Spilled Milk by Kelly Randis: Child Abuse and Reporting

Introduction

In cases of child abuse, the protection of the child is typically the concern of the state. That protection is conceived in different ways: some argue that the best protection for the child is to preserve the family if at all possible, through family preservation policies and practices; others argue that in abusive situations the child needs to be removed from the home (Patwardhan, Hurley, Thompson, Mason & Ringle, 2017). In the book Spilled Milk by Kelly Randis, it is not just one child but half a dozen children who are abused by a father and left unprotected by a disabled mother. The child at the center of the story must come forward and fight a system that seems determined to continue the abuse out of deference to family preservation. The book is based on the true story of Randis's own childhood experience of abuse at the hands of her father. It was not until social services assured her that she and her siblings would be protected that she became willing to come forward and tell the truth about what was happening.

In many child abuse cases, there is always an element of fear regarding what might happen if the truth comes to light — whether the abuse is perpetrated by a family member or by a trusted member of an organization such as a church (Harper & Perkins, 2018; Keenan, 2013; Murray, Nguyen & Cohen, 2014). Exposing the abuse can be terrifying because of the unknown ramifications for all involved.

The Fear of the Unknown

One of the central issues in Spilled Milk is the act of reporting an abusive parent when the outcome for the rest of the family is uncertain. For Brooke, the girl at the center of the narrative, this is a terrifying prospect — yet it is one quite common to the experience of reporting abuse, and many victims share the same fear. As Randis (2013) shows, Brooke is shamed by her mother for writing about the troubling experiences she endures at her father's hands in a private journal. When the journal is discovered, her mother reacts with embarrassment. She harasses and yells at Brooke until the girl agrees never to write such things again. The mother does not question Brooke about what prompted the writing, nor does she investigate. Instead, her first response is shame and fear — embarrassment about what such entries might do to the family's reputation. The mother is consumed by her own image and feelings, giving no attention to what her daughter is experiencing.

Such self-centered reactions to obvious signs of abuse are both a significant mistake and a common occurrence in abusive families. People who live in denial about ongoing abuse do so because facing the truth is too painful or too difficult to accept. It is precisely these types of cases that make family preservation programs almost impossible to implement effectively (Patwardhan et al., 2017). For a family preservation program to function, the entire family must participate openly and accept that harmful behavior has occurred. In most cases, these programs work best when the abuse is unintentional — caused by neglect stemming from poverty or addiction, for example — rather than deliberate. In Brooke's case, the abuse is deliberate, and the mother is in deep denial. It is therefore with profound fear that Brooke even contemplates reporting. Like many victims in her position, she does not know what will happen, and she fears that the consequences of reporting could be worse than the abuse itself.

Brooke tentatively explores her options, but her initial encounters with the legal system are overwhelming and offer no sympathy. This is an important consideration for social workers handling potential abuse situations: victims will not report if they feel they will not be heard or supported (Murray et al., 2014). As Randis (2013) demonstrates, Brooke does not fully come forward until she feels genuine support from a social system and is assured that her siblings will be protected. The system's default tendency is often to keep the family together — with the abusers in place — based on the belief that those committing the abuse can reform themselves through education and training (Patwardhan et al., 2017). Unfortunately, it is rarely that straightforward. Brooke's fear for herself and her siblings is valid, and that fear should be a primary concern for social workers before any family preservation approach is pursued.

The Psychology of Reporting Abuse

Why do people look the other way when it comes to reporting abuse? Harper and Perkins (2018) found that two theories best explain this phenomenon: moral foundation theory and system justification theory. Those who do not turn a blind eye to abuse tend to have a clear sense of right and wrong in which care for others outweighs any willingness to accept harm. The theory posits that in every moral dilemma there will be some form of conflict — between loyalty to a group and exposure of a wrong that brings negative attention to that group, or between accepting the authority of the abuser and the impulse to expose an abuse of that authority. Without a strong moral foundation, stakeholders are unlikely to address abuse appropriately (Harper & Perkins, 2018).

The other theory that explains why stakeholders look away is system justification theory, which holds that people prefer to maintain the status quo rather than disturb it by exposing unpleasant truths (Harper & Perkins, 2018). The failure of stakeholders to report child abuse within church organizations is frequently explained through this lens: stakeholders believe the institution itself is justified and therefore conclude that abuse allegations cannot be true. This is essentially the reaction of Brooke's mother when she discovers the girl's journal. The mother has justified the existence and structure of the family, and the truth Brooke records threatens the status quo and, in the mother's eyes, the continued survival of that family unit.

The reality, of course, is that exposure need not be viewed as something that brings only negative attention. It can instead be seen as something that brings necessary support, intervention, and ultimately positive outcomes. It is the fear of embarrassment, harassment, and unwanted scrutiny that prevents people from speaking out about abuse.

The book by Randis (2013) is therefore important because it brings the subject into the open without concealing its difficulty. Because it is based on a personal true story, the issues it portrays come from an undeniably real place. Reader comments on retail platforms confirm that the book has resonated deeply with others who have experienced similar situations. The fact is that abuse provokes all manner of conflicting feelings and emotions. One is expected to be loyal to one's family, but what happens when that family is disloyal and abusive? The psychology of reporting abuse is accordingly conflicted and emotionally overwhelming for those involved.

Conclusion

The book by Randis (2013) tells the story of a girl who comes forward to report on her father's abuse. Her concern is for her siblings, yet along the way she is shamed into keeping silent or led to believe that her family will be harmed if she pursues the matter. It is not until she receives the love and support she needs — and is confident that her siblings will be protected — that she finally comes forward to report on her father. For children who have experienced abuse, the fear of reporting is real and must be thoughtfully addressed by those working with them. Systems justification theory and moral foundation theory are useful frameworks for understanding the fears and actions of all stakeholders in an abuse situation.

For social workers, the essential point is that every case will be unique. Some cases may accommodate a family preservation approach that keeps children with their parents. Others will not. In Brooke's case, the father was arrested and sent to prison — but that outcome would not have been possible had Brooke not first received the support she needed to come forward and report the abuse.

References

Harper, C. A., & Perkins, C. (2018). Reporting child sexual abuse within religious settings: Challenges and future directions. Child Abuse Review, 27(1), 30–41.

Keenan, M. (2013). Child sexual abuse and the Catholic Church. Oxford University Press.

Murray, L. K., Nguyen, A., & Cohen, J. A. (2014). Child sexual abuse. Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Clinics, 23(2), 321–337.

Patwardhan, I., Hurley, K. D., Thompson, R. W., Mason, W. A., & Ringle, J. L. (2017). Child maltreatment as a function of cumulative family risk: Findings from the intensive family preservation program. Child Abuse & Neglect, 70, 92–99.

Randis, K. L. (2013). Spilled milk.