Partnered with a Survivor: David Mandel and Ruth Reymundo Mandel

Season 2 Episode 18: Multiple Pathways To Harm: An assessment approach that better mirrors the lived experience of survivors

October 13, 2021 Ruth Stearns Mandel & David Mandel Season 2 Episode 18
Partnered with a Survivor: David Mandel and Ruth Reymundo Mandel
Season 2 Episode 18: Multiple Pathways To Harm: An assessment approach that better mirrors the lived experience of survivors
Show Notes Transcript

Phrases like "child witness to violence" or "children exposed to violence" only capture a small slice of how domestic violence perpetrators' behaviors harm children.  Assessment frameworks based on these concepts  primarily emphasize the traumatic impact of the direct witnessing of acts of physical violence .  Coercive control teaches us that it is patterns of entrapping & controlling behaviors which deprive adult & child survivors their basic human rights including safety, well-being, and autonomy. The Safe & Together Institute uses a multiple pathways to harm framework which brings assessment processes into alignment with a coercive control framework.

In this episode, David & Ruth discuss the multiple pathways to harm framework including:

  • how it adds to the "child exposure" approach
  • increases accountability for perpetrators as parents
  • operationalizes improved gender equality 
  • makes wider impacts of coercive control visible 

Related episodes
Season 2 Episode 14: How to perpetrator proof custody & access processes

Season 2 Episode 12: How coercive control harms child safety & wellbeing: An interview with researcher Dr. Emma Katz

Season 2 Episode 8: “I spiraled down to a dark place:” An interview with a young survivor of officer-involved domestic violence and his Mum

Now available! Mapping the Perpetrator’s Pattern: A Practitioner’s Tool for Improving Assessment, Intervention, and Outcomes The web-based Perpetrator Pattern Mapping Tool is a virtual practice tool for improving assessment, intervention, and outcomes through a perpetrator pattern-based approach. The tool allows practitioners to apply the Model’s critical concepts and principles to their current case load in real

[00:00:15] And we're back and we're back, and this is part of a survivor.  [00:00:19][3.5]

Speaker 1: [00:00:20] Yes, it is. And I think today we really need to start with acknowledgments.  [00:00:24][4.3]

Speaker 2: [00:00:26] That's right. This is Indigenous People's Day and formerly Columbus Day in the United States. And we just want to acknowledge that where we are recording this podcast on Texas land, the traditional custodians of the land here have been the Texas people, part of the larger Algonquin nation. And it's just important for us to recognize the history of settlement colonization, land stealing, and that is  [00:00:51][25.1]

Speaker 1: [00:00:51] the continuing impacts of that,  [00:00:53][2.3]

Speaker 2: [00:00:54] right? All all over the world, really  [00:00:56][1.7]

Speaker 1: [00:00:56] generational trauma, right?  [00:00:57][1.2]

Speaker 2: [00:00:58] Yeah. And and so anyway, so this is important for us to talk about acknowledged today. So we are we're joining you. I am David Mandel, the executive director of the Safety Other Institute.  [00:01:08][10.2]

Speaker 1: [00:01:09] And I'm Ruth Jones Mandel, the e-learning, communications and strategic manager.  [00:01:13][3.8]

Speaker 2: [00:01:14] That's right. That's what you have. You have more titles than I do. And and this is Tiberius a dog. And so if you're watching on Facebook Live, you get to see him. If you're not, you may get to hear him wrestle and see him move around and we've taken him for a walk. So he's OK today. And before today's podcast is about multiple pathways to harm. But before we get into that topic, I want to talk about ducks and being wrong. I really think it's important to talk about ducks and being wrong.  [00:01:45][30.8]

Speaker 1: [00:01:46] So you messed with the human that was a survivalist and also taught natural science. That's right, David proclaimed that ducks are herbivores, and I had to disabuse him that notion. That's right. I tried to do so gently, but I then had to read him every single thing that ducks eat.  [00:02:05][19.4]

Speaker 2: [00:02:06] That's right. Which included fish. And I was happy to be wrong and I enjoyed the conversations. But in case you were out there and you, you want to ask Ruth questions about natural science, please do that text, you know, text me with questions about natural science should be able to explain things to you and bacteria. Bacteria, bacteria as well. You know you have a whole other life in the life sciences and everything else, and I made the mistake of going up against you.  [00:02:34][28.0]

Speaker 1: [00:02:34] Brooklyn went toe to toe with  [00:02:35][1.0]

Speaker 2: [00:02:35] Brooklyn, went toe to toe and I was wrong and I was happy to be wrong, actually, and it was funny. So anyway, so if those of you who want to know ducks are omnivores, not not herbivores, so, so on partner with survivor, we're full of information. You know, we are we cover all sorts of topics.  [00:02:53][17.9]

Speaker 1: [00:02:54] We may give you useless facts.  [00:02:55][1.0]

Speaker 2: [00:02:56] He uses facts and seriously, please write in and ask us to cover topics not about ducks or fish, but  [00:03:04][7.9]

Speaker 1: [00:03:04] about and interview  [00:03:05][0.7]

Speaker 2: [00:03:05] people. Interview people. Yeah, we really serious about wanting your input on on ideas for shows, right? Things you like to see as to topics. But please also make comments and, you know, email us. We're just we're just I'm actually a little hungry for more interaction with our audience. So, so please, you know, write us in and let us know how you're using the show because we're hearing people using it for professional development. We hear them using it for work with their clients. You know, we're hearing from survivors who listen the show  [00:03:36][31.3]

Speaker 1: [00:03:38] are being trained and university with,  [00:03:40][1.9]

Speaker 2: [00:03:40] Yeah, yeah. So I'm really interested in this and  [00:03:43][2.7]

Speaker 1: [00:03:44] it's informing dogs everywhere. I don't think Tiberius the dog has been disseminating the podcast.  [00:03:49][4.6]

Speaker 2: [00:03:50] I don't think so. OK. You were right about the Ducks, but not I mean, I'm going to believe you about everything that you talk about. So today's today's show is about multiple pathways to harm, which is which is one of the, you know, it's not one of the critical components. Formally, it's not part of the principles, but it's been a mainstay of the model from the beginning. And I'll talk a little bit about it and then we can we can discuss it.  [00:04:16][26.6]

Speaker 1: [00:04:18] I actually think you should you should go behind the principle, OK, because the principle was developed. To explain phenomena of the impact of abuse on family members and children, and that was obviously in response to systems that weren't considering that. So what were the gaps in the industry and all of the systems that touch on domestic violence and child well-being that led you to say, we have to talk about these multiple pathways to harm which perpetrators engage in consistently and the impact of child and family functioning? Like what were the gaps that like you there?  [00:05:02][44.2]

Speaker 2: [00:05:03] I think the main one was my frustration with conversations where people would say, well, the domestic violence in the home. But there's no other word that got thrown around. That point was Nexus. There's no nexus, not a word people use in real life, you know? But there's no nexus. Well, of course you use the word nexus all the time because you're because you're smart and you like big words. Is a nice word. I use disgruntled good coming out of the mouth. It does nexus and I used to for a while. I don't use it any more. But but nexus that between the domestic violence and the harm to the kids. And there was this deep frustration I felt where you knew that the person choosing violence was harming the kids. And it took a while for me to unwind that that people were talking about things like zone of danger and they would use this term. I'm not even sure where it came from originally. What were the kids weren't in the zone of danger, and that was a physical danger and physical harm. And so one is that they were really making this tight connection, this high standard connection up. Well, the kids weren't in physical danger. Therefore, there's no nexus. There's no way to show harm to kids. And then also reflecting upon the language in the field where people would say things like, and these are still the two common terms of the field. Children exposed to domestic violence, which I've witnessed domestic violence and both really put this emphasis on seeing hearing being in the presence of the acts of violence. And and it really wasn't consistent with the lived experience of adult child survivors, which is that the patterns of behavior permeate their everyday life. Even if somebody isn't being physically assaulted right now, that that the harm and the control that permeates their entire, their entire lives,  [00:06:55][112.1]

Speaker 1: [00:06:55] even even if a child witnesses violence. And, you know, places like the Family Court, that's still not enough to compel them into limiting contact with that child or assessing if that parent is safe. You know, we're still really living in this physical right. We you you have to pay the toll.  [00:07:18][23.3]

Speaker 2: [00:07:19] Could you have an order for this is right. You have to be really grateful.  [00:07:22][3.8]

Speaker 1: [00:07:23] Fact fracture or you need a head  [00:07:24][1.6]

Speaker 2: [00:07:25] injury, right? You need something so clear, something  [00:07:26][1.8]

Speaker 1: [00:07:27] so clear and concise that that you're actually now in long term physical danger of of having effects from that abuse both emotional, verbal and physical. It really is kind of it's it's a it's a it's a level of insanity in my mind that we we want people to pay that physical harm told before we'll do anything to to to intervene. Right.  [00:07:52][25.0]

Speaker 2: [00:07:53] Right. And the other thing I think when you asked me what the gaps were. The gaps were around. The thing I talk about all the time, which is gender double standards, which was low expectations for for men as parents. That that people were really struggling. To articulate the harm that those fathers who are choosing violence were an abuse and coercive control we're doing to our kids. And so I wanted a way to operationalize it. And so the multiple pathways of harm is is is is meant to close that gap around that. It's not just seeing and hearing, it's not just those things. And and the other one is is also just not about think about fathers and what their behaviors and their violence. It's about sort of how does that person choosing violence change the function of family and how do we talk about them and how they change the day to day functioning those kids or their partner? And while I think this multiple pathways to harm framework isn't. Doesn't touch on everything and moves us closer to the lived experience of adult and child survivors when we're trying to identify harm and tell the story of how that person's choosing course to control how their behaviors are changing, the kids function are changing, their development, are changing, their their behaviors are changing, their emotional well-being, are changing their educational success. All those different things.  [00:09:19][86.3]

Speaker 1: [00:09:21] Yeah, it really it really is. Is taking domestic violence practice out of a out of a in incidents based but also a reductionist view of violence to widen the lens and see the real impact of what those behaviors are. Do you want to talk about the principle itself?  [00:09:44][23.5]

Speaker 2: [00:09:45] Well, you know, it's the concept of of this idea that when you approach. Looking at domestic violence, coercive control and children that you want is you? You expand upon the traditional view of did the kids see it or hear it? But you, but you go much further and I can't talk about the main areas that we can kind of go back to them. I think it's sort of what is it? You start with the behaviors that the person who is being abused. Patterns of coercive control and actions taken to harm the kids. And that's right, have a critical component. And and for me, we created a visual which is sort of an arrow connecting those things to changes in the kids functioning, those kind of things. And then the multiple pathways is, you know, as things like children, trauma and safety, its impact on family ecology and its impact on the other person's parenting. And we really tried to lay out that if you're going to talk about this and you're really going to explore this, you have to ask questions about that kind of quote unquote traditional area. Did the violence make the kids physically unsafe? Was it traumatic for them, right? Well, you know, and then there's other areas as well.  [00:10:58][72.7]

Speaker 1: [00:10:58] Well, what's interesting to me is the measure of physically unsafe. You know, recently in California, the family courts now have to consider domestic violence in their family court cases. They're not compelled to. But right at the beginning of the law is this huge loophole that says that when the court determines that it's in the best interest of the child to not consider domestic violence, and I'm like, Whoa, whoa, whoa. So we still have a misunderstanding across a lot of different systems about what child well-being and safety mean. So, for example, you know, neglect, which is the one of the largest reason that children are removed and put into foster care, as we all know, right? How did the domestic violence perpetrator contribute to the neglect which actually endangered that child malnourishment safety issues within the home, unlocked doors, broken windows which increased, you know, the child's lack of safety and well-being? How are we measuring that right, right?  [00:12:09][70.4]

Speaker 2: [00:12:10] Well, you know, and I think it's it's one of the misnomers, I think, broadly thinking about the impact on kids. When you think about domestic violence, homicides related to kids, people will think about things that are the most dramatic the stabbings, the beatings, the shaken babies when when New South Wales, the child protection agency, their number of years ago did a retrospective look at deaths of kids known to the department over. I think, of course, of seven or eight years, there's hundreds of cases they found that I think it was 61 percent roughly of those cases correlated with the presence of domestic violence in the family. Two percent is sixty two. OK, you, you got the number. And but the vast majority of those were neglect deaths. And I think those of us come out of the domestic violence field don't think about those deaths when we think about child domestic violence related deaths.  [00:13:03][53.5]

Speaker 1: [00:13:04] But having lived in one of those homes, right? I know very clearly that the domestic violence perpetrator creates an environment of neglect via trauma and a campaign of terror control and fear. Right? They kick in doors, they break windows, they get the police to come over and over, and again they create an environment of fear and depletion, a lack of nourishment and connection. And that puts a child in danger. That puts a child in danger, not just from their immediate environment. Maybe they're malnourished. Maybe they're not getting appropriate heat or they live in a home that is that is in disrepair and is dangerous. And there are holes in the floor and there's hoarding involved because of mental health issues. But they create that environment and children die in those environments, right?  [00:14:03][58.9]

Speaker 2: [00:14:03] Well, if we we know that  [00:14:05][1.7]

Speaker 1: [00:14:06] and children are also predated upon right  [00:14:08][2.2]

Speaker 2: [00:14:09] then  [00:14:09][0.0]

Speaker 1: [00:14:09] by other predators and those invited by sexual abusers, they are protected, right?  [00:14:15][5.8]

Speaker 2: [00:14:15] Yeah, I think and I think that if we can't also look at things like and we'll talk about this about about domestic violence victims, trauma survivors having addiction, mental health issues at higher rates. Yeah, and we can't connect that back to the actual to the people who are choosing violence. Yeah. And lay responsibility on them that we're not going to be able to see the story, you know, I mean,  [00:14:40][24.4]

Speaker 1: [00:14:40] we moved to Appalachia. Women put their babies in ovens to keep them warm during cold snaps because it was literally just above the Mason-Dixon line. It was kind of the south. It never truly got cold enough. And they lived in those environments with men who were abusive and coercive would not be right. You know, the whole community in that that was that was the status quo, right? So I think that we're really we're really conditioned poorly around safety and well-being of children. But you know, when I think of the the day to day injuries, right, that happened to children in our environments. I'm just I'm I'm I'm I'm at a loss for why people can't see the big picture  [00:15:32][51.1]

Speaker 2: [00:15:32] right and can't really see the whole thing. And not just the the kid was nearby when dad was hitting mom or something like. That's much, much bigger than so. So the multiple pathways to harm framework is really meant to really move the conversation, the assessment, Congress's effect on our course, we call it multiple pathways to harm a comprehensive assessment framework because really meant to get people thinking about, well, how do I do assessments that really reflect? The experience and the lived experience of survivors, adult and child survivors, and so so one of the areas is this safety and trauma and and to a number of physical safety particularly, you know, and trauma has an emotional component to it. But did kids see and hear the violence? You know where they. How were they impacted by it? And I think a lot of times, you know, for all these things that a lot of our assessments are very cursory. I can't tell you how many times I would see assessments that the kids were in the room. The kids saw and and saw the violence, and that was summarily the harm. And when you actually look at it, there's actually no description of harm right there.  [00:16:43][70.5]

Speaker 1: [00:16:43] Don't describe their behavior.  [00:16:43][0.7]

Speaker 2: [00:16:44] They don't describe what's different. They don't actually describe the impact. And so, you know, so for me, it was is about this digging deeper and saying, well, how the kids lives change. You know, what did they do? How do they act? You know? Did they go and hide under a bed? You know, sometimes you'd see people do that. They get or they get statements from the kids or you'd see things like, well, the kids were out in the road unsupervised because they were scared about what's going on in the house. But people have said, well, the kid. So they were scared. They wouldn't ask the kids what they were scared of. Hmm. You know, so for me that that in each of these areas that part of is trying to help people get better at asking that next question being more curious, trying to understand. Well, let's change.  [00:17:31][46.6]

Speaker 1: [00:17:31] Let's, let's be honest, that it's not just the the the willingness and ability to ask that next question, but to know what the next question is. You really need to be trained into this. But also, when we're dealing with certain systems, it's the liability and asking the next question. It puts that professional on the hook if a child's in danger. Right? For them now, to make a decision that they don't know how to make or they're won't be supported and making.  [00:18:01][30.0]

Speaker 2: [00:18:02] I think it's complicated because I often what what I often say at the beginning of my career was, you know, workers are, you know, different systems are often overworked there.  [00:18:11][9.0]

Speaker 1: [00:18:12] Look at me defending workers like professionals, you are. I went out. Yeah. Oh, OK, good. I was like, I want like some brownie points or something.  [00:18:20][8.5]

Speaker 2: [00:18:20] No, I think survivor was. No, I think it's it's it's about systems. I think what I would see over and over again is if you're overworked, if you've got too much to do and the system lets you just say that minimum level, the kids are in the room and you can file a legal petition or a legal filing, and it's granted you in your case, then what you learn as, Oh, that's all I need. That's all I need to do, right? And I think it's it's really raising the standard of of how we talk about it. And I think part of it is is that may work in a moment to actually get kids immediately safe. But what happens pretty quickly is it doesn't sustain over time. Right? You know, through different circumstance, and this is where the gender bias kicks in. You may say, Oh, we're going to take the kids here because they're really severe violence.  [00:19:12][51.3]

Speaker 1: [00:19:12] Well, I think one of the most painful things about trying to sustain good practice over time is that no one there's no singular person who's capable of shifting the reality around a survivor because they've got all these pressures on them and all these systems they're interfacing with. And then no one, unless there's a real, organized campaign to hold the perpetrator behaviorally accountable, whatever that looks like. Then that person just continues to abuse and terrorize my family and and everybody around them feels helpless to to to to figure out a way to assist them. Well, and I think that takes a concerted effort and I think a  [00:19:55][43.0]

Speaker 2: [00:19:55] lot of people and for me, for me, foundationally, the multiple pathways of harm is this this way of increasing accountability? And I talk about this a lot lately. I think we think accountability is arrest, and I think accountability is, as you know, big things, you know, systems changes. But there's like what I refer to as micro accountability, which is to me, maybe more important and some of which is the ability to say these behaviors had this effect because,  [00:20:19][23.7]

Speaker 1: [00:20:20] well, think about interventions, right, that we do with people who have addiction, right, where we've gotten really good at this, where we gather together everybody, we gather together the pastor and the family and the friends and maybe even the employer if there are really connected and emotionally involved, you know, environment and we say this person needs an intervention, right? We need to hold them accountable. People will do that for addictions, but they won't do it for domestic violence. Number one, because we've highlighted the most egregious instances of pathological violence where those perpetrators probably cannot be rehabilitated and they need to be contained from society and they need to be monitored in order to not harm people in the future. But we haven't looked at the rest of those sort of run of the mill coercive controllers, run of the mill domestic abusers that we can intervene with and would respond to the pressure of a community around them who is holding them behaviorally accountable and saying, No matter how you may feel entitled to behave towards your family, you're harming and frightening them. And that is not a recipe for an ongoing, loving, good, healthy relationship.  [00:21:39][78.9]

Speaker 2: [00:21:39] Right? That's right.  [00:21:40][0.8]

Speaker 1: [00:21:40] You need to stop these behaviors. It doesn't matter if you feel entitled to them if your partner and your child are frightened and afraid and traumatized by your behaviors. Let's talk about another way to do this, right?  [00:21:53][12.7]

Speaker 2: [00:21:54] So I think that that those conversations require this kind of framework and discussion because you want to be able to say, not just did the kid see it or hear it, but did they learn about it they know about? And I was always talk about that. That was that that trauma and safety piece, which is, you know, that people will say the kids were asleep and I'll say, OK, so the kids were asleep during the incident. Let's assume that was true. It may not be true, but they wake up the next morning and dad's not there because he's out on know on a on a protection order or the intervene intervention order. He's arrested. Well, what are they learned? Where they know? How are they? How is it explained to them to act like even  [00:22:32][38.3]

Speaker 1: [00:22:32] in matters of non arrest? Right? Dad could just not be there.  [00:22:35][3.0]

Speaker 2: [00:22:36] That's right. To act like everything falls or rises on on seeing it, it is is naive and disrespectful to the children and disrespectful to the family, and sort of implies this kind of simplistic kind of point of view. I still think about, you know, the day I looked at that said that when kids get harmed and physically harmed in the context of domestic violence incidences that this one say 100 percent of the people who took from the hospital were the victims. They don't victims now the perpetrators. And so to sort of make this whole thing about, did the kids see the incident and not about, I'm now impeding my kid's medical care on top of it. We have to have this really robust framework. And and this idea of safety and trauma also includes Am I physically abusing my kids directly or sexually abusing my kids directly? That's all that part and part of that behavior. Am I targeting them? You know, so safety and trauma, is this this most common area that people talk about? When you talk about how kids are harmed by perpetrator's actions? But usually we don't even use in the most complete way. Right? You know, I always use the example of a broken coffee table, glass coffee table, you know,  [00:23:46][70.8]

Speaker 1: [00:23:48] all the glass on all of us on the ground, an infant that's crawling around,  [00:23:52][3.8]

Speaker 2: [00:23:52] that's right in their mouth. We have to slow down the conversation to that level, right?  [00:23:58][5.8]

Speaker 1: [00:23:58] Who clean that glass up? I know exactly who cleaned that glass.  [00:24:01][2.7]

Speaker 2: [00:24:01] Right, exactly. And and to say so you you not only hate your partner, you not only hurt your partner or  [00:24:07][6.5]

Speaker 1: [00:24:08] just you broke this. You punched a wall, right? They kicked the door in. Right now, those are our families living in these situations where there's there's evidence of your violence. Right? That makes all of us afraid and feel bad inside, and we don't want to engage with you in an emotional way. We're going to try to, you know, move around you and and avoid you. Right? And this is this is nobody is looking at those factors as well.  [00:24:35][27.1]

Speaker 2: [00:24:35] So so that's that's one of those areas, you know, so so when we're talking about. Behaviors we want to can I can I can I see them is not a word, is it? What is connect and tie them is what I want to say. Can I them? Can I speak good with words? This is a new word. Can I them welcome you when you made up a word today, too? Yes, I can't remember what it was. Conni them and was about species. Species connect the behaviors through the the the the traumatic experience through the danger of physical safety, through the impact of those physical acts of violence on the home environment. All those things then to to impact on kids, right? But then the second thing is, and I have to say, when I talk about this, it's one of the things that to me almost feels the most important, and I don't want to minimize the other things, but impact on family ecology. Right? And we kind of play with the terms, and I think we talk a lot more about family functioning now. A family ecology encapsulates things like housing, income connections to extended family and can education social connections. And the reason why I feel  [00:25:47][71.9]

Speaker 1: [00:25:48] the ability to engage in in nourishing endeavors like after school.  [00:25:53][5.6]

Speaker 2: [00:25:54] That's right. That's right.  [00:25:55][1.2]

Speaker 1: [00:25:55] Or those type of things to me.  [00:25:59][3.6]

Speaker 2: [00:25:59] I think why I feel so important that these, as they're so important, is that many of these things that sort of connect back up to basic needs of kids being met or not being met, and that often the failure of those basic needs. Being met are often laid back reflexively on Mother's. And so for me, the ability to tell this story  [00:26:24][24.2]

Speaker 1: [00:26:24] discarded as not being necessary.  [00:26:26][1.5]

Speaker 2: [00:26:27] That's not like sports and connection to find the right thing. Right, exactly. Yeah.  [00:26:33][5.4]

Speaker 1: [00:26:33] And I think as an abuser will claim that they have a right to control that environment and that those things are not necessary for their child in order to contextualize their control, their coercive control of the family and justify it by saying This is a cultural perspective that I have. Girls don't need to go to school.  [00:26:55][21.9]

Speaker 2: [00:26:57] Right. That's right. And, you know, and you're familiar, you're familiar with that one somewhat. You're somewhat familiar with that one personally. But I do think it's really, you know, I think people talk about economic abuse and talk about economic control. And I think we need to really be able to talk about again how perpetrator's behaviors destabilize the home economic environment. Right. And so many different ways, you know, whether his violence caused him to lose his job or whether he stops her from working or stops you from getting an education?  [00:27:28][31.0]

Speaker 1: [00:27:29] Well, let's just let's talk about Luke and Ryan Hart, right? It's such a profoundly common example where poverty was considered some type of adherence to a simpler life, but it was enforced  [00:27:47][18.5]

Speaker 2: [00:27:48] and enforced by and enforced poverty  [00:27:49][1.4]

Speaker 1: [00:27:50] in a way that was was controlling crimes ultimately limited the choices of the other partner. And and that's deeply embedded in this idea that men get to decide what is good for the whole family, right?  [00:28:07][16.8]

Speaker 2: [00:28:07] And we're back to the we're back to the gender, the gender stuff. And I think it's really interesting because I think it's there's a there's a as well as we're talking, I'm thinking about the difference between money as a weapon of control and economic impact of the abuse or or our impact on housing. And again, I think about you hear a lot. I used to hear a lot more when I doing consultations that mothers were unable to maintain safe and stable housing. But when you look just a little bit further,  [00:28:40][32.5]

Speaker 1: [00:28:41] you know, all of the financial abuse. Right? The post-separation course  [00:28:45][4.0]

Speaker 2: [00:28:45] or the fact she had to flee to go to a refuge or a shelter, or that that he got them evicted through his violence or is  [00:28:51][5.8]

Speaker 1: [00:28:51] stalking her place of work and getting her fired, you know, all sorts  [00:28:55][4.1]

Speaker 2: [00:28:56] of things. I was doing some training for a housing project funded housing project, looking at how you could create if you created safe and stable housing that you prevent removals of kids into care to enter, you know, to foster care. And I was doing training with these folks and I was talking about. Perpetrators sabotaging, you know, people's housing and and there was a moment of of of I was a kind of close to horror when the people who I was working with said, Wait a second, we've got a rule in our program that says that our residents can't engage in violence in effect, violence on the property as a reason for getting evicted.  [00:29:36][40.1]

Speaker 1: [00:29:37] So if a perpetrator comes on the property and attacks that  [00:29:39][2.2]

Speaker 2: [00:29:39] person, then that was that would have been that would have been the outcome. And you see that in congregate housing all the time as a perpetrator could get violent and not being the fault of the person who is the victim. And it would be perceived as she engaged in violence. And all these phrases that when you are not clear on these things, that the couple's engaging in violence as she keeps taking back each of these phrases are kind of missing things as these profound consequences. And so why is so important to tell a story about how perpetrators disrupt housing or how perpetrators disrupt income, or how they disrupt childcare, or how they disconnect kids from family or their education or their education? You know, if you've got a kid who's doing poorly in school and has a history of domestic violence, you have to ask the question How did the domestic violence perpetrators behavior contribute to the kid's academic issue? I mean, it's actually not that hard  [00:30:29][49.6]

Speaker 1: [00:30:29] and was the child being abused over their school marks at home?  [00:30:33][3.8]

Speaker 2: [00:30:33] So there's all sorts of things, you know, also to different ways. But I think the most basic question for me is is you look at these issues around housing, poverty, academic issues for kids and just ask the question Did the domestic how I'm sorry, how did the domestic violence perpetrators? Behaviors contribute to this problem. Right? And there's a way I say to all audience, it's not that hard. We just need to do this regularly all the time and needs to become second nature, you know, because we're so used to. We've been all taught to silo these issues. Services are often cited as housing services. There's employment services, there's addiction services. And and and so for me, that's sort of why I think this family ecology bit is so important is again, it's a ask the question. Just ask how do these behaviors over here contribute to this problem over there? Yeah. And a huge number of cases. You will have the answer at your fingertips. You'll actually know it. It won't be a lot of work.  [00:31:37][63.2]

Speaker 1: [00:31:37] I think a lot of times after you've seen a lot of different perpetrator patterns, you just you can predict it is right. It becomes super easy to spot the pattern because the patterns are so similar. All right.  [00:31:50][12.8]

Speaker 2: [00:31:50] So so we've actually covered two of these things already. Look at us. Look at us. And then the third one is is effects on the partner's parenting.  [00:31:58][8.1]

Speaker 1: [00:31:59] Now hold on here about okay. No, seriously. Because a lot of times defining the effects of the the the, you know, on the on the protective parent and their parenting is used against them in family court.  [00:32:16][16.4]

Speaker 2: [00:32:16] It is tricky and I think my my thinking about this has gotten more complex over time. Yeah, I think it is  [00:32:22][5.8]

Speaker 1: [00:32:24] one they say, well, we will we will default to putting that person, making that person responsible, right? Instead of making the person responsible who who is the one that caused those situations. And I think that that has to do with a couple of different things. I think it has to do with the way that our legal system and evidentiary measures are again made when women were property of men needs a review and reform. But the other piece of that is that we don't have effective pathways that we've invested in to make sure that we hold that perpetrator behaviorally accountable, above and beyond arrest. We don't have good evaluations and assessments behaviorally of those perpetrators, which tie in to the experience of survivors and their kids. We don't even monitor and assess perpetrators with a high likelihood for recidivism. We don't do that even if it's violence, right? But even if it's violence, we don't do any of those things.  [00:33:27][62.5]

Speaker 2: [00:33:28] I was talking to somebody the other day, and I can't remember the context. I can no longer remember anything. I can't remember who I spoke. I remember you. I remember. I remember our kids. We may need to go to the doctor. I, you know, I'm like, I have these conversations. I can't remember with whom or what continent. Zoom is wonderful, but I'm like, It doesn't give me a lot of markers. That's right. It does give me a lot of markers.  [00:33:47][19.2]

Speaker 1: [00:33:48] Yeah, there's no there's no, you know, like, you're not traveling.  [00:33:51][2.9]

Speaker 2: [00:33:51] Yeah, I'm I'm not, you know, and all the  [00:33:53][2.2]

Speaker 1: [00:33:53] accents  [00:33:53][0.0]

Speaker 2: [00:33:55] and the accents hang your memory on that I can't. So I was somebody who was saying was confirming for me again, they were talking about talking to a group of guys. And it may have been my work with some folks in Texas now that I'm saying this. I mean, the problem is that the issues are almost the same everywhere. I mean, that's part that's really one of the things I know that there's there's some there's silence, there's some cultural specificity that's so important and there's a universality to this issue as well to our responses. And and and they were confirming again that these guys were saying there were men who had been arrested or have been involved in a men's behavior change group that when they were put out of the house, they felt like they had less responsibility as parents. Well, they they did. They did well, they did informally, they didn't formally, but nobody was holding them accountable. And sort of you were saying this, and I'll say to people, you know, somebody gets arrested or put out on a domestic violence order there. If there are biological or legal guardian or parent, their responsibilities have not changed. Even though they're living a town away or block,  [00:34:59][64.3]

Speaker 1: [00:34:59] you have to support their children financially. They still have to. That's right. Well, parents, how do you do that safely?  [00:35:06][6.9]

Speaker 2: [00:35:07] Well, basic needs, I mean, and basic needs in terms of medical care, food, housing, all those things and and our systems often give. That perpetrator more power, because all of a sudden, all he needs to do is stay away. And then he's in compliance. And and people say, Oh, there's other mechanisms she can go to family court or she can go get child support or she can go and get on the U.S. food stamps. But none of those really are timely, and none of them really address the basic needs those kids in a meaningful way. And very few of them are direct mechanisms for accountability where, you know, in my perfect world, there be some sort of process where you'd be like, OK, you're on the house. We're going to look at a whole range of responsibilities you have as a parent, right? And see how we can kind of put something in place in the short term that your kids aren't out in the street because. They're their mother can't pay the rent because you you chose to be violent, you chose to be violent, you know, and I always say to people, you know, him going to jail. Might be create some safety, but don't think that it hasn't impacted the kids emotionally. I remember a case years ago where where he was the primary caregiver and it was it was a younger kid and he got violent to the mother. He went to jail. And this kid totally decompensated because his primary caregiver was gone was gone. And and and I think people will be like, Oh, that's good, that he was gone.  [00:36:30][83.2]

Speaker 1: [00:36:30] I just I think that if that was a woman who did that, people would immediately see the selfishness of that act, right immediately. But because it's it's not that people don't look at that and say what a what a real, you know, I'm going to use a curse word now. Shitty thing to do to your child, to not choose behaviors which would continue your contact with them to be nourishing and caretaking of the child.  [00:36:59][29.0]

Speaker 2: [00:37:01] So, so going back to, you know, we were talking about the complexity before. I think this idea when we talked about how somebody who's choosing gross controls behavior is impacting kids through impacting the other person's parenting. I think we all need to wrestle with this, like the Scottish Loughran coercive control. Is brilliant in the sense of it doesn't need to show. Harm, it just needs to show that a reasonable person would believe that these things were consistent with coercive control, so you don't need somebody as a puddle on the floor, you don't need somebody weak, you know, and I think this works, it really can be very helpful. At the same time, we don't want to minimize the harm. We don't minimize the damage. We don't want  [00:37:40][39.1]

Speaker 1: [00:37:41] to minimize the danger,  [00:37:42][1.1]

Speaker 2: [00:37:42] the danger. But we also want to tell the story of how. This person who is violent pushed drugs on this person or how they traumatize them and how now they can't sleep, or now they're more anxious or and now that they need to be on medication because otherwise if we don't and this has been my term lately, if we can't contextualize the issues in that mother's parenting back to the abuse, then we're doing her disservice if we're doing the kids a disservice. Right? Used to do this exercise, and I don't do this bit of training anymore, but I used to show people and say, OK, imagine the scenario where you're working with a mom post-separation. He's out that the data was violence out of the house. And imagine you walking up to the front door and you're a social worker and you hear mom yelling and screaming at the kids, cursing at them. Mm-Hmm. And in scenario one ending, you know, dad had been violence narrow. When you walk in and you say, Mom, I heard you cursing. You know, we need to give you more parenting support. You know, we want you to succeed so you need more parenting support, right? And now she's going to another service and you better talking through a deficit lens, right? So that's a narrow one. But then I say, imagine you're that social worker and you're walking up the steps and you hear the same thing. But instead of going through the door and saying, Mom, you got parenting deficit, you say, Mom, you know what? I've never really explored with you how his violence has impacted your relationship with the kids and their respect for you and how they listen and how they treat each other.  [00:39:14][91.8]

Speaker 1: [00:39:15] And so I want to see how they comply with normal, you know, reputable demands upon them, and they may have been taught to resist. Right? That person's parenting to call that person stupid. That's right. To undermine their authority.  [00:39:30][14.4]

Speaker 2: [00:39:31] So, so this is really operationalized for me because, you know, you want to be in that latter scenario where you're sitting down and saying, you know, I want to listen, I want you to describe to me. And that's an intervention, right? That's tremendously empowering because she's probably walking around going, What's wrong with me? I can't control my kids. And I've been doing some work with juvenile justice recently, and they'll tell stories about about. Kids beating up their mothers because she's setting boundaries around Xbox, around phones, and they'll say, Well, yeah, there's been domestic violence in the home, but that's not connected, I go, Yes, it is  [00:40:04][33.1]

Speaker 1: [00:40:05] like that kid. Why? Yes, it is a parent. It is  [00:40:08][3.2]

Speaker 2: [00:40:08] connected.  [00:40:08][0.0]

Speaker 1: [00:40:09] That's right, parent. When they didn't get what they wanted, that was a learned behavior.  [00:40:13][3.3]

Speaker 2: [00:40:13] And it is connected.  [00:40:14][0.9]

Speaker 1: [00:40:14] Don't understand. I don't understand how the how the industry has developed this way, except for the fact that we've really just assumed that men are violent as a baseline, right? That that's just the way it is that they're entitled to some of those behaviors and that women are the ones that have to modulate everything around them and heal their children and keep the household together, right?  [00:40:40][25.3]

Speaker 2: [00:40:40] That's your operation.  [00:40:40][0.5]

Speaker 1: [00:40:41] I teach the children how to resist the learned behaviors that their other parent has taught them that if they do X and are violent, they'll get their way right.  [00:40:51][10.2]

Speaker 2: [00:40:52] So compliance so that the things that we have listed under effects on partners parenting. And again, this list is not complete. You know, depression, PTSD, anxiety, substance abuse, loss of authority, which is what we're talking about, you know, could be affect energy going. To address the perpetrator instead, the children,  [00:41:11][18.9]

Speaker 1: [00:41:12] oh yes, because it is another type of parenting, right? You are actually parenting a very large, volatile, oh yeah, unpredictable child, emotional child who has a lot of physical strength, right?  [00:41:27][14.6]

Speaker 2: [00:41:27] And who could hurt you? I remember hearing that early in my career again, women saying, well, that she had actually two biological children.  [00:41:34][7.1]

Speaker 1: [00:41:35] Whenever I hear somebody joke, Yeah, they have an adult child, I my my, my red flags always go up on like, right?  [00:41:42][7.7]

Speaker 2: [00:41:43] But I think it's really important that the energy that goes to managing that other person is energy that's not going to the kids. It is who are going to being successful in your life and and and and achieving or  [00:41:56][12.4]

Speaker 1: [00:41:56] being able to contribute to your financial well-being. All those things, that's right. You know? You know, if there's, you know, the needs of children which are, you know, have disabilities, how well is that disability being being addressed and worked with? And and how is that child being supported? Because we know that children like autistic children may have a much higher likelihood of being abused in the home, but that also correlates to domestic violence in the home as well.  [00:42:26][30.1]

Speaker 2: [00:42:27] So I think this one is a big one. I think it's again for me, it's is this idea of if we slow down. And we listen to survivors. And we really seek to understand what their experience is and how it relates to this intersection of domestic violence, perpetration and kids. And ask yourself again, this is what's different in this household because one of the parents is choosing abuse. And one of the places it's different is I need to navigate every bit. In many cases of the day, my timing, my plans is getting the report card or danger is what I buy in the supermarket. The danger is how clean the house is. A danger is, is the way the meal is prepared. The danger is the way the kids are not cleaning up any of these things at dinner. A dangerous. That's right.  [00:43:19][51.9]

Speaker 1: [00:43:20] Not buying milk. A dangerous right is me asking for the car a  [00:43:23][3.6]

Speaker 2: [00:43:23] danger, right? Right. And so and so now I  [00:43:26][2.3]

Speaker 1: [00:43:26] need my cell phone bill going over a danger.  [00:43:28][2.4]

Speaker 2: [00:43:30] So I'm constantly trying to navigate and manage myself. The kids and kids are not predictable. Kids are not really kids. They're not predictable, you know, they don't have the frontal lobe that lets them plan. So I'm not talking from any kind of experience where a kid pops up and goes, Hey, could you take me here right now? I'm like, Why I'm in the middle of doing something? Not any kid that I know personally, an actual  [00:43:55][25.1]

Speaker 1: [00:43:55] parental  [00:43:55][0.0]

Speaker 2: [00:43:56] group that is, you know, heard on the podcast. Right, exactly. You know, this is not like anything real that I've experienced recently where, you know, a hypothetical child says, Hey, could you do this right now for me? You know, when you think about kids and their needs, they're unpredictable, right then. And so if you're trying to manage that and and then worry about this person's response, how can you be fully present for those kids? Right? And again, this stuff will be invisible, particularly based on gender bias, how hard this person is working. And so then the last thing on here is interference with day to day routine and basic care. And you know, one of the ways this this. I thought about this was years ago I had a. Some sort of consulting gig where I spent and this is the vague recesses of my mind. Days reviewing police reports in a little closet office someplace as part of some consulting I was doing and all I had was police reports to look at, and there was something to try to figure out about the impact on kids. And as you can imagine, these police reports had no specific information about the kids, actually.  [00:45:02][66.3]

Speaker 1: [00:45:03] You know, it's so it's so weird to me because such little things impact children's lives so adversely with such big ripple effects like I think about having garbage stacked in a shower. Because of the chaos in the household and the neglect and the abuse. You can't take a shower, right? What are the ripple effects?  [00:45:26][23.8]

Speaker 2: [00:45:28] You know, right? I mean, are you going to school and you're going to school? You have hygiene issues are going to be all this torture by your classmates.  [00:45:34][6.1]

Speaker 1: [00:45:35] You know, all sorts of things that are these little things that are actually really important aspects of just day to day stability. And you know, we we grew up at times with no electricity, no running water. I'm not saying that you need to have, you know, you know, those type of accommodations to be a good parent. But what I'm saying is this if the violence of another parent impedes that normal expectation from the type of hygiene that you need to engage in or the access to clean water, the access to a stove that works right. That is a very big deal in a child's life. And an adult is causing that. Right? Those resources are there and they're accessible, but they become inaccessible in the chaos of domestic violence, in the chaos of child abuse, addiction, mental illness, all of those type of things. And it's devastating. It's devastating for a child.  [00:46:39][64.5]

Speaker 2: [00:46:40] And again, you have to look at that to see what you're talking about. You can't go in looking at just a nexus between physical violence and did the kid see and hear, you know, like you're not going to notice that. And and I remember the case where the the social worker came in the house and there was a lock on the freezer and and she asked us, the mother, you know, why she locked the freezer? And she said, Well, he thinks that me and the kids are eating too much me. You know, you know, that has nothing to do with on the surface of it, physical violence, but has everything to do with control, everything to do with what's a threat that's backing up? Why does he feel privileged to do that? You know, how does he get to decide who's eating too much meat or not? You know, what's the impact of that on the kids development on their their mental health? But reading this, police reports going back to that for a second. All I could do to try to ascertain impact on kids was look and see what time of day the incident happened and start thinking about what would be a normal routine or routine activity that should be going on at seven a.m. or at noon or at three o'clock or at midnight. And you get no, but you start thinking about,  [00:47:52][71.8]

Speaker 1: [00:47:52] no, I'm laughing because that's a that's a that's a night waking wasn't right was a common occurrence, right? In in the environments that I lived in. Right. That's a that's a level of coercive control that makes you exhausted as a child and as an adult, it's difficult to it's difficult to function right in that kind of environment.  [00:48:11][19.2]

Speaker 2: [00:48:13] And all these things are these three different areas, you know, trauma and safety, impact of human ecology, impact on the other partners parenting. All of these come back to at the end of the day, you know, in this framework, what does this mean for the kids development, for their well-being, for their functioning? And again, just ask this basic question. I feel like this is like a plea today. I feel like a plea. When you're looking at a kid who has got issues and you know, there's a history of domestic violence, ask the question how did the domestic violence perpetrators behavior pattern contribute or cause or exacerbate these issues in this child? And think through a multiple pathways to harm. So it's like it feels to me like a like I want to like, beg people today. And that feels a little weird because that's not normal for me. But I'm like, Just do this, this one thing. Just do this because it feels like to me that I trust because I trust people actually, that if they ask that question, they're going to figure so much how  [00:49:13][60.5]

Speaker 1: [00:49:14] they will figure so much out. But then they need to be empowered to take the next step. And that is to not make the survivor and their children responsible for the for the for the environment, which was created by that person who is choosing violence and causing chaos, causing poverty, causing, you know, social disconnect, causing familial disconnect and to have to work with that person in ways that improve the safety, self-determination, stability and satisfaction of the adult and child survivor.  [00:49:49][34.9]

Speaker 2: [00:49:50] Well, this is where we're, you know, I'll make that distinction because I know you said your word that that will get flipped onto survivor. It always does. It always does. And, you know, because in part, you know, I guess I don't want to paint this as a panacea. Every time you say, how has the domestic violence harmed the kids, you open the door for the victim blaming whenever you say, How do the domestic violence perpetrators behavior harm the kids, you make it less likely. That's the only way I might say right. Less likely that that victim blaming is going to happen. Right. And that's the best we have because that's that's that's factually true, right? And so and then we've got to work from there. Like you're saying, we've got to be able to implement and we've got to be able to use that. We've got to be able to change policy. We've got to to talk to, you know, so what's the intervention of the perpetrator then how do you partner with that survivor? But it's it. Again, this is my plea to people is drop the language of domestic violence. How is domestic violence harm the kids? Don't talk about the words domestic violence like it's the weather or it's rain. Connect it to a person's choices and behaviors, and then connect those choices and behaviors through multiple pathways to harm framework to what that means for the kids. The partner's parenting, the family functioning,  [00:51:05][75.1]

Speaker 1: [00:51:06] you know, think of it like a flood or an earthquake and then talk about all of its impact from there. Not like the weather. I liked your weather analogy. I'm just running with it. Yeah.  [00:51:18][11.3]

Speaker 2: [00:51:19] You keep running with it. Well, it's like I remember having a conversation about about rape education in colleges, and it's like, it's very much like to women, dude. You know, don't leave your drink alone, you know, do this carry mace. And it's like, it's out. And the implication is, if you don't do that, then something happen to you, right? And it's like  [00:51:42][23.3]

Speaker 1: [00:51:43] it's in your headphones while you're running. Right, exactly where it totally is. Right?  [00:51:46][3.7]

Speaker 2: [00:51:47] And the equivalent is what you didn't take an umbrella and you got wet and that is going to rain, you know, is going to rain  [00:51:51][4.4]

Speaker 1: [00:51:52] like male violence is like the rain.  [00:51:55][2.4]

Speaker 2: [00:51:55] That's what that's what the analogy I made. And people talk about it as it's inevitable. That's why I like the weather analogy. It's inevitable you're supposed to plan for it. And if if you get harmed by bad weather and you didn't check the news, look at it. You didn't  [00:52:10][14.6]

Speaker 1: [00:52:10] carry an aluminum boat with you  [00:52:12][1.9]

Speaker 2: [00:52:12] in it. That's right. Exactly. You said, OK, we're going pretty far on that one. But you know this this multiple pathways, the harm framework is,  [00:52:20][8.6]

Speaker 1: [00:52:21] is the people on Facebook Live or  [00:52:23][1.8]

Speaker 2: [00:52:23] die if they are to, you know, I hope it was anybody watching us. You know, there they're watching people, right? Yeah. So anyway, so so this multiple pathways the harm framework is is essential to the model. It's it's one of our e-learning courses, you know, so if you if you're interested in this and you can always go on, take our e-learning course about it. And it's it's really it's a way to operationalize assessment in a way that lets you ask a series of questions that lets you think about, well, what is the impact on the kids and right?  [00:52:57][34.1]

Speaker 1: [00:52:57] And in order to look at multiple pathways to harm and really create the the documentation, which is necessary to push the system into greater responsibility in looking at child well-being in domestic violence cases, you have to map perpetrators patterns, you have to map those patterns of behaviors and you have to do your due diligence in that regard. So, you  [00:53:23][25.3]

Speaker 2: [00:53:23] know, I mean, this power is our mapping tool, which will soon be our mapping app, not software, because I've been trying to do things that were it on the use of word software, but that be. Coming out in 2022. Yes. And I really want to invite people to really think about what this framework means for their practice, what they're doing, family law, whether doing child protection, whether they're they're doing advocacy work, whether doing men's behavior change, where I did some work with a group of men's behavior change folks in Texas, and they were really intrigued by, I think about what's missing from their curricula. Yeah, around this and and how to really increase accountability, we have to. Turn up the heat on a conversation about what people choose, violence, what's their responsibility? Right. And we have to find a way that this is not just  [00:54:11][48.2]

Speaker 1: [00:54:11] their legal response.  [00:54:12][0.5]

Speaker 2: [00:54:12] That's right. This is cultural. It's cultural, social, legal responsibility. It's, you know, it's it's you know that if somebody is violence is causing his kids to be homeless, people should be able to say to him, What are you doing? You know, what are you doing that your kids had to flee in the middle now and go to refuge, right? You know, not just that you got violent, but that your behavior led to your kids not sleeping in their own beds, not sleeping in their own bed. I mean, it's dropped it again. It's like, slow it down, not sleeping in their own bed, not having things that are familiar to them. You know, being around strangers, being in, you know, being traumatized and being an unfamiliar place, right? And not knowing what will happen and not knowing what happened and and  [00:54:54][41.4]

Speaker 1: [00:54:54] and and loving and loving right and not knowing what's going to happen. That's right. And feeling scared for you.  [00:55:01][6.4]

Speaker 2: [00:55:01] That's right. Yeah. Worried about because of  [00:55:03][1.9]

Speaker 1: [00:55:03] your own self.  [00:55:03][0.4]

Speaker 2: [00:55:04] That's right. You know, the kids who will say the young kids will say. Mommy, I'm worried daddy's alone because we're together, right? Kids of different ages react differently. We really need to be able to say, you know, to that person, who is you and your kids scared for you? Yeah. Because your behavior has carried the consequence of you not being around them and. They're feeling worried for you in a way they shouldn't have to and that you're responsible for. I mean, I think it just we all have to slow this down. Yeah. And and really take the time to think about these things have these conversations. Think about what those behaviors mean for the kids. Think about how we talk to people who are choosing violence about these things and then also naming these things, so survivors feel validated because they're often walking away with tremendous guilt and shame. Yeah. You know, confusion. I wanted to go. I need to go to shelter and refuge, but it's better for my kids. My kids are angry and they're upset and they're in a strange environment. And you know, why is this happening? I mean, all  [00:56:18][74.4]

Speaker 1: [00:56:18] these years, is that going to shelter off and makes the situation more volatile, right? You have to return home at some point. Right. That doesn't mean your perpetrator won't be there. It doesn't mean they were arrested or held accountable. It doesn't mean that you're not going to be punished for that protective action that you might even die for it, right? That your kids may be hurt for it. You know, there are. There are the assumption that the going to refuge keeps women safe. Is is a poor  [00:56:48][29.8]

Speaker 2: [00:56:48] assumption, just short term safety strategy.  [00:56:50][1.8]

Speaker 1: [00:56:50] It's not even sometimes a valid safety strategy. Sometimes it actually is an accelerant in a situation, right? And it can lead to to to to to to to death if the system doesn't understand how to continuously respond after that moment is over. So anyway, I think we've I think  [00:57:13][22.3]

Speaker 2: [00:57:13] we've covered, but I know we both kind of go, you know, I did bag today and I as I don't feel ashamed, sick of the same, I feel ashamed about begging. But so you've been listening to this episode of multiple pathways to harm? Yeah, a comprehensive assessment framework. And we hope that you will take this information and use it right away today in your mind, unless you listen this late at night. And you know, and then  [00:57:41][27.7]

Speaker 1: [00:57:41] tomorrow, the only people that are going to be able to apply it right away are the people that were on Facebook Live,  [00:57:45][4.1]

Speaker 2: [00:57:46] right? That's right. Because we have to just in case you're wondering, we have to, you know, do post-production after our music and I do a little editing, not much. Yeah. And get it up. And so I am David Mandel, the executive director of the Safe and Together Institute.  [00:58:00][13.8]

Speaker 1: [00:58:00] And I was Stearns Mandel, the e-learning, communications and strategic manager and Tiberius. The dog is here, and he's been sleeping  [00:58:08][7.6]

Speaker 2: [00:58:09] the whole time. He normally gets up once and kind of moves around because  [00:58:12][3.0]

Speaker 1: [00:58:12] I was petting, Okay.  [00:58:13][1.1]

Speaker 2: [00:58:14] And if you like this podcast, please share it. Please like it. Give it to friends. You know who might be interested in it? Write us and give us ideas for shows or questions you have. And then also check out our virtual Academy Academy Dot Safe at the other institute dot com. Nice. And is there still a  [00:58:38][23.6]

Speaker 1: [00:58:39] there is still a discount code. It is part partnered all lowercase. OK, that applies to all of our training.  [00:58:46][7.2]

Speaker 2: [00:58:46] And what percentage?  [00:58:47][0.4]

Speaker 1: [00:58:47] I believe it's 10 or 15 percent. OK? I don't. I have to go back and  [00:58:51][3.5]

Speaker 2: [00:58:51] look and then check out our websites, every other sitcom, and we've got a conference coming up in January. We have got our fingers crossed about a conference in in Australia, in person in May 2020 to, you know, are watching you do it. You know, Sydney came out of lockdown today for you. So anyway, so we're hoping we get to see people in person. We want to come see you. We might come and see you. So anyway, and we're out, we're out.  [00:58:51][0.0]

[3414.8]