This email is for you if you like hearing the honest truth about people’s behaviour and all the ways they contradict themselves. No sugar-coating. Just a clearer idea of what you’re dealing with in the real world.
I came across a news story the other day that I want to tell you about. The Irish parliament recently passed a new law called Jennie’s Law.
Under the law, people convicted of serious domestic violence offences against a current or former partner can be named on a public online register. The idea is to let you find out whether someone you’re seeing, or thinking about getting involved with, has a history of domestic violence.
The law is named after Jennifer “Jennie” Poole, a 24-year-old woman who was murdered by her former partner in 2021. She had no idea that he had already been convicted of violently attacking a previous partner.
And you’ll probably be thinking: what a good idea!
People who can’t function in society will have their names put on a register. Then, anyone unlucky enough to cross paths with them can look them up and say:
“Oh, this person is on the list. I’d better stay away from them.”
Right?
Right.
Because people always make perfectly rational decisions.
Right?
Over the past few weeks, I’ve seen several Irish adverts and promotional videos about the law.
In them, professionals from different fields described it as a highly effective measure. Their argument centred on Jennie’s case and something one of her brothers said: if she’d seen this man’s name on a register, she would never have got involved with him.
Let me be clear: the law is well intentioned. Any attempt to eradicate domestic abuse is a good thing. The question is whether it will actually work.
Even so, the law strikes me as rather simplistic. It overlooks the psychology of people who end up in relationships with abusers. At first glance, I’d say the people behind it have no idea how the mind of someone in an abusive relationship works.
Seeing a name on a register may seem like all the proof you need. Yet it may count for very little when you’re making a deeply personal decision about someone.
We make those decisions emotionally. Logic rarely gets the final say.
Anyone who has been through domestic abuse, or watched someone close to them go through it, knows how hard it can be to help someone leave and rebuild their life with people who treat them well.
From the outside, the answer seems obvious: leave.
When you’re inside that relationship, things don’t look nearly so simple. By then, logic has very little say.
If logic were enough, why would they be with an abusive person in the first place? Why would they have chosen someone like that?
A register can be useful, particularly when it comes to sex offenders. If you discover before a first date that someone has a criminal record for a sexual offence, you can avoid meeting them altogether.
Domestic abuse is more complex. An abuser rarely goes from zero to 100 on the first date.
Abuse often starts subtly and escalates over time. The psychological manipulation escalates with it, making the situation increasingly difficult to escape.
A look.
A spiteful comment.
A shove.
“I don’t like you spending time with that person.”
Small things that gradually get worse.
And then there’s another problem with the register. It can only tell us about people who have already been convicted. What about all the abusers whose behaviour has never led to a conviction? Do we have to wait for someone else to be seriously harmed before their names can appear? It doesn’t make much sense.
To understand why someone else stays, you have to ask why a person like that felt familiar to them in the first place. I can tell you now: childhood and upbringing play a big part. Put simply, they may have learnt that this is what relationships are supposed to look like.
Being treated badly feels normal. Being controlled feels normal. The whole dynamic feels normal. You also have to understand why smaller acts of abuse become tolerable when they happen one at a time.
Again, abuse rarely jumps from zero to 100.
One incident today, another tomorrow. A look, a shove or an objection to who you’re allowed to see. Each one a little worse than the last.
Someone who has never learnt to see this kind of treatment as normal may spot the first subtle sign of abuse and leave. They may notice that look or hear that malicious comment and think: No. I’m not going to tolerate this.
They’ll walk away before it goes any further.
Jennie’s Law falls short because it starts at the end of the story. It focuses only on the final outcome: Was this person convicted?
Then their name can go on the list.
Anyone can look them up. If the name isn’t there, everything must be fine. Except people don’t work like that.
What about all the subtle psychological abuse that never results in a criminal conviction? None of it will appear on the register.
If you never address the root of a problem, it will keep coming back. Addressing the root means stepping back far enough to ask how it began and what keeps it going. We can’t focus solely on the end result of a much longer psychological process.
Someone who has been abused can break out of that cycle.
They can rebuild their life, learn to spot the subtle behaviours they once accepted as normal, recognise them for what they are and go on to have a healthy relationship with someone who treats them well.
Of course they can.
But getting there means going back to the root of the problem.
Love,
Noemi
P.S. Starting today, your dose of practical psychology will arrive three times a week. Yes, August is already here. Gangatu’s newsletter will land in your inbox every Monday, Wednesday and Friday at 3 p.m. (CEST/UTC+2). Just open whichever ones catch your gut.
