what is emotional abuse?

Pollycat

Person_one wrote: »

Can you quote the bit where she said it was definitely his fault? It seemed to me that she's more bothered by him being unconcerned about how frightened/shaken up she was.

merlin68 wrote: »

We had an incident in the car today, He never saw a car pull out so i had to scream at him to stop and the other driver waved his arms and swore and when i pulled him up, he took his hands of the wheel and said this is dangerous driving and it was the other drivers fault.
So we got to the cafe and he went into order the meal and i said i felt like going home after nearly being in a car accident, i was in shock and shaky and he was like well im not having nothing im dropping you and going home.
Luckily they had nothing i could eat so home it was.
No was could i sit and eat a meal like that.

It sounds to me that a car pulled out on their car, the OP saw it but her OH didn't.
She screamed at him to stop.
The OP's partner said it was the other driver's fault (which it sounds like it was).
I'm not sure what the OP means by 'when I pulled him up' - I'd hazard a guess that she means she had a go at him about the near-miss.

It really doesn't sound like a healthy relationship at all.

Person_one

Pollycat wrote: »

It sounds to me that a car pulled out on their car, the OP saw it but her OH didn't.
She screamed at him to stop.
The OP's partner said it was the other driver's fault (which it sounds like it was).
I'm not sure what the OP means by 'when I pulled him up' - I'd hazard a guess that she means she had a go at him about the near-miss.

It really doesn't sound like a healthy relationship at all.

It certainly doesn't, no argument there.

Sounds to me like blame can be shared by two drivers, one for pulling out when it wasn't safe, and the other for not concentrating enough to spot it. Both are drive errors, but either way it's not fair for guest101 to have a go at somebody for reacting in fright to a frightening situation!

tomtontom

Gigervamp wrote: »

I was under the impression that motability cars are only meant to be used to ferry the disabled person about, or to e.g collect something like prescriptions for the person.

I don't think they're meant to be used by the non-disabled person as a runnabout for themselves.

If you only go out a few times a week, it might work out cheaper to use taxis.

Is husband not allowed to go out on his own at all?

The rules around Motability are pretty relaxed, the carer may well be taking journeys that are indirectly related to the cared for person. (I don't agree with the generous rules, but that's not relevant here.)

Guest101

Person_one wrote: »

It certainly doesn't, no argument there.

Sounds to me like blame can be shared by two drivers, one for pulling out when it wasn't safe, and the other for not concentrating enough to spot it. Both are drive errors, but either way it's not fair for guest101 to have a go at somebody for reacting in fright to a frightening situation!

My point is:


the OP either saw what was happening and screamed when it was not necessary.


OR


Screamed last second and decided that her husband must've been to blame, with no evidence to support this.


I clearly said this, and neither look particularly good on the OP

Gigervamp

tomtontom wrote: »

Is husband not allowed to go out on his own at all?

The rules around Motability are pretty relaxed, the carer may well be taking journeys that are indirectly related to the cared for person. (I don't agree with the generous rules, but that's not relevant here.)

I added a quote from Motorbility in that post. The carer can use the car, but it has to be for the benefit of the person being cared for.

Pollycat

Person_one wrote: »

It certainly doesn't, no argument there.

Sounds to me like blame can be shared by two drivers, one for pulling out when it wasn't safe, and the other for not concentrating enough to spot it. Both are drive errors, but either way it's not fair for guest101 to have a go at somebody for reacting in fright to a frightening situation!

It may just have been that the OP saw the other car pull out first and reacted (possibly over-reacted) by screaming at her OH.
The OP's OH may well have seen the car a split-second after the OP did and would have reacted in plenty of time.

My Mother was a nightmare passenger (she didn't drive) - she was forever 'seeing' potential accidents that my Dad and sister (who drove her most often) were more than capable of seeing for themselves and taking avoiding action.
She also 'screamed' at whoever was driving the car she was a passenger in.
Not a pleasant experience - either for the driver or any other passenger.

tomtontom

Gigervamp wrote: »

I added a quote from Motorbility in that post. The carer can use the car, but it has to be for the benefit of the person being cared for.

The benefit can be indirect, and Motability have no problem with the carer using the car to go to work (for instance), as they need the car in case the cared for person needs them in an emergency. The same applies for doing the school run. The rules are very relaxed.

The carer is allowed to have a life beyond their house, and a suggestion of getting taxis because the OP only goes out a few times does not take into account the needs of the rest of the family.

Mojisola

tomtontom wrote: »

The carer is allowed to have a life beyond their house, and a suggestion of getting taxis because the OP only goes out a few times does not take into account the needs of the rest of the family.

But DLA is paid because the person has needs - the money isn't there to provide a carer with a social life.

Guest101

Mojisola wrote: »

But DLA is paid because the person has needs - the money isn't there to provide a carer with a social life.

Yes but those needs are going to be better met by someone who is coping well with life.....

tomtontom

Mojisola wrote: »

But DLA is paid because the person has needs - the money isn't there to provide a carer with a social life.

I 100% agree - so should the family buy a second car? Or should the carer be stuck in the house because they don't have access to a vehicle for their own needs?