For victims of domestic violence, one of the most disrespectful, obnoxious questions first time listener's often ask is, "why didn't you leave?" Usually followed by a few of their thoughts on how easy it would have been to leave sooner given the circumstances.Not, 'why did you stay" which would at least have given the victim the benefit of doubt in having a brain that could logically, rationally produce reasons for staying as long as you did. What I've found most disconcerting, are the number of people today who are still insensitive, unable to relate, and bold in their opinions on how simple the decision would be to leave. As though at the drop of a pin, its that easy. Yet, one might be surprised to know how much domestic violence there is in upper middle income and wealthy populations. In those groups, everything is to be kept quiet, behind closed doors, and the reasons for staying in the domestic violence are greater than those in poverty, including the threat of death. The higher the income, the greater the denial.
Back 12 years ago there were large movements to get the greater population to wake up and realize there are many logical, rational, explainable reasons why people (women for the most part) do not quickly leave environments of domestic violence. The more education on that, the more reasons victims found for not leaving. Life can be hell, but it can be worse after leaving domestic violence - no thanks to the general mainstream public.
There are loads of people who hate their jobs, complain about them day in and day out, and for years afterwards. How often are they asked, "why didn't you leave?" They are asked that, but not nearly as much as a victim in domestic violence, or with the tone of voice and looks the questioner delivers the question with. Hearing long term dissatisfaction with a job, first though assumption generally is 'the pay must be really good'. Finances in a job and those relative to a home environment are pretty much the same - safety net. Lot's of other logical, rational, explainable reasons in both instances. There is also a lot of support for those who quit bad jobs, and typically without remarks questioning something having been 'wrong' with them that the job didn't work out. Huge contrast to a victim of domestic abuse, quitting the marriage, trying to get back into mainstream civilization, and the snide remarks referencing something wrong with them not only because they quit the marriage, but because of their poor choice of marriage partner to begin with, and then "what did you do to become abused?".
2008, and still people don't know better than to judge a victim of abuse negatively, or know the person has a fully functional brain and is not some piece of emotional garbage, or 'damaged goods' for the remainder of their life? Wouldn't it be nice if we could all have a peaches and cream life, or that no one had any skeletons in their closet making them 'damaged goods' for their entire life.
A few months ago I proposed the difference between "why didn't you leave" and "why did you stay" to an organization in California who is working on teaching medical professionals how to be more sensitive to victims of abuse - past and present. My explanation was presented that week to the Board of Directors, caused quite a stir and discussion, and a change in all of their material was made to "why did you stay". Everyone in agreement to the subtle difference the questions infer. The words we say and how we say them does make a difference. In the above, one is an accusation with negative connotations, the other is an open invitation denoting real understanding and caring.