Child fatalities - underreported

Does the child welfare profession and agencies under report child homicide?

A gallup poll of parents found them admitting to far more abuse of their
children than USDHHS has recorded.

Does it follow, logically, that though they would not admit to murder of
their child, that more child deaths have been misidentified as other
than filicide?

Well if some will admit to abuse, but have succeeded in keeping it
hidden, what do you think?

What does the medical community say?

Well, for one thing their reporting is far more accurate, as to the real
number of child homicides. They have the bodies all coming to one kind
of facility. (And to maintain their accreditisation they MUST report
deaths accurately).

CPS does not directly track child deaths, because many of them would not
be reported to them as 'allegations of abuse,' but simply proceed
through a call to law enforcement, and the delivery of bodies health
providers often while the child is still alive, or not yet declared dead.

Even police records are not as accurate, because the medical profession
is the last stop for a human being.

Here is an interesting article on child homicides, and some excerpts
from it:

http://content.nejm.org/cgi/reprint/339/17/1211.pdf

.... "ABSTRACT
Background
Homicide is the leading cause of infant
deaths due to injury. More than 80 percent of infant
homicides are considered to be fatal child
abuse. This study assessed the timing of deaths and
risk factors for infant homicide.
Methods
Using linked birth and death certificates
for all births in the U.S. between 1983 and 1991, we
identified 2776 homicides occurring during the first
year of life. Birth-certificate variables were reviewed
in both bivariate and multivariate stratified analyses.
Variables potentially predictive of homicide were selected
on the basis of increased relative risks among
subcategories with adequate numbers for stable estimates." ...

For those following recent conversations in this news group about
child deaths and their number, this sample would pencil out to 9 years
into 2776 homicides IN JUST THE FIRST YEAR OF LIFE.

JUST THE FIRST YEAR OF LIFE.

2776 one year olds killed, in a nine year period.

308 ONE YEAR OLDS, ON AVERAGE, KILLED EACH YEAR.

BY HOMICIDE. Not neglect, but deliberate killing.

ONE YEAR OLD BABIES. 308 of them DOUG, YOU ****ING PIECE OF LYING ****.

Even this source admits to a high probability of UNDER REPORTING...which
would FURTHER skew data to LESS than is in fact homicide.

"A number of factors probably lead to underascertainment
of infant homicides. Five percent (139) of
known homicides in our study occurred during the
first day of life, but the actual number of infants
killed on the day of birth could be higher, since
some births may have been kept secret. In addition,
some homicides were probably classified as deaths
due to either unintentional injury or other causes,
including the sudden infant death syndrome. The
classification of homicide was based on the designation
of intent in relation to the underlying cause of
death, as determined by the medical examiner or
coroner. We included deaths with a final designation
of suspicious intent. However, at least 5 percent of
deaths classified as due to the sudden infant death
syndrome may actually be due to child abuse or neglect.
6,21
Many fatal cases of child abuse are classified
as deaths due to other causes and are not consistently
documented across information sources such as
death certificates, records of medical examiners, crime
reports, abuse registries, hospitals, and ambulatory
care records.
11,21-23
Indeed, reviews of records from
multiple systems after the cause of death had been
determined by a medical examiner showed that substantiated
child abuse or neglect may have been involved
in 7 to 27 percent of deaths from injuries
classified as unintentional.
3,6,7"

.... "DISCUSSION
Our study lacks data on the perpetrators. The perpetrator’s
relationship to the infant was specified on the death certificate in
less than 10 percent of homicides due to battering or other maltreatment
and in none of those due to other causes. Studies have
shown that most infant homicides are carried out by parents or
stepparents, and a slight majority are attributable
to males.
5,11,12
In the case of children
killed after the first two years of life, however, the
perpetrator tends to be unrelated to the child. Some
studies have found that mothers are the perpetrators
in the majority of cases only in the case of homicides
during the first week of life. A possible explanation
is that the mother is trying to hide the pregnancy
and birth.
9-11
In our study, 95 percent of infants
killed during the first day of life were not born in a
hospital, as compared with 8 percent of all infants
killed during the first year of life — a finding that is
consistent with this explanation. "

I find interesting this statement: "In the case of children
killed after the first two years of life, however, the
perpetrator tends to be unrelated to the child."

Could it be foster parents?

Well, the highest rate of non-parental perpetrators of child homicides
is NOT foster parents, but in fact, overwhelmingly DAY CARE PROVIDERS.

A choice the PARENTS, not the STATE, made, folks.

http://www.gc.cuny.edu/faculty/resea.../childCare.pdf

And do we get some weird outcomes in this demographic of death for
children.

"Table 1. Fatalities and Serious Injuries from Violence by Type of Child
Care in the United States, 1985–2003
Fatalities, Injuries,
by Type of Care Serious by Type of Carea

Type of FDC In-home Center Total FDC In-home Center Total

Incident (%) (%) (%) (N) (%) (%) (%) (N)
Violent
Assault 66 32 2 255 61 18 21 160

Shaking 84 16 0 187 85 12 3 168

Sexual
Assault 25 75 0 16 47 47 5 19

Total, N 330 123 5 458 249 59 39 347

—(%) (72) (27) (1) (100) (72) (17) (11) (100)

Note: FDC = family day care.
a Requiring medical care.

The breakdown is by two types of day care provider. In-home, and day
care Center.

When one considers that day care is NOT the choice, after age five
(children being in school) then these numbers and percentages start to
take on their true meaning as to rates of death and abuse in child care.

Especially if you are making a comparison to Foster care deaths and
injuries, where children from new born to 17 are commonly the population.




--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin

Child Protection agency abuse of families
is under reported, under litigated and any
involvement with CPS agencies carries a
social stigma that serves the agencies.

noooooooooow, didn't joseph mccarthy say something like this about
communists in the state department when he was waving his
list...................this has all the indications of someone trying
to start another witch hunt...................

]:^ runs around her dog lot barking i have a list................i
have a list................i have a list................i have a
list................i have a list................i have a
list................i have a list................i have a
list................i have a list................

What does the medical community say?

Regarding child homicides? They underestimate the percentages of younger
children killed through abuse and neglect compared to USDHHS figures. In
compiling fatalities due to abuse/neglect, however, NCANDS gathers data from
these same sources.

Well, for one thing their reporting is far more accurate, as to the real
number of child homicides. They have the bodies all coming to one kind of
facility. (And to maintain their accreditisation they MUST report deaths
accurately).

This is probably why USDHHS gathers their data on fatalities from these
sources.

CPS does not directly track child deaths, because many of them would not
be reported to them as 'allegations of abuse,' but simply proceed through
a call to law enforcement, and the delivery of bodies health providers
often while the child is still alive, or not yet declared dead.

Actually, NCANDS uses a variety of sources, including state CPS reports.

Even police records are not as accurate, because the medical profession is
the last stop for a human being.

Here is an interesting article on child homicides, and some excerpts from
it:

http://content.nejm.org/cgi/reprint/339/17/1211.pdf

Using linked birth and death certificates
for all births in the U.S. between 1983 and 1991, we
identified 2776 homicides occurring during the first
year of life. Birth-certificate variables were reviewed
in both bivariate and multivariate stratified analyses.
Variables potentially predictive of homicide were selected
on the basis of increased relative risks among
subcategories with adequate numbers for stable estimates." ...

In 2004, NCANDS data from 32 states showed 59.6 of child fatalities due to
abuse or neglect were children 1 year old or younger. For the nation, this
would project out to 888 fatalities of children 1 year old or younger (1490
* .596).

For those following recent conversations in this news group about child
deaths and their number, this sample would pencil out to 9 years into 2776
homicides IN JUST THE FIRST YEAR OF LIFE.

JUST THE FIRST YEAR OF LIFE.

2776 one year olds killed, in a nine year period.

308 ONE YEAR OLDS, ON AVERAGE, KILLED EACH YEAR.

BY HOMICIDE. Not neglect, but deliberate killing.

Homicides are fatalities due to abuse or neglect. Homicides are deaths
caused by another. If you starve someone to death, you have committed
homicide.


ONE YEAR OLD BABIES. 308 of them DOUG, YOU ****ING PIECE OF LYING ****.

NCANDS shows 888 fatalities due to maltreatment of babies 1 year old or
younger during 2004. This is part of the data you posted disproving your
contention 1,000 children died as the result of abuse that began with
spanking.

The vast majority of fatalities due to child maltreatment involve children
under four years old. In fact, 81% of the fatalities due to abuse and
neglect involved children under 4 years old. And, as we have seen, the
largest percentage of that subgroup involves children 1 year old and
younger. That does not change the aggregate NCANDS figures, which clearly
proved your contention incorrect.

Even this source admits to a high probability of UNDER REPORTING...which
would FURTHER skew data to LESS than is in fact homicide.

Yes. And it also reports that a lot of the homicides it tallied could have
been accidental deaths or SIDS.

Also, nothing in the survey you cite says anything about fatalities due to
abuse that began with spanking.

Greegor wrote:
Child Protection agency abuse of families
is under reported,

Do you have some data or analysis from an authoritative source?

Please post.

under litigated

That would be an opinion. But if you have real proof, please provide it.

and any
involvement with CPS agencies carries a
social stigma that serves the agencies.

How is this accomplished?

What precisely IS the social stigma? Do you speak from experience? And
how does this, if it exists at all, serve the agencies?

Or is this just your opinion?

0:-


--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else)

Greegor wrote:

Child Protection agency abuse of families
is under reported,

And your evidence is? Your personal experience that allows you to
generalize?

under litigated

And your evidence is? Your personal experience with CPS?

and any
involvement with CPS agencies carries a
social stigma that serves the agencies.

Your report and what happened with your family made you angry, didn't
it? You just can't go around abusing your kids, even if your name is
"greegor."

LaVonne

Carlson LaVonne wrote:


Greegor wrote:

Child Protection agency abuse of families
is under reported,

And your evidence is? Your personal experience that allows you to
generalize?

under litigated

And your evidence is? Your personal experience with CPS?

and any
involvement with CPS agencies carries a
social stigma that serves the agencies.

Your report and what happened with your family made you angry, didn't
it? You just can't go around abusing your kids, even if your name is
"greegor."

LaVonne

He, and the rest of the pro spank-antiCPS crowd are getting well over
the edge these days.

Lies, dodges, and foolishness like this.

The fact that the schools, state after state, are doing away with
paddling are leaving them mad..not not angry, NUTS.

It is so frustrating to have spent a lifetime defending people's right
to assault children only to find themselves uncovered like maggots in a
corpse.

The rest of the world is waking up, so they can no longer count on
numbers in agreement, and they know their foolishness is doomed.

Just like slavery, and other human rights issues, it takes only a
critical mass...and it is NOT a majority that is needed.

All forms of CP are going to be outlawed.

It won't be long now.

0:-




--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else)

LaVonne yaps about sources but neglects
to detect that the source posted did not
support the premise as propagandized by Kane!

Way to go LaVonne!
Will you step in dog doo next?

Loved your title "Garbage spewed without support"
but where it applied to the data Kane presented
it absolutely did not support what he said it did.

Shouldn't the title have been "Garbage spewed as if it supports
non-spanking"
or perhaps "Kane misrepresents meaning of stats"?

What citations does anybody need to catch onto
Kane presenting citations as if they prove his
desired premise when the stats actually DO NOT?

Pfft!

OK, So Kane is asserting that some of the
deaths that are officially marked as accidental
were actually murdered by parents.

There would of course be no proof of that.

In this country people are supposed to be
innocent until proven guilty. Citizens have rights.

There IS proof that agencies lie, exaggerate
and distort in order to make cases and
because those "scores" generate funding.

Bureaucracies almost universally try to
inflate their own performance to appear
more efficient and worthy of funds than they are.

In this country, did you know that it is
not possible to slander or libel an AGENCY?
An agency has no constitutional rights.

It actually seems reasonable when evaluating
a bureaucracy to presume guilt and corruption
because those problems are so prevalent.

Qualified immunities, political nature and the
awesome potential for HARMING so many
families make the presumption of bureaucratic
corruption an obvious premise.

Greegor wrote:
OK, So Kane is asserting that some of the
deaths that are officially marked as accidental
were actually murdered by parents.

I believe I quoted, and cited with link to the source. Do you think this
source would be lying?

There would of course be no proof of that.

Odd, you seem totally unexcited about YOUR lack of proof, WITHOUT EVEN
CITATIONS OF AUTHORITY, as I've provided.

In this country people are supposed to be
innocent until proven guilty. Citizens have rights.

Mmm...no one was charged. That's the point Greg. Insufficient evidence
to claim it was a murder, but more than enough to convince experts that
it was the most likely scenario.

There IS proof that agencies lie, exaggerate
and distort in order to make cases and
because those "scores" generate funding.

You are ignoring my cited source. It had NOTHING whatsoever to do with
any "agency." These are doctors who know what they are seeing.

Bureaucracies almost universally try to
inflate their own performance to appear
more efficient and worthy of funds than they are.

No they don't.

In this country, did you know that it is
not possible to slander or libel an AGENCY?

Then you can say anything you wish and get away with it. Notice that? I
have. You are a little thug.

An agency has no constitutional rights.

That's pretty much it. However an agency is people. And people DO have
constitutional rights.

Or were you going to sue a copy machine?

It actually seems reasonable when evaluating
a bureaucracy to presume guilt and corruption
because those problems are so prevalent.

Actually they are so extremely rare they are big news when they do happen.

How many actual cases have you seen?

Come on, Greg. Give us a count.

Qualified immunities,

I thought you said agencies have no constitutional rights?

By the way, it is impossible for an "agency" of enforcement to operate
if they do not have some immunities. All an accused person would need to
do to get away with their violation would be claim the agency is doing
something illegal and sue. And criminally charge.

Fact is anyone CAN sue a state agency employee. Did you know that,
Greeg? There is absolutely NOTHING to stop you from doing so.

Ask an attorney.

political nature and the
awesome potential for HARMING so many
families make the presumption of bureaucratic
corruption an obvious premise.

My what a brilliant sounding babble.

So, when are you pressing your and Lisa's case against Iowa CPS? Are you
going to charge Concannon, as one you claim is responsible for your
"plight?"

0:-



--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else)