help??!!!!

Here's the situation in a nutshell:

Kids (5 and 7) abused about a year ago by older cousin (now 14).
Kids are biracial, so especially need to be around their black side of the family, but this cannot happen unless their mother is willing for them to be around the abuser (because he lives with the grandparents where all the family get-togethers occur and because the family will have it no other way). They want to be around him. Should she allow it (supervised of course)?

Hi!
Not sure if I understand the situation correctly. Are you saying that you are concerned that the children will be exposed to the abuser if they hang out with the black side of the family?

Sylvia
Admin

Sorry, I meant they DEFINATELY WILL be around the perpetrator if she lets them be around their black side since he is at 100% of family events, and the family is unwilling to change that or come to events where he is not invited. They just want to "watch" and make sure interactions are adult supervised (the perpetrator is a teen). So the choice is either they do not see their black side (almost at all) or they have to be around the perpetrator.

I would definitely supervise ALL visits and never let the child out of my site, even to go to the bathroom if you decide to be around that side of the family. However, it is EXTREMELY important not to re-traumatize the children by putting them in an environment where the perpetrator will be. If I had to choose between the children's safety versus bonding with the family. I would choose the children's safety and keep them away from anywhere the perpetrator will be.

Thanks, that is helpful!
I have another question. You mentioned the importance of not re-traumatizing. The children want (very badly) to see the perpetrator again. They know what he did was wrong, but they really like/love him and want to see him. Since they want to see him, do you think that re-traumatizing is probably not an issue as long as they are closely supervised? I have been looking for stuff to read on this specific question, but have not found much. Most of the literature is about adult perpatrators and does not address kids with a early teen perpetrator.

Great question! What I'm about to you is with the highest love and respect. The children and the teen perpetrator should not be around each other until both parties get professional help. One thing that sexual abuse does to both the survivor and perpetrator is damage one's boundaries, especially children. As a result, neither party can be expected to have healthy boundaries with each other to prevent the abuse from happening again. And it sounds like the perpetrators side of the family is not willing to acknowledge what has happened and get the perpetrator help, so that means that the children should be kept away from the perpetrator and should be going to therapy. Remember, children and the teen can not be expected to make an adult decision, so the adults will have to make this decision. I'm sure these children are very smart, but they are still children and children who have been sexually abused, their idea of play, boundaries and decision making have been obscured. Also, I wonder if the teen perpetrator was sexually abused because most abusers have been sexually abused themselves. It's learned behavior. Which means someone else close in the teen's life or in the teen's family probably abused the perpetrator, because statistically most children are sexually abused by someone they know. So, it is important to limit the younger children from being around that family. I wouldn't do any supervised visits until the small children see a therapist and the therapist says it's ok to have visits ....(On a side note, adults can't be with children 24/7. I know many survivors who were secretly sexually abused by other family members while their parents were in the room) ...Also, there's a link to black therapists under the "Resource" tab on our main site: www.blacksurvivors.org.

lookingforrealanswers wrote:Thanks, that is helpful!
I have another question. You mentioned the importance of not re-traumatizing. The children want (very badly) to see the perpetrator again. They know what he did was wrong, but they really like/love him and want to see him. Since they want to see him, do you think that re-traumatizing is probably not an issue as long as they are closely supervised? I have been looking for stuff to read on this specific question, but have not found much. Most of the literature is about adult perpatrators and does not address kids with a early teen perpetrator.