An Open Letter From Dylan Farrow

[Shinola]

I agree with much of what you said but do believe Mia is partly responsible if Woody abused Dylan. She knew something was off and had given orders that he should not be alone with her. She then found he was sexually involved with Soon-yi and still wanted to try and save the relationship. And most striking to me, she got involved with a man who wanted nothing to do with her children. Then added 3 more kids to her family with the man who wanted nothing to do with kids. She was willing to have a life with a man and build a family with him even though he wanted nothing to do with her kids. That is setting your kids and relationship up for failure and is not healthy for the kids even if no abuse happens.

It's absolutely fucked up and a failure, and I think that Dylan could reasonably feel very let down by her mother but has opted not to go there because she gets more out of having a parent who supports her than from turning against both, and Mia apparently is there for her now even if she wasn't fully there at the time.

Mia Farrow clearly fucked up, but the appeals court made a good point, which was that some of her behavior could be seen as incited by the things Woody Allen had done, but the same could not be said for him of her. If I had a partner I loved and who was accepted as eccentric and widely adored--and perhaps if I had some personal issues that made me easily manipulated or fleeced, and I was reeling from finding naked photos of my daughter taken by my partner and went off the rails, and it was not 2014 but a couple of decades earlier--maybe I would have made some poor decisions too. All I know is I frequently see that women are expected to be the moral police in families and take responsibility for men's transgressions in addition to their own.

^^ I wouldn't want to be with someone I couldn't trust to be alone with my cats, never mind any theoretical children. First warning signs and they would be GONE. When you take on the responsibility for another life, animal or human, then you have to think and act with them in mind.

We know from the court records that Mia had concerns about Woody's behavior, and evidently she believed it was emotional over-involvement and lack of judgment, and not full-on abuse. In other words, she didn't have the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, as Dylan had not yet made accusations, and there were no Soon-Yi photos, only misgivings that were no doubt going to be swatted away. We know that Woody Allen countered her concerns by saying she was too attached to Satchel / Ronan.

I have my own prejudice here. I know what it's like to be told that purple is green and be expected to believe it, and I know it's easier to put someone in that position if their own background weakens their self-protective mechanisms. I was in a messed-up scenario, married to a very controlling and possibly sociopathic man, and have had to work very hard to get stronger and trust my gut and stand my ground.

So anyway, yes, Mia Farrow didn't do all she could have to protect her kids, and she has to live with that. Public judgment says she was supposed to believe that Woody Allen was a child molester in advance of evidence, when even many members of the public do not believe it despite his now adult daughter saying he molested her. Interesting circular logic.

[witchcurlgirl]

http://www.nytimes.com/books/97/02/23/reviews/farrow-doctor.html

This was linked in another Salon piece today. Dr. Coates was Ronan's psychologist, she was mentioned above in the NY appellate court decison, alone with Dr. Schultz who was Dylan's clinical psychologist. According to the NY court's decision above, these two doctors agreed with the Yale/New Haven assessment. Her testimony at the link is more about Mia, but it certainly was interesting.

[MohandasKGanja]

There were problems with the Yale assessment, though, so not sure how much that's worth. To review:

An examination of the Yale report and court documents shows:
• The Yale team used psychologists on Allen’s payroll to make mental health conclusions. “That seems like a blatant conflict of interest; they should have excluded themselves,” Schetky says.
• Custody recommendations were made even though the team never saw Allen and any of the children together. “I’d sure want that information,” Schetky says.
• The team refused to interview witnesses who could have corroborated the molestation claims.
• The team destroyed its notes. “I don’t know why they would,” Schetky says. “They shouldn’t have anything to hide, unless they’re in disagreement.”
• Leventhal, the only medical doctor on the team, did not interview Dylan. “How can you write about someone you’ve never seen?” Schetky asks.
• The night before Leventhal gave a statement to Farrow’s attorney, he discussed the scenario with Abramowitz, the head of Allen’s legal team, for about 30 minutes.
• The team interviewed Dylan nine times. For three consecutive weeks, she said violated her sexually. In several of the other sessions, she mentioned a similar type of abuse. When Dylan did not repeat the precise allegation in some of the sessions, the team reported this as an inconsistency.

[Mel1973]

boo! invalid address, witch!

[Mel1973]

There were problems with the Yale assessment, though, so not sure how much that's worth. To review:

An examination of the Yale report and court documents shows:
• The Yale team used psychologists on Allen’s payroll to make mental health conclusions. “That seems like a blatant conflict of interest; they should have excluded themselves,” Schetky says.
• Custody recommendations were made even though the team never saw Allen and any of the children together. “I’d sure want that information,” Schetky says.
• The team refused to interview witnesses who could have corroborated the molestation claims.
• The team destroyed its notes. “I don’t know why they would,” Schetky says. “They shouldn’t have anything to hide, unless they’re in disagreement.”
• Leventhal, the only medical doctor on the team, did not interview Dylan. “How can you write about someone you’ve never seen?” Schetky asks.
• The night before Leventhal gave a statement to Farrow’s attorney, he discussed the scenario with Abramowitz, the head of Allen’s legal team, for about 30 minutes.
• The team interviewed Dylan nine times. For three consecutive weeks, she said violated her sexually. In several of the other sessions, she mentioned a similar type of abuse. When Dylan did not repeat the precise allegation in some of the sessions, the team reported this as an inconsistency.

No offense (or as little as possible), but there seems to be a problem/concern with every evaluation that doesn't flat-out say "Woody's a kiddie fucker"...

[MohandasKGanja]

No offense (or as little as possible), but there seems to be a problem/concern with every evaluation that doesn't flat-out say "Woody's a kiddie fucker"...

No offense taken at all. In the passage I cited, the problem/concerns are made by:

Dr. Diane Schetky, an associate professor of psychiatry at the University of Vermont, co-author of the widely used textbook Child Sexual Abuse and co-editor of Clinical Handbook of Child Psychiatry and the Law

Since she doesn't appear to have worked for either of the parties in the case, it would seem that her disinterested concerns would be pretty relevant.

[witchcurlgirl]

Of course they used doctors that were on Allen (and Farrow's) payroll to make the assessment. The kids had already been in therapy for ages, so the Yale New Haven Team spoke to them. Why wouldn't they speak to the people that had been treating them?

[MohandasKGanja]

Of course they used doctors that were on Allen (and Farrow's) payroll to make the assessment. The kids had already been in therapy for ages, so the Yale New Haven Team spoke to them. Why wouldn't they speak to the people that had been treating them?

They said they used them to make mental health conclusions, not just spoke to them. Once again, a psychologist whosse specialty was in this area thought that was a "blatant conflict of interest".

[witchcurlgirl]

Sorry about the broken link, Mel. Maybe if I type it out it will be workable, just close the space I added: www. nytimes.com/books/97/02/23/reviews/farrow-doctor.html

[Mel1973]

Someone PLEASE explain to me WHY toddlers are in fucking therapy? I mean, seriously... what are toddlers so upset and in need of therapy over? not enough blocks for 15 children at your home? I mean, these kids are barely verbal and they are sitting there discussing WHAT with THEIR shrink?

[sluce]

We treat toddlers everyday. It is normal practice.

Shinola - I do not think it is just mothers who are held to policing everything. But most often it is the father who abuses the kids. In the reverse cases I see, the fathers are viewed the same as mothers when they knew or suspected abuse and did nothing to protect their kids. I watched a Judge ream a father last week for not doing enough to protect his 3 kids and he didn't even live in the same house. The judge told him he had failed as a father because he walked away when they needed him the most he must now step to the plate since he wants custody.

[sputnik]

I'll agree with that. Hated that movie and have never been a Mia fan. But I'm not a Woody fan either, even before the accusations.

i think she's an obnoxious attention-whore and a crappy person but i loved rosemary's baby and i think she's delivered some wonderful performances in her career, ironically mostly in woody allen movies.

[*DIVA!]

I'll agree with that. Hated that movie and have never been a Mia fan. But I'm not a Woody fan either, even before the accusations.

I have never cared for him nor his movies!!

[witchcurlgirl]

• Leventhal, the only medical doctor on the team, did not interview Dylan. “How can you write about someone you’ve never seen?” Schetky asks.

Not certain when Schetky became involved in the case, or if they just involved her for the CT magazine piece, but contemporaneous accounts seem to dispute some of her points. According to sworn statements Levanthal interviewed Dylan nine times. http://www. Nytimes.com/1993/05/04/nyregion/doctor-cites-inconsistancies-in-dylan-farrow-s-statements.html

[rollo]

I can't understand the point of view (which is in other threads as well) that they are both as bad as each other. Someone did something awful, the other person reacted and somehow they are both equally to blame. I can't make that leap of bad logic. There is always someone (Woody in this case) who started a chain of events which caused the recipients (the kids and Mia) to react, perhaps belatedly or insufficiently, but the inappropriate behaviour (to say the least) started with Woody.