Divorce and custody proceedings are often high-stress, contentious events that can cause extreme behavior on the part of those involved. Some cases have resulted in situations tied to what was often called "malicious mother syndrome" but is now referred to as "malicious parent syndrome." This syndrome was first theorized by the psychologist Ira Turkat to describe a pattern of abnormal behavior during divorce.
Hinder Extreme Behavior Zip
It's important to note that malicious parent or malicious mother syndrome is not currently recognized as a mental disorder by the medical profession. Rather, the syndrome describes a type of behavior at issue in some court cases and has lead proponents to call for further study and research.
The idea of identifying a syndrome or mental disorder to explain the actions of extreme malicious behavior by parents during divorce arose from examples of vindictive parents in clinical and legal cases. Some of these behaviors include burning down the house of an ex-spouse, falsely accusing the other parent of abuse, or purposely interfering with planned parenting time.
Other acts related to this pattern of behavior may be violations of civil law. For example, denying a parent their court-ordered visitation rights can constitute illegal parent time interference and can result in fines, court-ordered counseling, and adjustments to custody and visitation plans. Lying about the acts of the other parent in a way which harms his or her reputation and results in actual injury can constitute defamation.
Malicious behavior by a parent can also impact parenting plans and custody arrangements. If a parent has been involved in alienating, cruel or illegal behavior, this conduct can be considered a factor in any proceeding to gain or adjust custody.
Though models of human behavior centered on rationality suggest that people should respond to hurricane forecasts by taking steps to reduce their risk of loss, decision science has shown that many factors impede such action. Rather than weighing the relatively low cost of preventive steps, in relation to the high benefit of protection, people are influenced by a variety of factors.
Antitrust laws are traditionally enforced by the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). They challenge anticompetitive mergers and other anticompetitive behavior by firms, such as exclusionary practices. The DOJ also prosecutes the criminal antitrust laws that bar collusive behavior, such as price-fixing.
Stalking is a strong predictor of future violence. Some stalking situations involve intimate partners or former partners, while other stalking behaviors are engaged in by people unknown to the victims. One study of female murder victims in 10 cities found that 76% of women murdered and 85% who survived a murder attempt by a current or former intimate partner had been victims of stalking by that individual in the year preceding the murder or attempted murder. Under current federal law, individuals convicted of felony stalking offenses are prohibited from accessing guns. But individuals convicted of misdemeanor stalking offenses are not prohibited from accessing guns if the stalking offense did not occur in the context of a domestic relationship. The following states prohibit firearm access after a person has been convicted of a stalking offense from purchasing or possessing guns.
In addition, several states have enacted laws, generally referred to as extreme risk protection orders, which allow law enforcement officers or family or household members to petition a court for an order to have firearms temporarily removed from an individual who poses a significant risk of harm to self or others. For more information on this type of law, see our summary on Extreme Risk Protection Orders.
In contrast, when private individuals or groups organize boycotts against stores that sell magazines of which they disapprove, their actions are protected by the First Amendment, although they can become dangerous in the extreme. Private pressure groups, not the government, promulgated and enforced the infamous Hollywood blacklists during the McCarthy period. But these private censorship campaigns are best countered by groups and individuals speaking out and organizing in defense of the threatened expression.
American law is, on the whole, the most speech-protective in the world -- but sexual expression is treated as a second-class citizen. No causal link between exposure to sexually explicit material and anti-social or violent behavior has ever been scientifically established, in spite of many efforts to do so. Rather, the Supreme Court has allowed censorship of sexual speech on moral grounds -- a remnant of our nation's Puritan heritage.
WHAT THE STUDIES SHOWStudies on the relationship between media violence and real violence are the subject of considerable debate. Children have been shown TV programs with violent episodes in a laboratory setting and then tested for "aggressive" behavior. Some of these studies suggest that watching TV violence may temporarily induce "object aggression" in some children (such as popping balloons or hitting dolls or playing sports more aggressively) but not actual criminal violence against another person.
INTERNATIONAL COMPARISONS are no more helpful. Japanese TV and movies are famous for their extreme, graphic violence, but Japan has a very low crime rate -- much lower than many societies in which television watching is relatively rare. What the sudies reveal on the issue of fictional violence and real world aggression is -- not much.
The only clear assertion that can be made is that the relationship between art and human behavior is a very complex one. Violent and sexually explicit art and entertainment have been a staple of human cultures from time immemorial. Many human behavioralists believe that these themes have a useful and constructive societal role, serving as a vicarious outlet for individual aggression.
WHERE DO THE EXPERTS AGREE?Whatever influence fictional violence has on behavior, most expert believe its effects are marginal compared to other factors. Even small children know the difference between fiction and reality, and their attitudes and behavior are shaped more by their life circumstances than by the books they read or the TV they watch. In 1972, the U.S. Surgeon General's Advisory Committee on Television and Social Behavior released a 200-page report, "Television and Growing Up: The Impact of Televised Violence," which concluded, "The effect [of television] is small compared with many other possible causes, such as parental attitudes or knowledge of and experience with the real violence of our society." Twenty-one years later, the American Psychological Association published its 1993 report, "Violence & Youth," and concluded, "The greatest predictor of future violent behavior is a previous history of violence." In 1995, the Center for Communication Policy at UCLA, which monitors TV violence, came to a similar conclusion in its yearly report: "It is known that television does not have a simple, direct stimulus-response effect on its audiences."
The Council is designed to play a central role in the regulation of behavioral health services and social work practice in Texas and is guided by the seasoned wisdom of its member boards in abiding by its mission and philosophy.
The mission of the Council is to protect and promote the welfare of the people of Texas by ensuring that behavioral health services and social work practice are provided by qualified and competent practitioners who adhere to established professional standards. This mission is derived from the duly enacted statutes governing each regulated profession, as well as the law creating the Council, and supersedes the interest of any individual or special interest group.
Acting in accordance with the highest standards of ethics, accountability, efficiency, and openness, the Council approaches its mission with a deep sense of purpose and responsibility, and affirms that the regulation of behavioral health services and social work practice is a public trust. The Council assumes a proactive leadership role in this regard and pledges to carry out its mission in an efficient, innovative, collaborative, and equitable manner.
The Council honors and supports our military personnel and veterans returning to civilian life and wishes to thank them for the sacrifices that they and their families have made on behalf of our nation. The skills that men and women acquire in the Armed Forces are valuable. These skills may benefit an individual that decides to pursue a career in behavioral health.
Many people have heard of codependency and understand that it can be harmful in a relationship. But, what does being codependent mean? Some people interpret codependency as an extreme dependence on someone else, a strong need for the companionship of another. Although this might be part of it, this is not the entire definition of codependency.
Being codependent and suffering from codependent relationship symptoms can cause an individual to experience numerous troubles in any (if not all) of their relationships. For example, if a codependent individual gives so much to another person and that person does not return the same sentiment, it can cause the codependent individual to grow extremely upset to the point where he or she becomes seriously depressed and other mental health issues can form thereafter.
This type of behavior can also cause an individual to enter into a relationship with someone who is likely to hurt them, as well as cause him or her to lose track of his or her own basic needs. The best way to prevent codependent behavior is to get the proper treatment to develop coping skills strong enough to negate codependency tendencies, all while promoting positive, healthy behaviors that encourage successful relationships.
There are additional symptoms of codependency that fall outside of these four codependent patterns. Many of us may even find that we have a few codependent behaviors. Because codependency is usually rooted in a person from an early age, treatment often involves exploration into early childhood issues and the correlation to current destructive behavior patterns. 2ff7e9595c
Comments