Health and Human Services website playing games with abuse statistics
Thanks to Stan Rains for the following information:
I found some interesting twists in the U.S. Dept of H&HS website. A quote and link are provided below.
The raw data for the conclusory article is no longer readily available on this sight as it once was for researchers and journalists. The Department has taken to editorializing and putting it’s own twist to aid in its own political agenda (a radical feminist twist). Some of these ‘misdirections’ are obvious and some are very subtle. However, once it is read nearly everyone can see that the article is based on a new cultural social experiment in forced matriarchy (father bad in spite of importance and mother good in spite of anything and everything).
One of the notable statements is that mothers, acting alone, account for 40+% of child abuse and neglect but that is somehow the fathers fault (he doesn’t take more of the load off the mother-another societal myth debunked whenever it has been carefully studied as to total work load of the father including hours at job and doing ‘male only’ chores such as car and home repair, etc…). This has been previously studied and the mothers time with the children factored in and with the weighted study, Mothers still abused in far greater numbers than men or fathers. That was even in information previously readily available on this referenced site.
“In 2003, an estimated 906,000 children were victims of abuse and neglect. Neglect was the most common form of maltreatment, with 60.9 percent of child victims suffering from neglect in 2003. Neglect was followed by physical abuse (18.9 percent of child victims), sexual abuse (9.9 percent of child victims), and psychological maltreatment (4.9 percent of child victims). In 2003, approximately 1,500 children died because of abuse or neglect.29
The largest percentage of perpetrators (83.9 percent) was parents, including birth parents, adoptive parents, and stepparents.
30 How do fathers compare to mothers in the perpetration of child maltreatment? As discussed earlier, Federal data derived from CPS reports in 2003 indicate that in 18.8 percent of the substantiated cases, fathers were the sole perpetrators of maltreatment; in 16.9 percent of the cases, the fathers and the mothers were perpetrators; and in 1.1 percent of the cases, the father acted with someone else to abuse or neglect his child. Mothers were the sole perpetrators in 40.8 percent of the cases and acted with someone besides the father in 6.3 percent of the cases.31 This means that fathers were involved in 36.8 percent of child maltreatment cases and that mothers were involved in 64 percent of child maltreatment cases. Additionally, more than one-half of the male perpetrators were biological fathers, and, although recidivism rates were low, biological fathers were more likely to be perpetrators of maltreatment again than were most other male perpetrators. This may be due in part to the lack of permanence between a mother and her boyfriend or that the perpetrator may be excluded from the household before recidivism can occur.32″
on August 20th, 2006 at 2:49 pm
From the web site:
“A father who has a good relationship with the mother of their children is more likely to be involved and to spend time with their children and to have children who are psychologically and emotionally healthier. Similarly, a mother who feels affirmed by her children’s father and who enjoys the benefits of a happy relationship is more likely to be a better mother.”
It doesn’t take long to find a quote. This one is quite amusing. If the father has a good relationship with the mother then they would be still married. Similarly, a mother that gets emotional support from the father wouldn’t be looking elsewhere for that emotional support. Isn’t it interesting how it’s about supporting the mother? Just one question? Isn’t it supposed to be about the children, without regard to how the parents get along? Anyone who claims that divorce is not a divorce of the children from the father either has the children, or has no children and has read way too many books, or is still married.
But I know from personal experience that it’s not about emotional support, because even that is not a guarantee; if the mother wants out for any number of reasons she will either find fault or make one up. In my case, I was the primary care giver from birth till “the day” (and I had a full-time job at the time, too), when the mother of the children decided that being a career “person” was not the way to go and the children needed their mother at home more often and involved, but first she had to get rid of the competition, me. So, overnight I went from loving father to monster who abused everyone and everything, physically, emotionally, and I supposedly had been doing it for a number of years but providing specifics was “too painful” and I supposedly failed to provide adequate emotional support; it didn’t matter that there wasn’t one shred of physical evidence in any form, including but not limited to doctors, dentists, hospitals, police. Supposedly, I had hidden it so well that it could only be found in the mind of the mother and I supposedly had also failed to provide her with emotional support; except now my children are carrying on the party line ; it’s interesting to hear my oldest tell me all about it, and of course, the court (via lawyer) tells me to not correct the child, so “as to not put the child in the middle of it”, advice that I don’t follow to begin with (I think they call that “contempt of court”, just a guess… I have nothing but contempt for the court.).
The divroce is not even granted and the mother has a boyfriend whom she is “dating” and strangely enough has been dating him for as long as the divorce has been going on. Of course, I’m told that it’s just a coincidence.