Mothers Who Molest Their Children

By Eric Ross, Ph.D.

Mistie Atkinson is accused of having sex with her
16-year-old biological son several times, while
videotaping the crime.  She sexted her son nude
pictures of herself, and they were planning
to run away together.

Repulsive and sick as it is, incest, including that committed by mothers, is an ugly crime. Yet, when women molest, the societal taboos and the Western cultural chivalry result in a virtual ban on an honest discussion of their conscience-shocking behavior. We either "do not want to know” or would rather forget that women do molest, kill, and manipulate their children. At best, we search for "reasons" to explain-away such ugly behavior on various convenient excuses, designed to satisfy our romantic, chivalric cultural mythology of saintly motherhood, going back to the first centuries of Christianity.

Why do they really do it? – There is often (but not always) a discernible method to these women's "madness":  it is not unusual among "mothers" mastering the "fine art" of manipulation, to be motivated by seeking and gaining mental and emotional control over their male children by sexually seducing them.  By turning her young son against his father, the malignantly narcissistic "mother" transforms the child into her “avenger” for the “transgressions,” often imagined, which she may believe were committed by the child’s father. Incest may become part of the mother's efforts to alienate the child from his father. More often than not extreme parental alienation and emotional manipulation by mother results in folie a deux relationship with the disturbed mother and ends up tragically, leading to the child’s criminal behavior in life.  (See, e.g. Tucker L.S., Cornwall T.P.: Mother-son folie a deux: a case of attempted patricide. American Journal of Psychiatry 1977; 134:10:1146-1147)


In other cases, sex with their sons is no more to these "mothers" than a primitive bodily function, which in their Troglodytic minds of the dregs of society, trumps the law, ethics and basic moral barriers. Other reasons may include the added sexual excitement of breaking the law and societal taboos.


Here's the latest example:

<< Napa police said that videos captured on the boy's phone show Atkinson allegedly performing oral sex and having sexual intercourse with the teen in February. She's also accused of sending sexually explicit images to the boy electronically. "Atkinson and the victim are aware they are biological mother and son," cops said in a release.
       The boy's father, who has sole custody, obtained a restraining order against Atkinson,The Weekly Vice reported.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/01/woman-had-sex-with-son_n_1467202.html?1335880755&ncid=edlinkusaolp00000008  >>

Amie Sword, age 35, contacted her
10-year-old son she had given up for
adoption as toddler, and engaged
the young boy in a-several-months-
long sexual relationship, before it
was discovered by his guardians.

This case is reminiscent of another incest case, circa 2009-2010, that of Aimee Louise Sword, of Waterford, Michigan, who tracked down on the Internet her son, whom she had given up for adoption as a toddler. Having made a contact with the 10-year-old boy, the 35-year-old "mother" began a sexual relationship with him, which went on for several months undetected, before the boy's legal guardians found out.  Her lack of responsibility and restrain absolutely confounded psychologists. 


This essay is not a comment on the specific cases of Mistie Atkinson or Amie Sword.  Rather, it is a musing about much larger phenomena, from the pop culture painting women as "nurturing saints," when in reality many are master manipulators who molest their sons and mess with their minds, to the psychology of family relations, the "divorce battles", "Gender Wars," and the Family Law, deliberately made and kept adversarial.


Because of the adversarial “Family Law” system, set up by the states’ Bar Associations to benefit, first and foremost, the legions of hungry lawyers, of which the U.S. has more than the rest of the world combined, America’s parents are forced to compete for the “custody” of their children in fully blown "Divorce Battles" and the raging "Gender War." In this war, children – despite their “resiliency,” falsely alleged by the beneficiaries of the hostilities, the lawyers – suffer dearly, often maimed psychologically for life, and for generations to come.  


Jocasta, Oedipus and Medea Complex  

          
In psychoanalysis, the Jocasta complex is the incestuous sexual desire of a mother towards her son. It may be a latent manifestation of her desire to control her child.  Mothers seeking to spite the child’s father, may engage in extremely harmful behaviors, including sexual and psychological seduction of the child, appealing to the male child's deeply rooted and inescapable Oedipus complex (competition with the father for the mother’s affections), universally acknowledged as the central concept in all schools of psychoanalysis, from classical to post-modernist. 

Jocasta, Oedipus' mother, who became his lover and wife, was
a much tougher enigma for Oedipus to crack than the Sphinx.

An interesting interpretation of the ancient Greek tragedy “Oedipus, the King” by the author of this blog, can be found at http://www.logos-publishing.com/Oedipus-1.htm .  It shows some of the games the "motherly" women play to blind men, while men are desperately looking for truth.

Oedipus and Sphinx, by
Gustave Moreau, 1864

The Father of psychoanalysis, Sigmund Freud, gave the Oedipus complex this succinct definition: 

“It is the fate of all of us, perhaps, to direct our first sexual impulse towards our mother and our first hatred and our first murderous wish against our father.”

               (Sigmund Freud, The Interpretation of Dreams, chapter V, "The Material and  Sources of Dreams", (D) Typical Dreams, New York: Avon Books, p. 296.)

In some most pathological cases of Parental Alienation, women seek to harm their children, or even kill them, deliberately, in order to hurt the children’s Father (Medea Complex):  

“When the mother wishes to punish the father by turning their children against him, she is also aggressing against the children. In her unconscious, both the children and the husband represent the same thing… and destructiveness is wished on them both. In short, a mother who brainwashes her children against their father has a Medea Complex.”

     (Robert M. Gordon, Ph.D., The Medea Complex and the Parental Alienation)

Eugène Delacroix. Medea about to
Kill Her Children. 1838.
Oil on canvas. Louvre, Paris, France

Behind the perversion and depravity of harming children, is the State, with its Family Courts benefiting the lawyers and the notorious “Village”, which breeds virtual orphans, thoroughly brainwashed by the State. Their slogan “It takes a Village” is used to remove one or both parents in order to indoctrinate children into being the obedient slaves of the State. Ultimately, that is what is going on, always on "good" excuses, and "in the best interests of children."  


While a dishonest, heartless parent may engage in a campaign of alienating the child from the other biological parent, she is often aided and abetted by the family court. The government, whose effectiveness is magnified by its virtually unlimited power, often acts as an omnipowerful alienator against one or both parents. 

Key to Effective Brainwashing of Children: Removal of Parental Authority, and Substituting “the Village” for One or Both Parents

A child is a moral and political tabula rasa. The Latin phrase means a blank slate, on which his/her grownup teachers and indoctrinators can inscribe any toxic ideology. When the biological father, usually the source of moral guidance for children, is removed, the state  can brainwash the child as Nazis did, without having to overcome the resistance from the ethical and moral barriers, usually instilled in children by their biological parents. These barriers allow the normally-developed adults to distinguish good from evil. But the state needs children who can be told what is good and the state will use every opportunity to screw with the youngsters' minds to fit the state's needs. 

Tabula rasa is also featured in Sigmund Freud's psychoanalysis. Freud saw personality traits as being formed by the family dynamics. (For extreme cases see, e.g., Oedipus complex, Jocasta complex, Medea complex above.) According to Freud, humans lack free will, in that they inevitably become the product of their upbringing; and also – the genetic influences on human personality are minimal when compared to the person's upbringing. In psychoanalysis, one is largely determined by one's upbringing, and we all intuitively and empirically know this to be true.  Now, pause and ponder over this ...  Isn't it why totalitarian governments always claimed the young generation of people to be their own?
You may find many events in history that show totalitarian regimes forcing the parents out or destroying them, then assuming their role. See, for example www.Logos-Publishing.com.


From Hitler’s Third Reich, to America’s Fourth Reich, governments, "leaders" and governmental organizations systematically remove parents – particularly fathers – from their children’s lives, so the totalitarian State could turn these children into its obedient slaves, efficient operatives, and cannon fodder. As Hitler said in his programme book Mein Kampf:

"Only the greatness of the sacrifices will win new fighters for the cause, till perseverance finally receives the reward of success.

But for this, one needs the children from the great masses of the nation. "

In the U.S., it is the Family Courts, who harvest children en mass; in Nazi Germany it was the youth organizations linked to the Nazi Party, NSDAP:

http://www.logos-publishing.com/Hitlerjugend-1.htm