Honestly, I don't know what the "right" answer is. I doubt there is one. It's far too complicated. It's an awful thing to have happened, for both children.
To be honest, I think the right answer is that it wasn't an awful thing to have happened. I recognised that they would create trauma where there was none, which would mean they (collectively) would be abusing her. Hence my advice. They took my advice, and things have worked out fine. But it has sprung to mind a few times over the years.
IIN to treat abuse as trivial to avoid traumatizing the victim?
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
Honestly, I don't know what the "right" answer is. I doubt there is one. It's far too complicated. It's an awful thing to have happened, for both children.
--
Anonymous Post Author
6 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
To be honest, I think the right answer is that it wasn't an awful thing to have happened. I recognised that they would create trauma where there was none, which would mean they (collectively) would be abusing her. Hence my advice. They took my advice, and things have worked out fine. But it has sprung to mind a few times over the years.
--
Ellenna
6 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
You don't know that things have "worked out fine" nor that they always will: this type of response trivialises abuse