When Courtney Gilmartin walks into a room, her strength and resilience are palpable. Yet her journey to becoming the founder of New Jersey Protective Moms is one woven with the dark threads of domestic violence and the battle scars of a high-conflict divorce. Courtney's story, shared in this episode, is full of raw emotion and legal complexities, yet shines a light on the unsettling truth of emotional abuse and the desperate need for a family court system that understands trauma and puts child safety at the forefront.
Courtney's experience with intimate partner violence is a harrowing reminder of how stalking, manipulation, and coercive control can maintain an abuser's grip without leaving a visible mark. What's more, even after the divorce, the specter of her ex-husband loomed large, twisting the family court system to his advantage and dragging their children into the fray. Courtney's story doesn't just expose the emotional and financial desolation faced by survivors; it's a call to action for recognizing the signs of abuse and the imperative of legal reform to protect victims from being re-traumatized by the very system that should defend them.
Beyond sharing her personal narrative, Courtney's advocacy work offers a beacon of hope for legislative change. The recent triumph of having coercive control recognized in New Jersey law is just the beginning. Her leadership in the Divorce Coalition's legislative team and her hand in pushing Caden's Law forward demonstrate a path to uniform protection for abuse survivors. Through the empowering resources of New Jersey Protective Moms and her own relentless spirit of support, Courtney Gilmartin isn't just a survivor—she's a warrior for change, providing an arsenal of knowledge and support for those navigating the aftermath of domestic violence.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
When it comes to domestic violence, survivors are
the experts of their ownexperience and often inspire
others to navigate similarcircumstances and take action.
Today we talk with survivor andfounder of the Grassroots
Initiative New Jersey ProtectiveMoms, courtney Gilmartin.
I'm Maria McMullin and this isGenesis, the podcast.
Courtney Gilmartin is aprotective mom of two who
(00:48):
resides in Monmouth County, newJersey, and is the co-founder of
New Jersey Protective Moms, agrassroots nonprofit dedicated
to improving the family lawsystem in New Jersey through
advocacy, education andawareness.
She has extensive experiencewith post-settlement custody
litigation and family courtstrategy for protective parents.
Recently, she has becomeincreasingly active in her
(01:11):
efforts relating to thelegislative reform, including
the groundbreaking coercivecontrol legislation that was
passed and signed into NewJersey law in January 2024.
It is Courtney's hope thatFamily Court will one day be a
trauma-informed system thatprioritizes child safety above
parental contact when domesticabuse is a factor.
(01:33):
This episode may includedetails of domestic violence and
intimate partner abuse thatsome may find troubling or
triggering.
Courtney, welcome to thepodcast, thank you so much for
having me.
I'm glad you're here and I'veenjoyed getting to know you over
the past few weeks, because youand I met briefly and talked
about your personal experiencewith domestic abuse and other
(01:55):
things.
I would like to invite you toshare your story with us, with
our listeners today, so we canall learn from you and really
understand what happened and howyou took action against your
abusive partner.
Speaker 2 (02:10):
So my story started when I was about 19 and I met my
now ex husband and we weretogether about four years before
we got married.
We quickly had two childrenpretty close together, two years
apart, and it was at that pointin time when I really started
to notice the controllingbehaviors and the instances of
(02:32):
really contentious fightingwithin the home, and I noticed
that my daughter, who was reallyyoung at the time she was two,
two and a half was reallystarting to pick up on that.
So I was starting to reallyimpact not only the environment
in the home, but then also myrelationships outside of the
home, my relationships with myfamily and my friends and me.
Professionally, I owned abusiness and there was obviously
(02:54):
some spillover in that.
So that's when I started toexplore the idea of a divorce
and a separation.
But I always give this adviceto all of my friends that are
thinking about it you need toreally do your due diligence and
get your affairs in order, ifyou will.
So I had some things I had todo on my end to really prepare
for the divorce in the best waythat I knew possible.
(03:17):
But looking back, I had no ideawhat I was really going to be
going up against, whichultimately was my ex-husband and
his behavior.
So I did what I thought reallygoing to be going up against,
which ultimately was myex-husband and his behavior.
So I did what I thought Ineeded to do.
I got an attorney, I filed fordivorce.
Of course, this is really theabridged version but shortly
thereafter I realized that thiswas not going to be a cookie
(03:40):
cutter divorce.
This was going to be what theycall high conflict, which now I
know isn't truly high conflict,which now I know isn't truly
high conflict.
I mean, it is, in a sense,where one person can really
drive that conflict.
But the protracted litigationthat has followed me for now
seven years is really stemmingfrom his need to continue to
exert his control over myselfand our two children, really
(04:02):
utilizing the children as histools in doing that.
So I think for me, somethingthat really stood out was when
we filed the complaint fordivorce and there's some time
that has to go in for theprocessing, but obviously my
ex-husband had known at the timethat I was filing.
He was incessantly calling thecourthouse every day, just
grilling the women that workedin the office.
(04:23):
When's the complaint comingthrough?
When am I going to get thewomen that worked in the office?
When's the complaint comingthrough?
When am I going to get thepaperwork?
I want the paperwork.
You're not going to serve me.
Tell my ex's attorney she's notgoing to serve me.
So he was insistent that he wasgoing to go down to the
courthouse and get the paperworkhimself and my attorney had
been doing it.
My first attorney had been doingthis for about 20 years at the
time and he told me one day he'slike I've never seen someone
(04:46):
serve themselves.
But sure enough he bullied andbadgered his way into going down
there and serving himself.
So now, looking back, thatshould have been a giant glaring
sign, like premonition for whatwas to come.
But everyone falls into thattrap of really making excuses
and he's just angry.
He doesn't want to get servedat work and you know he's just
(05:09):
upset because he didn't see thiscoming.
But it really was aforeshadowing.
That you know was the warningsign, if you will, for what was
to come.
Speaker 1 (05:17):
So so he?
I just want to ask a quickquestion.
Speaker 2 (05:21):
Sorry to interrupt.
Speaker 1 (05:22):
So he served himself, meaning he went down and picked
up the documents right.
Speaker 2 (05:26):
Yes, and instead of being served or letting his
lawyer, you know, coordinate thedivorce complaint Interesting,
yeah, he, yeah, he went downthere and I remember my attorney
called and he's like thecourthouse just called that.
You know he's down there, he'sreally angry, he wants the
paperwork.
He wants them to give it to himright here.
And no one had really ever hadthat happen, so they didn't
(05:48):
really know how to handle it.
But ultimately, you know hetechnically served himself.
So yeah, and to many you know,that may seem insignificant,
especially when you look at itin the scope of domestic
violence or domestic abuse.
Right, well, it's not aphysical incident.
He didn't come to my house andbeat me up or try to really harm
me and the kids when we left.
But it's that complete need anddesire for him to control all
(06:13):
of the circumstances surroundinga scenario that really, I think
, paints a powerful picture ofhow he has conducted himself
throughout this litigation,unfortunately and that feeling
is so stifling when you're in asituation like this, because
there's really no break fromsomeone who's acting in that way
so that temperament that he setcontinued throughout.
(06:36):
So the divorce was verylitigious.
I found himself one day outsidethe marital home.
He hadn't been living there, hewas staying with relatives, but
I found him there outside ofthe marital home.
He hadn't been living there, hewas staying with relatives, but
I found him there outside ofthe marital home, going through
my car, taking pictures ofvarious people's phone numbers,
because at the time I had ahandwritten agenda, or calendar,
(06:57):
if you will, with people'scontacts in there.
So he was taking pictures of myfriends' contacts.
He then proceeded to startcalling everybody that I was
friends with because he hadtheir number and he was
badgering them, tell her not toget divorced and sending my
friends and family articlesabout kids who have divorced
parents, how they're drugaddicts and all these things.
(07:18):
The crime rates are higher infamilies like that, so on and so
forth, really trying toStarting his campaign of
propaganda to really try to wearme down to kind of walk back
the divorce complaint.
So it was at that time I filedmy first restraining order and
that kind of really was thecatalyst, I would say, for just
(07:39):
the intense and very heightenedsense of contention, if you will
, around the rest of the divorceproceedings.
So we settled the firstrestraining order for civil
restraints, mostly because mylawyer talked me into it and I
did some research and I know ahearing for that's extremely
costly.
And again there was thisinstitutional brainwashing from
(08:01):
a lot of people that wereinvolved in my life at the time.
He's going to calm down, he'sgoing to settle down.
He's just mad Making thoseexcuses for his behavior, not
really looking at the patternsthat he was already exhibiting,
even though it was early on inthe process.
So we settled for civilrestraints, of course didn't do
much of anything to help thesituation and the vitriol from
(08:27):
him continued and every text orevery exchange, every
interaction was really anopportunity for him to cause
some sort of chaos.
So exchanges with the kidswould be yelling and screaming
or showing up late orwithholding the kids and really
putting the kids in the middleof the conflict, which we know
(08:47):
is so damaging for kidsdevelopmentally.
So not too soon after the firstset of civil restraints were
entered, I filed for a secondrestraining order after he
conducted himself in a way inwhich the kids were present,
which I just couldn't letcontinue, through a remote
control, the garage remotecontrol and his watch at me in
(09:09):
front of the kids, along withscreaming, yelling, profanities.
So I filed the secondrestraining order and that one
went to trial.
Unfortunately that one wasturned over by the judge because
again there was this sentimentof he's just angry, he's just
acting out, he's lashing out,he's upset.
He's such a loving, caring,doting father.
(09:29):
Look at him, he's so victimized, you know.
Yes, I remember one of hislawyer's arguments was he's just
so upset.
You know he has to go out andbuy all new furniture for a
house.
He, you know he doesn't evenhave any of his belongings which
he had his belongings butessentially always painting
himself as the real victim here.
So they gave us a stern warningon the record the judge at the
(09:53):
time, because she had seen usnow throughout the beginning
phases of the divorce and thefirst restraining order and now
the second.
So she gave us a warning andeveryone again kept telling me
rest assured, give him a year,he'll get over it, so on and so
forth.
So ultimately we ended upgetting divorced with a pretty
extensive MSA in terms ofcontact and behavior and conduct
(10:15):
and so on and so forth, whichobviously seven years later
didn't really help much, butnonetheless it was in there and
which was helpful in ways thatwe can touch on if time permits.
But also, I think one importantthing for listeners to hear and
I say this in a lot of podcastsor speaking engagements I do is
that we put a clause in ourdivorce decree that explicitly
(10:39):
said that we weren't happy withthe custody arrangements but we
were going to sign our divorcedecree in an effort to stop the
litigation for the divorcebecause financially it's just
very expensive and now we hadhad a lot of motion practice and
two restraining orders, so thecosts were up there.
So we also reserved the right tohave a custody evaluation done
(11:00):
for the best interests of thechildren or best interests of
all whatever you call it in thestate you reside in.
We had a clause in there and wenamed our expert that we wanted
to use and we also said wecould ask for it without a
change in circumstance.
So it kind of gave us afoundation that we could use if
we needed to change things, ifthings continue to disintegrate.
(11:21):
And I'm happy that we did,because it was helpful down the
road when we finally had to gothat path.
But it allowed us to kind ofend that litigation that was
consuming a lot of our lives andtry to hopefully, you know, let
the dust settle and move on.
Speaker 1 (11:34):
Yeah, I mean, I can see it.
So you had mentioned patternsof behavior for him.
Give us an example.
What type of patterns was heexhibiting?
Speaker 2 (11:43):
So a lot of the, I would say, probably the most
overlooked aspect of my case, Ithink even to current days,
there was a lot of monitoringand surveillance.
So I think when we talk aboutstalking in the context of
domestic violence, people thinkof someone sitting in front of
their house with binoculars orin the car following them and
(12:03):
then a violent incidenthappening, you know happening.
That's like stalking and that'swhy people are always scared.
But you can be scared withoutthat person, especially in
today's day and age with all thedigital stuff, without that
person ever really being in yourvicinity for a majority of the
time.
Right so we had the twochildren together.
So you know he knew where thechildren were most of the time
(12:24):
because, right so, we had thetwo children together.
So he knew where the childrenwere most of the time because
they were involved in activities.
So then he knew where I was.
He would show up or drive by.
If he were to show up, he wouldpark near my car or near me and
just the posturing, theintimidation, the staring, the
glaring, the yelling causing ascene, the outburst, the anger,
the rage, that was a consistentpattern throughout and then he
(12:47):
would kind of tamper down.
But then something would happenand there would be an explosive
episode again, and then alsothe pattern that was huge was at
any exchange there was aproblem.
So we were constantly bendingand changing things to try to
absolve that conflict or thatfrom happening in front of the
kids.
But every time we change thingsit was almost like he just
(13:09):
learned a new way or thought ofa new way, Because I just
listened to Lundy on yourpodcast, like I said before we
started, and he said this is avery they aren't dumb, they know
what they're doing.
They're creating this ecosystemof control and fear.
And so he knew what he wasdoing and he was very methodical
and what he did.
(13:30):
So if we said, okay, let's docurbside exchanges, well, he
would just do something.
You know, he would get out ofhis car but he would stand on
the curb.
So if my lawyer would go to hislawyer and say, you know this
happened, well, he was, you know, at the curb, he didn't do
anything wrong.
And then, you know, if wechanged it to exchanges in a
public place, he would just, youknow, cause a scene in a public
(13:50):
place.
If we did it at school, okay,he didn't really have access to
me that day for the exchange,but then at any sporting event,
he would park near me, glare andstare, come up to the car, yell
at me.
So there was this constantevolution of what he was doing
and us continuously trying tochange the circumstances to try
to mitigate the behavior.
(14:11):
But the behavior was a constant.
Speaker 1 (14:13):
So did anyone else point out these patterns over
time?
Because listening to you sharethat information, I can see the
pattern.
I mean he's definitely pushingthe envelope just enough to get
away with it and still havecontrol over you and make you
feel intimidated.
Speaker 2 (14:34):
Yeah, and I think that's the hardest thing and
that's why I always say therewas this institutional
gaslighting and just the excuses, and Lundy touched on this too.
There's so many people that areso quick to jump to the defense
of these behaviors and makeexcuses, which really waters it
down and is so damaging to thevictims and the kids that are
(14:55):
trapped in these scenarios,because there was always an
excuse.
Oh well, he was just upsetabout this or it was this or it
was that and, to your point, hewas always teetering the line.
So I've always said it wasalmost like a handicap that he's
a non-physical abuser.
But if you go by Lundy'sdefinition, he was physical in
(15:16):
many ways, but I never walkedaway with broken bones or black
eyes or a smash car, slit tirewhat have you?
But walking that line allowedhim to just get away with what
he was doing so much longer.
I mean, in our thirdrestraining order hearing the
judge really said like you areteetering the line here, which
(15:37):
is still mind blowing because atthat point in time he was
incessantly text harassing me.
I mean 37 texts in one hour andshe's like that's really
walking the line.
And I'm like walking the line,what's 40?
What's the benchmark here?
Not to laugh, but unansweredtext messages.
And also look at the context.
(15:57):
You're a B-I-T-C-H and you're ahorrible person and I'm going
to take custody from you.
And just the incessant, horrificcommunications was also a
glaring pattern.
I mean I could literally sendhim an email hey, today is
Monday April 22nd and he wouldwrite back you're the biggest
(16:17):
liar in the world.
Everybody hates you.
It is Tuesday April 23rd.
So it was an extremely tryingtime and it was so incredibly
frustrating.
And I know there's such it'stough for victims because and
again, lundy, so bless him forthat podcast but he said a lot
of these perpetrators' behaviorswork to the benefit of them and
(16:40):
the detriment of victims andthat's so true.
So I was incredibly frustratedbecause I could see the patterns
and I was talking about thepattern and I was starting to
really do research on domesticabuse and trying to talk to my
lawyer anyone that would listenabout it and there was just this
constant diminishing hisbehavior and making excuses and
(17:01):
the more frustrated I got, italmost made it easier for them
to kind of start turning theblame to me.
Speaker 1 (17:09):
You told me offline we talked about, you know, some
other things that happenedduring your divorce and
subsequently you told me aboutan experience that the children
had with him.
That really became kind of thelast straw.
Speaker 2 (17:22):
So after the divorce, obviously it was very
contentious, but I had seen howexpensive and just emotionally
draining the litigation was.
So I was trying to take alittle bit of a pause in that
active litigation and I wasdocumenting things and so on and
so forth.
But there were incidents inbetween that were horrific.
(17:43):
So COVID then hit.
We got divorced in 2017.
Those three years leading up toCOVID were awful.
So COVID then hit.
We got divorced in 2017.
Those three years leading up toCOVID were awful, but my kids
were also young.
And then COVID hit and he wasseemingly quiet, I think because
the world around him was out ofcontrol.
So he wasn't as bad.
But as the world started toopen up, he really started to
ramp up and there's a very clearpicture looking back now, you
(18:05):
can see the close correlationthere.
So I got my son an Apple Watchin the summer of 2021.
And he did not like that at all.
He wanted to get the children'sdevices because he wanted to
have access to be able to putLife 360 or whatever monitoring
device on there, and in beingthat, they were my accounts.
(18:26):
He wasn't able to do that.
So he came to my home and wasso irate.
I mean he busted open the frontdoor, was screaming, yelling in
front of the kids, and that'swhen those text messages ramped
up to 30, 40, 50 a day and justawful disparaging language in
those texts.
So I got my third restrainingorder and it was after that my
(18:49):
daughter was in sixth grade andshe was starting to come into
her own and he was starting toexhibit a lot of the behaviors
he had on me, on the kids, notletting her hang out with
friends that were friends withme or whose parents I was
friendly with, and he lives in adifferent town than the kids go
to school in where I live andit was always very adversarial
(19:11):
my town's better than that townand you should live here and
withholding the kids fromholidays and special days.
So my daughter started to recordhim and the behavior that he
was doing when they were alonewith him and those recordings
were horrific because it wasjust intense, intense screaming
and emotional abuse anddisparaging me and putting them
(19:31):
in these horrible situationswhere he would lecture them for
hours on end and almost makethem just yes him to death to
stop, and then he would say, ohsee, you just said you don't
like your mom and then he wouldgo with that and go with that
and then send me awful emails.
The kids say they don't likeyou.
So it was at that point in timewhen my daughter really started
(19:54):
to vocalize to me like I don'twant to be with dad.
This is what he's doing and Ihad known those behaviors were
going on.
But when you hear it on theaudio it's so different and it's
so horrific to hear.
And so that's when I knew wewere in a really bad situation.
We were basically in crisisbecause she no longer wanted to
(20:16):
go and I physically couldn'tforce a sixth grader to go into
that environment.
Speaker 1 (20:21):
So then, what was the I guess the response to that?
So then, what was the I guessthe response to that?
Speaker 2 (20:26):
So you know, I tried my best to reach out to him,
which I knew was probably notgoing to be successful.
But for my own sake and for thekid's sake I really was hoping
that if I reached out to him hewould kind of see the light and
maybe agree to go toco-parenting therapy or start
the evaluation process.
But that was met with completeand utter.
(20:48):
You know just the continuedhatred towards me and blame,
shifting narrative that he hadreally dug its heels in at this
point and he went with the whole.
You know you're alienating thekids from me and for my
children's safety I couldn't atthat point.
This is also something thatvictims face in a lot of these
cases, because evidence isreally hard to get if there's
(21:10):
not blatant physical abuse right.
So because a lot of times whenhe would lecture them he would
take my children's devices awayor hide them so that there was
no chance that they wererecording him or that they could
call anyone right.
So we had this evidence, but atthat point in time I couldn't
disclose that we had thatbecause I was so fearful of what
(21:32):
he would do to them and mydaughter didn't want him to know
.
So I couldn't betray her trustin that way.
That was something that I knewwould be damaging to her.
So I was in this really toughsituation and I tried my best to
reason with him and ask can wego to therapy, can we talk about
some things?
Obviously there's been issuesand putting it lightly and that
(21:55):
was just met with the alienationclaims.
And in response to that thirdrestraining order that I got, he
went to the courthouse andfiled an order to show cause,
which is an emergent applicationor whatever language you want
to use.
So he filed.
He had asked for me to becommitted into a mental health
treatment facility, said I was adanger to him and the children,
(22:19):
that he needed a restrainingorder and that he wanted sole
custody.
And again, it was, you know, atthe end of COVID it was 2021,
but they weren't doing hearingsin person emergent or regular,
they were everything with Zoom.
But he badgered and just beatthose court officials down until
they let him go in thatcourtroom and get in front of
(22:40):
the judge.
So I was at a deficit rightthere because A I was caught off
guard, I had an order ofprotection against him and I was
talking with my attorney anddoing some research to see what
route I was going to go.
But he showed up at thecourthouse, bullied his way into
the courtroom and he was infront of that judge and, like
Lundy and everybody else willsay, they're very convincing.
(23:03):
He's so grounded in hisemotions and he was crying and
going on his whole tangent abouthow he's this amazing father
and I'm just withholding thekids and it's been five years of
this and he can't take itanymore and I, being on Zoom,
it's very different.
You can't really get a feel forthat person.
It was a new judge, so sheobviously dismissed the order to
(23:26):
show cause.
But she told him you need tofile a regular motion and sure
enough he did.
And at this time my daughter wasrefusing to go with him.
So he was asking for makeupcompensatory parenting time and
the judge denied it at first butordered us to a litany of
services, one being co-parentingtherapy, which was horrific
(23:46):
because it's never clinicallyindicated there's domestic abuse
going on.
But the problem with a lot ofcases where there's not physical
violence or there's no finalrestraining order or order of
protection, they're not viewedin the eyes of the court as a
domestic abuse victim and adomestic abuse case.
So I still, despite the lengthyhistory, wasn't, in the eyes of
(24:10):
the judge, a domestic abusevictim.
So she ordered us toco-parenting therapy, which was
just again horrific because itturned into hours of him just
sitting there eviscerating me infront of the therapist.
Speaker 1 (24:23):
And what was the response of the therapist to his
behavior?
Speaker 2 (24:27):
So my ex is very intense and he's very tall and
menacing and scary andintimidating.
So, even though people haveexperience and they're trained,
I've noticed in a lot ofsettings because we've had two
parenting coordinators and nowthe co-parenting therapists and
a litany of other peopleinvolved but they tend to freeze
(24:50):
up in a lot of instances andmost of them have been female.
So I also think he's much more.
He's much more aggressivetowards them because he sees
that he can, you know, dominatethem easier.
So they freeze and a lot ofthem will again shift the blame
to me.
I mean, I remember theco-parenting therapist brought
me in for a single session andshe told me literally she said I
(25:14):
think that he's a littleaggressive in his communication,
but I think that your facialexpressions because you're very
animated really incite him andmake him do what he does.
You're very animated, reallyincite him and make him do what
he does.
And I remember saying to her Ihaven't been in a room with my
ex-husband since 2017.
So I maybe see him across thefield at sporting events, but a
(25:37):
lot of times I sit in my carbecause I don't even want to be
near him.
But an email when I say ourson's baseball equipment's on my
front porch and I get inresponse a 10-page paragraph
about how horrible I am.
That's not my face inciting hisbehavior, and I certainly
shouldn't be to blame, but shedidn't want to hear it.
(26:00):
It's almost easier to continueto blame, shift than hold
accountable, because I thinkresearch is clear that these
types of personalities trulycan't change.
You're going to be hard pressedto get them to change.
So again I found myself whichwas so frustrating and so
re-victimizing and just awfulalways shrinking myself or
(26:22):
changing myself or bendingmyself to try to get him to
change, even when other peoplewere seeing it, which is so
damaging to victims.
Because that's what we findourselves doing in these
relationships, right, likeyou're always bending, you're
shrinking, you're minimizingyour voice and what you want.
I mean I've heard stories wherewomen like don't even know what
they like to eat anymorebecause they've spent so long
(26:44):
catering to their abuser.
So to be put in that scenariowhen you're trying to protect
your kids is so re-traumatizing.
Speaker 1 (26:53):
But eventually you did win full custody, is that
right?
Speaker 2 (26:56):
Yes.
So he filed the first motionfor compensatory makeup time.
It got denied.
We did the services like I said, and then my daughter still
wasn't going and he brought meback to court and the judge was
not happy, and, again,rightfully so.
You know it was a court orderand I tell every protective
parent that's listening followthe court orders.
(27:19):
It's so hard when you know yourchild is in danger, whether
it's physically or emotionally.
But the judge got upset and shegranted his motion and in turn,
what that did was gave himevery weekend, but our weekends
were Thursday to Tuesday morning, so I was only able to see the
kids Tuesday and Wednesday for aperiod of six months.
(27:40):
And then, on top of that, thejudge said if your daughter
doesn't go, you're going to losecustody forever.
And she wrote in the order thatshe gave my ex the authority to
use police force to remove thekids from my home if they didn't
go, which was awful yeah, itwas awful.
So at that point in time Ididn't have a choice.
(28:02):
I had to have a toughconversation with my daughter.
It was awful and they went andit was horrific for the children
.
The only silver lining and Idon't even know if it's silver
lining, but we were finallyinvolved in the custody
evaluation process so theevaluator essentially got a
front row seat to seeing whatthe impact of the kids would be
(28:25):
spending more time with theirdad.
So that gave her the ability toreally give strong
recommendations for that not toever happen, because they saw
the emotional impact that it hadon them during that time period
.
And people also think, you know,the court orders an evaluation,
it's going to just start andthings are going to get better.
I mean, they ordered theevaluation, yes, but the
(28:46):
evaluator was a little busy soshe had to finish some other
cases so there was a little bitof a lull.
Then we had to do all theintake stuff, pay the retainer,
start the interview process, sothere's probably a three, four
week period there.
And then the evaluation itselfwas supposed to take four months
, but in our case it ended uptaking 13.
And in that 13-month period thekids.
(29:09):
For six months of that 13months the kids were with him
five days a week and then forthe other seven-month period
they had a near 50-50 schedule.
So there was still thisconstant contention because
everything with him was a battle, braces were a battle and he
would call any of the kids'doctors and scream and yell at
(29:31):
them.
And my daughter, I remember,once came home from the
orthodontist and she's likeMommy, why does my chart say all
over it in big red letters,don't talk to dad about mom and
don't talk to mom about dad?
I mean, just things like thatare so, so hard to have a
conversation with kids aboutwhen they're 10, 11, any age.
(29:51):
You know, and I feel like theonus is always on the victim.
You know, don't tell the kidsabout the conflict, Don't expose
the kids to the conflict anddon't do this.
But when you have someone thatis essentially terrorizing your
family unit and doing thingslike this, people don't
understand that that has animpact on the kids.
And when my daughter gets inthe car and asked me that
(30:12):
question, am I just supposed tosit there and drive home and be
like, oh, I don't know, honey,you know everyone, everyone just
says that you know, I can't, Ican't, as a mother, gaslight my
own child about it.
Speaker 1 (30:22):
Right, exactly.
And you know, just going backto Lundy, lundy Bancroft, he
says he says the very same thingin that episode we just
released about.
Like you know, don't lie to thekid.
Validate how they feel and helpthem process it, and that
doesn't necessarily ever meanthat you need to talk badly
(30:43):
about the abusive parent inorder to do that.
This isn't about them.
This is about how the child isfeeling.
What was the turning pointwhere they no longer have time
with dad?
Speaker 2 (30:56):
So thankfully and bless our evaluator.
She really, really, reallyunderstood IPV, domestic abuse,
coercive control, and I knewthat just from her intake form
alone.
I saw the questions, I sawwhere she was going with it.
She asked for specific examples.
She wanted to understandcertain things that are very
(31:17):
nuanced, that most people thatare just looking at the violent
incident model probably wouldn'task.
So how is decision-makinghandled?
How is change in parenting timehandled?
How does your partner everimpact your relationships with
other people?
And I had done enough researchand kudos to Lundy again, I'll
say it over and over.
(31:37):
But his book why Does he Dothat?
Really changed my life at thatpoint to understand what she was
looking for and what I wasexperiencing.
But I didn't have a word for itat that point.
You know, coercive control waskind of just up and coming.
So she understood and shereally took her time.
You know, I think the 13 monthswas a long time, but it was
(31:58):
necessary because there's somuch history in our case and she
did an excellent job in thereport and being that, she
really grounds her reports in alot of research and a lot of
supplemental evidence.
She interviews tons ofcollaterals and she does a
really thorough job with theamount of visits she has us come
(32:18):
in for, and I know there's badevaluators out there.
My heart breaks for people thathave experience that.
I was lucky, I had a good oneand she really put it out there
for the court, and the samejudge that had essentially
ordered the kids to be with himfor five days a week now got
this report that really spoke tohow bad not only that time
(32:39):
period was, but the totality ofhis behavior on the kids, and
along with that there were hoursand hours of recordings of what
he had been doing, because hehad been acting the way he had
been to the kids since thedivorce and separation.
But during that seven-monthperiod when he had them for a
majority of the time, it gotreally bad and I was barely
(33:02):
allowed to talk to them.
I couldn't FaceTime them.
My daughter and I had to talkon Snapchat because if he saw
texts he would scream at her inthe middle of the night and so
the Snapchats disappear, and sowe had a tremendous amount of
recordings and the court sawthat and the evaluator was able
to speak to the fears that wehad for retaliation against the
(33:23):
kids for those recordingsBecause, keep in mind, he still
didn't know we had all theserecordings.
So when the report came out, weall knew that he was going to be
made aware of these recordings.
So the court took excellentprotective measures in that case
when the evaluation report cameout and since then, which was
December of 22, I've had primarycustody of the kids and my
(33:46):
daughter has not had to go,thankfully, and my son has very,
very limited parenting time atthis time, but there's a lot of
other safeguards that we wereable to get, so I'm in a better
place.
But the ongoing litigationafter the report came out was
tremendously emotionally andfinancially draining.
We were in court in 2023, Ithink a total of 13 times
(34:09):
because we kept getting calledin for case management
conferences because they werereally keeping a close eye on
the case and the progress of thevarious modalities that he was
ordered to do.
And then we subsequently had tohave a second evaluation that
we just finished a few monthsago and you know we've been in
some negotiations since.
So it's been tremendouslydraining financially and
(34:32):
emotionally.
Speaker 1 (34:33):
Yeah, it's been a really long journey for all of
you and yet somehow you managedto found an organization called
New Jersey Protective Moms, andit's a really interesting
platform.
Tell us about the work you'redoing.
Speaker 2 (34:48):
So in the midst of all of this, of course I'm in a
lot of online groups with othermoms experiencing this and I see
just a lot of venting and theycall it like ventilation therapy
right, where people are justcomplaining and I understand
it's tremendously emotional.
(35:20):
But I saw a lot of complainingand understandably so, and not a
lot of doing had been justindependently reaching out to
senators and legislators tryingto get the coercive control
added to DV, because I knewenough at that time that I knew
we needed that in Jersey and sowe decided to band together and
create a nonprofit to reallyleverage as like awareness,
(35:41):
education, outreach to try toget some legislative reform in
New Jersey.
And we knew that we would bebetter as a united front than
independent and it's a loftygoal.
But we want to startfundraising one day and
hopefully maybe expand to otherstates so that we can get some
sort of program where we canhelp protective mothers in some
(36:01):
capacity when they're ensnaredin custody battles with an
abusive ex-partner.
So that's kind of our five-yearplan, but right now it's more
just education, awareness andthe legislative piece for reform
.
Speaker 1 (36:15):
And then you also are doing work with Divorce
Coalition, leading theirlegislative team.
What is that like?
Speaker 2 (36:23):
So the founders of that found me, I believe,
through my work in Jerseybecause in great news we got
course of control codified as anact of domestic abuse in New
Jersey.
That was signed into law inJanuary of 2024.
So that was a huge moment forus.
I believe through the articlesand stuff I was posting and the
networking they found me andthey had asked me to join.
(36:44):
So they are a group of reallyrobust professionals that have a
ton of experience with divorceand they are trying to band
together, working to bandtogether really to improve the
divorce process for domesticabuse victims.
And so in the infantile stagesthey were flushing out the
committees.
They were going to have andthey want to have a legislative
(37:05):
committee.
So they asked if I would chairthat.
Of course I said I wouldbecause there's so much, which I
think is good.
A lot of states are now passingcoercive control.
There's some legislation, abusebills that are up and then of
course Cadence Law nationallythat have trickled down into the
states.
Various states are passingtheir own versions like Ohm's
Law, peakey's Law, cadence Lawin some states.
(37:25):
Pennsylvania just passed itfinally.
So we're going to try to bandtogether and really work with
states or organizations on astate level to try to get the
laws uniformly passed in all 50states.
That will benefit victimsprimarily Caden's Law and
coercive control and hopefully alitigation abuse bill too.
Speaker 1 (37:45):
So for people who may not know, tell us what Caden's
Law is.
Speaker 2 (37:49):
So Caden's Law was part of the Violence Against
Women Act that was passed in, Iwant to say 21 or 22.
I believe it was 22.
I meant to look that up before,so don't quote me if I'm
completely wrong.
That's okay.
Speaker 1 (38:03):
I can fix it.
Okay, if I'm completely wrong.
Speaker 2 (38:04):
Yeah, that's okay, I can fix it, Okay.
So basically the main fourpillars of Caden's Law are the
first pillar is that any expertsthat are testifying in a
custody case must be qualifiedand they can't just be forensic
clinicians.
And then courts must also takeinto consideration abuse factors
(38:25):
and history of abuse,no-transcript in various
(39:16):
hearings.
And then the final versionobviously is a little bit edited
or changed, so you're not goingto get everything you want, but
I think what I've heard is thebiggest pushback is that
judicial training piece.
So some states are able to getcadence law through, you know,
omitting that.
Some have gotten it through,Some have separate bills for
components of it.
But essentially, you knowthat's what we really need in
(39:38):
terms of custody legislationreform in the states.
Speaker 1 (39:43):
Yeah, the work you're doing is incredible, because I
know you've been through a lotand I think that there are so
many survivors out there who aregoing to benefit from the
actions that you're taking today.
If you could speak directly tosurvivors today, what would you
like them to know?
Speaker 2 (40:01):
There's so much.
I could probably talk aboutthis forever, but I think the
two things knowledge is trulypower right?
So we live in a very privilegedera.
We have Google.
We have so many resourcesavailable to us.
I have a ton of resources on mywebsite and if anyone finds
anything that they want me toadd to my website, I'm happy to
add it.
I put anything that's free thatI think will help people on
(40:23):
there, because I thinkaccessibility for victims is a
big blocker for a lot of peoplegetting a better resolution in
their case.
It's tremendously expensive andsome people you're overwhelmed.
You're in a trauma state so youdon't even know where to start.
So that's why I try to put allthat out there.
But knowledge is power.
So the more informed you areabout your state laws, the
(40:46):
custody statute in your state,the divorce process, the custody
process, the options availableto you, the better.
They have podcasts, there'sYouTube.
There's so much where you canimmerse yourself in this world
to get the education and theknowledge that you need.
So you're dealing with really,really important things.
(41:07):
So there's no rush.
I mean there's a rush becauseof the.
I know a day feels like aneternity when you're sending
your kids to an abusive parent.
But I took a long time to dothe evaluation in my case
because I really wanted to fullyunderstand what I was getting
myself into the process, myoptions, and I needed some time
(41:30):
to recover from my experience.
It's incredibly traumatizing.
It's re-traumatizing.
I know they're saying now it'sthe second most traumatizing
thing you can go through as adivorce and I think a contested
custody case is probably thefirst traumatizing thing you
could go through outside of adeath of a family member, a
loved one.
But take the time to really armyourself with knowledge and get
(41:51):
people in your camp that youcan trust and try to really
focus on yourself.
I know it's easier said thandone but the perpetrators and
the abusers we spend so muchtime trying to fix them in our
relationship.
Divorce decrees and civilrestraints and restraining
orders and getting yelled at bythe judge sometimes doesn't help
(42:13):
the worst offenders.
So your time will.
There's a lot more value inputting that time and resource
into yourself than into thatperson and trying to change them
.
And that's where that radicalacceptance comes in.
That I think a lot of peoplewill misconstrue with just
accepting your circumstance oralmost saying that their
behavior is okay, but that's nothow I take radical acceptance.
(42:36):
I take it as you have to reallytake a cold and hard look at.
This is the situation you're inand this is that person.
So you need to take a step backfrom trying to fix them and
really focus on fixing yourselfand giving your kids even if
it's only 50% of the time I sayto victims you're still giving
your kids 50% of the time apeaceful, loving, caring home
(42:59):
and eventually, as they age andget older, they will see the
difference in the two homeenvironments and they'll feel
the difference.
So that's when things, I think,really the tide starts to turn
as the kids get older.
Speaker 1 (43:12):
Yeah, that is good advice and I really admire your
strength and I appreciate yousharing so much of your personal
story with us and I love thework that you're doing for
others.
Before I let you go, tell usthe website for New Jersey
Protective Moms.
Speaker 2 (43:27):
Before I let you go tell us the website for New
Jersey Protective Moms, so it isnjprotectivemomsorg, and I'm
also on Instagram and Facebookand my profiles are public again
because I like to be accessible.
I answer all of the emailinquiries that I get.
There's a contact us area onour website where you can fill
it out.
I can add you to our mailinglist, but also, if you have
(43:48):
questions, I will certainlyanswer them.
I can't give legal advice,obviously, but I do answer
questions.
I can try to help point you inthe right direction and, like I
said, on the resource page,there's a ton of resources.
I have Christine Cociola, evanStark, dr Romany bless her too
Lundy Bancroft everyone that youcan really trust that will
(44:10):
validate you and give you goodinformation.
They're all on there so you canfind them.
And, yeah, I mean I'm happy tohelp as much as I can.
My hope really is one day thatwe have a more trauma-informed
family court system.
It works for a lot of peoplethat are not dealing with
(44:31):
abusive ex-partners, but forthose that are dealing with an
abusive ex-partner.
There needs to be a bettersystem to help that small subset
of individuals.
Speaker 1 (44:41):
Agreed and well said.
Courtney, thanks for being onthe show, thank you.
Attention, spanish-speakinglisteners Listen to the end of
this podcast for information onhow to reach a Spanish-speaking
representative of Genesis.
Speaker 3 (44:55):
Atención hispanohablantes Escucha este
podcast hasta el final pararecibir información de cómo
comunicarse con el personal deGenesis en español.
Speaker 1 (45:05):
If you or someone you know is in an abusive
relationship, you can get helpor give help at
genesisshelterorg or by callingor texting our 24-7 Crisis
Hotline Team at 214-946-HELP214-946-4357.
Bilingual services at Genesisinclude text, phone call,
(45:27):
clinical counseling, legalservices, advocacy and more.
Call or text us for moreinformation.
Donations to support women andchildren escaping domestic
violence are always needed.
Learn more at genesisshelterorg.
Thanks for joining us.
Speaker 3 (45:44):
I'm reminding you always that ending domestic
violence begins when we believeher, or by calling or sending a
text message to our 24-hourcrisis line at 214-946-4357.
Genesis Bilingual Servicesinclude text messages, calls,
(46:20):
counseling, legal services,advice and more.
Call us or send us a text forjoining us.
Remember that ending domesticviolence starts when we believe
(46:47):
in the victim.
Donate Gracias por unirse connosotros.
Recuerden que el terminar laviolencia doméstica empieza
cuando creemos a la víctima.
When it comes to domestic violence, survivors are
the experts of their ownexperience and often inspire
others to navigate similarcircumstances and take action.
Today we talk with survivor andfounder of the Grassroots
Initiative New Jersey ProtectiveMoms, courtney Gilmartin.
I'm Maria McMullin and this isGenesis, the podcast.
Courtney Gilmartin is aprotective mom of two who
(00:48):
resides in Monmouth County, newJersey, and is the co-founder of
New Jersey Protective Moms, agrassroots nonprofit dedicated
to improving the family lawsystem in New Jersey through
advocacy, education andawareness.
She has extensive experiencewith post-settlement custody
litigation and family courtstrategy for protective parents.
Recently, she has becomeincreasingly active in her
(01:11):
efforts relating to thelegislative reform, including
the groundbreaking coercivecontrol legislation that was
passed and signed into NewJersey law in January 2024.
It is Courtney's hope thatFamily Court will one day be a
trauma-informed system thatprioritizes child safety above
parental contact when domesticabuse is a factor.
(01:33):
This episode may includedetails of domestic violence and
intimate partner abuse thatsome may find troubling or
triggering.
Courtney, welcome to thepodcast, thank you so much for
having me.
I'm glad you're here and I'veenjoyed getting to know you over
the past few weeks, because youand I met briefly and talked
about your personal experiencewith domestic abuse and other
(01:55):
things.
I would like to invite you toshare your story with us, with
our listeners today, so we canall learn from you and really
understand what happened and howyou took action against your
abusive partner.
Speaker 2 (02:10):
So my story started when I was about 19 and I met my
now ex husband and we weretogether about four years before
we got married.
We quickly had two childrenpretty close together, two years
apart, and it was at that pointin time when I really started
to notice the controllingbehaviors and the instances of
(02:32):
really contentious fightingwithin the home, and I noticed
that my daughter, who was reallyyoung at the time she was two,
two and a half was reallystarting to pick up on that.
So I was starting to reallyimpact not only the environment
in the home, but then also myrelationships outside of the
home, my relationships with myfamily and my friends and me.
Professionally, I owned abusiness and there was obviously
(02:54):
some spillover in that.
So that's when I started toexplore the idea of a divorce
and a separation.
But I always give this adviceto all of my friends that are
thinking about it you need toreally do your due diligence and
get your affairs in order, ifyou will.
So I had some things I had todo on my end to really prepare
for the divorce in the best waythat I knew possible.
(03:17):
But looking back, I had no ideawhat I was really going to be
going up against, whichultimately was my ex-husband and
his behavior.
So I did what I thought reallygoing to be going up against,
which ultimately was myex-husband and his behavior.
So I did what I thought Ineeded to do.
I got an attorney, I filed fordivorce.
Of course, this is really theabridged version but shortly
thereafter I realized that thiswas not going to be a cookie
(03:40):
cutter divorce.
This was going to be what theycall high conflict, which now I
know isn't truly high conflict,which now I know isn't truly
high conflict.
I mean, it is, in a sense,where one person can really
drive that conflict.
But the protracted litigationthat has followed me for now
seven years is really stemmingfrom his need to continue to
exert his control over myselfand our two children, really
(04:02):
utilizing the children as histools in doing that.
So I think for me, somethingthat really stood out was when
we filed the complaint fordivorce and there's some time
that has to go in for theprocessing, but obviously my
ex-husband had known at the timethat I was filing.
He was incessantly calling thecourthouse every day, just
grilling the women that workedin the office.
(04:23):
When's the complaint comingthrough?
When am I going to get thewomen that worked in the office?
When's the complaint comingthrough?
When am I going to get thepaperwork?
I want the paperwork.
You're not going to serve me.
Tell my ex's attorney she's notgoing to serve me.
So he was insistent that he wasgoing to go down to the
courthouse and get the paperworkhimself and my attorney had
been doing it.
My first attorney had been doingthis for about 20 years at the
time and he told me one day he'slike I've never seen someone
(04:46):
serve themselves.
But sure enough he bullied andbadgered his way into going down
there and serving himself.
So now, looking back, thatshould have been a giant glaring
sign, like premonition for whatwas to come.
But everyone falls into thattrap of really making excuses
and he's just angry.
He doesn't want to get servedat work and you know he's just
(05:09):
upset because he didn't see thiscoming.
But it really was aforeshadowing.
That you know was the warningsign, if you will, for what was
to come.
Speaker 1 (05:17):
So so he?
I just want to ask a quickquestion.
Speaker 2 (05:21):
Sorry to interrupt.
Speaker 1 (05:22):
So he served himself, meaning he went down and picked
up the documents right.
Speaker 2 (05:26):
Yes, and instead of being served or letting his
lawyer, you know, coordinate thedivorce complaint Interesting,
yeah, he, yeah, he went downthere and I remember my attorney
called and he's like thecourthouse just called that.
You know he's down there, he'sreally angry, he wants the
paperwork.
He wants them to give it to himright here.
And no one had really ever hadthat happen, so they didn't
(05:48):
really know how to handle it.
But ultimately, you know hetechnically served himself.
So yeah, and to many you know,that may seem insignificant,
especially when you look at itin the scope of domestic
violence or domestic abuse.
Right, well, it's not aphysical incident.
He didn't come to my house andbeat me up or try to really harm
me and the kids when we left.
But it's that complete need anddesire for him to control all
(06:13):
of the circumstances surroundinga scenario that really, I think
, paints a powerful picture ofhow he has conducted himself
throughout this litigation,unfortunately and that feeling
is so stifling when you're in asituation like this, because
there's really no break fromsomeone who's acting in that way
so that temperament that he setcontinued throughout.
(06:36):
So the divorce was verylitigious.
I found himself one day outsidethe marital home.
He hadn't been living there, hewas staying with relatives, but
I found him there outside ofthe marital home.
He hadn't been living there, hewas staying with relatives, but
I found him there outside ofthe marital home, going through
my car, taking pictures ofvarious people's phone numbers,
because at the time I had ahandwritten agenda, or calendar,
(06:57):
if you will, with people'scontacts in there.
So he was taking pictures of myfriends' contacts.
He then proceeded to startcalling everybody that I was
friends with because he hadtheir number and he was
badgering them, tell her not toget divorced and sending my
friends and family articlesabout kids who have divorced
parents, how they're drugaddicts and all these things.
(07:18):
The crime rates are higher infamilies like that, so on and so
forth, really trying toStarting his campaign of
propaganda to really try to wearme down to kind of walk back
the divorce complaint.
So it was at that time I filedmy first restraining order and
that kind of really was thecatalyst, I would say, for just
(07:39):
the intense and very heightenedsense of contention, if you will
, around the rest of the divorceproceedings.
So we settled the firstrestraining order for civil
restraints, mostly because mylawyer talked me into it and I
did some research and I know ahearing for that's extremely
costly.
And again there was thisinstitutional brainwashing from
(08:01):
a lot of people that wereinvolved in my life at the time.
He's going to calm down, he'sgoing to settle down.
He's just mad Making thoseexcuses for his behavior, not
really looking at the patternsthat he was already exhibiting,
even though it was early on inthe process.
So we settled for civilrestraints, of course didn't do
much of anything to help thesituation and the vitriol from
(08:27):
him continued and every text orevery exchange, every
interaction was really anopportunity for him to cause
some sort of chaos.
So exchanges with the kidswould be yelling and screaming
or showing up late orwithholding the kids and really
putting the kids in the middleof the conflict, which we know
(08:47):
is so damaging for kidsdevelopmentally.
So not too soon after the firstset of civil restraints were
entered, I filed for a secondrestraining order after he
conducted himself in a way inwhich the kids were present,
which I just couldn't letcontinue, through a remote
control, the garage remotecontrol and his watch at me in
(09:09):
front of the kids, along withscreaming, yelling, profanities.
So I filed the secondrestraining order and that one
went to trial.
Unfortunately that one wasturned over by the judge because
again there was this sentimentof he's just angry, he's just
acting out, he's lashing out,he's upset.
He's such a loving, caring,doting father.
(09:29):
Look at him, he's so victimized, you know.
Yes, I remember one of hislawyer's arguments was he's just
so upset.
You know he has to go out andbuy all new furniture for a
house.
He, you know he doesn't evenhave any of his belongings which
he had his belongings butessentially always painting
himself as the real victim here.
So they gave us a stern warningon the record the judge at the
(09:53):
time, because she had seen usnow throughout the beginning
phases of the divorce and thefirst restraining order and now
the second.
So she gave us a warning andeveryone again kept telling me
rest assured, give him a year,he'll get over it, so on and so
forth.
So ultimately we ended upgetting divorced with a pretty
extensive MSA in terms ofcontact and behavior and conduct
(10:15):
and so on and so forth, whichobviously seven years later
didn't really help much, butnonetheless it was in there and
which was helpful in ways thatwe can touch on if time permits.
But also, I think one importantthing for listeners to hear and
I say this in a lot of podcastsor speaking engagements I do is
that we put a clause in ourdivorce decree that explicitly
(10:39):
said that we weren't happy withthe custody arrangements but we
were going to sign our divorcedecree in an effort to stop the
litigation for the divorcebecause financially it's just
very expensive and now we hadhad a lot of motion practice and
two restraining orders, so thecosts were up there.
So we also reserved the right tohave a custody evaluation done
(11:00):
for the best interests of thechildren or best interests of
all whatever you call it in thestate you reside in.
We had a clause in there and wenamed our expert that we wanted
to use and we also said wecould ask for it without a
change in circumstance.
So it kind of gave us afoundation that we could use if
we needed to change things, ifthings continue to disintegrate.
(11:21):
And I'm happy that we did,because it was helpful down the
road when we finally had to gothat path.
But it allowed us to kind ofend that litigation that was
consuming a lot of our lives andtry to hopefully, you know, let
the dust settle and move on.
Speaker 1 (11:34):
Yeah, I mean, I can see it.
So you had mentioned patternsof behavior for him.
Give us an example.
What type of patterns was heexhibiting?
Speaker 2 (11:43):
So a lot of the, I would say, probably the most
overlooked aspect of my case, Ithink even to current days,
there was a lot of monitoringand surveillance.
So I think when we talk aboutstalking in the context of
domestic violence, people thinkof someone sitting in front of
their house with binoculars orin the car following them and
(12:03):
then a violent incidenthappening, you know happening.
That's like stalking and that'swhy people are always scared.
But you can be scared withoutthat person, especially in
today's day and age with all thedigital stuff, without that
person ever really being in yourvicinity for a majority of the
time.
Right so we had the twochildren together.
So you know he knew where thechildren were most of the time
(12:24):
because, right so, we had thetwo children together.
So he knew where the childrenwere most of the time because
they were involved in activities.
So then he knew where I was.
He would show up or drive by.
If he were to show up, he wouldpark near my car or near me and
just the posturing, theintimidation, the staring, the
glaring, the yelling causing ascene, the outburst, the anger,
the rage, that was a consistentpattern throughout and then he
(12:47):
would kind of tamper down.
But then something would happenand there would be an explosive
episode again, and then alsothe pattern that was huge was at
any exchange there was aproblem.
So we were constantly bendingand changing things to try to
absolve that conflict or thatfrom happening in front of the
kids.
But every time we change thingsit was almost like he just
(13:09):
learned a new way or thought ofa new way, Because I just
listened to Lundy on yourpodcast, like I said before we
started, and he said this is avery they aren't dumb, they know
what they're doing.
They're creating this ecosystemof control and fear.
And so he knew what he wasdoing and he was very methodical
and what he did.
(13:30):
So if we said, okay, let's docurbside exchanges, well, he
would just do something.
You know, he would get out ofhis car but he would stand on
the curb.
So if my lawyer would go to hislawyer and say, you know this
happened, well, he was, you know, at the curb, he didn't do
anything wrong.
And then, you know, if wechanged it to exchanges in a
public place, he would just, youknow, cause a scene in a public
(13:50):
place.
If we did it at school, okay,he didn't really have access to
me that day for the exchange,but then at any sporting event,
he would park near me, glare andstare, come up to the car, yell
at me.
So there was this constantevolution of what he was doing
and us continuously trying tochange the circumstances to try
to mitigate the behavior.
(14:11):
But the behavior was a constant.
Speaker 1 (14:13):
So did anyone else point out these patterns over
time?
Because listening to you sharethat information, I can see the
pattern.
I mean he's definitely pushingthe envelope just enough to get
away with it and still havecontrol over you and make you
feel intimidated.
Speaker 2 (14:34):
Yeah, and I think that's the hardest thing and
that's why I always say therewas this institutional
gaslighting and just the excuses, and Lundy touched on this too.
There's so many people that areso quick to jump to the defense
of these behaviors and makeexcuses, which really waters it
down and is so damaging to thevictims and the kids that are
(14:55):
trapped in these scenarios,because there was always an
excuse.
Oh well, he was just upsetabout this or it was this or it
was that and, to your point, hewas always teetering the line.
So I've always said it wasalmost like a handicap that he's
a non-physical abuser.
But if you go by Lundy'sdefinition, he was physical in
(15:16):
many ways, but I never walkedaway with broken bones or black
eyes or a smash car, slit tirewhat have you?
But walking that line allowedhim to just get away with what
he was doing so much longer.
I mean, in our thirdrestraining order hearing the
judge really said like you areteetering the line here, which
(15:37):
is still mind blowing because atthat point in time he was
incessantly text harassing me.
I mean 37 texts in one hour andshe's like that's really
walking the line.
And I'm like walking the line,what's 40?
What's the benchmark here?
Not to laugh, but unansweredtext messages.
And also look at the context.
(15:57):
You're a B-I-T-C-H and you're ahorrible person and I'm going
to take custody from you.
And just the incessant, horrificcommunications was also a
glaring pattern.
I mean I could literally sendhim an email hey, today is
Monday April 22nd and he wouldwrite back you're the biggest
(16:17):
liar in the world.
Everybody hates you.
It is Tuesday April 23rd.
So it was an extremely tryingtime and it was so incredibly
frustrating.
And I know there's such it'stough for victims because and
again, lundy, so bless him forthat podcast but he said a lot
of these perpetrators' behaviorswork to the benefit of them and
(16:40):
the detriment of victims andthat's so true.
So I was incredibly frustratedbecause I could see the patterns
and I was talking about thepattern and I was starting to
really do research on domesticabuse and trying to talk to my
lawyer anyone that would listenabout it and there was just this
constant diminishing hisbehavior and making excuses and
(17:01):
the more frustrated I got, italmost made it easier for them
to kind of start turning theblame to me.
Speaker 1 (17:09):
You told me offline we talked about, you know, some
other things that happenedduring your divorce and
subsequently you told me aboutan experience that the children
had with him.
That really became kind of thelast straw.
Speaker 2 (17:22):
So after the divorce, obviously it was very
contentious, but I had seen howexpensive and just emotionally
draining the litigation was.
So I was trying to take alittle bit of a pause in that
active litigation and I wasdocumenting things and so on and
so forth.
But there were incidents inbetween that were horrific.
(17:43):
So COVID then hit.
We got divorced in 2017.
Those three years leading up toCOVID were awful.
So COVID then hit.
We got divorced in 2017.
Those three years leading up toCOVID were awful, but my kids
were also young.
And then COVID hit and he wasseemingly quiet, I think because
the world around him was out ofcontrol.
So he wasn't as bad.
But as the world started toopen up, he really started to
ramp up and there's a very clearpicture looking back now, you
(18:05):
can see the close correlationthere.
So I got my son an Apple Watchin the summer of 2021.
And he did not like that at all.
He wanted to get the children'sdevices because he wanted to
have access to be able to putLife 360 or whatever monitoring
device on there, and in beingthat, they were my accounts.
(18:26):
He wasn't able to do that.
So he came to my home and wasso irate.
I mean he busted open the frontdoor, was screaming, yelling in
front of the kids, and that'swhen those text messages ramped
up to 30, 40, 50 a day and justawful disparaging language in
those texts.
So I got my third restrainingorder and it was after that my
(18:49):
daughter was in sixth grade andshe was starting to come into
her own and he was starting toexhibit a lot of the behaviors
he had on me, on the kids, notletting her hang out with
friends that were friends withme or whose parents I was
friendly with, and he lives in adifferent town than the kids go
to school in where I live andit was always very adversarial
(19:11):
my town's better than that townand you should live here and
withholding the kids fromholidays and special days.
So my daughter started to recordhim and the behavior that he
was doing when they were alonewith him and those recordings
were horrific because it wasjust intense, intense screaming
and emotional abuse anddisparaging me and putting them
(19:31):
in these horrible situationswhere he would lecture them for
hours on end and almost makethem just yes him to death to
stop, and then he would say, ohsee, you just said you don't
like your mom and then he wouldgo with that and go with that
and then send me awful emails.
The kids say they don't likeyou.
So it was at that point in timewhen my daughter really started
(19:54):
to vocalize to me like I don'twant to be with dad.
This is what he's doing and Ihad known those behaviors were
going on.
But when you hear it on theaudio it's so different and it's
so horrific to hear.
And so that's when I knew wewere in a really bad situation.
We were basically in crisisbecause she no longer wanted to
(20:16):
go and I physically couldn'tforce a sixth grader to go into
that environment.
Speaker 1 (20:21):
So then, what was the I guess the response to that?
So then, what was the I guessthe response to that?
Speaker 2 (20:26):
So you know, I tried my best to reach out to him,
which I knew was probably notgoing to be successful.
But for my own sake and for thekid's sake I really was hoping
that if I reached out to him hewould kind of see the light and
maybe agree to go toco-parenting therapy or start
the evaluation process.
But that was met with completeand utter.
(20:48):
You know just the continuedhatred towards me and blame,
shifting narrative that he hadreally dug its heels in at this
point and he went with the whole.
You know you're alienating thekids from me and for my
children's safety I couldn't atthat point.
This is also something thatvictims face in a lot of these
cases, because evidence isreally hard to get if there's
(21:10):
not blatant physical abuse right.
So because a lot of times whenhe would lecture them he would
take my children's devices awayor hide them so that there was
no chance that they wererecording him or that they could
call anyone right.
So we had this evidence, but atthat point in time I couldn't
disclose that we had thatbecause I was so fearful of what
(21:32):
he would do to them and mydaughter didn't want him to know
.
So I couldn't betray her trustin that way.
That was something that I knewwould be damaging to her.
So I was in this really toughsituation and I tried my best to
reason with him and ask can wego to therapy, can we talk about
some things?
Obviously there's been issuesand putting it lightly and that
(21:55):
was just met with the alienationclaims.
And in response to that thirdrestraining order that I got, he
went to the courthouse andfiled an order to show cause,
which is an emergent applicationor whatever language you want
to use.
So he filed.
He had asked for me to becommitted into a mental health
treatment facility, said I was adanger to him and the children,
(22:19):
that he needed a restrainingorder and that he wanted sole
custody.
And again, it was, you know, atthe end of COVID it was 2021,
but they weren't doing hearingsin person emergent or regular,
they were everything with Zoom.
But he badgered and just beatthose court officials down until
they let him go in thatcourtroom and get in front of
(22:40):
the judge.
So I was at a deficit rightthere because A I was caught off
guard, I had an order ofprotection against him and I was
talking with my attorney anddoing some research to see what
route I was going to go.
But he showed up at thecourthouse, bullied his way into
the courtroom and he was infront of that judge and, like
Lundy and everybody else willsay, they're very convincing.
(23:03):
He's so grounded in hisemotions and he was crying and
going on his whole tangent abouthow he's this amazing father
and I'm just withholding thekids and it's been five years of
this and he can't take itanymore and I, being on Zoom,
it's very different.
You can't really get a feel forthat person.
It was a new judge, so sheobviously dismissed the order to
(23:26):
show cause.
But she told him you need tofile a regular motion and sure
enough he did.
And at this time my daughter wasrefusing to go with him.
So he was asking for makeupcompensatory parenting time and
the judge denied it at first butordered us to a litany of
services, one being co-parentingtherapy, which was horrific
(23:46):
because it's never clinicallyindicated there's domestic abuse
going on.
But the problem with a lot ofcases where there's not physical
violence or there's no finalrestraining order or order of
protection, they're not viewedin the eyes of the court as a
domestic abuse victim and adomestic abuse case.
So I still, despite the lengthyhistory, wasn't, in the eyes of
(24:10):
the judge, a domestic abusevictim.
So she ordered us toco-parenting therapy, which was
just again horrific because itturned into hours of him just
sitting there eviscerating me infront of the therapist.
Speaker 1 (24:23):
And what was the response of the therapist to his
behavior?
Speaker 2 (24:27):
So my ex is very intense and he's very tall and
menacing and scary andintimidating.
So, even though people haveexperience and they're trained,
I've noticed in a lot ofsettings because we've had two
parenting coordinators and nowthe co-parenting therapists and
a litany of other peopleinvolved but they tend to freeze
(24:50):
up in a lot of instances andmost of them have been female.
So I also think he's much more.
He's much more aggressivetowards them because he sees
that he can, you know, dominatethem easier.
So they freeze and a lot ofthem will again shift the blame
to me.
I mean, I remember theco-parenting therapist brought
me in for a single session andshe told me literally she said I
(25:14):
think that he's a littleaggressive in his communication,
but I think that your facialexpressions because you're very
animated really incite him andmake him do what he does.
You're very animated, reallyincite him and make him do what
he does.
And I remember saying to her Ihaven't been in a room with my
ex-husband since 2017.
So I maybe see him across thefield at sporting events, but a
(25:37):
lot of times I sit in my carbecause I don't even want to be
near him.
But an email when I say ourson's baseball equipment's on my
front porch and I get inresponse a 10-page paragraph
about how horrible I am.
That's not my face inciting hisbehavior, and I certainly
shouldn't be to blame, but shedidn't want to hear it.
(26:00):
It's almost easier to continueto blame, shift than hold
accountable, because I thinkresearch is clear that these
types of personalities trulycan't change.
You're going to be hard pressedto get them to change.
So again I found myself whichwas so frustrating and so
re-victimizing and just awfulalways shrinking myself or
(26:22):
changing myself or bendingmyself to try to get him to
change, even when other peoplewere seeing it, which is so
damaging to victims.
Because that's what we findourselves doing in these
relationships, right, likeyou're always bending, you're
shrinking, you're minimizingyour voice and what you want.
I mean I've heard stories wherewomen like don't even know what
they like to eat anymorebecause they've spent so long
(26:44):
catering to their abuser.
So to be put in that scenariowhen you're trying to protect
your kids is so re-traumatizing.
Speaker 1 (26:53):
But eventually you did win full custody, is that
right?
Speaker 2 (26:56):
Yes.
So he filed the first motionfor compensatory makeup time.
It got denied.
We did the services like I said, and then my daughter still
wasn't going and he brought meback to court and the judge was
not happy, and, again,rightfully so.
You know it was a court orderand I tell every protective
parent that's listening followthe court orders.
(27:19):
It's so hard when you know yourchild is in danger, whether
it's physically or emotionally.
But the judge got upset and shegranted his motion and in turn,
what that did was gave himevery weekend, but our weekends
were Thursday to Tuesday morning, so I was only able to see the
kids Tuesday and Wednesday for aperiod of six months.
(27:40):
And then, on top of that, thejudge said if your daughter
doesn't go, you're going to losecustody forever.
And she wrote in the order thatshe gave my ex the authority to
use police force to remove thekids from my home if they didn't
go, which was awful yeah, itwas awful.
So at that point in time Ididn't have a choice.
(28:02):
I had to have a toughconversation with my daughter.
It was awful and they went andit was horrific for the children
.
The only silver lining and Idon't even know if it's silver
lining, but we were finallyinvolved in the custody
evaluation process so theevaluator essentially got a
front row seat to seeing whatthe impact of the kids would be
(28:25):
spending more time with theirdad.
So that gave her the ability toreally give strong
recommendations for that not toever happen, because they saw
the emotional impact that it hadon them during that time period
.
And people also think, you know,the court orders an evaluation,
it's going to just start andthings are going to get better.
I mean, they ordered theevaluation, yes, but the
(28:46):
evaluator was a little busy soshe had to finish some other
cases so there was a little bitof a lull.
Then we had to do all theintake stuff, pay the retainer,
start the interview process, sothere's probably a three, four
week period there.
And then the evaluation itselfwas supposed to take four months
, but in our case it ended uptaking 13.
And in that 13-month period thekids.
(29:09):
For six months of that 13months the kids were with him
five days a week and then forthe other seven-month period
they had a near 50-50 schedule.
So there was still thisconstant contention because
everything with him was a battle, braces were a battle and he
would call any of the kids'doctors and scream and yell at
(29:31):
them.
And my daughter, I remember,once came home from the
orthodontist and she's likeMommy, why does my chart say all
over it in big red letters,don't talk to dad about mom and
don't talk to mom about dad?
I mean, just things like thatare so, so hard to have a
conversation with kids aboutwhen they're 10, 11, any age.
(29:51):
You know, and I feel like theonus is always on the victim.
You know, don't tell the kidsabout the conflict, Don't expose
the kids to the conflict anddon't do this.
But when you have someone thatis essentially terrorizing your
family unit and doing thingslike this, people don't
understand that that has animpact on the kids.
And when my daughter gets inthe car and asked me that
(30:12):
question, am I just supposed tosit there and drive home and be
like, oh, I don't know, honey,you know everyone, everyone just
says that you know, I can't, Ican't, as a mother, gaslight my
own child about it.
Speaker 1 (30:22):
Right, exactly.
And you know, just going backto Lundy, lundy Bancroft, he
says he says the very same thingin that episode we just
released about.
Like you know, don't lie to thekid.
Validate how they feel and helpthem process it, and that
doesn't necessarily ever meanthat you need to talk badly
(30:43):
about the abusive parent inorder to do that.
This isn't about them.
This is about how the child isfeeling.
What was the turning pointwhere they no longer have time
with dad?
Speaker 2 (30:56):
So thankfully and bless our evaluator.
She really, really, reallyunderstood IPV, domestic abuse,
coercive control, and I knewthat just from her intake form
alone.
I saw the questions, I sawwhere she was going with it.
She asked for specific examples.
She wanted to understandcertain things that are very
(31:17):
nuanced, that most people thatare just looking at the violent
incident model probably wouldn'task.
So how is decision-makinghandled?
How is change in parenting timehandled?
How does your partner everimpact your relationships with
other people?
And I had done enough researchand kudos to Lundy again, I'll
say it over and over.
(31:37):
But his book why Does he Dothat?
Really changed my life at thatpoint to understand what she was
looking for and what I wasexperiencing.
But I didn't have a word for itat that point.
You know, coercive control waskind of just up and coming.
So she understood and shereally took her time.
You know, I think the 13 monthswas a long time, but it was
(31:58):
necessary because there's somuch history in our case and she
did an excellent job in thereport and being that, she
really grounds her reports in alot of research and a lot of
supplemental evidence.
She interviews tons ofcollaterals and she does a
really thorough job with theamount of visits she has us come
(32:18):
in for, and I know there's badevaluators out there.
My heart breaks for people thathave experience that.
I was lucky, I had a good oneand she really put it out there
for the court, and the samejudge that had essentially
ordered the kids to be with himfor five days a week now got
this report that really spoke tohow bad not only that time
(32:39):
period was, but the totality ofhis behavior on the kids, and
along with that there were hoursand hours of recordings of what
he had been doing, because hehad been acting the way he had
been to the kids since thedivorce and separation.
But during that seven-monthperiod when he had them for a
majority of the time, it gotreally bad and I was barely
(33:02):
allowed to talk to them.
I couldn't FaceTime them.
My daughter and I had to talkon Snapchat because if he saw
texts he would scream at her inthe middle of the night and so
the Snapchats disappear, and sowe had a tremendous amount of
recordings and the court sawthat and the evaluator was able
to speak to the fears that wehad for retaliation against the
(33:23):
kids for those recordingsBecause, keep in mind, he still
didn't know we had all theserecordings.
So when the report came out, weall knew that he was going to be
made aware of these recordings.
So the court took excellentprotective measures in that case
when the evaluation report cameout and since then, which was
December of 22, I've had primarycustody of the kids and my
(33:46):
daughter has not had to go,thankfully, and my son has very,
very limited parenting time atthis time, but there's a lot of
other safeguards that we wereable to get, so I'm in a better
place.
But the ongoing litigationafter the report came out was
tremendously emotionally andfinancially draining.
We were in court in 2023, Ithink a total of 13 times
(34:09):
because we kept getting calledin for case management
conferences because they werereally keeping a close eye on
the case and the progress of thevarious modalities that he was
ordered to do.
And then we subsequently had tohave a second evaluation that
we just finished a few monthsago and you know we've been in
some negotiations since.
So it's been tremendouslydraining financially and
(34:32):
emotionally.
Speaker 1 (34:33):
Yeah, it's been a really long journey for all of
you and yet somehow you managedto found an organization called
New Jersey Protective Moms, andit's a really interesting
platform.
Tell us about the work you'redoing.
Speaker 2 (34:48):
So in the midst of all of this, of course I'm in a
lot of online groups with othermoms experiencing this and I see
just a lot of venting and theycall it like ventilation therapy
right, where people are justcomplaining and I understand
it's tremendously emotional.
(35:20):
But I saw a lot of complainingand understandably so, and not a
lot of doing had been justindependently reaching out to
senators and legislators tryingto get the coercive control
added to DV, because I knewenough at that time that I knew
we needed that in Jersey and sowe decided to band together and
create a nonprofit to reallyleverage as like awareness,
(35:41):
education, outreach to try toget some legislative reform in
New Jersey.
And we knew that we would bebetter as a united front than
independent and it's a loftygoal.
But we want to startfundraising one day and
hopefully maybe expand to otherstates so that we can get some
sort of program where we canhelp protective mothers in some
(36:01):
capacity when they're ensnaredin custody battles with an
abusive ex-partner.
So that's kind of our five-yearplan, but right now it's more
just education, awareness andthe legislative piece for reform
.
Speaker 1 (36:15):
And then you also are doing work with Divorce
Coalition, leading theirlegislative team.
What is that like?
Speaker 2 (36:23):
So the founders of that found me, I believe,
through my work in Jerseybecause in great news we got
course of control codified as anact of domestic abuse in New
Jersey.
That was signed into law inJanuary of 2024.
So that was a huge moment forus.
I believe through the articlesand stuff I was posting and the
networking they found me andthey had asked me to join.
(36:44):
So they are a group of reallyrobust professionals that have a
ton of experience with divorceand they are trying to band
together, working to bandtogether really to improve the
divorce process for domesticabuse victims.
And so in the infantile stagesthey were flushing out the
committees.
They were going to have andthey want to have a legislative
(37:05):
committee.
So they asked if I would chairthat.
Of course I said I wouldbecause there's so much, which I
think is good.
A lot of states are now passingcoercive control.
There's some legislation, abusebills that are up and then of
course Cadence Law nationallythat have trickled down into the
states.
Various states are passingtheir own versions like Ohm's
Law, peakey's Law, cadence Lawin some states.
(37:25):
Pennsylvania just passed itfinally.
So we're going to try to bandtogether and really work with
states or organizations on astate level to try to get the
laws uniformly passed in all 50states.
That will benefit victimsprimarily Caden's Law and
coercive control and hopefully alitigation abuse bill too.
Speaker 1 (37:45):
So for people who may not know, tell us what Caden's
Law is.
Speaker 2 (37:49):
So Caden's Law was part of the Violence Against
Women Act that was passed in, Iwant to say 21 or 22.
I believe it was 22.
I meant to look that up before,so don't quote me if I'm
completely wrong.
That's okay.
Speaker 1 (38:03):
I can fix it.
Okay, if I'm completely wrong.
Speaker 2 (38:04):
Yeah, that's okay, I can fix it, Okay.
So basically the main fourpillars of Caden's Law are the
first pillar is that any expertsthat are testifying in a
custody case must be qualifiedand they can't just be forensic
clinicians.
And then courts must also takeinto consideration abuse factors
(38:25):
and history of abuse,no-transcript in various
(39:16):
hearings.
And then the final versionobviously is a little bit edited
or changed, so you're not goingto get everything you want, but
I think what I've heard is thebiggest pushback is that
judicial training piece.
So some states are able to getcadence law through, you know,
omitting that.
Some have gotten it through,Some have separate bills for
components of it.
But essentially, you knowthat's what we really need in
(39:38):
terms of custody legislationreform in the states.
Speaker 1 (39:43):
Yeah, the work you're doing is incredible, because I
know you've been through a lotand I think that there are so
many survivors out there who aregoing to benefit from the
actions that you're taking today.
If you could speak directly tosurvivors today, what would you
like them to know?
Speaker 2 (40:01):
There's so much.
I could probably talk aboutthis forever, but I think the
two things knowledge is trulypower right?
So we live in a very privilegedera.
We have Google.
We have so many resourcesavailable to us.
I have a ton of resources on mywebsite and if anyone finds
anything that they want me toadd to my website, I'm happy to
add it.
I put anything that's free thatI think will help people on
(40:23):
there, because I thinkaccessibility for victims is a
big blocker for a lot of peoplegetting a better resolution in
their case.
It's tremendously expensive andsome people you're overwhelmed.
You're in a trauma state so youdon't even know where to start.
So that's why I try to put allthat out there.
But knowledge is power.
So the more informed you areabout your state laws, the
(40:46):
custody statute in your state,the divorce process, the custody
process, the options availableto you, the better.
They have podcasts, there'sYouTube.
There's so much where you canimmerse yourself in this world
to get the education and theknowledge that you need.
So you're dealing with really,really important things.
(41:07):
So there's no rush.
I mean there's a rush becauseof the.
I know a day feels like aneternity when you're sending
your kids to an abusive parent.
But I took a long time to dothe evaluation in my case
because I really wanted to fullyunderstand what I was getting
myself into the process, myoptions, and I needed some time
(41:30):
to recover from my experience.
It's incredibly traumatizing.
It's re-traumatizing.
I know they're saying now it'sthe second most traumatizing
thing you can go through as adivorce and I think a contested
custody case is probably thefirst traumatizing thing you
could go through outside of adeath of a family member, a
loved one.
But take the time to really armyourself with knowledge and get
(41:51):
people in your camp that youcan trust and try to really
focus on yourself.
I know it's easier said thandone but the perpetrators and
the abusers we spend so muchtime trying to fix them in our
relationship.
Divorce decrees and civilrestraints and restraining
orders and getting yelled at bythe judge sometimes doesn't help
(42:13):
the worst offenders.
So your time will.
There's a lot more value inputting that time and resource
into yourself than into thatperson and trying to change them
.
And that's where that radicalacceptance comes in.
That I think a lot of peoplewill misconstrue with just
accepting your circumstance oralmost saying that their
behavior is okay, but that's nothow I take radical acceptance.
(42:36):
I take it as you have to reallytake a cold and hard look at.
This is the situation you're inand this is that person.
So you need to take a step backfrom trying to fix them and
really focus on fixing yourselfand giving your kids even if
it's only 50% of the time I sayto victims you're still giving
your kids 50% of the time apeaceful, loving, caring home
(42:59):
and eventually, as they age andget older, they will see the
difference in the two homeenvironments and they'll feel
the difference.
So that's when things, I think,really the tide starts to turn
as the kids get older.
Speaker 1 (43:12):
Yeah, that is good advice and I really admire your
strength and I appreciate yousharing so much of your personal
story with us and I love thework that you're doing for
others.
Before I let you go, tell usthe website for New Jersey
Protective Moms.
Speaker 2 (43:27):
Before I let you go tell us the website for New
Jersey Protective Moms, so it isnjprotectivemomsorg, and I'm
also on Instagram and Facebookand my profiles are public again
because I like to be accessible.
I answer all of the emailinquiries that I get.
There's a contact us area onour website where you can fill
it out.
I can add you to our mailinglist, but also, if you have
(43:48):
questions, I will certainlyanswer them.
I can't give legal advice,obviously, but I do answer
questions.
I can try to help point you inthe right direction and, like I
said, on the resource page,there's a ton of resources.
I have Christine Cociola, evanStark, dr Romany bless her too
Lundy Bancroft everyone that youcan really trust that will
(44:10):
validate you and give you goodinformation.
They're all on there so you canfind them.
And, yeah, I mean I'm happy tohelp as much as I can.
My hope really is one day thatwe have a more trauma-informed
family court system.
It works for a lot of peoplethat are not dealing with
(44:31):
abusive ex-partners, but forthose that are dealing with an
abusive ex-partner.
There needs to be a bettersystem to help that small subset
of individuals.
Speaker 1 (44:41):
Agreed and well said.
Courtney, thanks for being onthe show, thank you.
Attention, spanish-speakinglisteners Listen to the end of
this podcast for information onhow to reach a Spanish-speaking
representative of Genesis.
Speaker 3 (44:55):
Atención hispanohablantes Escucha este
podcast hasta el final pararecibir información de cómo
comunicarse con el personal deGenesis en español.
Speaker 1 (45:05):
If you or someone you know is in an abusive
relationship, you can get helpor give help at
genesisshelterorg or by callingor texting our 24-7 Crisis
Hotline Team at 214-946-HELP214-946-4357.
Bilingual services at Genesisinclude text, phone call,
(45:27):
clinical counseling, legalservices, advocacy and more.
Call or text us for moreinformation.
Donations to support women andchildren escaping domestic
violence are always needed.
Learn more at genesisshelterorg.
Thanks for joining us.
Speaker 3 (45:44):
I'm reminding you always that ending domestic
violence begins when we believeher, or by calling or sending a
text message to our 24-hourcrisis line at 214-946-4357.
Genesis Bilingual Servicesinclude text messages, calls,
(46:20):
counseling, legal services,advice and more.
Call us or send us a text forjoining us.
Remember that ending domesticviolence starts when we believe
(46:47):
in the victim.
Donate Gracias por unirse connosotros.
Recuerden que el terminar laviolencia doméstica empieza
cuando creemos a la víctima.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.