by not allowing abuse to penetrate the thick, strong, rock hard wall that is mentally/emotionally/spiritually constructable.  We can choose to construct it.  I believe this because I believe many, before us, have done it, in order to survive and thrive beyond abuse.  Spies are trained specifically with this technique.  Although, everyone has a breaking point and they are given a cyanide pill, just for that moment.

This deciding not to let abuse penetrate.....is not denying abuse, it is refusing to allow it to accomplish it's goal.. and cause harm.  It's rebellious.  There is no denial that the abuse exists, but there is a definate choice to stop it from getting under our skin and paralyzing us.

In my experience, this idea didn't cause numbness, it gave me strength and helped me feel able to think....and decide....and react by choice, rather than by simple reflex/or staying in automatic mode.  Ofcourse, there is automatic mode sometimes, just not always anymore, for me.

Same with emotional injuries - imo. Part of the response is automatic and just as fundamental as platelet aggregation. But there is a part that we can choose.

We're saying the same thing in many ways.

we can, recognizing full well the injury we have sustained, both choose to heal from it and choose to deal with it constructively.

We can also learn from it, learn to recognize it sooner, and become better kung fu blockers, to help protect ourselves from sustaining more of it, too, as part of that choice, imo.  Even while, but preferably prior, to it happening again.

Maybe this is what you meant by "deal with it constructively"?
I just see it as choice number 4, implementable ASAP, as part of a critical response, for me.

Wow!  Did I say all that???

GFN

[Anonymous]

Hi everyone,
I was reading down this thread, develping a response as I went until I got to Stormy's first post which pretty much said what I was going to say. Except I was going to use the thumb vs. hammer metaphor rather than the truck vs. foot, probably because I have done the former but not the latter.
So all I have to add is a modest proposal regarding warning others. Its probably not very practical but it sure would help.
Its kind of along the lines of the Scarlet Letter.
Only its an "N" not an "A".
And it could be tattooed on, since they never change.

mudpup

[longtire]

Wow!  Great replies.  This place is sooooo much better than a plain old journal.  People challenge, extend, and deepen ideas as well as giving support in return.  One thing that sparked this thread for me was thinking about a quote from "The Four Agreements" that I read somewhere recently.  I can't find it now, but it said something like (dimly remembered), nobody can make us feel a certain way, we make our own feelings.  I'm going to attempt to summarize the main ideas from posts so far and add my own spin.  

Nobody spoke up for being co-dependent. Most people don't seem to find confrontation helpful, except for Bliz.  Even she says that she is not always able to confront while it is going on in the moment.  The shock factor definitely makes that harder.  Most people said that confontation might help the confonter feel better, but usually doesn't elicit behavior change in the confronted.  Most people fell into the avoid or leave camp when possible.  The general consensus seems to be that warning a potential victim who is not already aware is mainly a waste of time.

(4)Blocking the abuse (like a kung fu fighter!! heehee)--Not giving the abuser a satisfying reaction.

GFN suggested new answer 4, which others agreed with.  I find myself doing this some these days as well.  I'm not sure how or why I am able to do this, though.  Maybe because I recognize the behavior for what it is and I am detached enough now to pause before reacting to give this awareness time to sink in?  Responding is often good.  Reacting almost never is.

Longtire, your post reminded me of a very N exboyfriend I had who used to be really awful to me, insulting me, calling me fat, whatever, and then when I cried and told him he had hurt me, he would say "that is not my responsibility! We are all responsible for our own emotions!"

About ‘everyone else’. No-one is perfect, abuse can be partly in the eyes of the beholder. Someone with NPD might say ‘he deliberately humiliated me by losing his job’ and say that it’s abuse. And make up a tale of lies to support their view. But they believe it’s abuse and to them it is abuse. That’s why many abusers aren’t in prison, it isn’t illegal to have your own view of the world.

Just a quick post to address that prevailing fallacy that we "make" ourselves feel everything.

I can tell you don't believe it, and it looks like most of the rest of us here don't either, but I'd really like to sound off, because it is used sooooo often by narcissists and other moral cowards, as an excuse to invalidate the pain of others.

I realized that the reason I started this thread is that I am afraid I made up all these problems with my wife "in my head."  What if what I define as abuse or at least "controlling behavior" is just me being "too sensitive?"  What if that is normal behavior and I just can't handle it because something is wrong with me?  What if I projected all the problems like Portia mentions in her response?  Well, my brain kicks in and tells me this is unlikely.  I don't get these mixed messages with other people.  The behavior is there to be observed.  In the past I didn't put any trust in my own observations, let alone my feelings about those observations.

All of this is just different ways of fearing that I can't trust my feelings.  I got this message from my parents because they didn't trust, or at least didn't use or have facility with their feelings.  They didn't validate or even acknowledge mine.  Doubting whether I saw what I remember seeing and heard what I remember hearing was a way to avoid being aware of how I felt about those observations.  Now that I trust my observations, I inevitably have reactions to those observations.

Looking back at my relationship to my wife, there were times when I felt something was wrong.  However, I didn't trust my feelings, so I ended up trusting her empty words instead.  I really get this connection to being coey in my life now.  If I am not sure that I trust my feelings, what do I base judgements on?  My thoughts?  Other people's words?  Their behavior?  All of these have their place.  But, if I don't use my feelings, I am (co)dependnet on these people for my decisions and behavior.

I guess the upshot of most of the responses is that we cannot control our basic reaction to someone's behavior.  We can supress awareness of it as I did. We can react to their behavior. Or, we can respond in our own conscious way to their behavior. One of the responses we can make is to leave or avoid situations with that person when a pattern of behavior is evident.  In this way we ARE responsible for our feelings by choosing not to expose ourselves to abuse.  We are NOT responsible for having a hurt response to abuse in the first place.  If not for this reaction, we would be like emotional lepers, never realizing we had been wounded until we die from the wounds we don't feel.

After writing that, I realize that is exactly what I have been doing.  Keeping unaware of the legitimate hurt I feel when treated badly and allowing myself to remain in a situation where I continue to be repeatedly wounded until my body finally shuts down and I realize that there must actually be something going on after all.  Emotional leprosy.  I am thankful that I am far enough out of that now to look back and see it.  That is not how I want to live the rest of my life!

[Stormchild]

Longtire, your post is a masterpiece of synthesis.

Brilliant!        

And the emotional leprosy analogy is utter genius. Have you read Philip Yancey's "Where is God When it Hurts"? He explores the fact that there is a legitimate need, in this world, for physical pain (as a protective and warning system); and he uses actual leprosy as the illustrative example.

Your extension to the emotional world is spot on.

Bravo!

[daylily]

On one hand, when someone is verbally and/or emotionally abusive towards me, it leads me to feel hurt.
---
On the other hand, no one else can force me to feel anything, I choose to be hurt or stressed in these situations.

For me, there's a third hand:  One of the consequences of long-term psychological abuse is that it can become internalized.  And as you start to recognize the abuse, being a logical adult who wants a certain amount of self-determination, you also realize that "nobody can force me to feel anything."  So you conclude that it has to be your fault, that you are somehow defective in not being stronger, in allowing the abusive behavior to penetrate.  Dr. Phil (yes, I read one of his books) wrote that one of the fundamental truths of life is that we teach people how to treat us.  I would say that, over time, abusers teach us how to treat ourselves.  And in this culture of self-empowerment, where everything is a choice, the feeling that somehow you've surrendered your power can induce a whole lot of guilt and confusion.

One of the problems of recovering from, or disengaging from, an abusive relationship is that distorted view of reality.  You have to question everything, you have to be willing to stop yourself all the time and say, "But is this really true?"  One of the incredibly interesting and valuable things about your long thread, Longtire, is that it documents that regaining of trust in your own perceptions.

But when I recognize these feelings, it is up to me to decide what to do.  I can stay in the situation and try to co-dependently "help" the one perpetrating the abuse (I don't recommend this one!), but will inevitably end up feeling "abused:"  hurt, denied, and devalued.  I can stay in the situation and confront the person and perhaps get them to back off around me or go elsewhere.  I can choose to leave the situation if the danger is too high or if it easier.  Honestly, I don't really like any of these approaches.

I honestly don't believe abusers can be "educated" or "helped" out of abuse--mostly because they don't see the objects of their abuse as full human beings, capable of a worthwhile opinion or reaction.  I have to say that I don't think most abuse is about wanting to make the object feel something bad (pain, shame, etc.), but about the subject wanting to feel something good (power, superiority, etc.).  The abuser does it because it fulfills a need that is stronger than the desire for a normal two-way relationship.  Abusers prey on the weaknesses of their victims because it gives them something to fill the cracks in their own self-images.  I turn you into sand, and use the mortar to patch myself.  Therefore, I have to say I think the whole idea of staying in an abusive relationship because you think you can change the individual is...sadly mistaken.

Confronting actually seems like the best approach out of the three to me.  It is probably the hardest and requires a lot of confidence.  Ideally, confrontation would get that person's attention and they would see what they are doing and move to stop it on their own.  In reality, even an hour long confrontation is not likely to overpower a lifetime of justification and repeated behavior.  So the person is likely to avoid abusing the person who confronted and will simply transfer the abuse to another, easier target.  Sometimes this means the abuser leaves the situation and carries on in a new setting where the truth is not recognized yet.

Confrontation is also hard because, if the abuser has been successful, the abused is extremely doubtful of the validity of his or her perceptions.  Exercising any sort of positive option requires that the abused regain enough accurate perception to recognize that the treatment is not "normal" or "justified."

The third option is to leave the situation.  Sometimes this is feasible, sometimes not.  I hate that this feels like running away to me.  However, if  you are in a situation with uneven power or where the abuse has worn you down to where you don't have the resources to stay any longer, then leaving is the best option.  Get out of the situation so you can heal and recover yourself from the damage done.

The most important thing is to take care of yourself first.  Once that safety and healing is obtained, then what?  Do we say, I'm glad I made it out and everyone else in on their own with this person.  Certainly to a degree that's true, we can't make choices for them any more than we could for the person committing the abuse.  Do we chase after the abuser and warn everyone about them?  That sounds like harassment, not to mention still being strongly connected to the abuser.

Disengaging is not weakness.  It all depends, I think, on whether you see something attractive enough in the "core" of your abuser to make you want to stay, and whether you think that elements will ever be accessible enough to tip the balance of the abuser's behavior toward healthy--or, at the least, leaving you alone.  Personally, I think all you can do is disengage.  The real choice lies in determining how muchdistance to put between yourself and your abuser.  States?  Continents?  The width of a bedframe?  It all depends on what you think the response will be when you finally say, "I value myself too highly to allow you to treat me this way.  I want you in my life only if you will see me as I am and treat me with respect."  Sometimes I think most abusers are incapable of really grasping that last part--that they have a choice, too.  Abusers are so often desperately afraid of abandonment and feel more or less driven to do what they do.  It's really a sad dynamic.

I've rambled on far too long, I know, but I just want to say one final thing on the issue of "warning" other people.  It depends.  You have a daughter, and I think you have a responsibility to try to get your daughter to understand what you've learned about her mother.  That's so very hard to do without seeming mean or bitter.  And don't ask me how it's done; I have no idea.  I think just being there to comfort her when the inevitable hurt happens is a big part of it.  I don't know if your wife has transferred any of her abuse to your daughter, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if she did.

But if you have no duty to look out for another person, I would say that in general you can't warn somebody about somebody else.  People see what they want to see--or are capable of seeing.

Very interesting discussion, Longtire.  Sorry for the length of this reply; I just feel pretty strongly about some of these issues and have thought about them at length.