Former Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax - murder/suicide?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is reported they were in the middle of a messy divorce. So awful.

Ugh. Another layer of awful.

In Virginia, you must be separated for a year in order to get divorced and you can live in the same house while being separated (if you move you it can be seen by the court as abandoning your claim to the house, happened to my cousin). Reports are that the couple had started this process so I am not surprised they were both still living in the house.

Fairfax made an accusation against his wife earlier this year that she had physically assaulted him. Apparently she had cameras in the house and after reviewing the footage the police determined the assault claim wasn't valid and there was a scheduled upcoming court date re this incident which could be what triggered the current awful events.

There were 2 teen sons in the house. This is absolutely awful.

I hope this is a wake up call to change the law re: leaving the home. It forces women into staying in a potentially very dangerous situation.

That and the 1 year separation. What is the purpose??
Tragic.

Maryland recently shortened their one year separation requirement to six months if there are no children in the marriage. I think the rationale is that the state has an interest in wanting couples to be sure they need to get a divorce before they do? Not supporting this.

The part they need to change is about "home abandonment." Fine, make people wait, but don't penalize their assets for leaving to do so.

Can someone point me to the Virginia law(s) that make it financially risky to move out of the house before the divorce is finalized? What an insane game of gotcha for a couple in a contentious divorce. I hate everything about this story.

I don’t know the law but a friend of mine moved out of the marital home while her ex was away on a business trip and he claimed she had abandoned the home (as in abandoned her financial claim to the home) and the judge agreed, so the ex got the house and didn’t have to buy her out. This was 10 years ago in NOVA.

That is an outrageous law.

Virginia is incredible regressive when it comes to women's rights in marriage. It would behoove people outraged to call their elected officials rather than blame and express incredulity toward a woman just murdered by her husband.

I’m in blue California and have a close friend in a situation very similar to Cerina’s and the family court system is incredibly stacked against her. There is hard evidence (photos, witness testimony) of abuse and the courts will still give the abusive SAHD custody and she was told she couldn’t leave the house for abandonment reasons, not that she would have because she would never have left her kids. She was only able to leave when her kids were old enough to state their own wishes and even then, the courts bent over backwards to protect custody for dad, so she pays her documented abuser significant child support but his kids won’t stay with him, so he just pockets the money.

The reasoning behind protecting the abusive spouse is far left progressive perhaps, unlike VA, but the practical anti-woman outcome is the same.

Please stop this misinformation. Women are always able to leave. (Men too for that matter.) Women need to face reality and pick a healthy living situation and ideally get rid of bad men before the situation becomes extreme.

What misinformation, exactly? What about a situation I have recounted precisely is “misinformation”?

That abused women have no option other than to stay in the home.

Dp: Of course, they also have the option to leave, and thus lose their rights, money, and possibly their kids. The law should not be forcing this lose-lose situation. What good reason is there for such a law that outweighs the needs to prevent this?

That's the point. There was no law saying that she had to stay.

Y’all don’t understand what “law” is. Virginia recognizes desertion as a basis for granting an at-fault divorce.

I am beginning to think that poster that you are responding to is just a misogynist incel. The ignorance is too profound.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is reported they were in the middle of a messy divorce. So awful.

Ugh. Another layer of awful.

In Virginia, you must be separated for a year in order to get divorced and you can live in the same house while being separated (if you move you it can be seen by the court as abandoning your claim to the house, happened to my cousin). Reports are that the couple had started this process so I am not surprised they were both still living in the house.

Fairfax made an accusation against his wife earlier this year that she had physically assaulted him. Apparently she had cameras in the house and after reviewing the footage the police determined the assault claim wasn't valid and there was a scheduled upcoming court date re this incident which could be what triggered the current awful events.

There were 2 teen sons in the house. This is absolutely awful.

I hope this is a wake up call to change the law re: leaving the home. It forces women into staying in a potentially very dangerous situation.

That and the 1 year separation. What is the purpose??
Tragic.

Maryland recently shortened their one year separation requirement to six months if there are no children in the marriage. I think the rationale is that the state has an interest in wanting couples to be sure they need to get a divorce before they do? Not supporting this.

The part they need to change is about "home abandonment." Fine, make people wait, but don't penalize their assets for leaving to do so.

Can someone point me to the Virginia law(s) that make it financially risky to move out of the house before the divorce is finalized? What an insane game of gotcha for a couple in a contentious divorce. I hate everything about this story.

I don’t know the law but a friend of mine moved out of the marital home while her ex was away on a business trip and he claimed she had abandoned the home (as in abandoned her financial claim to the home) and the judge agreed, so the ex got the house and didn’t have to buy her out. This was 10 years ago in NOVA.

That is an outrageous law.

Virginia is incredible regressive when it comes to women's rights in marriage. It would behoove people outraged to call their elected officials rather than blame and express incredulity toward a woman just murdered by her husband.

I’m in blue California and have a close friend in a situation very similar to Cerina’s and the family court system is incredibly stacked against her. There is hard evidence (photos, witness testimony) of abuse and the courts will still give the abusive SAHD custody and she was told she couldn’t leave the house for abandonment reasons, not that she would have because she would never have left her kids. She was only able to leave when her kids were old enough to state their own wishes and even then, the courts bent over backwards to protect custody for dad, so she pays her documented abuser significant child support but his kids won’t stay with him, so he just pockets the money.

The reasoning behind protecting the abusive spouse is far left progressive perhaps, unlike VA, but the practical anti-woman outcome is the same.

Please stop this misinformation. Women are always able to leave. (Men too for that matter.) Women need to face reality and pick a healthy living situation and ideally get rid of bad men before the situation becomes extreme.

What misinformation, exactly? What about a situation I have recounted precisely is “misinformation”?

That abused women have no option other than to stay in the home.

Dp: Of course, they also have the option to leave, and thus lose their rights, money, and possibly their kids. The law should not be forcing this lose-lose situation. What good reason is there for such a law that outweighs the needs to prevent this?

That's the point. There was no law saying that she had to stay.

Y’all don’t understand what “law” is. Virginia recognizes desertion as a basis for granting an at-fault divorce.

I suspect she would be paying alimony as well since Fairfax didn't have any source of income.

[Anonymous]

They were living in the house that they bought with two incomes, but relying on hers alone. In addition to not wanting the divorce to become at-fault, she may simply have lacked the funds to add a rental to her financial burden. From her perspective, the end was in sight. While he has accusations of sexual assault, there were no incidents of physical violence that she reported to police. She did not appear to have a case to get a protective order. She may not have felt fear of physical harm, or she felt uneasy but had no documented incidents to use to make a case to keep him away from her and her children.

Clearly, from the outside in hindsight we see the signs of fatal violence at the end of a relationship. But there are lots of deadbeat men who don’t kill their wives over a divorce.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is reported they were in the middle of a messy divorce. So awful.

Ugh. Another layer of awful.

In Virginia, you must be separated for a year in order to get divorced and you can live in the same house while being separated (if you move you it can be seen by the court as abandoning your claim to the house, happened to my cousin). Reports are that the couple had started this process so I am not surprised they were both still living in the house.

Fairfax made an accusation against his wife earlier this year that she had physically assaulted him. Apparently she had cameras in the house and after reviewing the footage the police determined the assault claim wasn't valid and there was a scheduled upcoming court date re this incident which could be what triggered the current awful events.

There were 2 teen sons in the house. This is absolutely awful.

I hope this is a wake up call to change the law re: leaving the home. It forces women into staying in a potentially very dangerous situation.

That and the 1 year separation. What is the purpose??
Tragic.

Maryland recently shortened their one year separation requirement to six months if there are no children in the marriage. I think the rationale is that the state has an interest in wanting couples to be sure they need to get a divorce before they do? Not supporting this.

The part they need to change is about "home abandonment." Fine, make people wait, but don't penalize their assets for leaving to do so.

Can someone point me to the Virginia law(s) that make it financially risky to move out of the house before the divorce is finalized? What an insane game of gotcha for a couple in a contentious divorce. I hate everything about this story.

I don’t know the law but a friend of mine moved out of the marital home while her ex was away on a business trip and he claimed she had abandoned the home (as in abandoned her financial claim to the home) and the judge agreed, so the ex got the house and didn’t have to buy her out. This was 10 years ago in NOVA.

That is an outrageous law.

Virginia is incredible regressive when it comes to women's rights in marriage. It would behoove people outraged to call their elected officials rather than blame and express incredulity toward a woman just murdered by her husband.

I’m in blue California and have a close friend in a situation very similar to Cerina’s and the family court system is incredibly stacked against her. There is hard evidence (photos, witness testimony) of abuse and the courts will still give the abusive SAHD custody and she was told she couldn’t leave the house for abandonment reasons, not that she would have because she would never have left her kids. She was only able to leave when her kids were old enough to state their own wishes and even then, the courts bent over backwards to protect custody for dad, so she pays her documented abuser significant child support but his kids won’t stay with him, so he just pockets the money.

The reasoning behind protecting the abusive spouse is far left progressive perhaps, unlike VA, but the practical anti-woman outcome is the same.

Please stop this misinformation. Women are always able to leave. (Men too for that matter.) Women need to face reality and pick a healthy living situation and ideally get rid of bad men before the situation becomes extreme.

What misinformation, exactly? What about a situation I have recounted precisely is “misinformation”?

That abused women have no option other than to stay in the home.

Dp: Of course, they also have the option to leave, and thus lose their rights, money, and possibly their kids. The law should not be forcing this lose-lose situation. What good reason is there for such a law that outweighs the needs to prevent this?

That's the point. There was no law saying that she had to stay.

Y’all don’t understand what “law” is. Virginia recognizes desertion as a basis for granting an at-fault divorce.

I am beginning to think that poster that you are responding to is just a misogynist incel. The ignorance is too profound.

The dangerous misogyny is everyone trying to claim here that an abused woman has no way to get away.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The WaPo article about Justin Fairfax’s downward spiral is horrifying. His poor wife. I hope Eric Swalwell’s wife remains safe.

Can you share a gift link?

https://wapo.st/4cxnAyf

Thank you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They were living in the house that they bought with two incomes, but relying on hers alone. In addition to not wanting the divorce to become at-fault, she may simply have lacked the funds to add a rental to her financial burden. From her perspective, the end was in sight. While he has accusations of sexual assault, there were no incidents of physical violence that she reported to police. She did not appear to have a case to get a protective order. She may not have felt fear of physical harm, or she felt uneasy but had no documented incidents to use to make a case to keep him away from her and her children.

Clearly, from the outside in hindsight we see the signs of fatal violence at the end of a relationship. But there are lots of deadbeat men who don’t kill their wives over a divorce.

I’m sure that was part of it and maybe she had other motives. But this was clearly a spiraling and dysfunctional situation regardless of how it ended. Having been through this and seeing my friends navigate the situation (and also reading DCUM posts about it) the lesson I think women need to hear is that at some point you need to prioritize getting out and establishing one stable home for yourself and your children. The money doesn’t matter.

[Anonymous]

Those who met him and knew instantly that he was bad news, what tipped you off? I also met him but did not see those red flags.

What did give me pause was that there was a period of days many years ago when there was an old scuzzy looking mattress in their front yard. It just made me think that whatever the outer persona was, things were not that smooth behind those walls. I mean, everyone has belongings that look gross but most adults, especially someone like him, would be embarrassed to have them in the yard for days. They could store it inside or bring it out and get rid of it immediately. Felt like there was more to the story.

[Anonymous]

I left my kids behind, because their and my safety was at risk had I fought for them. He abused me, not the kids. He abused the kids indirectly. As long as he had them, I was hoping I was safe and he wouldn't spiral further.
I did not recognize the person he had become. It's like some disease had taken over. Let's stop acting like we should have known the person we married. I had no idea what was going to eat him up from inside.
Even his family couldn't help him and stayed out of it all.
He passed away from whatever made him spiral and I got my kids back. I think even his family was breathing easily, because he could have taken the kids with him.
I'm sure he didn't want to die, but he is not match to the craziness/changes in his head.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They were living in the house that they bought with two incomes, but relying on hers alone. In addition to not wanting the divorce to become at-fault, she may simply have lacked the funds to add a rental to her financial burden. From her perspective, the end was in sight. While he has accusations of sexual assault, there were no incidents of physical violence that she reported to police. She did not appear to have a case to get a protective order. She may not have felt fear of physical harm, or she felt uneasy but had no documented incidents to use to make a case to keep him away from her and her children.

Clearly, from the outside in hindsight we see the signs of fatal violence at the end of a relationship. But there are lots of deadbeat men who don’t kill their wives over a divorce.

She probably was afraid of angering him further with a protective order that would have done nothing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They were living in the house that they bought with two incomes, but relying on hers alone. In addition to not wanting the divorce to become at-fault, she may simply have lacked the funds to add a rental to her financial burden. From her perspective, the end was in sight. While he has accusations of sexual assault, there were no incidents of physical violence that she reported to police. She did not appear to have a case to get a protective order. She may not have felt fear of physical harm, or she felt uneasy but had no documented incidents to use to make a case to keep him away from her and her children.

Clearly, from the outside in hindsight we see the signs of fatal violence at the end of a relationship. But there are lots of deadbeat men who don’t kill their wives over a divorce.

I’m sure that was part of it and maybe she had other motives. But this was clearly a spiraling and dysfunctional situation regardless of how it ended. Having been through this and seeing my friends navigate the situation (and also reading DCUM posts about it) the lesson I think women need to hear is that at some point you need to prioritize getting out and establishing one stable home for yourself and your children. The money doesn’t matter.

As has been repeated ad nauseum in this thread, but the incel troll keeps ignoring, women cannot leave with their children. They have to leave without their children or leave their kids with a violent abuser alone. What you suggest is that women have to make a Sophie’s Choice and most women will not abandon their children with a violent man.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are some real ogres on this thread.

Mrs. Fairfax is the victim. She likely was trying to do what was best for the kids. So sad.

Remember, at one time she loved him--maybe, she still did. Just proves that if a smart, educated woman cannot figure this out, how can those with fewer advantages?

Yes we know she was the victim. That is totally clear. And maybe this was the inevitable outcome no matter what she did. But I think it is really important for women to know that bad situations can get worse and nothing is worth staying with a spiraling or unstable man. Do what you can to get out even if it means living in a small apartment, your kids switching schools, whatever. Call a lawyer with DV experience and figure it out.

Stop. There is nothing to “figure out” here. She had a lawyer, she had a court proceeding, and the judge was more focused on giving her husband hype talks as if that man had anything good left to salvage, than protecting her.

There is a reason why women in this situation kidnap their kids and go into hiding - it’s because that is your only option. And for a woman who grew up dirt poor, I’m sure she wanted to do all she could to spare her children from that same fate.

She told friends her lawyer advised her she’d risk being found to have abandoned the home if she moved out.

Then she got bad legal advice. There is no legal requirement that you extend the misery of living with someone spiraling for years while a divorce moves forward. Or you prioritize your stability over the prospect that you could lose some equity.

Well, if you want to keep your kids, there is. You keep on glossing over that.

You don’t lose custody of your kids if you move out and get a temporary custody plan.

You are not helping women here.

That means leaving the children alone with a violent abuser. Please be honest about what you are recommending women do here. You are saying abused women should move out, leave their minor children alone with a violent abusive man, and hope for the best with a temporary custody order.

Be very honest about what your recommendation for abused women is here. Don’t hide behind vagueness. And then tell us why you think your plan is a good idea for abused women.

Please be honest about what YOU are saying - women have to stay in the same house even with a dramatic breakdown of the relationship. It’s just not true. It is a difficult situation but there are legal options. Not saying it always works out but the idea of complete lack of power and agency is wrong too. Pick yourself up and get out.

You are twisting and turning to avoid saying with specificity what you are saying women married to abuser should do. So, since you won’t be honest, I’ll say it for you: you are saying that women with children in violent abusive relationships should leave their children with the violent abusers and leave the house, then seek temporary custody after having left the children with a violent abuser. That is your recommendation.

You are free to recommend that course of action, but most mothers, even ones being physically abused, will never leave their children unprotected and alone with a violent abuser.

Adding here that then the court or opposing counsel could argue, "Well, she left the kids with him [the abuser], so how bad could he really be?" Then she has an even more uphill battle for custody.

This was what was said exactly by the responding officers to me after my ex attempted to kills us. After being repeatedly beaten by a door trying to get my son I went to my neighbors house to wait for the police. They said it couldn't have been that bad if I left my child with him. Even though I was bruised head to toe. Then they also said why didn't I just remove myself from the door too. And leave my child? I could not win.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They were living in the house that they bought with two incomes, but relying on hers alone. In addition to not wanting the divorce to become at-fault, she may simply have lacked the funds to add a rental to her financial burden. From her perspective, the end was in sight. While he has accusations of sexual assault, there were no incidents of physical violence that she reported to police. She did not appear to have a case to get a protective order. She may not have felt fear of physical harm, or she felt uneasy but had no documented incidents to use to make a case to keep him away from her and her children.

Clearly, from the outside in hindsight we see the signs of fatal violence at the end of a relationship. But there are lots of deadbeat men who don’t kill their wives over a divorce.

She probably was afraid of angering him further with a protective order that would have done nothing.

You can't get a protective order easily. Not without evidence of continuing threats if violence. So even one DV incidence that involved threats of violence isn't enough. There is a very high bar for one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is reported they were in the middle of a messy divorce. So awful.

Ugh. Another layer of awful.

In Virginia, you must be separated for a year in order to get divorced and you can live in the same house while being separated (if you move you it can be seen by the court as abandoning your claim to the house, happened to my cousin). Reports are that the couple had started this process so I am not surprised they were both still living in the house.

Fairfax made an accusation against his wife earlier this year that she had physically assaulted him. Apparently she had cameras in the house and after reviewing the footage the police determined the assault claim wasn't valid and there was a scheduled upcoming court date re this incident which could be what triggered the current awful events.

There were 2 teen sons in the house. This is absolutely awful.

I hope this is a wake up call to change the law re: leaving the home. It forces women into staying in a potentially very dangerous situation.

That and the 1 year separation. What is the purpose??
Tragic.

Maryland recently shortened their one year separation requirement to six months if there are no children in the marriage. I think the rationale is that the state has an interest in wanting couples to be sure they need to get a divorce before they do? Not supporting this.

The part they need to change is about "home abandonment." Fine, make people wait, but don't penalize their assets for leaving to do so.

Can someone point me to the Virginia law(s) that make it financially risky to move out of the house before the divorce is finalized? What an insane game of gotcha for a couple in a contentious divorce. I hate everything about this story.

I don’t know the law but a friend of mine moved out of the marital home while her ex was away on a business trip and he claimed she had abandoned the home (as in abandoned her financial claim to the home) and the judge agreed, so the ex got the house and didn’t have to buy her out. This was 10 years ago in NOVA.

That is an outrageous law.

Virginia is incredible regressive when it comes to women's rights in marriage. It would behoove people outraged to call their elected officials rather than blame and express incredulity toward a woman just murdered by her husband.

I’m in blue California and have a close friend in a situation very similar to Cerina’s and the family court system is incredibly stacked against her. There is hard evidence (photos, witness testimony) of abuse and the courts will still give the abusive SAHD custody and she was told she couldn’t leave the house for abandonment reasons, not that she would have because she would never have left her kids. She was only able to leave when her kids were old enough to state their own wishes and even then, the courts bent over backwards to protect custody for dad, so she pays her documented abuser significant child support but his kids won’t stay with him, so he just pockets the money.

The reasoning behind protecting the abusive spouse is far left progressive perhaps, unlike VA, but the practical anti-woman outcome is the same.

Please stop this misinformation. Women are always able to leave. (Men too for that matter.) Women need to face reality and pick a healthy living situation and ideally get rid of bad men before the situation becomes extreme.

What misinformation, exactly? What about a situation I have recounted precisely is “misinformation”?

That abused women have no option other than to stay in the home.

Dp: Of course, they also have the option to leave, and thus lose their rights, money, and possibly their kids. The law should not be forcing this lose-lose situation. What good reason is there for such a law that outweighs the needs to prevent this?

That's the point. There was no law saying that she had to stay.

Y’all don’t understand what “law” is. Virginia recognizes desertion as a basis for granting an at-fault divorce.

I am beginning to think that poster that you are responding to is just a misogynist incel. The ignorance is too profound.

It's not. It's a 45 year old married woman who has never been abused. I know, those were the women siding with my ex after he assaulted me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are some real ogres on this thread.

Mrs. Fairfax is the victim. She likely was trying to do what was best for the kids. So sad.

Remember, at one time she loved him--maybe, she still did. Just proves that if a smart, educated woman cannot figure this out, how can those with fewer advantages?

Yes we know she was the victim. That is totally clear. And maybe this was the inevitable outcome no matter what she did. But I think it is really important for women to know that bad situations can get worse and nothing is worth staying with a spiraling or unstable man. Do what you can to get out even if it means living in a small apartment, your kids switching schools, whatever. Call a lawyer with DV experience and figure it out.

Stop. There is nothing to “figure out” here. She had a lawyer, she had a court proceeding, and the judge was more focused on giving her husband hype talks as if that man had anything good left to salvage, than protecting her.

There is a reason why women in this situation kidnap their kids and go into hiding - it’s because that is your only option. And for a woman who grew up dirt poor, I’m sure she wanted to do all she could to spare her children from that same fate.

She told friends her lawyer advised her she’d risk being found to have abandoned the home if she moved out.

Then she got bad legal advice. There is no legal requirement that you extend the misery of living with someone spiraling for years while a divorce moves forward. Or you prioritize your stability over the prospect that you could lose some equity.

Well, if you want to keep your kids, there is. You keep on glossing over that.

You don’t lose custody of your kids if you move out and get a temporary custody plan.

You are not helping women here.

That means leaving the children alone with a violent abuser. Please be honest about what you are recommending women do here. You are saying abused women should move out, leave their minor children alone with a violent abusive man, and hope for the best with a temporary custody order.

Be very honest about what your recommendation for abused women is here. Don’t hide behind vagueness. And then tell us why you think your plan is a good idea for abused women.

Please be honest about what YOU are saying - women have to stay in the same house even with a dramatic breakdown of the relationship. It’s just not true. It is a difficult situation but there are legal options. Not saying it always works out but the idea of complete lack of power and agency is wrong too. Pick yourself up and get out.

DP here. Wow, now we’re going to “bootstrap” domestic violence?

Sorry, but in the real world, life doesn’t fit your neat little plan. As so many posters have mentioned, there are potential legal ramifications for leaving the home and taking the kids. And also risks to leaving without the kids. And even when the stars align for a woman to try to leave, that is one of the most dangerous times in her relationship. A man with a gun who has nothing to lose anymore is a scary situation, so I can see how a woman in survival mode may try to keep the status quo and work toward a mutual exit.

Then you have he said/she said in court, false accusations, denial of real accusations, etc. I imagine this situation is all the worse for women who don’t have the financial ability to get a new place to live, who might lose their job and/or miss wages if they leave town, etc.

And all of these logistics don’t begin to touch on the emotional aspect of things. Abusers know how to manipulate their partners.

Not everything is just easily wrapped in a nice bow. Real life isn’t a made for tv movie with a strong female protagonist who gets away.

Once you have kids with a person and intertwine your lives, there may only be sh!tty options to choose from. And hindsight is 20/20 when something goes wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are some real ogres on this thread.

Mrs. Fairfax is the victim. She likely was trying to do what was best for the kids. So sad.

Remember, at one time she loved him--maybe, she still did. Just proves that if a smart, educated woman cannot figure this out, how can those with fewer advantages?

Yes we know she was the victim. That is totally clear. And maybe this was the inevitable outcome no matter what she did. But I think it is really important for women to know that bad situations can get worse and nothing is worth staying with a spiraling or unstable man. Do what you can to get out even if it means living in a small apartment, your kids switching schools, whatever. Call a lawyer with DV experience and figure it out.

Stop. There is nothing to “figure out” here. She had a lawyer, she had a court proceeding, and the judge was more focused on giving her husband hype talks as if that man had anything good left to salvage, than protecting her.

There is a reason why women in this situation kidnap their kids and go into hiding - it’s because that is your only option. And for a woman who grew up dirt poor, I’m sure she wanted to do all she could to spare her children from that same fate.

She told friends her lawyer advised her she’d risk being found to have abandoned the home if she moved out.

Then she got bad legal advice. There is no legal requirement that you extend the misery of living with someone spiraling for years while a divorce moves forward. Or you prioritize your stability over the prospect that you could lose some equity.

Well, if you want to keep your kids, there is. You keep on glossing over that.

You don’t lose custody of your kids if you move out and get a temporary custody plan.

You are not helping women here.

That means leaving the children alone with a violent abuser. Please be honest about what you are recommending women do here. You are saying abused women should move out, leave their minor children alone with a violent abusive man, and hope for the best with a temporary custody order.

Be very honest about what your recommendation for abused women is here. Don’t hide behind vagueness. And then tell us why you think your plan is a good idea for abused women.

Please be honest about what YOU are saying - women have to stay in the same house even with a dramatic breakdown of the relationship. It’s just not true. It is a difficult situation but there are legal options. Not saying it always works out but the idea of complete lack of power and agency is wrong too. Pick yourself up and get out.

You are twisting and turning to avoid saying with specificity what you are saying women married to abuser should do. So, since you won’t be honest, I’ll say it for you: you are saying that women with children in violent abusive relationships should leave their children with the violent abusers and leave the house, then seek temporary custody after having left the children with a violent abuser. That is your recommendation.

You are free to recommend that course of action, but most mothers, even ones being physically abused, will never leave their children unprotected and alone with a violent abuser.

+1

And how many times have we seen it play out where a father kills his children to hurt the mother? I don’t blame mothers for not wanting to leave their children.