Showing posts with label child abuse. Show all posts
Showing posts with label child abuse. Show all posts

Thursday, December 1, 2011

Penn State Child Sexual Assault Update: LawSuits Filed, Repoerted Threats by Sandusky to Harm Family

For a variety of videos and updates, including information about the first Lawsuit, click HERE CNN

For the Story that Sandusky threatened to hurt a victim's family if they told, Click HERE ABC News

For Links to Original story, Click HERE

http://marysbeagooddogblog.blogspot.com/2011/11/penn-state-men-in-power-sexually-and.html


excerpt from first story:
"...(CNN) -- A 29-year-old man alleged Wednesday that Penn State University former assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky sexually abused him dozens of times over several years during the 1990s, when he was a boy, his lawyer said.

The lawyer, Jeff Anderson, said his client is suing the school, Sandusky and the charity the coach founded.
The lawsuit is the first in a scandal involving the university's former defensive coordinator, who has been accused in a grand jury report of sexual abuse against eight other boys over 15 years.
Sandusky's face on Michael Pilato Mural painted over
The accuser, identified as "John Doe A," was not cited in the grand jury report, said Anderson, who said his client was 10 years old when he first met Sandusky. .." 

Excerpt from the second story:
"...The latest person to accuse former Penn State coach Jerry Sandusky of sexual abuse also claims that Sandusky threatened to hurt the boy’s family if he ever told anyone about the abuse. Sandusky’s newest accuser, who is now 29, had not told anyone about the abuse until he read about the grand jury presentment charging Sandusky with 40 counts of child molestation over 15 years, his lawyer Jeff Anderson said today. Until that time, he had thought he was the only victim..."


Student Riots HERE
Are you blame free? What would you do  HERE

Grand Jury Testimony in full HERE

Saturday, November 26, 2011

Our National Treasure: Children, Detroit, and Dickens

"Our children are our future"--our most precious national resource. So it is written--but why then, do we treat them so badly!? In every village, in each city, in all countries, the children are magical little us -es. Why do they get such short shrift?
Through a very ingenious, Mystical, fabulously bizzare design, we get together with our two invisible cells and a little us appears! Strange and I wonder who first figured that one out...
In the field of working with abused children, our heads are constantly exploding. We are unable to fathom the desire, let alone the ability some have to deliberately hurt children--physically and psychologically.
I onced worked
 on a project in Florida involving "crack babies"--infants born with addiction to cocaine, due to mommies' inability to shake the habit during pregnancy. (The babies must be held with as little touching as possible, facing away from the caregiver, in order to lessen the stimulus to the child, which is painful.) This example of child abuse shows the range/layers of problems- personal, family, community, and country--that can be involved.
Then there is the pure evil of deliberate abuse. And the selfish desires that lead to neglect. And the national priorities that leave children with table scraps.
You don't need to hear me whine. (Or if you do, i will put some links at the bottom of the post.:-)
I saw a PBS newhour clip about the detroit schools last night.
it struck me, how embarrassing and insane it is that we have stunning new stadiums in our cities, and Exquisite Performing Arts Centers, and new computers every year in our universities--but cannot take our tiny little offspring and give them all they need.
Good Classrooms. Good teachers. Safe places to be. Free parenting classes. Before the fact!

So, in the Kansas City Star today is a book review i want to share (Andrea Warren's Charles Dickens and the Street Children of London). I had a phase, recently, of reading Charles Dickens. He was a child with a very very hard childhood, but was moved by pity by the children who were even worse off than he.
 excerpt from E M Eveld's story in
"A Local Author Salutes Dickens"--
[quoting Warren: ] “It was a cold, blustery London day, but I bundled up and went, and I’m glad I did,” she said. “In nearly every sentence the guide mentioned the name of Charles Dickens. I have a master’s degree in British literature, so I thought I knew something about Dickens.
When I asked about that, she said, ‘Well, you know he’s our greatest reformer. He changed everything for the poor.’ ”
The guide didn’t say greatest writer or novelist. She said reformer. It was Dickens’ choice to write about England’s abandoned children, its debtors’ prisons and workhouses, its pollution and slums. And it was his writing that fueled reforms when few at the height of industrialization seemed to care, Warren said.
...
Warren learned that while Dickens wasn’t born into society’s lowest classes, his family was plunged there by his father’s indebtedness. When Dickens’ father was sent to debtors’ prison, the family became homeless and finally went to live with him at the prison — except for Dickens. At age 12, he was sent to work 10 hours a day, six days a week at a bootblack factory and to live in a run-down boarding house.
“Walking about the city, when he detoured down narrow, twisty streets where the poor lived, he came face-to-face with London’s underworld,” Warren writes about the young Dickens. “The filth and odors of the slums were overwhelming. Wherever he turned, he saw painfully thin children dressed in rags, with hopeless eyes.
“Though despairing of his own situation, he was moved by what he saw and wondered why no one helped the children.... “Whenever he’s writing about the street children, air pollution, foul water, he never lets the reader off the hook,” she said. “Children suffer in his books. His writing is very powerful.
“And reforms followed. When he wrote about the national disgrace of the abuses at the Yorkshire boarding schools in ‘Nicholas Nickleby,’ within a year of publication they were closed.”
...Warren hopes that besides a renewed appreciation for Dickens, young readers will be inspired to use their talents to help others and will recognize that today’s street children are in poorer countries around the globe — some 100 million homeless children. Warren devotes the last section of the book to their plight.
“People who travel in Africa, in Central and South America and Asia, usually aren’t ready for what greets them there, hordes of homeless children,” Warren said. “These are not problems of the past.”
read the entire story and more HERE

I admire the filthy rich who know you can't take it with you,
and spend their wealth on the chillin's. like, oprah, and  bill gates, --
and  Charity Watch also rates/lists top notch charities that get A ratings in directly helping children and families, like Children's Defense Fund and  catholic charities,  and  (surprise) salvation army
 and what better to spend it on than our "national treasure"?

http://marysbeagooddogblog.blogspot.com/2011/07/somalia-norway-sudan-and-football.html
http://marysbeagooddogblog.blogspot.com/2010/07/hurting-your-own-species.html
http://marysbeagooddogblog.blogspot.com/2010/12/sexual-physical-and-emotional-child.html

Saturday, November 12, 2011

Penn State Men in Power Sexually and Psychologically Abusing Boys: What’s Wrong With That? Sports, Evolution and “Morality” (Joey, did ya ever hang around a gymnasium?)

(Never before—maybe Gladiator Rome—have sports been so Adored.)
Modern Theories of Evolution have taught us that we are at core, soulless globs of molecule conglomerates. Yea, verily we are at the Top of the Glob Heap, complication/evolved/adaptation-wise, but globs of self-perpetuating atoms nonetheless.
Penn State Students
Rioting video
and story links click HERE
There is no “earthly” reason why a globule can not be absolutely selfish. Particularly if a huge mass of globules create a support structure, the evolved sociopath trips across the ocean of drones, spreading its seed, maintained in a solitary journey of manipulation and charm and theft and betrayal and objectification of every being—oops, soulless mass-- they encounter.

Where there are no myths such as a “Universal God” or “Good” “Evil” “Absolute” “Judgment”—the Crown Jewel of Evolution is Passing Along the Genes, Hitler is Evolution’s Genius, and Powerful Men should take whatever they want. Survival, nay, Rule of the fittest.

Sports in the Modern Day was not always Centerpieced on the Altar as it is today. There was a time when sports embodied certain “principles” which are now laughed at, scorned to shame. When KSU Football Coach Bill Snyder responded to a player being investigated for sexual assault during the Fiesta Bowl, he responded with a heart-wrenching letter to the community in which he stated that “…I do not condone any form of sexual abuse or for that matter, sexual activity for young unmarried males and females…”
That sort of expectation, of honor, of “morality” is falling away, almost gone.
Mating for life. Like the higher forms of life...
The Rule of Sports has slowly been wrested away from men like maybe your Dad—honest and filled with integrity (integrity to the point that it pissed you off when you were a teenager) (and my Dad would still be upset if he saw me use the word “pissed” –I remember playing in a softball game in junior high where a parent yelled the phrase “pissed off” and my father went over to let him know that kind of language should not--would not-- be used in front of us girls.) "Why yawanna talk like that?" he'd ask quizzically...

I remember in the blockbuster movie Airport, with Burt Lancaster and Maureen Stapleton and Jean Seberg and George Kennedy and the suave Dean Martin was having an affair with a cute stewardess, it was one of the first grown up movies I saw and my emotions were stretched by the amazing power of Van Heflin –sacrificing his life for his wife’s future… and after the movie my father processed the movie with us kids to make sure we understood that no matter how much the plot made it seem like Dean Martin should drop his loving old wife for the hot young stewardess—now pregnant—it was in fact adultery which was “Wrong” …to be avoided...don't ever do it...
Ironically,
the hilarious spoof of that movie, Airplane,
has as some of its most famous lines: a Grown Man in power
asking
an 8-10 year-old boy in the cockpit of the airplane,
“Joey, You ever been in a cockpit before?”
--No sir, I’ve never been in a plane before.--
“You ever seen a grown man naked?”
“Joey, did ya ever hang around a gymnasium?”
“Joey, do you like movies about gladiators?”
“Joey, have you ever been in a Turkish prison?”

Sports is the Secret Drain. Money, Power, Influence. Desire. Access. College, Junior College, High School, Junior High School, Grade School, Kindergarten—the influence of sports curriculum is there.
The money in sports must be unimaginable—but it is the
Power that is the Prize.
Testosterone likes to have its way.
Its purpose perhaps is to take, to dominate.
The Yang without the Yin is Brute.
The Yin without the Yang is soft to the point of dissolving.

The Yang without the Yin is like the structure of the universe without its soul.
Evolution without the Spirit is doomed to selfishness –self-propagating sociopathic self-pleasing in the end. Flesh and Blood is slavishly given to indulgence; those in power actually live a “brutish life in a rather more exquisite manner…” (A. Goodier, The Meaning of Life p. 16)
If you believe in modern soulless random mathematical evolution, there is nothing “wrong” with Sandusky’s behavior. You may not like it, but it is not “wrong
-Don’t Be So Judgey!!
 Who are you to judge Sandusky, or anyone else!
If there is no such thing as absolutes, right and wrong, good and evil, sin and redemption, there is no “moral reason” that whoever is the Fittest should not take what s/he wants. As cowards they might lie to avoid “dis-grace” but will defend what they do.

The other globules may try to limit your behaviors—whatever. They may try to limit the effect of your actions on the group—ok. [Although, the sociopath provides for many many jobs in our society—so many of the helping professions—criminal response, addictions, depression, child abuse, health, traffic, family services—the list is endless. The sociopath also provides us with the life lessons of pain and suffering, the Downs that some say make our Ups so much better… yada yada.]

Why is mean, ugly, violence so en vogue? At the KSU men’s basketball game last night, during the chant where the Crowd yells, “We…Are…Wildcats!” a large section of students near me were adding a four-syllable obscenity in between, yelling at the top of their voices, “We Are The M…..F….Wildcats!” Sadness for the four children standing in front of me (always sit behind tiny peeps at a BB game…)

Why have sports become Dirtied Up, Nasty, like Territorial Pissings from angry wounded animals? Bad parenting? Video Games that teach our children to rape, murder and torture? The desire to be Gangsta, to be Badass, to be Chuck Norris but with video game heartlessness added and without the integrity of Superman.

Why can’t they just be Wildcats? Why do the have to be M..F.. Wildcats? When did we move from Beauty to Porn -From kindness and compassion to entitlement and demands? From John Kennedy, “Ask not… Well you know the answer. Don’t you?

I wish, when the other team was introduced, the Kansas State University Student Body would find clever ways to react. What if the entire crowd fell dead silent but clapped politely?
What if when KU comes to play basketball here, when each player is introduced, we all yell, “Good luck Brian!” or “Hello Jimmy!” That would do more to freak them out than yelling snotty stuff anyway.

Answer me this.

Why did/do/will powerful successful men like Jerry Sandusky who have everything rape little boys and girls?
Why do those under or over them like Joe Paterno not report it?
Mike McQueary says he stepped in and stopped the felony-- would most people do that? What if it was not their own child?
Do you have the courage to step in? What about report to police?
Why do Kobe Bryant, Ben Roethlisberger, and thousands of others get away with rape? Why are there millions of girls and boys and women trafficked over the globe in the past decade for sexual torture, for the pleasure of grown men?
When will those who know what is going on—you and I, actually demand that something be done to stop the insanity?
(Who do we demand it to? Is all lost?)

“Man cannot leave God alone…Man is too terribly convinced of God for God not to Be or to Matter…” (A. Goodier)

So are you a hypocrite or would you call the police on your best friend of father?


The corruption, or the sadness: Why is the prosecutor who would have taken on the case missing and now declared dead?
abcnews.sandusky-investigator-center-mystery
Were children handed to large donors? businessinsider.com/2011-11-10 child-molester-madden-claims-jerry-sandusky pimped boys
Penn state post 1 here and post 2 with the grand jury testimony HERE


Wendy Murphy's Column  about institutional cover-up  HERE
excerpt:
"...Paterno bears some of the blame because he knew there were multiple incidents and he never did anything to protect the victims. After McQueary told him of the 2002 attack, Paterno told Penn State’s athletic director, Tim Curley, what McQueary saw, but he didn't tell police or child welfare authorities. And for reasons that remain inexplicably unclear, Paterno remained close personal friends with Sandusky after 2002 and continued to serve on the advisory board of a foundation, set up by Sandusky in 1977, to provide mentoring for boys from troubled families. The foundation gave Sandusky access to the vulnerable children he groomed for sexual victimization.
Though too late and self-serving, Paterno is the only one from Penn State thus far willing to acknowledge that he was wrong. He announced his resignation this week and was formally relieved of all coaching duties for the rest of the 2011 season amid tearful expressions of shame and guilt for not doing more. It was a good step in the right direction but Paterno’s contract was up anyway and his resignation should have no bearing on our collective willingness to hold other responsible adults accountable.

Two individuals who deserve far more blame than Paterno are Tim Curley and the university’s Vice President for business affairs (otherwise known as the risk management guy) Gary Schultz, who were told about the rape in 2002. Neither man reported the crime to outside authorities though they did take away Sandusky's keys and forbid him to bring children to the university.
Schultz and Curley now stand charged with failing to report child abuse as well as perjury for lying to the Grand Jury about what they knew. They claimed, under oath, that Paterno told them the 2002 incident involved only harmless horseplay. Paterno, by contrast, testified that he told both men the incident involved sexual abuse. The Grand Jury concluded that Curley and Schultz lied, no doubt because they found it hard to believe Paterno would have felt compelled to report to Schultz and Curley an incident involving only harmless roughhousing. It also makes no sense that if it were truly only nonsexual horseplay, school officials would have felt compelled to take Sandusky’s keys away and forbid him to bring children to campus...

Penn State and Joe Paterno's Biggest Sin Isn't in Showing Mercy; It's In Allowing the Malignancy to Live On.

Are you a hypocrite or would you call the police on your best friend Bob or your brother Jim or your dad, upon catching them in the act of an immoral felony?
Do you Destroy a man? Everyone's pointing fingers; are you squeaky clean? What do you let slide? Your brother who deals drugs in a neighborhood, a son who beats his wife in front of the children--you are calling the police,
Yes?
Or do you intervene, call a family meeting, confront the guy, etc etc.
If you spare a man, if you excuse a woman because of friendship, love, contextual circumstances--fine. But concomitant with that mercy is the responsibility to take custody. YOU are in lieu of the confinement of jail bars.
There must be an end to the behavior. No contact with children, for example. 'While i will not destroy you, it is now my responsibility to make sure you never never even have a chance to fall again.'

So if we abhor the first case of mercy (particularly if given by someone else) when there are traumatized victims involved, we simply Will Not Allow the freedom for the behaviors to continue. There is no  logic, love, justice or meaning in that. There must be a deep heavy sense of the weight of Godness--I'll keep your evil quiet, but you gotta be sorry and stop doing it.

being generous,
Whatever acts of mercy occurred at Penn State-- when
the "rape of a boy"
became
"inappropriate abuse"
then
"shower horseplay"
as the cover-up moved up the chain--
Paterno and others
did not corral and quarantine the filthy mutation of
taking pleasure in the destruction of innocence.

[And if you believe in Soulless Evolution, should you not be advocating for the euthanizing of such mutant globules--these troublemakers? If we are just lovely collections of coordinating atom clusters, why not excise the freak ones? Not "good" or "evil" as evolution would have it, i understand--just whatever the Jew du Jour is-- in  Cambodia, the intellectuals; in Germany the Jews and homosexuals, in China's wombs, the females-- the ottoman's Christians, the Taliban's Strong Women (you get the picture).
Just curious. ]
Full Grand Jury Evidence HERE

Tuesday, September 22, 2009

Mothers commit vast majority of parental murders of children & women are violent

Much of the data is  U.S. sourced and there are similarities in English speaking western democracies. Click on the links below for the source data.

This is a link to an Australian Newspaper showing a study where the substantial abuser is the mom. The chart below shows the data.
http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/newshome/6089613/mum-not-dad-more-likely-to-neglect-kids/


http://www.menshealthaustralia.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=556&Itemid=79


The following is a Norwegian Study but even they, despite the studies findings, indicate female received violence is likely the worst without corresponding substantiation:

MEDICINE AND SCIENCE Original Article Violence and violations of young people's relationships 
Violence and verbal aggression in young people’s intimate relationships. (Norway)
 Nr. 15 - 14 August 2003
Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen 2003; 123:2016-20
http://www.tidsskriftet.no/index.php?seks_id=850050&a=summary&art_id=850018
Background. The prevalence of partner violence in Norway is unknown. International research on individual risk factors for such victimisation is also sparse; moreover, the research has almost exclusively been focused on female victims.

Material and methods. The data stem from a representative longitudinal study of young people in Norway. In the latest survey, 2211 (response rate: 68%) responded to standardised questions on aggressive behaviour in an intimate relationship. The average age was 22; 37% were married or cohabiting.

Results. Slightly more men (6%) than women (4%) reported that a partner had physically attacked them in course of the past six months. For men and women alike, victimisation correlated with aggressive behaviour towards a partner on their own part, alcohol or drug use, involvement in problem behaviour, and friends with a wild lifestyle. Own and friend’s problem behavior in the teenage period were also related to future victimisation among women.

Interpretation. The observed gender difference in victimisation for the more prevalent, less serious forms of partner violence could be explained by the social norm that tells men to refrain from violence against those physically less strong and against women in particular. However, other studies indicate that victims of gross maltreatment and systematic abuse are most likely to be female and that studies of standard populations fail to disclose such grave partner violence.



Federal Data: Mothers commit vast majority of parental murders of children



These data are not blips. The trend is clear over many years that the mother (female) is responsible for the greatest amount of child abuse and child murder in family relationships. How then can it be there is no tax supported DV or emergency shelters for men in Canada; how can it be there are few, if any, (I haven't found any yet) tax supported counseling services for men in marital breakdown in Canada; how can it be woman's groups can tap into such large amounts of tax support to send out propaganda about how vulnerable they are; how can these DV groups spout the invective they do against men when their own clients are the worst perpetrators of abuse to children.

How many women are actually in these shelters because of DV; how many are in them for addictions; how many are planning a false ex parte order to nail hubby while he sleeps; how many are in there because they are hiding from legal pursuits of them; how many are "passing through" while traveling. I think an accounting and operational audit of these facilities should be part and parcel of their ability to obtain tax funds. There is no doubt some women are there because they have no recourse and are subject to abuse but it casts a pall over them if many are there for other reasons. They are emergency shelters - so called - for Domestic Violence - at least in terms of the marketing of them to get tax funding.

Is there something wrong with our values? Is there something wrong with government largess and what is wrong with us men for laying down and taking this misinformation from groups like the Tennessee DV coalition as described here amongst many others.



Figure 3-3 Victimization Rates by Age and Sex, 2007 Child Maltreatment 2007


Victimization Rates by Age and Sex, 2007

This bar graph breaks the victim population into age groups as follows: Less than 1, 1, 2, 3, 4–7, 8–11, 12–15, and 16–17 and either boy or girl sex. According to this graph, the youngest age group is the most victimized, with a rate of 22.2 boys and 21.5 girls per 1,000 children of the same age and sex group. The oldest children were victimized the least frequently.








































Victims by Perpetrator Relationship, 2007

This pie chart presents victims by relationship to their perpetrators. More than 80 percent (80.1%) of victims were maltreated by at least one parent. Nearly 40 percent (38.7%) of victims were maltreated by their mother acting on her own.
Note the rate by mom and other is 44.4% while dad and other is 18.8%. The rate by the mother is 2.36 times higher than dad. That is 236% greater. Now how to explain that away to those who believe only men are abusive.MJM





Table 4-5 Perpetrator Relationships to Child Fatalities, 2007 Child Maltreatment 2007



Relationship to Child Child Fatalities
Number Percent
PARENT Blank Cell
Mother 347 27.1
Mother and Other 96 7.5
Father 208 16.3
Father and Other 11 0.9
Mother and Father 232 18.1
NONPARENT Blank Cell
Daycare Staff 24 1.9
Foster Parent (Female Relative) 0 0.0
Foster Parent (Male Relative) 0 0.0
Foster Parent (Nonrelative) 3 0.2
Foster Parent (Unknown Relationship) 3 0.2
Friend or Neighbor 2 0.2
Legal Guardian (Female) 0 0.0
Legal Guardian (Male) 0 0.0
More than One Nonparental Perpetrator 52 4.1
Other Professional 2 0.2
Partner of Parent (Female) 4 0.3
Partner of Parent (Male) 35 2.7
Relative (Female) 29 2.3
Relative (Male) 20 1.6
Staff Group Home 2 0.2
Unknown or Missing 210 16.4
Total 1,280 Blank Cell
Percent Blank Cell 100.0





Perpetrator Relationships to Child Fatalities, 2007
This table first lists perpetrator relationships including mother, mother and father, father, mother and other, father and other, female daycare staff, more than one nonparental perpetrator, unknown, etc. In the next column is listed the number of child fatalities from the specified perpetrator. The third column lists the percentage. More than 27 percent (27.1%) of child fatalities were perpetrated by a mother acting alone.


Moms and another are more than twice as likely to kill a child as a dad and another.MJM





Figure 4-2 Fatality Rates by Age and Sex, 2007
Child Maltreatment 2007


Fatality Rates by Age and Sex, 2007

Fatality Rates by Age and Sex, 2007

This bar graph shows two groupings of victims, one for boys and one for girls. Each grouping displays the fatality rates for each sex by age group. The graph indicates that the youngest children have the highest fatality rates for both sexes.


Note boys have the higher death rates.MJM










Some data on child abuse from Child Maltreatment 2006, a report by the Federal Administration for Children & Families...

Figure 4-2 Perpetrator Relationships of Child Fatalities, 2006

Child Maltreatment 2006


Perpetrator Relationships of Child Fatalities, 2006
Perpetrator Relationships of Child Fatalities, 2006
This pie chart indicates that 27.4 percent of child fatalities were perpetrated by the mother acting alone. Such non-parental perpetrators as daycare providers, foster parents, or residential facility staff were responsible for 14.6 percent of fatalities.






Leaving aside killings by non-parents or by mothers and fathers acting together, mothers committed a significantly greater number of the parental murders of children.


Figure 3-5 Victims by Perpetrator Relationship, 2006

Victims by Perpetrator Relationship, 2006
Victims by Perpetrator Relationship, 2006
This pie chart shows that 39.9 percent of child victims were maltreated by their mothers acting alone; another 17.6 percent were maltreated by their fathers acting alone; 17.8 percent were abused by both their mother and father. Victims abused by a nonparental perpetrator accounted for 10.0 percent.



Table 4-5 Perpetrator Relationships to Child Fatalities, 2006
Child Maltreatment 2006

Relationship to ChildChild Fatalities
NumberPercent
Mother 28827.4
Mother and Other 12111.5
Father 13813.1
Father and Other 161.5
Mother and Father 23522.4
Female Relative 313.0
Male Relative 171.6
Female Foster Parent (Relative) 00.0
Male Foster Parent (Relative) 00.0
Female Partner of Parent 00.0
Male Partner of Parent 302.9
Female Legal Guardian 10.1
Male Legal Guardian 00.0
Foster Parent (Nonrelative) 50.5
Foster Parent Unknown Relationship 40.4
Staff Group Home 40.4
Daycare Staff 323.0
Other Professional 00.0
Friend or Neighbor 20.2
More than One Nonparental Perpetrator 262.5
Unknown or Missing 1009.5
Total 1,050 Blank Cell
Blank Cell Blank Cell 100.0
Based on data from 36 States.
Perpetrator Relationships to Child Fatalities, 2006
This table first lists perpetrator relationships including mother, mother and father, father, mother and other, father and other, female daycare staff, more than one nonparental perpetrator, unknown, etc. In the next column is listed the number of child fatalities from the specified perpetrator. The third column lists the percentage. More than 27 percent (27.4%) of child fatalities were perpetrated by a mother acting alone.



The following are data from 2005.


Figure 4-2 Perpetrator Relationships of Child Fatalities, 2005
Child Maltreatment 2005

Figure 4-2

Note the mother (female) again is responsible for the vast majority of deaths of children.


Table 4-5 Perpetrator Relationships of Fatalities, 2005
Child Maltreatment 2005

Blank Cell Child Fatalities
Perpetrator Number Percent
Mother 287 28.5
Mother and Other 104 10.3
Father 159 15.8
Father and Other 16 1.6
Mother and Father 205 20.4
Famale Relative 24 2.4
Male Relative 7 0.7
Female Foster Parent (Relative) 0 0.0
Male Foster Parent (Relative) 0 0.0
Female Partner of Parent 6 0.6
Male Partner of Parent 33 3.3
Female Legal Guardian 1 0.1
Male Legal Guardian 0 0.0
Female Foster Parent (Nonrelative) 5 0.5
Male Foster Parent (Nonrelative) 1 0.1
Female Foster Parent
Unknown Relationship
1 0.1
Male Foster Parent
Unknown Relationship
0 0.0
Female Staff Group Home 0 0.0
Male Staff Group Home 0 0.0
Female Daycare Staff 20 2.0
Male Daycare Staff 2 0.2
Female Other Professional 0 0.0
Male Other Professional 1 0.1
Female Friend or Neighbor 2 0.2
Male Friend or Neighbor 4 0.4
More than One Nonparental
Perpetrator
23 2.3
Unknown or Missing 105 10.4
Total 1,006 blank cell
Percent blank cell 100.0

Based on data from 34 States.
Perpetrator Relationships of Child Fatalities, 2005
This table first lists perpetrator relationships including mother only, mother and father, father only, mother and other, father and other, female daycare staff, more than one nonparental perpetrator, unknown, etc. In the next column is listed the number of child fatalities from the specified perpetrator. The third column lists the percentage. 28.5 percent of child fatalities were perpetrated by a mother acting alone.







"According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' new report Child Maltreatment 2004, when one parent is acting without the involvement of the other parent, mothers are almost three times as likely to kill their children as fathers are, and are more than twice as likely to abuse them."
Source: Child Maltreatment 2004, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. According to Figure 4-2 “Perpetrator Relationships of Fatalities, 2004 Child Maltreatment 2004” here, child fatalities perpetrated by mothers or by “mother and other [not father]” comprise 40.6% of all child fatalities. Figure 4-2 also shows that fatalities perpetrated by fathers or by “father and other [not mother]” comprise 15.6% of all child fatalities. According to Figure 3-6 “Victims by Perpetrator Relationship, 2004 Child Maltreatment 2004,” here child abuse perpetrated by mothers or by “mother and other [not father]” comprise 45.6% of all child abuse. Figure 3-6 also shows that abuse perpetrated by fathers or by “father and other [not mother]” comprise 19.5% of all child abuse.

Monday, September 14, 2009

In OZ ~ Mums lead abuse shame


This will get the anonymummies in OZ in a snit and a knot. They spout they, as maternalists, (i.e. victim feminists with children) are the right parent for children but the OZ data is consistent with most every where else in western democracies. Single moms alone or in partnership with their boyfriends/new male partners are the worst abusers and killers of children. These maternalists rail against male abusers but they operate hate sites and slime their critics. Last time I checked that was abuse. Go figure at the hypocrisy and double standards. MJM









Sunday Herald Sun


(Melbourne)
13 September 2009, Page 35


By Laurie Nowell

Child abuse is rising dramatically in Australia, according to the first
in-depth study to be released on the issue in a decade.

Data shows cases of abuse against children rose more than 50 per cent
between 2006 and 2008.

In the 37 per cent of cases in which a parent was the perpetrator, mothers
were responsible for 73 per cent of abuse cases while fathers were the
cause of 27 per cent.

The data, the first of its kind to emerge since 1996 and obtained under
Freedom of Information (FoI) laws, was compiled by the Western Australia
Department of Child Protection.

The figures present a disturbing snapshot of soaring child abuse and its
perpetrators. Experts say the data can accurately be applied across Australia.

Applications under FoI for similar data from all other states were refused.

The statistics come as the Federal Government has signalled it may roll
back the "shared parenting" amendments to the Family Law Act, brought in
under the Howard government to give fathers greater access to their
children in custody battles.

The data shows fathers are most responsible for sex abuse against children
- accounting for more than 85 per cent of cases.

But mothers carry out more than 65 per cent of cases of emotional and
psychological abuse and about 53 per cent of physical abuse. They are also
responsible for about 93 per cent of cases of neglect.

There were 1,505 cases of abuse of children in WA in 2007-08 - 427 of them
were carried out by mothers and 155 by fathers.

In other cases in which the gender of the perpetrator was determined, 463
cases were carried out by women and 353 by men.

A comparison with 2005-06 data shows the number of total cases of abuse had
risen more than 50 per cent from 960. In 2005-06, mothers carried out 312
acts of abuse and fathers 165.

University of Western Sydney lecturer Micheal Woods said the findings
"undermined the myth that fathers were the major risk factor for their
children's wellbeing".

"While there are some abusive fathers, there are in fact a larger
proportion of violent and abusive mothers," Mr Woods said.