New Member Commentary

[Curryong]

Before the incest theory becomes too entwined in the narrative here on the forum, there is absolutely no evidence that anyone has dug up in 122 years that Andrew Borden ever abused anyone.

Emma had been at Fairhaven since July 21st. Lizzie had travelled back from New Bedford on July 26th. Are you suggesting that this was the first time that Andrew was alone with Lizzie in the house? Because it wasn't. On one occasion a few summers before Lizzie had remained at No 92 when Emma and Abby were at the farm and Andrew was detained in town, to help the maid with his meals and keep him company.

Why would rape/ incest occur with Uncle John sleeping really close by in the guest room? The Bordens had few visitors. Why wait and do that when an overnight visitor was in the house? Would a man who had vomited heavily on the Tuesday night, was resting on the couch on the Wednesday when John Morse saw him, and was so peaky on the Thursday that onlookers commented on it, decide that a romp with his daughter, and with his former brother in law nearby, was exactly what he wanted? He could then have a nice restoring dose of Garfield tea afterwards, perhaps? Sorry, I don't mean to be sarky, but I just can't see it.

[debbiediablo]

This was written while Curryong was posting before me:

I don't see Lizzie as a victim of incest for the first time at age 32 nor do I see her as spending 32 years of her life before being left alone in the house without Emma. Nor do I see Andrew who was in his 70s and unwell at the time as a rapist of opportunity, nor do I see Abby as blowing off her husband raping her step-daughter if this were the first and only time. Nor does this explain the ongoing hostility between Lizzie and Abby that existed for years and escalated in months prior to the murders. Or the locks on the doors. Or Abby's paranoia about being poisoned. Or the daylight burglary. Or the extremely clever/lucky disposal of the weapon and lack of blood splatter. Murder while in a fugue state is extremely rare; murder while pretending to be in a fugue state is a bit more common. Most people in fugue spend days, weeks or even months wandering around unable to recall their identity or address. Most often that period of time is forever lost to their memory. The one and only person I've ever encountered who experienced true fugue state was bipolar with psychosis, and she lived in absolute dread of relapse. Her first episode occurred shortly after getting married; she spent almost three months hitchhiking around the Midwest. The only way she knew was a map found in her belongings marking everywhere she'd traveled. Other than the map, she was clueless as to where she'd been and what she'd done. If Lizzie committed those murders while in a fugue state, she wouldn't have needed to lie to cover to save her skin; her disconnect would have been apparent. More likely she would've been found covered in blood with a hatchet in her hand looking anywhere from dazed and confused to totally catatonic.

[irina]

My general thoughts on the matter are that the issue with Abby and the girls was more of a territorial and control issue rather than that there was inappropriate sexual activity, i.e. incest.

It's like I have two alpha female dogs. They want to kill each other. They would rather kill each other than anything. Both are spayed. There is always plenty of food, resources, attention, activity and room. According to them there isn't room in the whole world for both of them.

Going back to the Bordens, Emma was the little mother after Sarah died. That must have made her feel important and useful. When her father remarried she was supposed to cede her position. I have an idea the girls thought they should run the household and be in charge of family social life. That the hard feelings we know about between Abby and the girls had to do with property and by extension, money, it seems to me a territorial thing is behind the hard feelings. I'm not saying that was the reason for murder if Lizzie did it, but I am saying that Abby was a bit dehumanized in the minds of Emma and Lizzie, so if they were involved in murder there would have been less human emotions to overcome on the way to violence.

Thank God my dogs don't know how to use a hatchet.

[taosjohn]

This was written while Curryong was posting before me:

I don't see Lizzie as a victim of incest for the first time at age 32 nor do I see her as spending 32 years of her life before being left alone in the house without Emma. Nor do I see Andrew who was in his 70s and unwell at the time as a rapist of opportunity, nor do I see Abby as blowing off her husband raping her step-daughter if this were the first and only time. Nor does this explain the ongoing hostility between Lizzie and Abby that existed for years and escalated in months prior to the murders. Or the locks on the doors. Or Abby's paranoia about being poisoned. Or the daylight burglary. Or the extremely clever/lucky disposal of the weapon and lack of blood splatter. Murder while in a fugue state is extremely rare; murder while pretending to be in a fugue state is a bit more common. Most people in fugue spend days, weeks or even months wandering around unable to recall their identity or address. Most often that period of time is forever lost to their memory. The one and only person I've ever encountered who experienced true fugue state was bipolar with psychosis, and she lived in absolute dread of relapse. Her first episode occurred shortly after getting married; she spent almost three months hitchhiking around the Midwest. The only way she knew was a map found in her belongings marking everywhere she'd traveled. Other than the map, she was clueless as to where she'd been and what she'd done. If Lizzie committed those murders while in a fugue state, she wouldn't have needed to lie to cover to save her skin; her disconnect would have been apparent. More likely she would've been found covered in blood with a hatchet in her hand looking anywhere from dazed and confused to totally catatonic.

Sure; and I saw much of that when I posted.

But IMO acolytes of any incest theory do have to explain why Abby was killed first, but Andrew was killed too; and some explanation of "why now?"-- what the trigger was would be nice. And why Emma would keep her trap shut about it; those were pretty much what I was trying to cover in that one.

The incest need not have happened immediately prior for a conversation to develop that set the rage off; Emma's trip and Lizzie's return early just provided a convenient plot device for me.

I have heard of cases where a victim successfully bargained for a sibling to be spared, and the bargain held for an extended period... it struck me that collapse of such a bargain and Abby's acceptance of the behavior would/could account for all of the above.

And I'd point out that I said "something like a fugue state," and said it of the hour or so after the murder... I thought of saying "blackout" or "daze" but thought this would be clearer; my meaning was that after the murder, after the rage subsided, that she spent an hour or so not very conscious of what she was doing while what she had done was sinking in... post adrenaline crashes can put one in some pretty disorganized conditions.

Even fatigue can cause blackouts of a sort-- I had one once myself, found myself at lunch with no clue what I had done the previous couple of hours beyond that I must have picked up my mail, because it was in my pocket. Turned out I had been to all my classes, aced a quiz, and either smoked a cigarette or was bummed for one, because the new pack was opened and one missing. No memory of any of it immediately thereafter or today.

[taosjohn]

Before the incest theory becomes too entwined in the narrative here on the forum, there is absolutely no evidence that anyone has dug up in 122 years that Andrew Borden ever abused anyone.

Agreed; but there is evidence that people familiar with the household thought something was amiss. How many choices are there?

Drug abuse, alcohol abuse, sexual aberration cover about 95% of it, and one would think that drunkenness would have left records of some sort...

The other 5%?

Were they crypto-Judaic? That would work maybe, but what part of the family would it have come from?

Wicca or Satanism presumably would not have happened among churchgoers. Andrew seems a poor candidate for Communism or Anarchism. The underground railroad was 30 years in the past.

Running a brothel in one of the other properties? Even Andrew doesn't seem to have been out of the house enough.

A business Shanghaiing sailors? That was still going on on the west coast, but not New England that I have heard of...

I come back to sleepwalking-- I have the impression that that was still seen as pretty eerie in 1892. That would explain the impressions of servants, and possibly the locking of doors and so on, I suppose, without being involved in the murders; just another red herring.

[debbiediablo]

This was written while Curryong was posting before me:

I don't see Lizzie as a victim of incest for the first time at age 32 nor do I see her as spending 32 years of her life before being left alone in the house without Emma. Nor do I see Andrew who was in his 70s and unwell at the time as a rapist of opportunity, nor do I see Abby as blowing off her husband raping her step-daughter if this were the first and only time. Nor does this explain the ongoing hostility between Lizzie and Abby that existed for years and escalated in months prior to the murders. Or the locks on the doors. Or Abby's paranoia about being poisoned. Or the daylight burglary. Or the extremely clever/lucky disposal of the weapon and lack of blood splatter. Murder while in a fugue state is extremely rare; murder while pretending to be in a fugue state is a bit more common. Most people in fugue spend days, weeks or even months wandering around unable to recall their identity or address. Most often that period of time is forever lost to their memory. The one and only person I've ever encountered who experienced true fugue state was bipolar with psychosis, and she lived in absolute dread of relapse. Her first episode occurred shortly after getting married; she spent almost three months hitchhiking around the Midwest. The only way she knew was a map found in her belongings marking everywhere she'd traveled. Other than the map, she was clueless as to where she'd been and what she'd done. If Lizzie committed those murders while in a fugue state, she wouldn't have needed to lie to cover to save her skin; her disconnect would have been apparent. More likely she would've been found covered in blood with a hatchet in her hand looking anywhere from dazed and confused to totally catatonic.

Sure; and I saw much of that when I posted.

But IMO acolytes of any incest theory do have to explain why Abby was killed first, but Andrew was killed too; and some explanation of "why now?"-- what the trigger was would be nice. And why Emma would keep her trap shut about it; those were pretty much what I was trying to cover in that one.

The incest need not have happened immediately prior for a conversation to develop that set the rage off; Emma's trip and Lizzie's return early just provided a convenient plot device for me.

I have heard of cases where a victim successfully bargained for a sibling to be spared, and the bargain held for an extended period... it struck me that collapse of such a bargain and Abby's acceptance of the behavior would/could account for all of the above.

And I'd point out that I said "something like a fugue state," and said it of the hour or so after the murder... I thought of saying "blackout" or "daze" but thought this would be clearer; my meaning was that after the murder, after the rage subsided, that she spent an hour or so not very conscious of what she was doing while what she had done was sinking in... post adrenaline crashes can put one in some pretty disorganized conditions.

Even fatigue can cause blackouts of a sort-- I had one once myself, found myself at lunch with no clue what I had done the previous couple of hours beyond that I must have picked up my mail, because it was in my pocket. Turned out I had been to all my classes, aced a quiz, and either smoked a cigarette or was bummed for one, because the new pack was opened and one missing. No memory of any of it immediately thereafter or today.

In no particular order:1) Abby was the first who became available and the easiest to kill; 2) she could've been the main event or the trial run; 3) Abby's actions (past and/or present) triggered the killer's rage but Andrew had to die, too, to protect the killer's identity; 4) Abby needed to die first so Andrew's estate wouldn't pass to her and then to her family; 5) Abby figured out something that required her to die with the knowledge before she could tell Andrew, then see #3; 6) something became the straw that broke the camel's back...but we don't know what; 7) they died closer to the same time than initially believed (some of the determinants regarding time of death are no longer considered accurate); 8) and my favorite - Lizzie and Andrew used each other, and Lizzie was okay with whatever had happened between them because she used it to maneuver herself into Daddy's Favorite, until he betrayed her by investing in the Whitehead house...she couldn't live with him choosing Abby over her for anything, trivial or otherwise.

Yes, there is no evidence of incest but there's no evidence there wasn't either.... I agree with TJ, something was amiss in that household which went beyond "we want the money now." I'm convinced it had to do with power and control and that Andrew chose Abby because she was chronically mentally unstable and both grateful to be married to a successful man and submissive enough to always be compliant. Incest was and remains the most secret of family secrets; the only people privy to incest are the perpetrator and the victim, and the victim is often shamed for a number of reasons which are so pathologically complex that we can't understand the victim's own deep-seated need for it to remain a secret. The pain and pleasure centers in the brain are side by side, and this can be very confusing for a child.

[Aamartin]

I would like to participate in this thread-- but I don't know where to begin. I can't organize it in any concrete way.

[debbiediablo]

Just toss out what you think, concrete or abstract, organized or any old which way. To me when we back away from incest or mental illness (or any taboo topic for which evidence is scant or absent) we may be skipping the most important element of the crime(s). Or we may be a on a wild goose chase. I'd love to read your comments, Anthony!

With regard to sleepwalking: my very brilliant oldest daughter (PhD in biogenetics from MIT) has been a sleepwalker and sleeptalker since puberty. The most recent time she was home involved a dream where she was convinced the geomagnetic poles were switching and we needed to flee up the Al-Can Highway. She spent a good part of the night getting a bass boat stocked and ready to be towed. I'm not convinced this is enough to warrant the Bordens as insane but it sure can be attention getter!

[Aamartin]

I am more willing to entertain the sexual abuse aspect than I have been in the past.....

However, I do not feel it was the main impetus to the murders. I think it was financial.

Stockholm Syndrome?

If there was sexual abuse, I do not think It occurred as suggested-- Emma out of town, Lizzie raped, stunned, reaching out to Abby, stonewalled and snapped. She didn't like Abby long before that August day. While I do believe most of her dislike/hatred of Abby was a result of Emma's manipulation, there was hatred and distrust all over that house.

I don't know for sure that I can even confidently say that anyone unconditionally loved anyone else under that roof, including the sisters.

I don't care what the practices of the time were-- good, caring, decent men do not kill pigeons in a rampage. Had he done it as a plan, it's even worse.

The daylight robbery--- I believe 100% it was Lizzie-- a cry for help, a passive aggressive ploy-- whatever. She did it-- and she did it out of dark/black emotions. The very color of the aura that surrounds that house, that family and their relationships.

I have known people who live with constant mistrust, drama and unhappiness. My late x-wife's mother. To this day I deal with the negativity she sprinkled into my son's lives.

I have known people who have survived sexual abuse. Years ago I was Director of Psychological Services in a 'mental hospital' for the indigent. Everyone knows the statistics of those who commit crimes or abuse themselves-- but to be mired down in all that darkness, it takes a huge toll on people and their care givers and other professionals trying to help them.

Do I believe Lizzie suffered abuse? Yes, I do. What I don't know for sure is who her abuser was. Andrew? Emma? Was is emotional? Physical? Sexual? I just don't know. No one does for certain. Lizzie and Emma's relationship was so very codependent-- and there are reasons for that.

People think perhaps Lizzie was a selfish, 'it's all about me' person. Sometimes (most) those people aren't truly selfish. Just totally effed up!

I do not think she was bipolar. Or even borderline. I think she was a product of her environment in as much as we all are. And I think more discussion and speculation about her environment can be just that, speculation. Hence, we never can truly know the truth. Did she or didn't she swing the hatchet? The fact that we have SO many questions speaks volumes itself.....

[Curryong]

What do you think of this re the financial angle? From the 'New Bedford Evening Standard' of Monday Aug 8th 1892.
Rebello Page 122.

'Early in the case, the Government employed Officers John Parker and Frank Hathaway of this city who have been busy on the Dartmouth end of the case and are still engaged on it. They have held frequent interviews with the occupants of the William Davis cottage on the Smith Hills Rd and have supplied many missing links. John V Morse visited at the cottage and I have been informed that both Miss Emma and Miss Lizzie have been there and consulted their uncle on business, though I haven't talked with Parker or Hathaway recently and don't know just what recent discoveries they made.

The assumption on which the State has proceeded, however, is that the daughters Miss Emma and Miss Lizzie learned of their father's intention through their uncle. It is presumed that the latter was on very intimate terms with Mr Borden, at least certain members of the family convey that impression, and it was understood that the will would give the girls 25,000 dollars apiece, and the residue of the estate would go to Mrs Borden. Mr Borden knew of course that the daughters and particularly Miss Lizzie, were not on the best of terms with his wife, and their relations were not becoming any more pleasant as time went on...'

New Bedford Evening Standard Aug 8th, 1892 2

'He (Morse) is said to have had a long confidential talk with Mr Borden the evening before the tragedy, but what the nature of it was I do not know. I do know, however, that just before Mr Borden was killed, there were frequent journeys between the Dartmouth cottage, and the Borden house on Second Street, and it looked as if considerable business was being transacted. I am pretty positive that more or less of the motive theory has come....'

Now normally I don't set much store by contemporary newspaper reports but New Bedford was close to Fall River, Lizzie had stayed there at the end of July, and this newspaper correspondent seems to have kept his ears open. He may have known some of the participants in the case.
Also, William Davis, who is mentioned, was a butcher and close to Uncle John. John Morse would stay there on and off for many years.

[irina]

One of the old papers cited the motive as Andrew deciding to give Abby more than her "dower right" because of her years of being a loyal spouse. It is interesting that this is mentioned that way. On the other hand, put crudely without figuring the money value from then to now, what if Emma and Lizzie each got a million dollars while Abby got a million and a half plus the house? So what? We have no indication Lizzie and Emma were greedy by nature before or after the murders.

It has been written that successful businessmen share many traits with psychopaths. Over time I have been married to two MBAs who were very successful. There is a the singleness of purpose, constant drive for success and control that blots out everything else. Those desiring love on other terms wonder if they are loved. From the businessman's perspective a nice home, clothes, food, jewellery and opportunities are the love. If Lizzie shoplifted I think each episode was a cry for her father's love. When he paid the bills she was receiving his love. Perhaps her fur coats and trip to Europe translated as love to her. Perhaps Emma wanted a different kind of love and she gave up seeking it. Perhaps Abby helped build the empire by scrimping and not spending and thus Andrew rewarded her.

I don't think Andrew was a monster but I think he demanded control and his main way of providing love was to provide. Not bad in that day or this, when so many struggle.

I have had times in my life when I envied those who had nothing and who struggled to build a life together. In the end being a businessman's partner is not a bad deal at all though a personality like mine may continually cry out for a bit of softness.

[taosjohn]

I would like to participate in this thread-- but I don't know where to begin. I can't organize it in any concrete way.

My fault.

I have to apologize to the forum; it didn't occur to me until too-late that posting such a wide-ranging thread might function as a sort of a "forum-jack."

Might be good to return to the existing threads relating to each point? I believe I've gotten adequate chance to promote my notions.

[Curryong]

I have to say, Anthony, that I thoroughly agree with your post above and with the summing up of the relationships within the Borden house and the conditions pertaining there.

[debbiediablo]

I am more willing to entertain the sexual abuse aspect than I have been in the past.....

However, I do not feel it was the main impetus to the murders. I think it was financial.

Stockholm Syndrome?

If there was sexual abuse, I do not think It occurred as suggested-- Emma out of town, Lizzie raped, stunned, reaching out to Abby, stonewalled and snapped. She didn't like Abby long before that August day. While I do believe most of her dislike/hatred of Abby was a result of Emma's manipulation, there was hatred and distrust all over that house.

I don't know for sure that I can even confidently say that anyone unconditionally loved anyone else under that roof, including the sisters.

I don't care what the practices of the time were-- good, caring, decent men do not kill pigeons in a rampage. Had he done it as a plan, it's even worse.

The daylight robbery--- I believe 100% it was Lizzie-- a cry for help, a passive aggressive ploy-- whatever. She did it-- and she did it out of dark/black emotions. The very color of the aura that surrounds that house, that family and their relationships.

I have known people who live with constant mistrust, drama and unhappiness. My late x-wife's mother. To this day I deal with the negativity she sprinkled into my son's lives.

I have known people who have survived sexual abuse. Years ago I was Director of Psychological Services in a 'mental hospital' for the indigent. Everyone knows the statistics of those who commit crimes or abuse themselves-- but to be mired down in all that darkness, it takes a huge toll on people and their care givers and other professionals trying to help them.

Do I believe Lizzie suffered abuse? Yes, I do. What I don't know for sure is who her abuser was. Andrew? Emma? Was is emotional? Physical? Sexual? I just don't know. No one does for certain. Lizzie and Emma's relationship was so very codependent-- and there are reasons for that.

People think perhaps Lizzie was a selfish, 'it's all about me' person. Sometimes (most) those people aren't truly selfish. Just totally effed up!

I do not think she was bipolar. Or even borderline. I think she was a product of her environment in as much as we all are. And I think more discussion and speculation about her environment can be just that, speculation. Hence, we never can truly know the truth. Did she or didn't she swing the hatchet? The fact that we have SO many questions speaks volumes itself.....

I pretty much agree with Anthony here and also with taosjohn...in that something went on in that house which was toxic to all the players. Whether these murders were the result of incest, emotional or physical abuse, Andrew impregnating servant girls, Abby's mental illness, Lizzie's BPD, substance abuse or whatever, I do not think money was at the root of the problem...but it may well have been the straw that broke the camel's back.

[phineas]

Debbie, totally agree. Money was not the main motivator but in a toxic environment money could take on an aspect of justice - if somehow had endured years of abuse, an inheritance could feel like appropriate pay for undergoing that. The prospect of being denied that money after all that suffering could feel like the final revenge of an abuser and could have caused *someone* to snap.

Something was very, very wrong in that house. We all agree. Last night I was thinking of the old Texas joke about the sheriff who comes to the scene of a murder and asks about the victim: "Did he need killin?" I started thinking whether Abby and Andrew needed killing in the sense that what if they really were monstrous, outside appearances to the contrary, and what could have been their deeds. Many murders are of innocents, but I'd say a good proportion are of people whose actions led to their deaths as the hands of others they'd angered.

[twinsrwe]

I am more willing to entertain the sexual abuse aspect than I have been in the past.....

However, I do not feel it was the main impetus to the murders. I think it was financial.

Stockholm Syndrome?

If there was sexual abuse, I do not think It occurred as suggested-- Emma out of town, Lizzie raped, stunned, reaching out to Abby, stonewalled and snapped. She didn't like Abby long before that August day. While I do believe most of her dislike/hatred of Abby was a result of Emma's manipulation, there was hatred and distrust all over that house.

I don't know for sure that I can even confidently say that anyone unconditionally loved anyone else under that roof, including the sisters.

I don't care what the practices of the time were-- good, caring, decent men do not kill pigeons in a rampage. Had he done it as a plan, it's even worse.

The daylight robbery--- I believe 100% it was Lizzie-- a cry for help, a passive aggressive ploy-- whatever. She did it-- and she did it out of dark/black emotions. The very color of the aura that surrounds that house, that family and their relationships.

I have known people who live with constant mistrust, drama and unhappiness. My late x-wife's mother. To this day I deal with the negativity she sprinkled into my son's lives.

I have known people who have survived sexual abuse. Years ago I was Director of Psychological Services in a 'mental hospital' for the indigent. Everyone knows the statistics of those who commit crimes or abuse themselves-- but to be mired down in all that darkness, it takes a huge toll on people and their care givers and other professionals trying to help them.

Do I believe Lizzie suffered abuse? Yes, I do. What I don't know for sure is who her abuser was. Andrew? Emma? Was is emotional? Physical? Sexual? I just don't know. No one does for certain. Lizzie and Emma's relationship was so very codependent-- and there are reasons for that.

People think perhaps Lizzie was a selfish, 'it's all about me' person. Sometimes (most) those people aren't truly selfish. Just totally effed up!

I do not think she was bipolar. Or even borderline. I think she was a product of her environment in as much as we all are. And I think more discussion and speculation about her environment can be just that, speculation. Hence, we never can truly know the truth. Did she or didn't she swing the hatchet? The fact that we have SO many questions speaks volumes itself.....

WOW, Anthony, what a great post!!! I agree with you, there had to be something going on in that house which was at the root of a turbulent existence for all occupants of the household. Two people died at the hands of a brutal killer.

[debbiediablo]

Debbie, totally agree. Money was not the main motivator but in a toxic environment money could take on an aspect of justice - if somehow had endured years of abuse, an inheritance could feel like appropriate pay for undergoing that. The prospect of being denied that money after all that suffering could feel like the final revenge of an abuser and could have caused *someone* to snap.

Something was very, very wrong in that house. We all agree. Last night I was thinking of the old Texas joke about the sheriff who comes to the scene of a murder and asks about the victim: "Did he need killin?" I started thinking whether Abby and Andrew needed killing in the sense that what if they really were monstrous, outside appearances to the contrary, and what could have been their deeds. Many murders are of innocents, but I'd say a good proportion are of people whose actions led to their deaths as the hands of others they'd angered.

Yes, sort of like the tip of an iceberg where we see money as a means of remediation...as Phineas says, it takes on an aspect of justice. But the iceberg below the surface, the part we cannot see, is what sinks the Borden boat.

[Aamartin]

I believe Andrew measured his success by his money and used it as a weapon/reward.

Looking at it in those terms make me believe if was all financial. That's what mattered in that house. Not people

[debbiediablo]

With apologies to Karl Marx. If religion is the opium of the people then money was opium for the Bordens.

[Curryong]

Yes, agreed, agreed! Abby is interesting in all this, though. Was she a passive onlooker, a 'victim' herself, an enabler in Andrew's worship of money and 'waste not, want not' philiosophies? There is evidence of her reaching out, to family members, to Phoebe Bowen. Was she long suffering or cowed down? Remember her complaints about having to buy household linen, napery etc from her allowance.

[irina]

I think a point is missed in dismissing the motive as "financial". Certainly money could have been the root of the evil but I suggest the actual motive had to do with human emotions unmet, unfulfilled, ignored. We could assume there was not good communication in the family. We think basic affection was missing. I think (if) Lizzie shoplifted it was to get her father's love and attention by having him repeatedly prove his love by paying for things she took in a socially unacceptable fashion. I absolutely reject the idea that if Lizzie was guilty, the motive was to get more money or to inherit and control the money etc. She had a game going with her father, I think. He proved his love for her by buying her things willingly or unwillingly. Once he was dead that game was over. The chance for him to prove his love was gone forever. So I think motive is something deeper.

Or it could be simpler in that Abby made Lizzie horrendously angry as is supposed, Abby got murdered, Andrew came home too early, Lizzie didn't want to lose his love when he figured out she was inside the home alone with Abby when Abby somehow got horribly murdered. So Lizzie killed Andrew before he could figure it out and reject her. Unless the harsh words or whatever from Abby that brought on the presumed rage in Lizzie, were about money, inheritance, etc., this scenario fairly rejects money as a motive.

[debbiediablo]

[quote="irina"]I think a point is missed in dismissing the motive as "financial". Certainly money could have been the root of the evil but I suggest the actual motive had to do with human emotions unmet, unfulfilled, ignored. We could assume there was not good communication in the family. We think basic affection was missing. I think (if) Lizzie shoplifted it was to get her father's love and attention by having him repeatedly prove his love by paying for things she took in a socially unacceptable fashion. I absolutely reject the idea that if Lizzie was guilty, the motive was to get more money or to inherit and control the money etc. She had a game going with her father, I think. He proved his love for her by buying her things willingly or unwillingly. Once he was dead that game was over. The chance for him to prove his love was gone forever. So I think motive is something deeper.
quote]
This is exactly what I've seen as the motivation for quite a long time, only very much better expressed by Irina...

[irina]

Thank you Debbie. I was trying to explain this when I mentioned my marital history, and we could go back to my parents who were business oriented. Though I am a Christian and follow Jesus' command to love everyone, I cannot love myself as Jesus said to love others. From my perspective of myself, there is no such thing as intrinsic love. It is all based on accomplishments that make me specifically, worth loving or not. So my mentality is a bit schizophrenic that way. I try to live like Jesus said but I don't feel it inside because I don't understand it. I am generous with others but not with myself.

How many times I wanted softness from parents or husbands and it wasn't there. Now in late middle age I am like them which isn't necessarily bad, but I think I have missed out on some things in this world. I think Andrew was very similar to men I married. (I am a widow BTW, not divorced.) In one marriage I never had a key to the house because pragmatically my successful businessman husband felt I was absent minded (yes), would lose the key (possible), and he didn't like some of my young friends who were kind of dead enders(true). So that Abby didn't have a key or didn't always have a key really doesn't seem all that sinister to me. Maybe I am offering a perspective on the Borden household, or not, but it is another point of view.

[Aamartin]

Thank you Debbie. I was trying to explain this when I mentioned my marital history, and we could go back to my parents who were business oriented. Though I am a Christian and follow Jesus' command to love everyone, I cannot love myself as Jesus said to love others. From my perspective of myself, there is no such thing as intrinsic love. It is all based on accomplishments that make me specifically, worth loving or not. So my mentality is a bit schizophrenic that way. I try to live like Jesus said but I don't feel it inside because I don't understand it. I am generous with others but not with myself.

How many times I wanted softness from parents or husbands and it wasn't there. Now in late middle age I am like them which isn't necessarily bad, but I think I have missed out on some things in this world. I think Andrew was very similar to men I married. (I am a widow BTW, not divorced.) In one marriage I never had a key to the house because pragmatically my successful businessman husband felt I was absent minded (yes), would lose the key (possible), and he didn't like some of my young friends who were kind of dead enders(true). So that Abby didn't have a key or didn't always have a key really doesn't seem all that sinister to me. Maybe I am offering a perspective on the Borden household, or not, but it is another point of view.

I was in a relationship for over 10 years that was suffocating. It changed me, for a while at least. I didn't realize how much till I ended it. I just thought I was 'maturing'. What I found out I was doing was changing my behavior to keep the peace. And while I am not some bawdy, rude buffoon who farts 24/7 and adores toilet humor, I can be rambunctious and like to have fun. Someone farts? LOL! But in this relationship I had to be much more provincial, quiet and reserved. Some of that stayed with me after I ended it, but not all.... His odd conservatism came from his religion-- and one day, in a pasta restaurant in Omaha, surrounded by our friends (other gay couples -- quite the competitive and gossipy lot) I informed him I really didn't think I could respect his intelligence anymore for believing the outlandish things he did. It took about two weeks-- but I moved out-- and 120 miles away!

That maudlin paragraph over-- I will say this. I too, identify myself as a Christian. But I am not 100% certain it is the only path to righteousness or whatever heaven is. I do firmly believe that in order to serve our higher power and mankind in general means that occasionally we have to allow others to do so by being kind to us-- so we need to accept help, offers of friendship and non-sexual love from others. We love FAR more people in a non sexual relationship manner and never tell them. We are uncomfortable with it. But I can say with 100% certainty that I do love you. I enjoy your posts here, you matter to me, no matter how slight our interactions. You are a part of my life, albeit an Internet one! Were you to show up at my front door, needing refuge, I'd let you in. I would be sad if I heard something bad happened to you and very happy if I heard something great happened for you.

I think you are the same-- and there is a lot about you to love!

I am too emotional sometimes. I was with my best friend when her daughter called her to tell her she and her husband were going to the hospital with baby #2. Her mom's phone kept dropping calls so she called me and asked me to tell her mom to come and stay with their first child, In instances like this I am very practical. 'She has to drop me off, go to her house and get her overnight bag, she will be there in about 30 minutes' and the darling girl said 'tell her to hurry'' and I began to cry. It was so sweet. She needed her mommy. I 'felt the love'. It was moving.

And now that I have made a total fool out of myself... Isn't he great!

[Curryong]

What an absolutely lovely baby, Anthony, and fast asleep! (I am especially baby oriented at the moment because later this month I'm going to be a grandmother again, of twins!)

Thank you Anthony and irina for telling us some of your life experiences so movingly. It does reinforce for me that great friendships can be formed on forums like this one. Long may it continue!

[immaseeya]

And the other theory in development-- the Incest Theory.

1. Andrew was in fact incestuous.
2. The initial object of his attentions was Emma...............

Do we know this for sure? What evidence is there, if any, that suggests this?

[debbiediablo]

And the other theory in development-- the Incest Theory.

1. Andrew was in fact incestuous.
2. The initial object of his attentions was Emma...............

Do we know this for sure? What evidence is there, if any, that suggests this?

We don't know this for sure or even partly for sure. However I would suggest you PM BOBO if you are interested in pursuing this topic. However, the demeanor of the persons living in that house and the murders themselves suggest a toxic environment that is well defined in previous posts by both Anthony and Irina.

[irina]

Beautiful, Anthony. Thank you. What a tiny baby!

You and I have had experiences and one way or another our circumstances changed. Thinking about Lizzie and Emma, they had whatever they had for 32 or more years. That's a frightening thought if their lives were as unhappy or unfulfilled as we think they may have been. If I was Lizzie I think I would have signed up to be a missionary to China or something.

[debbiediablo]

All of our lives are as little or as much as we make them...or don't. None of which has to do with money or power or fame or brilliance or beauty. These are the opium for those whose unhappiness stems from being unable to love themselves just as they are. I doubt that anyone in the Borden household was capable of love...at least not while living with each other in a Bleak House. Irina, your remark reminds me of The Painted Veil which is one of my very favorite books and movies.

[debbiediablo]

Thank you Debbie. I was trying to explain this when I mentioned my marital history, and we could go back to my parents who were business oriented. Though I am a Christian and follow Jesus' command to love everyone, I cannot love myself as Jesus said to love others. From my perspective of myself, there is no such thing as intrinsic love. It is all based on accomplishments that make me specifically, worth loving or not. So my mentality is a bit schizophrenic that way. I try to live like Jesus said but I don't feel it inside because I don't understand it. I am generous with others but not with myself.

How many times I wanted softness from parents or husbands and it wasn't there. Now in late middle age I am like them which isn't necessarily bad, but I think I have missed out on some things in this world. I think Andrew was very similar to men I married. (I am a widow BTW, not divorced.) In one marriage I never had a key to the house because pragmatically my successful businessman husband felt I was absent minded (yes), would lose the key (possible), and he didn't like some of my young friends who were kind of dead enders(true). So that Abby didn't have a key or didn't always have a key really doesn't seem all that sinister to me. Maybe I am offering a perspective on the Borden household, or not, but it is another point of view.

I was in a relationship for over 10 years that was suffocating. It changed me, for a while at least. I didn't realize how much till I ended it. I just thought I was 'maturing'. What I found out I was doing was changing my behavior to keep the peace. And while I am not some bawdy, rude buffoon who farts 24/7 and adores toilet humor, I can be rambunctious and like to have fun. Someone farts? LOL! But in this relationship I had to be much more provincial, quiet and reserved. Some of that stayed with me after I ended it, but not all.... His odd conservatism came from his religion-- and one day, in a pasta restaurant in Omaha, surrounded by our friends (other gay couples -- quite the competitive and gossipy lot) I informed him I really didn't think I could respect his intelligence anymore for believing the outlandish things he did. It took about two weeks-- but I moved out-- and 120 miles away!

That maudlin paragraph over-- I will say this. I too, identify myself as a Christian. But I am not 100% certain it is the only path to righteousness or whatever heaven is. I do firmly believe that in order to serve our higher power and mankind in general means that occasionally we have to allow others to do so by being kind to us-- so we need to accept help, offers of friendship and non-sexual love from others. We love FAR more people in a non sexual relationship manner and never tell them. We are uncomfortable with it. But I can say with 100% certainty that I do love you. I enjoy your posts here, you matter to me, no matter how slight our interactions. You are a part of my life, albeit an Internet one! Were you to show up at my front door, needing refuge, I'd let you in. I would be sad if I heard something bad happened to you and very happy if I heard something great happened for you.

I think you are the same-- and there is a lot about you to love!

I am too emotional sometimes. I was with my best friend when her daughter called her to tell her she and her husband were going to the hospital with baby #2. Her mom's phone kept dropping calls so she called me and asked me to tell her mom to come and stay with their first child, In instances like this I am very practical. 'She has to drop me off, go to her house and get her overnight bag, she will be there in about 30 minutes' and the darling girl said 'tell her to hurry'' and I began to cry. It was so sweet. She needed her mommy. I 'felt the love'. It was moving.

And now that I have made a total fool out of myself... Isn't he great!

The future of our world rests in your arms.

[Curryong]

Incest seems to be the theme of the week here. No, we know nothing or next to nothing about the relationship between Andrew and Emma, and only a little more about that between Lizzie and her father. Much of the latter centres around money issues, European trips and high school rings. We certainly don't know and probably will never know if Emma was an object of sexual desire to Andrew at all.

[twinsrwe]

Oh, Anthony, what a handsome little man! Are you the one holding this precious little guy? The picture you posted speaks volumes of a love connection. BTW, you did not make a fool of yourself; I was very touched by your post.

[irina]

I think it might be worthwhile to really look at Lizzie's relationship with her father in terms of the things she got from him over time. I also think it is interesting that Lizzie resembles her mother a great deal. Of the two girls Lizzie most resembles her mother. Are there any examples where Andrew gave her something extra nice like the European trip, during a time of family crisis or something? Were gifts and money the way Andrew showed affection to Lizzie? Another consideration could be, had Lizzie been accused or arrested for shoplifting, would Andrew have come to her rescue in more than a financial way? Was she seeking his attention or proof of loyalty and love?

[taosjohn]

And the other theory in development-- the Incest Theory.

1. Andrew was in fact incestuous.
2. The initial object of his attentions was Emma...............

Do we know this for sure? What evidence is there, if any, that suggests this?

Umm-- I referred to it as a theory? I don't see that anything much at all is supported by the known facts...

[irina]

We all have to work with the facts, as few as there are. A huge fact for all of us, whether we favour incest, money or even Lizzie didn't do it, is that Abby was killed first. She got the worst of it. Abby was the victim of over kill. Andrew not so much. This is a pivotal fact.

If the reason for killing was incest, why did anger erupt against Abby on that particular morning. Presumably Abby didn't protect the "girls" from their father. The girls were middle aged! Seems like that emotion would have been worked out much earlier when the girls were of an age to suffer passion at mistreatment. I favour an intruder but why would an intruder try to obliterate Abby? If the motive was money and inheritance, what did Abby say or do that led to over kill on that morning?

I have argued for an inexperienced killer over killing because he didn't know when the victims were absolutely dead. But with Abby the last "whacks" must necessarily have been a matter of splashing about in bloody pulp. That is the point upon which all of our theories must start. Whatever else was wrong in the household, what pushed it over the edge that day, whether it was Lizzie or an intruder. (In arguing for an intruder opportunity could have led to the crime ~Emma away, Bridget washing windows, Andrew out, Morse out, possibly belief that Lizzie was still gone~, but doesn't explain over kill.)

[debbiediablo]

Yes, one of John Douglas's points is that Lizzie strongly resembled her dead mother. Whatever Andrew may or may not have done, he was Lizzie's biological father and she loved him and he loved her in whatever limited and perverse ways of which they were capable. Abby was someone beyond the pale.

The Connection Between Batterers and Child Sexual Abuse Perpetrators


By Lundy Bancroft
© 2007

Multiple studies have established the high overlap between battering and incest perpetration (Herman, 1981; McCloskey et. al.; Paveza; Sirles and Franke; and Truesdell et. al.). These studies, taken together, indicate that a batterer is about four to six times more likely than a non-batterer to sexually abuse his children. These statistics are in line with studies of batterers’ risk to physically abuse children; the largest study of this kind showed batterers seven times more likely than non-batterers to frequently hit their children (Straus) About half of incest perpetrators also batter the children’s mother (Herman, 1981; Sirles and Franke; Truesdell). A recent major publication on family violence recommended that any history of sexual assaults against the mother be treated as a warning sign of possible sexual or physical abuse of the children (American Psychological Association).

The overlap between domestic violence and incest is not altogether surprising to people who work with batterers and incest perpetrators, because of the similarities between the profiles and tactics used by members of the two groups. Clinicians specializing in sexual abuser treatment have often approached me after my presentations on batterers to comment on how similar my clients sound to their sex offender clients.

Public misconceptions are similar between the two forms of abuse. Batterers and child molesters are perceived as mentally ill individuals from particularly disturbing childhoods; the public is always shocked when a man with a highly positive public image is exposed as a batterer or child molester. The nature of the abuse itself is similarly misunderstood; a batterer’s violence and an incest perpetrators sexual violations are just one aspect of their behavior problem. The overtly abusive behaviors are invariably accompanied by patterns of psychological abuse and manipulation that are often as damaging, or more so, than the overt physical or sexual abuse. Attempts to teach a batterer to stop hitting, or to teach proper boundaries to a child sexual abuser, miss the roots of both problems in a way that can leave victims vulnerable to continued psychological abuse and cruelty.

This article looks briefly at some of the similarities between batterers and incest perpetrators, to assist in understanding the nature of both problems and how they can interact.

Controlling

Both groups are known for exercising a high degree of control over their victims and other family members, through verbal abuse and other strategies. They believe in their right to use increasingly coercive tactics if they are not getting the obedience that they demand. Both batterers and incest perpetrators tend to alternate between periods of loving kindness and periods of harsh emotional abusiveness towards their victims. Incest perpetrators are often harsh and rigid disciplinarians.

Entitlement

Both groups tend to be self-centered in the home and believe that it is the responsibility of family members to make sure that the man’s needs are met at all times. They may become irate when other family members insist on not always being the ones to make the sacrifices. They expect deference to their desires and their opinions. Both types of abusers will justify their actions if caught, insisting for various reasons that they have the right to do what they did. Though they may appear remorseful, they typically have mental systems of seeing their victims as owned objects with whom they have the right to do as they see fit. Just as batterers may be angry at an arrest, saying, “What right do they have to tell me what I can do with my own wife?”, the incest perpetrator may take the attitude, “The way I choose to run my relationship with my own child is nobody else’s business.”

Selfishness and self-centeredness towards family members follow from the abuser’s sense of entitlement. With both batterers and incest perpetrators, these characteristics in the home are products of their attitudes more than of their psychology, and therefore they will not necessarily be found to be narcissistic by evaluators (though evaluators should look carefully for signs of narcissism). People who know either type of abuser in non-family contexts will not generally experience the person as self-centered.

Exploitativeness

Closely linked to the entitled attitudes of these abusers is the use of family members for the abuser’s purposes. Exploitation can be thought of as the fundamental characteristic of both batterers and sexual abusers, and the problem that most needs to be confronted and changed in the abuser.

It has been common for professionals to assume that the batterer’s problem is his anger, and that the incest perpetrator’s problem is his deviant sexual attraction to children. These are common misconceptions that lead to the overlooking of the key dynamics, which are that these abusers choose to take certain kinds of action, and that these choices are based on deeply-held beliefs and habits that support exploitation.

Denial and Minimization

Both groups are known for their high levels of denial and resistance to change. When they do admit to their actions, they minimize them greatly and play down their negative consequences, insisting that no damage has actually been done. They lie comfortably to cover any actions that are discovered.

Claimed Loss of Control

Both groups assert that they lost control when they acted abusively, but close examination of their actions reveals calculation and forethought. The batterer may claim to have “a bad temper,” just as the incest perpetrator claims that he just lost control of his sex drive, perhaps blaming it on his wife by saying that she has not been giving him sex. Both groups work hard to distract attention from the surrounding pattern of conscious activity.

Claimed Provocation

Both groups assert that the victim provoked their actions, and therefore they themselves are not responsible. The sexual abuser will say that a young child “seduced him” and “really wanted it,” just as the batterer states that his partner “set him off” and “knew that she was going to make me violent.”

Grooming or Seasoning

Both groups work to build trust and closeness during the early part of a relationship. Batterers are known for being charming, kind, and attentive during the first months or even years that a couple is together. An incest perpetrators may lay the groundwork for years as well; he works to build a special relationship with the intended victim, and strives to gradually break down her or his boundaries with slowly escalating invasiveness. The victim is often his “favorite,” to whom he gives particular kindness and attention, but often also particular harshness and control. Batterers are known for often being unusually appealing superficially, and sexual abusers are similarly often people who are identified as especially “good with children.” In both cases, the victim is often quite attached to the abuser, because of the manipulation and the many positive-seeming periods in the abuser’s behavior.

Positive Public Image

Members of both groups are typically well thought of in their communities. They may be professionally successful or socially popular, and may be involved in charitable or civic activities that make them appear outstandingly kind and responsible. Victims of both kinds of abuse face disbelief because “he’s just not the type.”

Objectification

Batterers and child sexual abusers tend to have strong capacities for mentally dehumanizing or depersonalizing their victims. They both use degrading language aloud and in their own minds, and see their victims as inferior to them in sensitivity, competence, and humanity. They are able to shut out any awareness of the victim’s feelings, and even to convince themselves that the victim is happy in the relationship. This is an important underlying factor in their exploitative behavior.

Sowing Divisions Within the Family

Both groups have a large impact on the overall functioning of their families, including using many behaviors that turn mothers and children against each other and that sow other types of divisions among family members. (For an excellent discussion of how child sexual abusers do this, see Leberg.) Both types of abusers are frequently effective at getting the family to focus on the victim, or on some other family member, as the target of all of their negative attention, thereby distracting the focus from the abuse.

Confusion of Love and Abuse

Both groups confuse loving and abusive behavior. Batterers may say, “I hit you because I love you so much,” and even use their passion as an excuse for killing. An incest perpetrator will describe incidents of abuse as moments of loving intimacy, or refer to “those things that happened between us,” as if they were moments of mutuality. Both groups call the feeling of possession or domination “love”.

Threats and Imposition of Secrecy

Both groups commonly require their victims not to tell other people about what has occurred, and threaten dire consequences should the secrecy be broken. Such threats are sometimes carried out in practice when secrecy is broken. The secrecy itself becomes an important aspect of the trauma for victims of both kinds of abusers.

Manipulation

Both groups are known for their outstanding manipulative skills, which contribute to their ability to keep their victims frightened, confused, and self-blaming. Victims of both types of abuse tend to be manipulated into feeling responsible to take care of the abuser’s feelings and to believe that his suffering is greater than their own. Both batterers and incest perpetrators manipulate individuals and systems with whom they come in contact to escape accountability for their actions and to create negative impressions of their victims.

Promises to the victim, or to others, that he will stop the abuse is frequently reported in both groups of abusers. They can often sound sincerely remorseful and serious about changing, but it is highly unusual for these promises to lead to anything other than a brief respite from the abuse. Only profound acceptance of responsibility for past actions leads to significant change in either group, as is mentioned repeatedly in the literature on offender and batterer treatment.

Under confrontation, both groups of abusers switch erratically back and forth between appearing remorseful and sounding highly justified and victim-blaming. The underlying attitudes that drive both forms of abuse take a long time and hard work to change.

Discrediting of Disclosures

Both groups characterize their victims as dishonest, as hysterical, and as vindictive when disclosures do get made. The incest perpetrator says, “She was angry at me because I wouldn’t buy her a Nintendo, and she told me she’s get me back for it.” The batterer says, “She is getting me back because I won’t always give her every dime of my money.” Both groups make the victim sound like a troubled, unstable individual (which at times may have some truth to it, largely because of the abuse itself).

Lack of Mental Health Diagnosis

Most batterers and most child sexual offenders show normal results on psychological testing. Mental health evaluations provide very little information about likelihood to reoffend. Both problems can therefore be concluded to have their roots primarily in attitudes and belief systems, reinforced by peers and by cultural messages, and cannot be defined as psychological or sexual illness or “deviance.” Even clinicians who specialize in offender evaluation have limited ability to assess accurately who is an incest perpetrator and who is not. Evaluations thus have to include the element of investigation, as with domestic violence.

Some of the confusion in this area comes from mixing different types of problems together. The generally violent man, who is largely involved in male-on-male violence, does often have psychological problems, unlike the batterer. Similarly, the so-called predatory child molester, who offends against large numbers of children and often prefers boys, often has mental health issues; the incest perpetrator, who generally offends against children with whom he has a trusted or caretaking relationship – often his own child or step-child – and tends to prefer female children, usually will not have any clear mental health problem.

High Recidivism and Resistance to Change

Both groups are highly resistant to change and are difficult clients in counseling programs that demand change. They may be quite comfortable in supportive therapeutic relationships that do not require change, however, and receive glowing reports in these cases about their progress. Professionals in both areas believe that stricter criminal and civil sanctions are necessary, and that change cannot come without full disclosure and acceptance of responsibility, through a mixture of education, confrontation, consequences, and accountability.

Because of the high statistical overlap between domestic violence and incest, and the similarity of the profiles and tactics of the perpetrators, service providers and court officials should assess carefully for the possibility that children of batterers are being sexually abused.

Such an assessment is necessary even if the batterer does not use high levels of physical violence; in fact, two studies (Truesdell et. al., 1986, and Herman, 1981) mention the tendency of batterers who perpetrate incest to use low levels of physical violence towards the mother. The literature on incest perpetrators indicates that the best predictors of which batterers will sexually offend against their children are the batterer’s level of manipulativeness, entitlement, or self-centeredness; his history of expecting and requiring that the child meet his needs; and past behaviors of his that introduce a sexual or romantic element to his relationship with the child (Bancroft, 1996, and the various sources listed below on sexual offenders). Substance abuse is also positively correlated with sexual abuse.

Children of batterers should be monitored for symptoms of sexual abuse or any indications that they are being required or manipulated to keep secrets. Preventive education on sexual abuse should be done with abused women and their children, whether or not the batterer is still in the home. Although female children appear to be at a greater risk statistically for incest, the danger to male children is substantial. The rate of confirmed allegations of sexual abuse during custody and visitation disputes stays at roughly the same level as those arising at other times (Thoennes and Tjaden, 1990), contrary to widespread beliefs; court personnel in particular need to be aware of this reality.

Finally, professionals working in any capacity with domestic violence should seek training on the warning signs of child sexual abuse and the profile and tactics of the incest perpetrator, in order to increase the level of support and assistance available to victims of any type of abuse within the home.

Bibliography

Many additional sources are listed in Chapter 4, “The Batterer as Incest Perpetrator” by L. Bancroft and M. Miller, in Bancroft, L., & Silverman, J. (2002). The Batterer as Parent: Addressing the Impact of Domestic Violence on Family Dynamics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

American Psychological Association Presidential Task Force on Violence and the Family Violence and the Family American Psychological Association, 1996 Discusses the overlap among different forms of family abuse.

Ayoub, C., Grace, P., Paradise, J., and Newberger, E., “Alleging Psychological Impairment of the Accuser to Defend Oneself Against a Child Abuse Allegation: A Manifestation of Wife Battering and False Accusation” in Assessing Child Maltreatment Reports Haworth Press, 1991, pgs. 191-207

Bancroft, R. Lundy “Assessing Risk to Children from Unsupervised Visitation With Batterers” 1996 Available from the Resource Center on Domestic Violence: Child Protection and Custody at (800) 527-3223 Discusses overlap between battering and various forms of risk to children, including sexual abuse.

Crites, Laura and Coker, Donna “What Therapists See that Judges May Miss” in The Judges’ Journal Spring 1988 Describes batterers’ style and tactics.

Groth, Nicholas “The Incest Offender” In Sgroi, Suzanne, M.D., Ed. Handbook of Clinical Intervention in Child Sexual Abuse Lexington Books, 1982 Role of entitlement in incest perpetration, particularly for the “aggressive-dominant” type of perpetrator (in other words, the batterer)

Herman, Judith, M.D. Father-Daughter Incest Harvard University Press, 1981 50% of incest perpetrators in this study also abused the mother; provides an introduction to the tactics and style of incest perpetrators.

Herman Judith M.D. “Considering Sex Offenders” in Signs, Vol. 13, No. 4, Summer 1988 Looks at studies indicating that a high proportion of sex offenders are psychologically normal.

Leberg, Eric Understanding Child Molesters: Taking Charge Thousand Oaks: Sage, 1997 Profile of child sexual abuser, including denial, manipulativeness, grooming of the victim, and careful preparation of the social environment, often including abuse of the child’s mother

McCloskey, L.A., Figueredo, A.J., and Koss, M. “The Effect of Systemic Family Violence on Children’s Mental Health” Child Development No. 66, pgs. 1239-1261 This study found batterers more than six times as likely as non-batterers to perpetrate incest; incest was present in almost 10% of the battering homes in their study

MacFarlane, Kee, and Waterman, Jill Sexual Abuse of Young Children The Guilford Press, New York, 1986 Contains an excellent discussion of sexual abuse allegations that arise for the first time during custody or visitation disputes.

Myers, John Evidence in Child Abuse and Neglect Cases New York: Wiley and Sons, 1997 Citing many sources, attorney Myers demonstrates that there is no psychological profile of the sexual offender, and that most courts agree.

Paveza, G. “Risk Factors in Father-Daughter Child Sexual Abuse” Journal of Interpersonal Violence 3 (3), Sept. 1988, pgs. 290-306Paveza found domestic violence to be one of the top four predictors of child sexual abuse.

Sanford, Linda The Silent Children Garden City: Anchor Press, 1988 Explains the cultural supports for child sexual abuse, making a compelling argument for understanding incest perpetration as largely a cultural problem rather than a psychological one (as with battering).

Sirles, E. and Franke, P. “Factors Influencing Mothers’ Reactions to Intrafamily Sexual Abuse” Child Abuse and Neglect Vol. 13, pgs. 131-139 44% of the incest perpetrators in this study battered the child’s mother.

Straus, M. “Ordinary Violence, Child Abuse, and Wife-Beating: What Do They Have in Common?” In D. Finkelhor, R.J. Gelles, G.T. Hotaling, and M.A. Straus (Eds.) The Dark Side of Families: Current Family Violence Research Beverly Hills: Sage, 1983 Over 50% of batterers had physically abused children more than once in the last year in this large-scale study, vs. 7% of non-batterers

Thoennes, Nancy and Tjaden, Patricia “The Extent, Nature, and Validity of Sexual Abuse Allegations in Custody/Visitation Disputes” in Child Abuse and Neglect Vol. 14 (1990) A national study of over 100 cases found that sexual abuse allegations arising in custody/visitation litigation are found by child protective services to have roughly the same rate of reliability as those arising under other circumstances

Truesdell, D., McNeil, J. and Deschner, J. “Incidence of Wife Abuse in Incestuous Families” Social Work March-April 1986, pgs. 138-140 Over 70% of the incest perpetrators in this study also battered the children’s mother. Most of the violence was at lower levels.

http://www.lundybancroft.com/articles/t ... rpetrators

[debbiediablo]

Boundary violations between persons in positions of trust and power and those they care charged to care for is pathologically complex. Anthony touched on this in an earlier post:

Stockholm Syndrome


Described as a victim’s emotional “bonding” with their abuser, Stockholm Syndrome was given its name following a hostage situation in Stockholm, Sweden when, following the end of a bank robbery, the hostages identified with and supported their captor.

Dr. Joseph Carver, a clinical psychologist, describes emotionally bonding with an abuser as a survival strategy for victims of abuse and intimidation. For example, a victim who was abducted and raped may, years later, describe the captor as a “great person” with whom he/she formed an emotional bond, may be showing characteristics of a victim suffering from Stockholm Syndrome.1

It is important to remember that Stockholm Syndrome develops subconsciously and on an involuntary basis. The strategy is a survival instinct that develops as an attempt to survive in a threatening and controlling environment.

The Components and Progression of Stockholm Syndrome

Following are the components of Stockholm Syndrome as they relate to abusive and controlling relationships. Common symptoms include:1
•Victim having positive feelings toward the abuser
•Victim having negative feelings toward family, friends, or authorities
•Abuser having positive feelings toward the victim
•Victim supporting or helping the abuser

Following are several stages in the progression of Stockholm Syndrome:1
•The victim dissociates from his or her pain, helplessness or terror by subconsciously beginning to see the situation / world from the abuser’s perspective. The victim begins to agree with the abuser and certain aspects of his or her own personality, opinions, and views will fade into the background.
•By doing this, the victim begins to learn how to appease and please the abuser, which may keep him or her from being hurt or worse. Similarly this tactic can be used to manipulate the abuser into being less dangerous, at least for a little while.
•After a while the victim begins to realize that his or her abuser portrays the same human characteristics as anyone else. At this point he or she will begin to see the abuser as less of a threat. Some abusers may even share personal information in an effort to bond with the victim and to promote pity rather than anger.
•This bonding, in turn, leads to conflicting feelings (e.g., rage and pity) and illogical concern for the abuser. The victim may even ignore his or her own needs.
•Once the traumatic event has ended, however, the victim must again learn not to dissociate from his or her emotions and not focus on the abuser. This can be a very difficult transition.

Four situations or conditions are present that serve as a foundation for the development of Stockholm Syndrome:1
1.Perceived or real threat to one’s physical or psychological survival and belief that the abuser will carry out the threat. The abuser may: •Assure the victim that only cooperation keeps loved ones safe.
•Offer subtle threats or stories of revenge to remind the victim that revenge is possible if they leave.
•Have a history of violence leading the victim to believe they could be a target.

2.Presence of a small kindness from the abuser to the victim •In some cases, small gestures such as allowing a bathroom visit or providing food/water are enough to alter the victim’s perception of the abuser.
•Other times, a birthday card, a gift (usually provided after a period of abuse), or a special treat can be seen as proof that the abuser is not “all bad.”

3.Victim’s isolation from other perspectives •Victims have the sense they are always being watched. For their survival they begin to take on the abuser’s perspective. This survival technique can become so intense that the victim develops anger toward those trying to help.
•In severe cases of Stockholm Syndrome the victim may feel the abusive situation is their fault.

4.Perceived or real inability to escape from the situation •The victim may have financial obligations, debt, or instability to the point that they cannot survive on their own.
•The abuser may use threats including taking the children, public exposure, suicide, or a life of harassment for the victim.


How to Help: What to do and what not to do

While each situation is different, there are general guidelines to consider if you know or suspect that someone you love is suffering from Stockholm Syndrome:1
•Your loved one has probably been given a choice – the “relationship” or the family. Because the victim believes that choosing the family will result in adverse consequences, the family always comes second.
•Your loved one is being told the family is trying to ruin their wonderful “relationship.” Remember: the more you pressure the victim, the more you prove that point.
•Your goal is to remain in contact with your loved one during the abusive “relationship.” There are many channels of communication, including phone calls, letters, cards, emails, etc. Keep contact brief and consider contacting him or her at “traditional” times such as holidays, birthdays, and special occasions.
•Your loved one may open up communication and provide subtle hints about his or her “relationship” with the abuser. If so, listen and let them know that you are behind any decision they need to make. Remember: he or she may be exploring what support is available but may not be ready to ask for help just yet.

https://rainn.org/get-information/effec ... m-syndrome

[irina]

Great information! Thanks Debbie.

I'm reading "My Story" by Elizabeth Smart with Chris Stewart. Elizabeth Smart is of course the Utah girl from an extremely nice Mormon family, who was kidnapped from her bedroom at knife point when she was only 14 years old. The husband and wife kidnappers kept her for nine months during which time they did a number of cruel things to break her spirit. It is quite a study in abuse, control, sexual deviance and cruelty. Since Smart had a good solid family life and faith before the kidnapping, she is able to analyze the various steps in the dehumanization efforts. More amazing she has been able to overcome this treatment and fight back in a number of ways.

There are a number of people in our society who have suffered abuse, including sexual and physical. Unfortunately few of them have a background of a good family life, therefore victims beget victims without end. I find Elizabeth Smart's account to be very educational in that she can look back as a sane observer who has been able to go on with her life and not be ruined by the horrible experience.

[Franz]

We all have to work with the facts, as few as there are. A huge fact for all of us, whether we favour incest, money or even Lizzie didn't do it...
... but doesn't explain over kill.)

1. Irina, it seems to me that you were saying that if the motive was incest or money, the killer would be Lizzie (forgive me if I misunderstood you). I don't agree at least for the incest theory. Indeed if the motive were really incest, the killer could be very well a person other than Lizzie or Emma.

2. I still think that the killer was a very skilled person (a man) with his weapon. The over kill was just a mise en scène so that people would think the author of all this horror could not be a woman, but a man, in order to protect the two women (Lizzie and Bridget) present in the house while the killing was planned to take place.

[irina]

Franz: I don't really go for the incest theory either but I always think the best policy on forums is to look at everything, poke around, then accept or disregard what is there. I also don't exactly agree that someone other than Emma or Lizzie would avenge incest in this case. If they were children I could see someone else avenging a dirty deed, but Lizzie and Emma were middle aged women who theoretically could take care of themselves. They could have married, perhaps taught school.

I also don't think the killer was all that professional or efficient. Unfortunately for my belief in an intruder, especially with Abby, most of the blows seem weak and aimed like a girl would do. However the first few blows are more like a man would do. In my opinion. In those days men especially probably had reasonably good ideas about how meat was produced and how animals were killed. Whoever murdered Abby was sloppy and inefficient.

[Curryong]

If the sexual abuse stretched back over years (and let's make it plain) I'm not sold on Andrew B being a molesterer, wouldn't Andrew have been taking a risk allowing/rewarding Lizzie a European trip? She would have been in the company of other women for many weeks, a couple of them older, motherly. Lizzie shared a cabin with a distant relative, Anna Borden. Wouldn't Andrew have been a bit worried that Lizzie, away from home, under the influence of foreign parts and away from his, might have imparted something to others? Yet, apparently Anna Borden, her cabinmate gave testimony (that wasn't allowed) at her trial that the only complaints by Lizzie as they returned to the US were about the stifling, narrow atmosphere of her home.

Both Lizzie and Emma were mature women. They could have moved out in an instant, to the Gardiners, to a boarding house, to the Pooles at New Bedford, shared a house with Alice. They could have lived elsewhere and lived off the rent of the Ferry St house plus any allowance Andrew could be 'persuaded' to give them. They didn't have to remain. The fact that they were given the Ferry St house (virtually) and then, finding it all too much bother, sold it again, for considerably more than they paid for it, shows they weren't interested in moving out. There is not one hint in the aural evidence, letters etc of Borden/Gardiner relatives or anyone else that the two sisters were worried or troubled about anything other than Abby and whether she was influencing their father against them.

[irina]

Absolutely agree, Curryong!

[twinsrwe]

I am undecided about the incest theory, however, at this point in time, I’m leaning more toward the girls NOT being sexually abused by their father. Emma was 41 years of age, and Lizzie was 32 years of age, at the time Abby and Andrew were killed. They were not young girls, but middle aged women. If there was incest going on at 92 Second Street, Emma and Lizzie did not have to live under their father’s roof.

These women had two houses available to them, which they could have found refuge in. The first house was with the Gardner family, in Swansea, MA. It is a well known fact that Emma was very fond of the Gardner family, and that this family became a surrogate family for her, after she left Lizbeth and Maplecroft, in 1905. I am sure if there was incest going on in the Borden house, Emma and Lizzie could have found refuse with this Gardner family.

The second house was the Ferry Street house that Andrew purchased for Emma and Lizzie, after they confronted him about the Whitehead property fiasco. It is my understanding that the Ferry street house was a double house, and at one point in time Andrew and Abby lived in one side of the house, and Andrew’s sister and her husband lived in the other side of the house. Now if this is true, then Emma and Lizzie could have lived in one side of the house, and supported themselves by renting out the other side of the house.

Furthermore, the girls could have doubled their income by living with the Gardners in Swansea, and renting out both sides of the Ferry Street house!


Curryong: It looks as though you and I are on the same page, here!

[debbiediablo]

Incest forever changes the child AND the adult the child becomes. From the outside looking in, it's easy to say they could've moved out, fought back, cashed in and headed for greener pastures. But adult survivors of incest do not grow up with a full complement (or even a semi full complement) of coping skills. Often they are prime examples of learned helplessness which is described in the dog experiment below. A more comprehensive description of this experiment is on Wikipedia along with an overview of the actual changes in the amygdala and other portions of the brain when conditioned for defeat. It's important to remember that the child was the victim of abuse, and that a small child still exists within the adult and is still subject to the same physiological responses experienced as a child. The only experimental difference between animals and humans in this regard is that humans need not experience the abuse; humans have the ability to learn vicariously through observation. I would not expect to see Emma and Lizzie leave home in their mid 30s, not during the late 1800s. Nowadays I would expect to see them as teen-age runaways on some street corner in a large city. If a woman is going to surrender control of her body then why not get paid for it? This is exactly the same reason that a physically abused woman will wait until her abuser is asleep and then light the bed on fire. To those of us who fortunately not lived through the experience of being beaten for no reason, for any reason, for all reasons, and for what was a praised behavior the day (or hour) before, it seems incomprehensible that she just didn't pack her bag and head for the nearest bus station. This is an interesting first person description from a victim of incest:

The Effects of Child Sexual Abuse on the Adult Survivor

Any sexual contact, covert or overt, between a child and a trusted individual that damaged the child, whether these contacts included suggestive remarks, pornography, fondling or acts of sexual aggression or torture, needs to be dealt with assertively. These contacts scar virtually all facets of victims' lives since we are left with little or no self-esteem. At least one out of five boys and one out of three girls will be abused before they reach the age of eighteen. The child’s emotional growth will be arrested at the age of the first attack, and we have found the surviving victim won't begin to work on recovery until adulthood, if then.

Boys, as well as girls, are victims of child sexual abuse. Abusers come in all shapes and sizes. Many perpetrators were perceived by the child to be an authority, including: father, grandfather, mother, brother, uncle, friend of the family, aunt, teacher -- unfortunately the list is endless.

Some of the social maladjustments arising from incest are: alcoholism, drug addiction, self-injury, prostitution, promiscuity, sexual disfunction and suicide. Eating or sleeping disorders, migraines, back or stomach pains are just a few of the serious physical consequences that we may suffer. Food, sex, alcohol and/or drugs deaden painful memories of the abuse and obscure reality temporarily. If for instance we perceive obesity to be unattractive, and if we believe or were told that we were abused because we were attractive, we may overeat in a misguided yet totally understandable attempt to defend ourselves from further sexual assault.

"I felt like throwing up" is a common response among victims. Bulimia is a way of acting out that feeling. Anorexia can be another form of self-punishment, or a desperate grab for control, eventually leading to the ultimate self-victimization, suicide.

A number of emotional problems may emerge from the abuse, including inability to trust, perfectionism, phobias, avoidance of both intimacy and emotional bonding. The denial system that insured our survival as children now prevents us from enjoying unencumbered adulthood. We don’t trust our own perceptions; we were forced to become an expert in disbelieving our own senses. We tried to convince ourselves that we over-reacted and that nothing really terrible happened: "My daddy would never REALLY hurt me."

When reality is too painful for a child's mind s/he learn to fictionalize - to somehow make it all make sense. It is extremely painful to give up the fantasy family we needed but never got. Children see themselves either in reflected glory or disgraced shadows. Therefore, we sometimes make excuses for the abuser: "He was drunk at the time. She had it rough as a child." We take responsibility for the assaults: "I was too attractive, too sexy." The abuser probably reinforced our own nagging guilt and questions we had concerning our own innocence. Essentially, we defend the perpetrator by minimizing, rationalizing and taking on the blame.

If we continue to use these coping mechanisms (or "old ideas") as adults, we set ourselves up to be abused in current relationships. We may even feel safer in the familiar role of victim. In Survivors of Incest Anonymous, we can learn to accept the fact that we were abused rather than loved by the abuser. We can then learn to seek out healthy, loving relationships. We have been accustomed to accepting only crumbs, believing that we do not deserve anything better, when in fact we deserve the very best.

We may have parenting problems, always second-guessing our decisions - another result of distrusting our own perceptions. We may avoid parenting altogether, or try to be a perfect parent or live in fear of somehow repeating the abuse. The worst possible consequence of not working on our own recovery is to see abuse fall on the next generation and assume the blame.

Another repercussion of incest is that we often regard authority figures with anxiety. Passivity is comfortable because it is familiar, and we may accept familiar misery rather than risk unfamiliar change. An experiment in learned helplessness was conducted in which dogs were forced to endure painful electric shocks without any means of escape. A second group of dogs were compelled to endure shocks and quickly escaped when it was possible. When the first group was shocked again, with escape now possible, they did not leave. They had been conditioned to endure pain. This experiment explains why so many of us are sexually and/or emotionally abused as adults by therapists, spouses, counselors, doctors or bosses. We have become accustomed to losing battles and to feeling powerless. We may not believe we can winor we are worthy. Assertion is a difficult concept for incest victims.

Our inability to trust affects our sexual relationships, too. Women who have been abused by men will often say, "I don’t trust any men, they only want sex." Boys abused by women may feel that all women are threatening. Abused boys may feel compelled to believe " I MUST BE homosexual. " The assaults were sometimes associated with emotional or physical pleasure, and this fact reinforces the suspicion that the victim must be homosexual: "Both my uncle and a male teacher were attracted to me, and it felt good, I liked it, so I must be gay." In defense of the abuser, the victim may say, "I am the one that is gay, and my abuser sensed it, that’s all."

Another result of the conflicting messages of incest is that many of us confuse sex with affection and love. Many women will say, "The only time my father ever gave me any attention was in bed. I was special to him then. I felt loved." Since she desperately needs validation, this woman may become promiscuous. SIA may help her understand that a promiscuous child is often the result, but never the cause of incest. Here the victim may mistakenly believe if someone has sex with her, then that means she is loved. She has confused sex and love.

When the abuse is physically violent, perhaps even painful, we may confuse sex with control and power. A typical comment might be, "When I have sex with someone, I feel like s/he is controlling my body. I feel that as I respond to her/him, s/he is manipulating me, and I am a puppet all over again." We may shut off all sexual feelings and retreat from all sexual contact - we fear that everyone will use or abuse us.

Changing self-destructive patterns is a slow process, but in SIA we can learn that it is possible. It takes tremendous strength for us to put ourselves in a position to examine and feel this pain. We need incredible courage and reliable professional help. Survivors of Incest Anonymous, a 12-step, self-help, spiritual recovery program, is an available resource for adult survivors. A statement read at the end of each SIA meeting reminds us: "The pain is temporary, but denial and its consequences are forever." When we tire of the consequences, and become willing to work diligently on the incest issues, we are then on the way to living our lives as true survivors rather than victims.

[Curryong]

Again, a voice crying in the Wilderness! I appreciate that you have wide experience in this area, debbie, and all the studies you have posted, but thereis no evidence that has ever emerged that Andrew was commiting incest with his daughters. I have read studies of incest cases in 19th century Australia and Britain. We know that it was unfortunately much more common than people realised all over the world including the United States. There is no proof, however, that it was occurring in the Borden home.

You'd have to say, from people's reminiscences in later life, Lizzie seems to be the reverse of a helpless personality. People wrote of her, whether she was pleasant or not to them, as reserved, firm-minded, 'knew what she wanted' (this observation from people who nursed her in hospital), meticulous, even 'masculine' but certainly not helpless or needy in any way.

The 'girls' stood up for what they regarded as their 'rights' about the Whitehead house after relatives let the news out of the bag around town about Andrew buying it for Abby. Doesn't sound as if Andrew, in his response in offering his daughters another property after a row, was a molestering tyrant. Quite the opposite!

[debbiediablo]

Learned helplessness doesn't necessarily manifest in all areas of life...although it can. Just as often it relates only to the situation (physical, emotional, sexual abuse, kidnapping) under which it occurred. I totally agree that there is no concrete evidence that Andrew abused anyone excepting the Grein letters and possibly what's locked in a Boston law office; but, the fact is that all the evidence we have from that period has been gone through with a fine tooth comb a thousand times over. The answer does not lie in the testimony or anything else available to generations of amateur sleuths, and professional ones! For me, what remains is to attempt to gain insight from taking what we know in the 21st century -- advances in forensics and profiling and psychology to name a few - and applying them to information extant from 1892. Rather than say there's no evidence of incest when the likelihood of there being evidence is pretty much zero (regardless of the truth) unless Lizzie were foolish enough to try to use it as a defense or someone witnessed it and was willing to testify. I'd rather look at those aspects of the Borden family members, their lifestyle, their personalities and analyze them for the potential of abuse. Or anything else, for that matter. Horse rustling? Embezzlement? Blackmail? I can say without hesitation that if this family presented today with locks on all the doors, paranoia of poisoning, the mysterious "they" being responsible for missing keys and the like, a servant who is banned from the second floor and from all the bedrooms, etc., a patriarchal figure where money is the currency instead of love...red flags would fly. That Andrew and Abby ended up hatcheted to death with Andrew's murder showing clear signs of both depersonalization and undoing would elicit even more red flags. The kind of evidence we look for in murder needn't be whether or not Abby attempted to crawl under the bed; it can also be whether or not the victims own behavior was heinous enough to contribute to the heinousness of the crime. Unless something new surfaces, we will never know the truth for sure, but we can come to our own conclusions about probability versus possibility versus no way whatsoever.

[Curryong]

Yes, debbie, agree. However, you will agree, won't you that there is a danger in diagnosing inter-personal relationships in a family from the 1890's of which we really know so little. We have few if any letters, for example, between family members that could give us any soundings on what they really felt about each other. We only know what outsiders have told us in later years regarding Lizzie and her father ie that she spoke of Andrew sometimes with nostalgia, love and tenderness, but never spoke of Abby. Was that because 'you never speak ill of the dead,' because of remorse, because hatred was still there? We shall never know because the dead can't speak, they can't tell us, can they?

We know about the dislike of Abby by her stepdaughters because of testimony and witness statements, but what do we know about the relations between Andrew and Emma, for example? Nothing. It's a very large void when we try to unpick Borden family interaction. We can fill it with speculation and theory, but that's all it is, really.

When we look at the Bordens we can see a dysfunctional family, a family that didn't communicate well, a peculiar family with many odd habits. Some of it had to do with the times in which they lived, some of it had to do with members' attitudes to Andrew's wealth, some went back all the way to a deathbed promise.

However, for me, it is a very large leap to go from that to a firm conviction that incest must have taken place, without some smidgen of proof. Maybe BOBO will provide incontrovertible evidence and I will then come on the forum with hearty apologies and eat humble pie! Until then it's a case of 'not proven yet' for me.Sorry!

[irina]

Perhaps an interesting parallel study would be why women and womens' groups defended her. Women were to Lizzie what African Americans were to O.J. Simpson. There also seemed to be a reluctance in the part of the prosecution to win the case. This implies to me that a potential motive beyond greed was known in inner circles. Not necessarily incest, but something beyond murder for money was a likely known or strongly suspected. It should be the responsibility of the state to severely punish murder for greed. Not to do so sets a bad precedent.

That said, I have to agree with Curryong. Criminal profiling is helpful but it is not a completely accurate science. With Lizzie we also have to look back over many years and confirmation is hard to come by. Approaching the story as history only I think incest must be handled carefully, as a possibility. So if I wrote about Lizzie I would offer it as just that, a maybe.

In considering Andrew messing with the maids, we don't have a tradition of Bridget locking her room. Maybe she did & it wasn't discussed. It was Andrew who locked his room and that doesn't seem to fit with him as the mighty molester. I also get the idea Bridget was quite masculine. Maybe she didn't appeal to Andrew. Maybe Abby begged her to stay because she wasn't attractive to Andrew. Or maybe not.

I do have to take exception to the article about incest survivors, the part about the abuse causing migraine, stomach pains, etc. By EVER linking a psychological cause to physical ills marginalizes somatic conditions in need of medical treatment. Migraine and stomach issues go together. Migraine may even originate in the digestive system. It is genetic, period. I am sure some incest survivors get migraine due to genetics. Their perception of the condition may even be different from others but the condition is physical. When doctors can get away with dismissing what they can't fix, as mental, the patient is left to suffer. Thus I lost 40 years of my life to a horrible and extremely rare heart condition that was called mental illness until it almost killed me in my fifties. THEN there was no question I was very physically ill though I had been ridiculed for years as mentally ill. Indeed I had been trained to tell my doctors that my ridiculously high pulse was a mental condition! So I fight vehemently as a writer and researcher against psychosomatic illness. I don't believe it exists.

[MysteryReader]

[quote="taosjohn"]2. We know that Andrew was dosing himself with "Garfield Tea." I have the impression that the "tobacco" found in his pocket effects was loose in an envelope, rather than in a commercial pouch identifying it as tobacco.

Okay, this is the first I've heard of Garfield Tea so I had to look it up: it was used as a laxative and diruetic. For temporary constipation and for activating sluggish bowels. It was a combination of herbs which had laxative properties. (http://www.herbmuseum.ca/content/garfield-tea)

[debbiediablo]

Okay, were the Bordens suffering from diarrhea (what I've been thinking) or constipation. If Andrew was hauling home Garfield Tea then maybe he was causing some of the problems if both he and Abby were taking it in excess. It'd be somewhat amusing if all the concern about poisoning was the result of a self-administered herbal remedy.

Once again Irina has expressed my thinking better than I do. Retrospective diagnosing may be accurate or may not be... it's debatable but not provable one way or another. However, I do think something else was going on, something toxic in that household which people either knew about or suspected. Men refused to entertain the idea that properly bred and reared daughters could turn a hatchet on their father, and maybe women felt that way, too. But there's also the possibility that something either known or suspected in the community provided a degree of mitigation for women's groups.

For all the accolades offered about Andrew and Abby, I still cannot move past the neighbor who said, "We never heard that anyone of them is or ever
was Insane but I think some of them worse than Insane." In the late 1800s very little was considered worse than insane.