Greg - Abuse or Neglect?

Greegor wrote:
Kane:
You must be motivated by some kind of mental abberation.

What? Which one? Be particular in describing it. Use the DSM IV if you
can google something up. And I'll check it against the copy on my desk.

For an atheist to claim a "savior complex" is bizarre.

Atheists are not immune to various motivations common to theists.

I am socially responsible and an activist. Spent a few hours last week
at a convention both presenting and observing various social problems as
presented. My table and video loop was on the Meth problem.

Posting a horror story "to help me" is pretty funny also.

To help who? You? Of course. That's what I post replies to your drivel
for. To help you. Grow up, hopefully.

http://www.crimelibrary.com/news/index.html

You should go look again. Children are involved in a lot of those stories.

Here's one with the child being a background figure, sadly. My bet is
she witnessed much and may have suffered herself.

http://www.crimelibrary.com/news/ap/..._collared.html

If people would do this, would they hesitate to kidnapp children in the
Wal Mart parking lot? In fact another story on this page is of two women
that beat a women to try and snatch her baby. Babies are a criminal's
"commodity' in some places.

There are thousands of such horror stories.

Let me see now. There are thousands, BUT, you'd ask ...

Why is this one so special?

I know you are sitting there with your thumb up your butt twirling as
you try and figure out what I meant, so I'll explain.

The TWO stories I posted about, one where a mother butchered her child,
and another where a father raped his one NEWBORN ONE DAY OLD CHILD, with
the collusion of the mother, IN THE HOSPITAL, are so special because
they are representative of the thousands of stories of abuse, neglect,
and filicide annually that you and your cronies try to minimize.

And the actual calculations are presented to you, and STILL you
minimize, lie, dodge, excuse and SUPPORT THOSE THAT DO THESE THINGS, by
your little games here in service to your own abusive treatment of a
child...and by extension, her mother.

You admitted to using "aversive" cold showers to "teach" Lisa's 6 year
old daughter not to wet herself.

That IS abuse, Greg.

And cruel.

And fighting CPS when Lisa was, we presume, trying to get her daughter
back, was cruel and abusive to them both in the things you did.

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)

ROFL! Getting divorced or just separated?

Greegor wrote:
ROFL! Getting divorced or just separated?

To whom are you speaking?



--
"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:
Duh?
?



--
"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:
http://www.jacksonsun.com/apps/pbcs....605130304/1002

I posted this story originally, Greg, and you haven't answered the
question. It goes to the claim by you and others that parents don't
abuse that often.

95% of all child abuse is by parents and relatives. Get with the program
stupid.

0:-|





2 charged with rape of newborn
Newborn placed with relatives after both parents arrested in McKenzie

The Jackson Sun

McKenzie police have charged two Carroll County parents with raping
their child.

Jonathan Wayne Goodrum, 19, and Kristina Louise Sawyer, 18, are charged
with raping their 1-day-old girl before she was taken home from
McKenzie Regional Hospital about six weeks ago, said McKenzie Police
Lt. Tim Nanney.

While both parents have been charged, Sawyer's bond was reduced because
police still are investigating what role, if any, she played in the
possible rape of her child, Nanney said. She was charged because "I
could not exclude her from being part of it, so I had to charge her
also," he said. "I could not exclude her at the time from being a
participant of it."

Nanney said hospital officials notified police of the possible rape
after noticing injuries to the child's rear during a routine
examination given before newborns are released from the hospital.
"There were some skin tears in and around the private (back) area of
the child," he said.

The investigation led to the child's parents, Nanney said, and there
was no indication that any hospital worker was involved in the
incident.

"Based on the investigation, we ruled out everyone but the mom and the
dad," Nanney said.

The Tennessee Department of Children's Services has placed the baby
girl with a relative, Nanney said. The parents are not allowed to have
contact with the girl, who is now about 6 weeks old.

The couple was engaged to be married and was living at the Value Inn
Motel on Highland Drive in McKenzie at the time of the incident. Sawyer
is a McKenzie native, and Goodrum also has relatives living in Carroll
County, though Nanney did not know his hometown.

Goodrum is being held in the Carroll County Jail in lieu of $100,000
bond. Sawyer's bond was reduced to $5,000 after her arraignment. Nanney
did not know if she still was being held or had been released.

While no trial date has been set, Nanney said one probably would not
occur before September.

Visit jacksonsun.com and share your thoughts.

Originally published May 13, 2006



--
"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)

95%? That small?

Considering the amount of exposure that is wimpy.

Who is doing the 5% and what percentage of exposure
do they represent? 1% of exposure but 5% of abuse? Tsk Tsk.

Logically if we eliminate the Foster system that would
reduce abuse by almost 5%.

Not counting the abuse in Foster Contracting that never
makes the charts because of the systemic bias that resists
founding Fosters for abuse. (Bad PR for CPS)

Parents abuse at a drastically smaller rate than Fosters.

Even more dramatic would be if abuse was really abuse
and not a "risk of abuse" which falls under the DHHS
definition of abuse for the purposes of agency FUNDING.

Calling "risk of abuse" abuse is a lie.
That lie is used by every CPS agency in the USA
with the blessing of the US DHHS.

Supervision KNEW or SHOULD HAVE KNOWN of this charade.
Wouldn't you say, Kane?

Greegor wrote:
95%? That small?

You consider abuse by victims of 95% by parents or family small?

Considering the amount of exposure that is wimpy.

So the more exposure a parent has to a child the more likely they are to
abuse them?

Who is doing the 5% and what percentage of exposure
do they represent? 1% of exposure but 5% of abuse? Tsk Tsk.

Day care, for one. They have a very high rate.

Foster parents have a very high rate of exposure and yet they are far
from the most predominate abusers.

Logically if we eliminate the Foster system that would
reduce abuse by almost 5%.

Yes, and it would leave 100% by all the other sources, and then all the
children that are not abused in foster care would be returned to the
kindly ministrations of the 95%.

Or you possibly have a better solution of where to send them?

Not counting the abuse in Foster Contracting that never
makes the charts because of the systemic bias that resists
founding Fosters for abuse. (Bad PR for CPS)

Parents abuse at a drastically smaller rate than Fosters.

No, actually they do not. Foster parents are under very close scrutiny
and even a slap or spank is counted as an abusive incident. Not so for
parents in all but one of our United States, child. You yourself have
noted this. And spouted about how it's legal to spank.

Not for foster parents it isn't.

Even more dramatic would be if abuse was really abuse
and not a "risk of abuse" which falls under the DHHS
definition of abuse for the purposes of agency FUNDING.

You'd prefer to wait until the child is more severely injured I take it,
or dead?

I know.

Calling "risk of abuse" abuse is a lie.

No it isn't. It is rare that a child defined as at risk of abuse hasn't
also been abused. That is the "lumping together" that Doug tries so hard
with all his considerable artistry to hide.

That lie is used by every CPS agency in the USA
with the blessing of the US DHHS.

That's because of what I said above and the history of abuse taking
place in families where the child is at risk. The agencies have been
right. When they judge a child at risk and for whatever reason that
child is not removed, actual abuse tends to occur.

Supervision KNEW or SHOULD HAVE KNOWN of this charade.
Wouldn't you say, Kane?

No, I wouldn't say that because there is no "charade."

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)