Aoibheann Ni Shuilleabhain Harassment Story

Sardonicat

Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »

Lots of films have dramatic sequences where the protagonist chases a woman, sometimes even as they walk up the aisle, and profess their undying love. The outcome is usually positive. So he probably thought the same would happen for him.

A case of crossed wires.

One would hope that an individual with the intelligence to be a university professor would be able to tell the difference between fiction and reality.

riclad

He worked in the same building as her .She has a boyfriend .
He emailed her many times ,he asked her to go on a date .
He seems to have been obsessed with her.
he went to her office to ask her to go out on a date.
She would lock the door all the time because she was afraid he would come in
at any time.
he was stalking her.
You can ask a woman out if you want ,but if she says no you should back off.
Also its awkward to be going out with someone in the same place you work in .
she complained to HR about him and told HR every time he emailed her or spoke to her.
she gave an interview to a newspaper and to rte radio in order to get the word out or help women who may be in a similar situation .
Imagine going on a break to a hotel and then being told someone from work who is a weirdo going to reception with flowers and asking to see you.
its a scene from a bad hollywood film.
this harrassment went on for a long time until she took a court case against him.
This shows that every work place needs to have a clear policy on workplace harrassment .
How to deal with it and how to protect workers from being stalked by other employees .
Real life is more complex than most hollywood films.
She made it clear she had no desire to go out with him.
I don,t think its good advice to say ah sure just chase every woman and follow her around eventually she ,ll marry you even if she thinks you are a
weirdo stalker .

Psychiatric Patrick

I know people and circumstances are different in each situation but I'm curious as to how this kind of thing starts.

Had this professor already some fascination with Ni Shuilleabhain and it was coincidence that she came into his orbit?

Was it just something going in his head at the time he first saw her on campus that started the obsession? Could he latched onto some else if Ni Shuilleabhain had not been there at that time?s

Was he going to stalk somebody at some point?

UCD didn't just fail Ni Shuilleabhain here. This man clearly needs psychiatric help and as well as protecting the victim they should have put this guy into therapy.

IAMAMORON

He developed an obsession over her. It is a classifiable mental illness which can affect men and women alike. It does not necessarily make anyone an evil or devious person, but it will bring put inappropriate behaviours such as minor (or major )stalking and harassing. Imagine the real strong attraction feelings you develop when you begin crushing on someone, then multiply these by 100 times, you can begin to make up scenarios in your head and develop reciprocatory delusions very quickly, it is an illness.

The real perpetrators in my eyes are UCD, who it appears did not offer her enough support during her ordeal. It surprises me that they did not have any previous evidence of his OCD behaviours. I don't know how long he was an employee there, but he would have exhibited previous incidences in the past, in some shape or form. They either did not proof his employment history completely or do not assess current employees regularly enough. It is also plausible that he has a latent occurence, as in he may not have experienced an obsessive episode in some time.

Psychiatric Patrick

IAMAMORON wrote: »

He developed an obsession over her. It is a classifiable mental illness which can affect men and women alike. It does not necessarily make anyone an evil or devious person, but it will bring put inappropriate behaviours such as minor (or major )stalking and harassing. Imagine the real strong attraction feelings you develop when you begin crushing on someone, then multiply these by 100 times, you can begin to make up scenarios in your head and develop reciprocatory delusions very quickly, it is an illness.

The real perpetrators in my eyes are UCD, who it appears did not offer her enough support during her ordeal. It surprises me that they did not have any previous evidence of his OCD behaviours. I don't know how long he was an employee there, but he would have exhibited previous incidences in the past, in some shape or form. They either did not proof his employment history completely or do not assess current employees regularly enough. It is also plausible that he has a latent occurence, as in he may not have experienced an obsessive episode in some time.

Yes, as I said UCD should have been looking after both of their employees.

This guy probably had no control over himself.

However what has me curious in these situations is "why that woman?"

If the professor's mood had been different that day would he never have become obsessed with this lady or would it just delay it. Was he going to latch onto anyone that day? Was he obsessed with her since the Rose of Tralee and it was just fate that brought then to the same workplace?

I have OCD myself and can suffer from obsessive thoughts and can understand not being able to let go of a thought (though I know others who suffer much more) but I still cannot get in the head of someone like this guy.

Sardonicat

Psychiatric Patrick wrote: »

Yes, as I said UCD should have been looking after both of their employees.

This guy probably had no control over himself.

However what has me curious in these situations is "why that woman?"

If the professor's mood had been different that day would he never have become obsessed with this lady or would it just delay it. Was he going to latch onto anyone that day? Was he obsessed with her since the Rose of Tralee and it was just fate that brought then to the same workplace?

I have OCD myself and can suffer from obsessive thoughts and can understand not being able to let go of a thought (though I know others who suffer much more) but I still cannot get in the head of someone like this guy.

Indeed. There are those who suffer from obsessive, intrusive thoughts of a romantic nature who find it distressing, know the thoughts aren't reflective of reality and wouldn't dream if acting in them. They want the thoughts to stop. How does someone go from that to where this guy ended up going? Are they really the same thing?

IAMAMORON

Psychiatric Patrick wrote: »

However what has me curious in these situations is "why that woman?"

If the professor's mood had been different that day would he never have become obsessed with this lady or would it just delay it. Was he going to latch onto anyone that day? Was he obsessed with her since the Rose of Tralee and it was just fate that brought then to the same workplace?

I have OCD myself and can suffer from obsessive thoughts and can understand not being able to let go of a thought (though I know others who suffer much more) but I still cannot get in the head of someone like this guy.

Thanks for sharing Pat, and your honesty is very brave. You are lucky that you are conscious and aware of the issue, I hope you seek professional advice when necessary and that you are aware of warning signs of poor social behaviours etc.

We cannot speculate on why he found her attractive. I mean she is a pretty woman for starters, someone may or may not find other external factors attractive also( ie her Television appearances or Rose of Tralee etc). Everyone is different and even different sufferers of an obsessive disorder will develop obsessions based on a variety of factors.

But he crushed her badly and regrettably for him ( and her ) had no one close to him that recognised his poor behaviour as his obsession developed. I would also enthuse people who develop obsessive behaviours to develop proper friendships with a non sufferer who can have a small eye (or a kind ear) on what they could be up to socially.

She is massively lucky that she was not attracted to him. Had she reciprocated his advances and developed a relationship it would have been a nightmare for her further down the line.

Zarco

IAMAMORON wrote: »

She is massively lucky that she was not attracted to him. Had she reciprocated his advances and developed a relationship it would have been a nightmare for her further down the line.

These situations don't end up with people forming relationships

It's just an abstract obsession prob not even sexual

If it wasn't her it would be someone else and there's prob been more

Psychiatric Patrick

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Thanks for sharing Pat, and your honesty is very brave. You are lucky that you are conscious and aware of the issue, I hope you seek professional advice when necessary and that you are aware of warning signs of poor social behaviours etc.

We cannot speculate on why he found her attractive. I mean she is a pretty woman for starters, someone may or may not find other external factors attractive also( ie her Television appearances or Rose of Tralee etc). Everyone is different and even different sufferers of an obsessive disorder will develop obsessions based on a variety of factors.

But he crushed her badly and regrettably for him ( and her ) had no one close to him that recognised his poor behaviour as his obsession developed. I would also enthuse people who develop obsessive behaviours to develop proper friendships with a non sufferer who can have a small eye (or a kind ear) on what they could be up to socially.

She is massively lucky that she was not attracted to him. Had she reciprocated his advances and developed a relationship it would have been a nightmare for her further down the line.

I have received help and it did save my life but I didn't stick with the therapy. I'm okay as I have responsibilities that help keep it all in check, but I will get back to the therapy when I can.

Some "poor social behaviour" is a positive result of my OCD & therapy as I now no longer tae the same amount of crap I used to and instead give a balanced and timely retort.

I can see "issues" in others that they are oblivious to and it often baffles me how they are unaware.

Psychiatric Patrick

Zarco wrote: »

These situations don't end up with people forming relationships

It's just an abstract obsession prob not even sexual

If it wasn't her it would be someone else and there's prob been more

IAMAMORON did not mean that that a relationship could have formed with his behaviour.

He meant that Ni Shuilleabhain is fortunate that she did not accept one of the early invitations to date. That as bad as the experience had with them barely knowing each other, imagine the nightmare if she had gone to dinner even once with him.

Loafing Oaf

Psychiatric Patrick wrote: »

This guy probably had no control over himself.

However what has me curious in these situations is "why that woman?"

Well isn't the workplace possibly the locale most conducive to these sorts of infatuations? You're interacting with the other person on a regular basis, or even just seeing them across the staffroom. And I'm guessing the UCD science faculty would be predominantly male, and there would not be too many other Roses of Tralee among the female staff...

IAMAMORON

Zarco wrote: »

These situations don't end up with people forming relationships

It's just an abstract obsession prob not even sexual

If it wasn't her it would be someone else and there's prob been more

The flowers would indicate a sexual attraction, certainly a romantic coonotation from the prf Braun.

You are also very wrong in assuming that relationships do not form, they most certainly can and do occur. In particular attractive males will exhibit appalling interactive behaviours with their initial girlfriends. Also attractive females of course.

It is likely that if prof Brauns medical history was interrogated it would have examples of previous errors of judgement and erratic romantic behaviours.

Psychiatric Patrick

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Well isn't the workplace possibly the locale most conducive to these sorts of infatuations? You're interacting with the other person on a regular basis, or even just seeing them across the staffroom. And I'm guessing the UCD science faculty would be predominantly male, and there would not be too many other Roses of Tralee among the female staff...

Yes, but I'm curious as to what triggers the obsession about a person in particular.

Is it a genuine attraction like other people get but the obsessive's mind cannot process it properly? Or is is the attraction caused by the unbalanced mind?

Zarco

IAMAMORON wrote: »

The flowers would indicate a sexual attraction, certainly a romantic coonotation from the prf Braun.

You are also very wrong in assuming that relationships do not form, they most certainly can and do occur. In particular attractive males will exhibit appalling interactive behaviours with their initial girlfriends. Also attractive females of course.

It is likely that if prof Brauns medical history was interrogated it would have examples of previous errors of judgement and erratic romantic behaviours.

She wouldn't form a relationship with him

He's not like a narcissist reeling her in

Agree with your last part

Tombo2001

Psychiatric Patrick wrote: »

Yes, as I said UCD should have been looking after both of their employees.

This guy probably had no control over himself.

However what has me curious in these situations is "why that woman?"

If the professor's mood had been different that day would he never have become obsessed with this lady or would it just delay it. Was he going to latch onto anyone that day? Was he obsessed with her since the Rose of Tralee and it was just fate that brought then to the same workplace?

I have OCD myself and can suffer from obsessive thoughts and can understand not being able to let go of a thought (though I know others who suffer much more) but I still cannot get in the head of someone like this guy.

Hang on now, there is one victim here not two. What responsibility did UCD have to the perpetrator here? Is it their responsibility to employees to ensure they dont start harassing colleagues?

Psychiatric Patrick

Sardonicat wrote: »

Either way, I wish there was more public awareness about intrusive thoughts to remove the shame. A lot of people don't realise it's a form of OCD and that they can get help. It doesn't make you bad or sad. In most cases it's an anxiety response to direct your thoughts from issues in your life causing anxiety and it's totally involuntary.

People have been experiencing a bit of my world this year.

Without bogging us down in too much detail, I don't like people being near me and touching me. There are few exceptions. Coughing near me or a sneeze ... freak out!!

The masks, gloves and 2 metre distance are world that suits me very well.

Alway wore gloves when shopping for my groceries. Early in the lockdown when at the checkout in Dunnes the long lady said to me "your not special anymore".:D

Psychiatric Patrick

Zarco wrote: »

She wouldn't form a relationship with him

He's not like a narcissist reeling her in

Agree with your last part

I don't believe IAMAMORON is saying Ni Shuilleabhain would have been into the behaviour.

I believe he is saying that she is lucky that she didn't accept the early invitation to a date when Braun was behaving "normally".

Donald Trump

Tombo2001 wrote: »

Hang on now, there is one victim here not two. What responsibility did UCD have to the perpetrator here? Is it their responsibility to employees to ensure they dont start harassing colleagues?

When someone puts in a complaint against a colleague, the organisation might ask the accused questions. The accused might say "she's just being crazy and imagining it".


The accused will have rights as well. Unless you want a situation where all it takes is for one person to make a complaint and the other person is automatically fired without any due process.


I'd imagine that it is difficult to enforce anything without some kind of independent finding of guilt or justification for action.

Tombo2001

I have no real views on the offender to express on this particular forum.

But I do think that
(i) UCD did not show a responsibility of care to the victim (thats a a given)
(ii) UCD behaved as I would expect an organisation to behave where at the relevant decision making senior levels, the male incumbents would simply not 'get' this issue, would not allocate headspace to it, would hope to offload the issue to someone else, would hope it would simply go away.
(iii) This could easily happen in other large organisations with similar culture (which are most of them)
(iv) I have seen similar happening in large financial institutions.

Everyone says they have a policy, but when the **** hits the fan thats when you see what the real policy is.

irishblessing

Tombo2001 wrote: »

Hang on now, there is one victim here not two. What responsibility did UCD have to the perpetrator here? Is it their responsibility to employees to ensure they dont start harassing colleagues?

Well legally, employers have a duty of care to their employees, and in this regard the Aoibheann was badly let down. I'd imagine she'd have a case if she left work feeling unsafe and brought a claim.

It's so annoying the way this thread is going. Trying to find some excuse for this man to have and somewhat avoid accountability for his own actions. Even crossing into victimhood status.

The reality is, we have all been living in a culture that allowed sexual harassment & assault and excused this for decades. The "boys will be boys" mentality and the thinking that it's just women's lot in life to put up with. Men have been getting their kicks out of it and getting away with it forever.

Instead of all this attention on this man who is accountable for his own choice in his behaviour, maybe the worthier focus of discussion is on the impact of the real victim to this crap. Voicing support for those victims (god knows they need it and deserve it too). Supporting and looking for change in our own social lives and workplaces.

Tombo2001

Donald Trump wrote: »

When someone puts in a complaint against a colleague, the organisation might ask the accused questions. The accused might say "she's just being crazy and imagining it".


The accused will have rights as well. Unless you want a situation where all it takes is for one person to make a complaint and the other person is automatically fired without any due process.


I'd imagine that it is difficult to enforce anything without some kind of independent finding of guilt or justification for action.

Thats fine, except you are arguing against something I never said.

which is a strawman.

This case has reached a conclusion, there is no false accusation.

I am talking about this case, not 'hypothetical cases'.

What you are talking about is a totally different debate. Its just not relevant in this discussion.

Look at the title of the thread. It doesnt say 'General situation when harrasment accusations are made'.....its fairly specific.

irishblessing

Donald Trump wrote: »

When someone puts in a complaint against a colleague, the organisation might ask the accused questions. The accused might say "she's just being crazy and imagining it".


The accused will have rights as well. Unless you want a situation where all it takes is for one person to make a complaint and the other person is automatically fired without any due process.


I'd imagine that it is difficult to enforce anything without some kind of independent finding of guilt or justification for action.

The accused do have rights to a fair investigation and the natural justice process. That outcome just isn't going to happen.

Psychiatric Patrick

Tombo2001 wrote: »

Hang on now, there is one victim here not two. What responsibility did UCD have to the perpetrator here? Is it their responsibility to employees to ensure they dont start harassing colleagues?

I never said there was two victims.

And I never mentioned anything about UCD authorities predicting unbalanced behaviour.

Ni Shuilleabhain and Braun were both UCD employees. The powers That Be had a duty to ensure her safety and well being.

They also had a responsibility to Braun and everyone else on the campus to not allow his unbalanced behaviour to continue. What Braun did was awful but that doesn't make him some evil monster. It is a mental illness. UCD could have shown both these people some common human compassion and tried to help them both.

What do you suggest be done with Braun? Sack him and let him continue to stalk Ni Shuilleabhain outside of work or do this all somewhere else? Make him someone else problem?

Donald Trump

Tombo2001 wrote: »

Thats fine, except you are arguing against something I never said.

which is a strawman.

This case has reached a conclusion, there is no false accusation.

I am talking about this case, not 'hypothetical cases'.

What you are talking about is a totally different debate. Its just not relevant in this discussion.

Look at the title of the thread. It doesnt say 'General situation when harrasment accusations are made'.....its fairly specific.

So you think that they did not fail her up and until the court case finding and investigation by the Gardai?

Tombo2001

irishblessing wrote: »

Well legally, employers have a duty of care to their employees, and in this regard the Aoibheann was badly let down. I'd imagine she'd have a case if she left work feeling unsafe and brought a claim.

It's so annoying the way this thread is going. Trying to find some excuse for this man to have and somewhat avoid accountability for his own actions. Even crossing into victimhood status.

The reality is, we have all been living in a culture that allowed sexual harassment & assault and excused this for decades. The "boys will be boys" mentality and the thinking that it's just women's lot in life to put up with. Men have been getting their kicks out of it and getting away with it forever.

Instead of all this attention on this man who is accountable for his own choice in his behaviour, maybe the worthier focus of discussion is on the impact of the real victim to this crap. Voicing support for those victims (god knows they need it and deserve it too). Supporting and looking for change in our own social lives and workplaces.

It would be un-fuppin-believable if you hadnt seen it so many times before. Such as the 'Where's Clodagh' tragedy a few years back.

What its says is "I can only see this from my own personal perspective, that of a man that might someday unfairly face an accusation" .....complete inability to see beyond onesself.

irishblessing

Psychiatric Patrick wrote: »

I never said there was two victims.

And I never mentioned anything about UCD authorities predicting unbalanced behaviour.

Ni Shuilleabhain and Braun were both UCD employees. The powers That Be had a duty to ensure her safety and well being.

They also had a responsibility to Braun and everyone else on the campus to not allow his unbalanced behaviour to continue. What Braun did was awful but that doesn't make him some evil monster. It is a mental illness. UCD could have shown both these people some common human compassion and tried to help them both.

What do you suggest be done with Braun? Sack him and let him continue to stalk Ni Shuilleabhain outside of work or do this all somewhere else? Make him someone else problem?

Are you a licensed psychiatrist who has met with and diagnosed Prof. Braun?

Sardonicat

Psychiatric Patrick wrote: »

I never said there was two victims.

And I never mentioned anything about UCD authorities predicting unbalanced behaviour.

Ni Shuilleabhain and Braun were both UCD employees. The powers That Be had a duty to ensure her safety and well being.

They also had a responsibility to Braun and everyone else on the campus to not allow his unbalanced behaviour to continue. What Braun did was awful but that doesn't make him some evil monster. It is a mental illness. UCD could have should both these people some common hun=man compassion and tried to help them both.

What do you suggest be done with Braun? Sack him and let him continue to stalk Ni Shuilleabhain outside of work or do this all somewhere else? Make him someone else problem?

But we don't know he's ill, Patrick. There is nothing to suggest he's not a creep who gets his kicks out of scaring women. Such individuals do exist.

Tombo2001

Donald Trump wrote: »

So you think that they did not fail her up and until the court case finding and investigation by the Gardai?

Edit - sincere apologies, I just spotted my typo & fixed it.

Psychiatric Patrick

irishblessing wrote: »

Well legally, employers have a duty of care to their employees, and in this regard the Aoibheann was badly let down. I'd imagine she'd have a case if she left work feeling unsafe and brought a claim.

It's so annoying the way this thread is going. Trying to find some excuse for this man to have and somewhat avoid accountability for his own actions. Even crossing into victimhood status.

The reality is, we have all been living in a culture that allowed sexual harassment & assault and excused this for decades. The "boys will be boys" mentality and the thinking that it's just women's lot in life to put up with. Men have been getting their kicks out of it and getting away with it forever.

Instead of all this attention on this man who is accountable for his own choice in his behaviour, maybe the worthier focus of discussion is on the impact of the real victim to this crap. Voicing support for those victims (god knows they need it and deserve it too). Supporting and looking for change in our own social lives and workplaces.

Nobody said Braun was victim and no one is making excuses or denying his accountability.

We are simply expressing some compassion for those with mental illness and if more people with mental illness were not treated like freaks who do these things for "kicks", then there wold be less shame which would lead to more conversation which would make the Brauns of the world more likely to noticed or to seek help themselves.

Ni Shuilleabhain is 100% the victim and 100% the hero in this story. Nothing changes or lessens that. It also doesn't make braun a "beast" - neither you or I have any idea whether he tried to control this or what way he felt.

Tombo2001

The other issue here:

The victim here is someone who is famous, who is successful, is confident, well educated, has a strong network of friends and family.

And yet UCD did so little to protect her.

What happens when the victim is not famous, is not any of the above.....if its someone on the cleaning staff, or in the canteen...how many of these cases, at various colleges, have we not heard about.....