How many of you have heard things said about Elizabeth Smart such as, "There's something fishy about it" or "I don't buy it" or "Nobody's that good - they're putting on a show" or "She's not this perfect girl they want you to believe she is" or "She was there willingly - she wasn't abducted at all"? How many of you believe any of these things? How many of you think the people who accept the Elizabeth Smart story at face value are not thinking critically?
Shame on you. It is YOU who are not thinking for yourselves. First of all, you are not using empathy. You are not placing yourself in the shoes of a quiet, shy, 14-year-old girl who was violently abducted from her family. You are definitely cynical, and you are also obviously also ignorant about the psychology of abduction and abuse. Worse, you are illogically believing the least credible information available: about the character of the victim and her family, you are believing tabloid innuendo, rumor, and gossip instead of the people who knew them best: family members, neighbors, and friends. About the abduction itself, you are believing fairly tales and conspiracy theories rather than the first-hand witness testimony about the abduction from the little sister, Mary Katherine, not to mention the fact that police interrogators are absolutely convinced based on a plethora of evidence that she was taken against her will.
Two days after her return, I heard a guy claim on local radio that Elizabeth Smart had multiple facial piercings, including a nose piercing, as well as numerous tatoos, that she ran around with a wild crowd, and she wasn't this "harp playing angel" that had been portrayed by the family. The motivation of that comment was clearly to castigate her character and that of her family. In the first place, so what? Do you think it is more OK to kidnap a kid with piercings than one without? That is both illogical (argumentum ad hominem - attack the person) and morally outrageous. In the second place, it was obviously untrue. The photos since her return show no evidence of nose piercing scars nor any other body modification. And her closest friends who were interviewed on 20/20 last week certainly didn't look like wild hooligans - they looked just like Elizabeth before her abduction - cute, normal girls.
What is it about people that they want to blame the victim? It must have been her fault, right? That's what ignorant people also say about women who have been raped. She was asking for it. It's her fault. That's what people all over the world are saying about 9/11. It's our fault. We deserved it. It's payback to America. We were asking for it.
Apparently, religion is no guarantee that people will be empathetic and compassionate. The day after Elizabeth returned home, I heard a guy from Salt Lake City say on national radio that "only the people in the Smart's neighborhood believe it", and "the rest of us in Salt Lake don't buy it." The host of the show implied that the caller must be a non-Mormon, to be so cynical about the Smart family, but said no, he's a 5th generation Mormon whose ancestors crossed the plains in covered wagons.
There is a defense attorney in Logan who says that "the most judgmental people in the world fill our chapels each week in this valley." Apparently, the people around here don't believe their own doctrine. Jesus said, "Judge not, that ye be not judged." Joseph Smith changed that quote to read "Judge not unrighteously, that ye be not judged, but judge righteous judgement." Then Jesus went on to say, "For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again." In plain English, that means if you condemn other people, God will condemn you, but if you are tolerant and understanding and empathetic to other people, God will be tolerant and understanding and empathetic to you. Whether you are religious or not, it's good advice. The way you judge others is often the way others will judge you. Other, non-religious ways of saying this include "What goes around comes around" and "You reap what you sow."
Apparently, education is also no defense against insensitivity and stupidity. My wife works in a hospital, with nurses and physicians who have impressive college degrees. The other night, they were all standing around, and every single one of them (except my wife) had something unkind to say about the Smart family. One claimed that Ed Smart is a "flaming homosexual." Again, I ask, "So what?" What is he implying? That it's OK to kidnap the children of homosexuals? Does that somehow make it OK? And again, the known facts do not support this conclusion. If he is homosexual, why is he still married to his wife of 20 years? And the fact that he appears to be in the good graces of the LDS Church is incompatible with that claim. It simply doesn't hold water. Another doctor questioned why the little sister didn't go to her parents for four hours after the abduction. Way to go, Doc, questioning the motives and judgment of a traumatized 11 year old girl who is scared out of her wits. I'm sure you have a great bedside manner. He also questioned why neighbors were at the house when the police arrived. Well, duh, maybe the neighbors responded faster than the police did. Given the delays and mistakes made in the investigation, that certainly isn't out of the realm of possibility! He also said "something stinks about this." Yeah, something stinks, all right. It's your attitude. What are you saying - that the family willingly gave their daughter to this nutcase, and then spent all that effort working harder than any other family in history to try to find her and get her back, spreading her picture all over the country, praying and working for nine nightmarish months, and even now are continuing to be a support to other families who have lost children and lobbying Congress for the Amber Alert bill? What - you think they did it for fun? One doctor made fun of the Smart's bishop for saying Elizabeth is "pure before the Lord. People who are in the control of others are not accountable." He said that was a "stupid thing to say." These doctors are Mormons - and one of them was himself recently released as a bishop. So, no, it doesn't appear to me that going to church nor going to college gave these people any ability to think critically or with empathy. And I find that worse than sad - I find it outrageous.
It always amazes me how some people WANT to believe the worst. It's like they feed on negativism. Negativism is a thinking error, used by people who are feeling guilty about their own behavior, as a means to feel better about themselves by pulling everyone else down to their level in their own minds. From personal experience, I can tell you that such people are very depressing to be around, because they'll even use this technique against members of their own families when they are feeling guilty. (If this sounds like someone you are dating, my advice is to get out of the relationship right now! If this sounds like you, you need to get out of that mode if you want to have a happy life. There's probably something in your past that needs to be dealt with, and I would recommend that you get some competent, professional therapy.)
When Elizabeth was found, I was first of all amazed that she was still alive, because the vast majority of female children who are abducted by male non-family members are raped and murdered within a few days. There is some evidence to suggest that others are sold into slavery for purposes of prostitution, sometimes out of the country. So, the fact that she was alive and in the country was unusual, to say the least. The Smart family calls it a miracle. You can call it anything you want, but it was statistically improbable.
Given that Elizabeth was in that very small percent who was not either dead or gone, I was not at all surprised to learn that the motivation was some wacko, extremist religious philosophy. Regardless of what your own religious views are, the sad fact of the matter is that more evil in this world has probably been committed in the name of religion than any other motivation. In fact, most of the problems in the world today are caused by extremist religious zealots. Whether you like it or not, that's a fact. 9/11 would never have happened were it not for religious extremism. Look at Belfast and consider the cause of Irish terrorism for so many years. What do you think is the root cause of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict? What about the Balkan conflict in former Yugoslavia? What about the Tutu massacre in Africa? Every one of those was motivated by religious differences. Even the Japanese side of World War II can be blamed on religious doctrine that deified the Emperor. Religious extremism is why terrorism exists in the Phillippines, Indonesia, and elsewhere. It is why the horrors of the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition and the Salem Witch Trials and many other abominations have taken place in the world. It is why the Mormons were murdered and driven out of Missouri and Illinois. At times in the world's history, it has been the motivation for ritualistic human sacrifice. So it shouldn't be surprising that it could be the motivation for a kidnaping. God told this guy to kidnap Elizabeth, right? Who was he to disobey God? That is exactly the same mindset of those who flew the jets into the World Trade Center. God told them to do it, and who are they to disobey God? So, when somebody comes to you with some religious philosophy that goes against correct principles, and he says it's from God, a healthy dose of critical thinking would be appropriate! That's the time to think for yourself!
The day after Elizabeth's return, it came out in the news that it took the Sandy police officers over an hour of questioning her before she finally admitted who she was. She kept telling them, "I know you think I am that Elizabeth Smart person who ran away, but I'm not," and giving them the alias name, Augustine, that she'd been given by her abductors. When she finally admitted who she was, she used King James English which would be totally out of character for any non-abused 15 year old American child: "Thou sayeth".
It soon became known that she had been in public many times, including at parties, and even at the police station in San Diego, and had never tried to run. Her grandfather said the other day that her abductors even left her alone one day and she didn't try to escape. Does that mean she was a willing participant? Anyone who believes that is an ignoramus. The fact that she did not run does not surprise anyone with any training in psychology nor anyone who has been a victim of abuse. She was brainwashed. One look at the photo on the front page of the Herald Journal that day and anyone familiar with abuse could recognize the signs - the hollow look in the eyes.
It is not hard to brainwash a child. All you have to do is cut her off from everything familiar, deprive her of all comforts and love, and use classical conditioning - rewarding behavior you do want and punishing behavior you don't want (such as corporal punishment, withholding necessities such as food, etc.). Just keep telling her you'll kill her and her family if she doesn't obey, keep telling her that her family thinks she's dead and doesn't care about her and doesn't love her, and that if she went back they wouldn't want her anymore, keep telling her that she's no longer that person, keep telling her she's this new person you're creating, beat her or withhold food from her if she ever mentions anything from her past, tell her she's been chosen by God to be with you, recite convoluted religious doctrine at her for hours a day, and it she'll have Disassociative Disorder in no time, at all.
Disassociative Disorder is common among victims of abuse. It is a survival mechanism where victims compartmentalize their minds and separate the bad parts of their life from the good parts. Disassociative Disorder is a disassociation/ withdrawal/ mental movement away from a traumatic incident or situation. There are two forms of Disassociative Disorder: Repression is an unconscious process by which the mind separates out the trauma from day to day living. Suppression is a conscious effort to push it out of their mind. Either way, the effect is the same: the victim creates a separate place in their mind for the trauma. It's like a room with a door on it, where they go when they are being abused. It is a survival mechanism.
Sometimes Disassociative Disorder is called multiple personalities, but that's a bad description. It's not multiple personalities at all, it's a coping mechanism. Victims of abuse often appear to be "doing fine" because they shut out the abuse and lock it up in a separate part of their minds.
When the abuse is happening, they live from hour to hour just trying to survive, and they don't even think about the other part of their lives. In the case of Elizabeth Smart, it is likely that during the months of imprisonment and psychological abuse, she developed an entirely new identity - her past life was no longer even part of her thinking. All she was thinking was surviving the next few minutes, the next few hours, without being hurt. What do I have to do to not get hurt? That was her life. Her past - her family, her friends, her hobbies, her school - were like a movie or something that wasn't even real.
Disassociative Disorder is why victims can sometimes be such convincing liars about the abuse; they can lock it out as if it doesn't even exist. But there's a terrible price attached to this coping mechanism. The compartmentalization cannot last forever, and even after the abuse stops, the ugliness and horror inside that locked room in their minds continues to fester and grow. Eventually, the locked room starts to leak, and it spills out into other parts of their lives. Little things that remind them of the abuse can trigger debilitating panic attacks. Unless and until the secret room in their minds is opened and the putrid stuff inside is dealt with, the victim will have difficulty in interpersonal relationships, ranging from passive aggressive behaviors, to a lack of trust and security, to narcissistic compulsive behaviors.
Additionally, there is a condition called the Stockholm Syndrome, wherein kidnaped people who are completely dependent upon their abductors for basic survival begin to identify with and sympathize with their abductors. This is very common in hostage situations. That's why you'll see an American news reporter who was kidnaped a couple of years ago on a videotape saying things like how evil America is and how noble the motives and objectives are of the terrorist group that's holding him. The fact that Elizabeth has expressed concern over what's going to happen to her abductors suggests that the Stockholm Syndrome may be another aspect present in her brainwashing.
So, those of you who are saying to yourselves, "It doesn't add up. There's something fishy. The police say Elizabeth is articulate and intelligent, yet she wasn't even smart enough to run when she had the chance. All she had to do is pull off the veil at the party and say ‘I'm Elizabeth Smart'," you don't get it. What you fail to realize is that she wasn't Elizabeth Smart. She was compartmentalized, and in the part of her mind that was operating at that time, she really was someone else. She WAS Augustine.
Keep in mind also that she didn't know about all the publicity. She didn't know she was a household word all over the country. They kept her away from the media. She never heard a radio or TV, or saw a newspaper. Her father has said she did not see any of the banners and posters on the freeway and in stores.
Even if she had known, the risk of trying to flee was far too high. What if she failed? Her abductors had undoubtedly threatened her with death. She was afraid. The Sandy police said that while they were questioning her, Elizabeth's heart was beating so hard that they could see it pulse through her chest! Doesn't that tell you something about how petrified she was?
20/20 had an interesting interview a few days after Elizabeth's return. I just tuned in at the end, and didn't catch her name or even the whole story, but I gather this woman had been imprisoned in a box under a bed for several years. She finally escaped one day with the help of the wife of the perpetrator. During her ordeal, she had several chances to escape on her own before then, but she didn't. Why? She said she was too afraid. "What if I don't succeed? What if I fail? He'll kill me."
Some children are easier to brainwash than others. This person, Brian David Mitchell, who calls himself Imanuel, picked his victim carefully. I heard a guy on the radio who had been one of the experts who had originally profiled the abductor last summer soon after Elizabeth had been abducted, before they knew anything about him. He read part of his profile on the radio. It said that Elizabeth was picked because she was quiet, shy, artistic, right brained, compliant, and a middle child in the family, and also because she was fair skinned, fair haired, religious, and even because of her name: Elizabeth is a Bible name, and Smart implies everything he was looking for in a victim: intelligent, wise, etc. In short, in the perpetrator's perverted mind, she was perfect. She would be easy to abduct, because she would be too scared and compliant to scream or fight, and also easy to brainwash.
It's easy for a 20 year old college student to say that's ridiculous. The same with one of the male employees at the hospital. My wife told him, "Well that's easy for you to say. You're not a little girl. Girls get a lot more scared than guys do." That shut him up - for a few minutes, anyway.
Empathy teaches that not everyone is as strong as you are. Logic teaches that it's not so simple as some people think is. Why do you think even adult women who are in physically and mentally abusive relationships often find it so hard to leave? Why, when the police show up, do they lie about their injuries and protect their tormentors? Because they are brainwashed and because they are terrified. They know full well that the police will not and cannot protect them from the perpetrator. Can you imagine being told that if you tell anyone or try to leave, he will hunt you down and not only kill you -- but also your children? What would that do to you? My own wife lived in that kind of a relationship years ago with her first husband. She was afraid he was going to kill her if she didn't leave him, but she was even more afraid he would kill her if she did leave him.
I remind you of the story of Patty Hurst, who was kidnaped when I was in college. She had the Stockholm Syndrome so badly that she actually joined the group in robbing a bank, and served seven years in prison for it! Should she have been held accountable for that? In my opinion, no. She was kidnaped! She did not join that group of her own free will. She was brainwashed. Don't you get it?
It is WRONG to blame the victim of abuse. It is NOT her fault. You don't know what she's been through and it is unconscionable for you to judge her. Blaming the victim is a form of revicitimization. If you cynically dismiss her story, you are victimizing Elizabeth Smart all over again, and you should be ashamed of yourselves. You are making it so "it's still not over" for her. You are delaying her recovery. You are placing yourselves in the company of her abductor, and you are hurting her, just as he did. I certainly hope her family is keeping Elizabeth away from the media, because if she finds out about people who are blaming her, it will throw her right back into that protective compartmentalization in her mind, and the hollow, vacant look will be right back in her eyes. It's going to take years of competent professional therapy for her to get past what's happened to her, even without us piling more crap on her. She's been through enough.
Nor is it right to blame the secondary victims. Unless you've had one of your own children abducted, you don't have a clue how it feels. So if you don't like how the Smarts have conducted themselves before, during, or since the ordeal, as far as I'm concerned, you can just stick it in your ear. In my opinion, they have been amazing. I certainly know I could not have handled it as well as they have, and I'll bet most of the people criticizing them couldn't have, either. It was their perseverence, not giving up hope, pushing the police, going on America's Most Wanted, and so on that led to Elizabeth's return. If not for their unfaltering efforts, she'd still be with Mitchell.
Now, I need to mention something about false allegations of abuse. Some people say "victims never lie." That is not true. I am personally familiar with several cases where alleged victims have lied about abuse that never happened. Yes, there is such a thing as false accusations of child abuse. But kids seldom come up with such lies on their own. False accusations of abuse are almost always invented by adults, not kids, and they brainwash the kids into believing it. But the Elizabeth Smart case bears none of the circumstances that would suggest such a possibility. There is no apparent motive for the Smart family, for Mary Katherine, nor for Elizabeth to lie about what happened. There is no divorce happening; there is no grudge against the alleged abductor. They hardly even knew him. The idea that Elizabeth secretly ran off with this nut case is nothing short of ridiculous. There is zero credible evidence that she was rebellious, that she didn't get along with her parents, that she had secret contacts with this man before her disappearance, that she lived a secret life, nor that she secretly practiced his kooky religion.
It is clear that Elizabeth Smart was abused. It goes without saying that she was mentally and physically abused. The charges against Mitchell indicate she was also sexually abused. I'd like to offer my definition of abuse for your consideration: "Abuse is the use of power to intentionally manipulate and use another person for your own selfish needs or gratification, to the detriment of that person." Thus, another word for abuse might be "bullying." Abuse can be physical, sexual, or emotional. Usually, the perpetrator has physical power over the victim, but it does not have to be physical power; it can also be emotional or financial power. Adults can be abused, as well as children. Men can be victims, as well as women. Anyone who has power over another person and uses that power to selfishly manipulate and use that person to fill some physical or emotional desire is perpetrating abuse.
Victims of abuse suffer far deeper wounds than are often visible, and it affects them in ways others cannot imagine. Victims often shut the pain inside because others who are well meaning but ignorant perceive them to be weak and say "Why can't you just let it go and move on?" As I said, such statements and attitudes revicitmize the victim, making them feel like they are somehow to blame. But the victim of abuse is NEVER to blame. There is no excuse for abuse. Nobody deserves to be abused. And nobody who has been abused deserves to be blamed.
POSTSCRIPT: Since I wrote this, I have been criticized for my use of the word "ignoramus." Ignoramus is defined as "utterly ignorant person". Igorant is defined as "lacking knowledge or comprehension of the thing specified." The people, including the doctors my wife works with, who were spreading these lies, gossip and innuendo about the Smarts ARE obviously lacking in knowledge or comprehension of the topic of the psychology of abuse and abduction, including Disassociative Disorder and the Stockholm Syndrome, and I do not apologize for my use of that term. Furthermore, in addition to being ignoramuses, I believe they are also judgmental, petty, and uncompassionate.)
To email the author link here
To read other essays by this author link here