!!!!!!
0:- wrote:
Carlson LaVonne wrote:
Isn't it a hoot when Doug actually posts verifiable website references
that have nothing to do with his claim? Rather than linking the
"decline" to decreased funding, Finkelhor links the decline to:
".......a variety of social changes that have occurred in the last
generation. He cites more awareness about child maltreatment, improved
parenting practices, and more effective treatment for family and
mental health problems, including psychiatric medications."
I wonder if Doug reads the links and references he posts?
I've observed, in myself as well as others, that if I practice something
long and hard I will tend to carry over what I practice into other areas.
I think he also practices selective reading and practicing....seeing
only what he wants to see. This would explain the posting of a website
that only seems to confirm part of his position, without reading the
website in its entirety.
Doug would be a great cherry picker, if he had a cherry tree. So he
learns to pick literary cherries, leaving those he wishes not to pick
for their bad effect on his argument...hence when it comes time to see
things that COULD impact his argument, naturally he's practiced MISSING
THINGS and so he misses.
Practice makes perfect, or so I've heard (grin)!
No big thing, really. Some of the kids I worked with would steal for
practice, forgetting they could get caught for taking something they
didn't even want...hence risking unnecessarily. Habit. Stupidity. Among
other things.
Some of the "other things" are probably needing attention, and
validation. I remember working with a little 6 year old girl who had
been the victim of maltreatment by her mother and assorted boyfriends of
her mother. She would kick me, hit me, etc. and say, "Now are you going
to spank me?" She was looking for anything that said, "Pay attention to
me. I'm important." I continued to hold her and tell her that I would
never hit her. I liked her for who she was.
She's now a college graduate with an income nearly double mine and a
family of her own. And before the anti-CPS rapids respond, I was her
teacher. I was not a social worker or a caseworker for CPS. Never have
been -- and never will be!
LaVonne
LaVonne
But laughable. As he likes to say, mostly when unwarranted, but
warranted now, LOL!
0:-
0:- wrote:
Doug wrote:
http://www.answers.com/topic/child-abuse
More to consider, since we have debated these points as well, and
you are wrong.
"Sexual abuse is the least frequently reported form of child abuse
and is believed to be the most under-reported type of child
maltreatment because of the secrecy or "conspiracy of silence" that
so often characterizes these cases. Sexual abuse includes fondling
a child's genitals, intercourse, incest, rape, sodomy,
exhibitionism, and commercial exploitation through prostitution or
the production of pornographic materials."
"Incidence
Despite efforts to reduce child abuse in America, more than a
million children are physically abused each year; about 2,000 die.
Although the magnitude of sexual abuse of children in the United
States is unknown, it is considered to be an escalating problem,
and one that can result in serious psychological damage among
victims. There are no reliable statistics available for emotional
abuse and neglect, but these types of child abuse are as
potentially damaging to their victims as are various forms of
physical abuse. Child abuse extends across racial, ethnic, and
socioeconomic lines, but there are consistently more reports
concerning children born into poverty. The reporting of child abuse
is complicated by the private nature of the crime, the fearfulness
of the child, and strong motivation for denial in the abuser.
Hi, Kane,
Actually, rates of child abuse continue to decrease along with
decreases in
funding, according to the latest available data from USDHHS.
http://tinyurl.com/r59pf
"Rates of substantiated sexual abuse dropped by 6 percent in 2004
compared
to the previous year, capping a 49 percent total decline since 1992.
Rates
of physical abuse declined by 11 percent from 2003 to 2004, making
for a
total 43 percent reduction since a peak in 1992. Neglect also
declined 6
percent over the one year period."
"'These are very encouraging,' said David Finkelhor, professor of
sociology
and director of the Crimes against Children Research Center at the
University of New Hampshire, who has been studying these declines.
http://tinyurl.com/r59pf
"'For several years people thought these declines were statistical
flukes or
they attributed them to changes in the way cases were being
investigated or
reported." But Finkelhor and his colleagues' investigation into the
details
of the declines, in addition to their breadth and durability, have
convinced
him that fewer children really are being maltreated."
I hear that there is a shortage of Cherry Pickers out in Washington
state, Doug. You should try it. But then you probably make more money
doing it as you do already.
There was NO mention of funding cuts being significant to
reductions...in fact, a hint that it's quite the opposite.
"Finkelhor thinks that the declines are related to a variety of
social changes that have occurred in the last generation. He cites
more awareness about child maltreatment, improved parenting
practices, and more effective treatment for family and mental health
problems, including psychiatric medications."
You could have quoted the entire piece...it's not much over a screen
in length. Why didn't you?
By the way. I think Finkelhor is wrong, but working with the
available data.
At least he's not cherry picking and he DOES acknowledge what you won't.
Imagine, improved "parenting practices," which our friends in the
alt.parenting.spanking newsgroup might want to think about. I have a
hunch the "practices" don't include improved methods of child
beating, or even spanking...both of which they've defended and left
unchallenged when others advocated them.
So tell us again about these funding cuts?
What funding cuts?
By the way, thanks for steering me to this source.
I note something veeeeery interesting...and surprise, it's about your
little MODEL state, Illinois.
By golly, if they got kids out of foster care more and kept them with
their families they sure managed, somehow to reduce the amount of
physical abuse.
But....snicker it seems two other categories went UP, Doug. UP. One
of which is, to children, the most dangerous for risk for fatalities.
Care to explain the great success of Illinois in this matter?
Is this going to be another Florida where you crow that due to using
cops for investigations the rate of children in foster care went down
(NOT THE CAUSE AT ALL, AS I PROVED) ...but we found the rate of
substantiated cases went UP?
You sure are stupid, or very bad at predictions.
Sexual Abuse Physical Abuse Neglectą
% Change % Change % Change
1992- 2003- 1992- 2003- 1992- 2003-
2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004
Il 18.3 2% 8% 25.4 66% -17% 59.9 -33% 11%
Let me interpret for you, if the columns don't align properly.
And you can check the chart at (it's a download to the Office format
doc): http://www.unh.edu/news/img/cac/Decline_table.doc
On the "Il" row, the first figure is the rate per 10,000 age 18 for
year 2004.
Overall for the span of years from 1992 to 2004, it is a 2% increase,
with the 2003-2004 year an 8% increase..oh dear, Doug. Oh dear. That
one is Sexual Abuse. A favorite of yours. Seems keeping the kiddies
at home and out of foster care just made them more available to
loving mommy and daddy or others. (Consistent with other findings by
review of the research, Doug).
Then physical abuse is next. A rate of 25.4 per 10k, with a wonderful
17% drop in the last year, but...oh dear...A 66% INCREASE FROM 92 TO
04, tsk, tsk, tsk. I wonder where Il, or you, were getting the
figures to claim this fabulous improvement in child safety due to
moving children out of Foster Care.
Then the last set. Neglect, that most deadly of the kinds of abuse a
child faces from parents. 59.9 per 10k, with a terrific drop from 92
to 04 of -33% but sadly in that last year reported... an 11% INCREASE.
So much for your bull****, Doug.
Moving children out of foster care, providing up front services...did
NOT result in the claims you have made.
The source for the data? Why, of course: "Source: NCANDS with
additional calculations by CCRC; U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services, Administration on Children, Youth and Families. Child
Maltreatment 1992-2004 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing
Office, 1992-2006).
Doug, you are as full of **** as the proverbial Christmas goose. And
you'll by the propagandist line of your anti-CPS DestroyCPS buddies
forever, won't you.
0:-
|