Chapter 6 - THE JOURNAL
Police found a journal on Lauren’s laptop.
Not personal.
Research notes.
I almost wished it had been personal.
Instead it read like a lab report.
Hypothesis: attachment interference reduces independent motor initiative.
Test: delay paternal rescue response.
Paternal rescue response.
Me.
She had been studying my relationship with Sophie too.
Another entry:
Daniel undermines conditioning by immediate physical reassurance. Need sessions during absence.
My hands started shaking.
Another:
S demonstrates increased protest when D is visible. Consider visual separation.
I stopped reading.
Hannah did not.
She needed to.
Then:
Goal: induce autonomous movement under escalating controlled threat without actual injury.
That became central.
Controlled threat.
No actual injury.
Lauren believed the absence of injury proved safety.
But risk is not measured only by what happened.
It is also what reasonably could have happened.
The animal expert explained that in court.
The snakes were venomous.
Defensive reactions could be unpredictable.
Repeated impact against the cage increased agitation.
A toddler could not understand instructions reliably enough to navigate danger.
There was no legitimate developmental standard supporting such an exercise.
No pediatric or behavioral expert defended it.
Even BrightPath issued a statement that Lauren’s rejected proposal had never been approved, tested, or affiliated with current company practice.
Her scientific justification collapsed.
Then came the worst journal entry.
Dated two weeks before the snake incident.
If trial 47 produces sufficient mobility response, compile presentation for private resilience-parenting group.
She intended to present the video.
Not publicly perhaps.
But to others.
The thought that another parent might copy her made me physically ill.
The case was no longer only about Sophie.
May you like
Lauren had been preparing doctrine.
---
