We don need no steenkin' CPS.

forget the abuse or neglect statistics.................when thinking
about cps, follow the money trail................the game is to get
poorer and less sophisticated parents labeled as unfit, take their
children, let the taxpayers foot the bill, and accuse anyone opposing
the system of hating children.............that is why a massive
heavy-handed bureaucracy of make-work positions rather than a mentoring
system or other benign interventions..................the name of the
game is money and power................

Further, it is obvious to anyone here that not all of those child
fatalities that were caused by abuse (28.3% or 421 children) died as the
result of abuse that started with spanking. Many of those fatalities due
to abuse did not involve spanking at all.
Not all child abuse begins with spanking.

Oh, what DOES it begin with?

Hi, Kane,

Not all fatal child abuse esculates from spanking. You wrongfully claimed
that ALL of the child fatalities USDHHS shows as occurring as the result of
abuse -- 421 from abuse and 579 from abuse AND neglect for a total of
1,000 -- began with abuse.

That isn't true.

Not all fatal child abuse begins with spanking.

Not all the children who died as the result of abuse (421) in 2003 were
subject to maltreatment that began with spanking.

I didn't say "all the children." In fact I posted figures that show it is
NOT "all." But a large proportion. Stop lying, Doug.

You DID say ALL of the children USDHHS shows as dying due to abuse or abuse
and neglect (1,000 children) died of abuse that began with spanking.

"1,000 CHILDREN OR MORE DEAD EVERY YEAR AT THE HANDS OF THEY PARENT
PRACTICING CP THAT ESCALATED?"

You are wrong. Anyone with common sense knows that not all of these fatal
child abuse cases started with spanking that escalated.

You are now on your high speed spin cycle. And I'm hear to dry you out,
again and again.

LOL! Crow can give anyone a bit of drymouth.

"1,000 CHILDREN OR MORE DEAD EVERY YEAR AT THE HANDS OF THEY PARENT
PRACTICING CP THAT ESCALATED?"

That people who kill or injure their children by that escalation really
didn't do that? They just suddenly jumped from no spank to beating their
child to death?

Here is from a story you posted:

"Police found Liset Hernandez, 36, in a closet holding the toddler, who
had multiple stab wounds Friday night. The infant girl, who was slashed
in the chest and abdomen, was found wrapped in a white sheet in the
bathroom sink, officials said."

Does that sound like "CP THAT ESCALATED"?

Of course not. Where was spanking involved?

Hi, Kane,

Exactly the point made by the poster to which you reply. The infant was one
of the 1,000 who died as the result of abuse or abuse/neglect, but not as
the result of spanking that had escalated.

And more importantly, where did I say that all child deaths were the
result of parents spanking to escalation?

You said that ALL child fatalities USDHHS reported as the result of abuse
(421) and the combination of abuse and neglect (579) were cases where
spanking had escalated.

Here is your quote:

"1,000 CHILDREN OR MORE DEAD EVERY YEAR AT THE HANDS OF THEY PARENT
PRACTICING CP THAT ESCALATED?"

No, just you, and you did it again above, by attempting to claim I said
something I didn't.

Here, again, is your quote:

"1,000 CHILDREN OR MORE DEAD EVERY YEAR AT THE HANDS OF THEY PARENT
PRACTICING CP THAT ESCALATED?"

You said it. You were wrong.

USDHHS reported a total of 421 fatalities due to abuse in 2003. Another 579
children were reported by USDHHS to have died as the result of abuse and
neglect in combination. YOU took the total -- 1,000 -- and claimed ALL of
the children died as the result of "CP" that had escalated to fatal abuse.

You said it. The poster caught you at it. You were wrong.

Obviously, many of those fatalities due to abuse occurred without spanking
being a precursor.

gregory says neglect kills more than abuse.................


No, Greg continually demonstrates he does not KNOW that fact. I am the one
that has to keep telling him, now for three years.

Hi, Kane,

You just got through telling us that not only did 1,000 of the 1,490 child
fatalities due to abuse and neglect involve ABUSE, but that those 1,000
fatalities were the result of abuse that had esculated from spanking.

1,000 = From abuse that esculated from spanking.
490 = From neglect.

Any check of the data year after year shows that neglect is the major
killer of children. Sadly YOU ****ants want to discriminate between abuse
and neglect as though one was "nicer" or less serious than the other.

If a check of the data showed that neglect was responsible for the majority
of the 1,490 children who died as the result of abuse and neglect, how do
you support your statement that 1,000 of them died as the result of abuse
that esculated from spanking?

In an earlier post in this thread, you cited USDHHS
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/p...four.htm#child
and pasted:
Number of Child Fatalities
During 2004, an estimated 1,490 children died (compared to 1,460
children for 2003) from abuse or neglect ...

Then, wrote:

"Real children. Living, breathing, precious children. Just like our own.
Only now dead. Forever. By the hand of their parents."

"About a thousand children a year that die at the hands of their parents
do so because of "discipline" that escalated to murder. In other words,
two thirds of the total each year were 'disciplined to death.'"

"And these creeps wonder why anyone would be interested in legislation to
end spanking."

So, far from educating another poster that neglect is the biggest killer,
you are saying that abuse is responsible for 2/3 of the fatalities. You go
further to make the horrendously inaccurate claim that these 1,000 children
were "disciplined to death."

Doug wrote:
gregory says neglect kills more than abuse.................

No, Greg continually demonstrates he does not KNOW that fact. I am the one
that has to keep telling him, now for three years.

Hi, Kane,

You just got through telling us that not only did 1,000 of the 1,490 child
fatalities due to abuse and neglect involve ABUSE, but that those 1,000
fatalities were the result of abuse that had esculated from spanking.

1,000 = From abuse that esculated from spanking.
490 = From neglect.

Any check of the data year after year shows that neglect is the major
killer of children. Sadly YOU ****ants want to discriminate between abuse
and neglect as though one was "nicer" or less serious than the other.

If a check of the data showed that neglect was responsible for the majority
of the 1,490 children who died as the result of abuse and neglect, how do
you support your statement that 1,000 of them died as the result of abuse
that esculated from spanking?

In an earlier post in this thread, you cited USDHHS
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/p...four.htm#child
and pasted:
Number of Child Fatalities
During 2004, an estimated 1,490 children died (compared to 1,460
children for 2003) from abuse or neglect ...

Then, wrote:

"Real children. Living, breathing, precious children. Just like our own.
Only now dead. Forever. By the hand of their parents."

"About a thousand children a year that die at the hands of their parents
do so because of "discipline" that escalated to murder. In other words,
two thirds of the total each year were 'disciplined to death.'"

"And these creeps wonder why anyone would be interested in legislation to
end spanking."

So, far from educating another poster that neglect is the biggest killer,
you are saying that abuse is responsible for 2/3 of the fatalities. You go
further to make the horrendously inaccurate claim that these 1,000 children
were "disciplined to death."


Just more of your minimizing, Doug?

How many would YOU estimate started as spanking and eventually ended
with the child's death?

Want to argue with the source I quoted? Give them a buzz. Tell them they
are lying.

Then remember that YOU are playing with children's lives for your sick
little games.

I notice you stayed miles away from the injury estimates.

Reading research from pediatric medicine on estimates of death by abuse
from parents one gets the picture. Parents are killing their own
children at a significant rate. If we can't pin the numbers down to some
point of absolute precision how does that make it less dead for the
child, you stupid evil nasty little creep?

500 a year, 50 a year, or 5,000 a year (with the latter being very
possible given the secret nature of child abuse and child deaths at the
hands of parents.

Which figure do you want to use, Doug?

Which for your minimizing of a deadly problem for children and our society?

****ing lowlife scum, Doug. That IS what you are, after all.

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

On Mon, 15 May 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
"1,000 CHILDREN OR MORE DEAD EVERY YEAR AT THE HANDS OF THEY PARENT
PRACTICING CP THAT ESCALATED?"

Lies, damn lies and anti-spanking zealotS! ;-)

The NEJM and the USDHHS?

The LIES from anti-spanking zealotS! Do you think you can impress people
by throwing around "New England Journal of Medicine"? Do you think peolpe
would be so STUPID as to fall for that? All they have to ask is which
issue of the NEJM and they will see the lies exposed! ;-)



Doan

You have a better source and better numbers?

Which issue of the NEJM?

And you have not responded to my question..do you think that people just
go from non spanking to beating their children to death?

Actually, people go from non-cp to spanking. ;-)

Please explain your reasoning, if you can?

"CP is typically a response to misbehavior, particularly after one or more
other intervention have been tried repeatedly and the misbehavior they are
meant to correct recurs." Straus & Mouradian (1998)

Doan

0:-




On 15 May 2006, Greegor wrote:

Don't you mean "maltreatment"?





--
"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

Kane had written:

"About a thousand children a year that die at the hands of their parents
do so because of "discipline" that escalated to murder. In other words,
two thirds of the total each year were 'disciplined to death.'"

"And these creeps wonder why anyone would be interested in legislation to
end spanking."


Just more of your minimizing, Doug?

How many would YOU estimate started as spanking and eventually ended with
the child's death?

Hi, Kane,

I know that USDHHS reports 421 children died as the result of child abuse in
2004. I would have no way of knowing what percentage of those fatal abuse
cases started with spanking.

I do know that USDHHS did NOT report that 1,000 children died of abuse, let
alone abuse that started off as spanking.

Want to argue with the source I quoted? Give them a buzz. Tell them they
are lying.

You quoted USDHHS. I have posted the USDHHS figures. They tell us 421
children died as the result of abuse by parents, relatives, foster carers
and other caregivers. And the agency makes no claim what percentage of
those 421 involved spanking.

"The three main categories of maltreatment related to fatalities were
neglect (35.5%), combinations of maltreatments (30.2%), and physical abuse
(28.3%)," according to the USDHHS. "Medical neglect accounted for 1.4
percent of fatalities."

Then remember that YOU are playing with children's lives for your sick
little games.

My post simply disproved your false claim that USDHHS reported 1,000
children died from physical abuse that began as spanking. In your zealous
tirade against spanking, you misrepresented data about children who had died
as the result of major maltreatment.

I notice you stayed miles away from the injury estimates.

My post simply disproved your claim that USDHHS said 1,000 children died as
the result of physical abuse that esculated from spanking. I posted the
USDHHS figures that said 421 children died as the result of physical
abuse -- not 1,000. My post simply disproved your suggestion that USDHHS
said ANYTHING about spanking being involved in ANY of 421 fatalities it did
report as being due to physical abuse.

Spanking, which is probably practiced by the major of caregivers, is not
fatal. Nor does it necessarily lead to increasingly violent behavior
resulting in homicide.

Doug wrote:
Kane had written:

"About a thousand children a year that die at the hands of their parents
do so because of "discipline" that escalated to murder. In other words,
two thirds of the total each year were 'disciplined to death.'"

"And these creeps wonder why anyone would be interested in legislation to
end spanking."


Just more of your minimizing, Doug?

How many would YOU estimate started as spanking and eventually ended with
the child's death?

Hi, Kane,

I know that USDHHS reports 421 children died as the result of child abuse in
2004. I would have no way of knowing what percentage of those fatal abuse
cases started with spanking.

I do know that USDHHS did NOT report that 1,000 children died of abuse, let
alone abuse that started off as spanking.

Want to argue with the source I quoted? Give them a buzz. Tell them they
are lying.

You quoted USDHHS. I have posted the USDHHS figures. They tell us 421
children died as the result of abuse by parents, relatives, foster carers
and other caregivers. And the agency makes no claim what percentage of
those 421 involved spanking.

"The three main categories of maltreatment related to fatalities were
neglect (35.5%), combinations of maltreatments (30.2%), and physical abuse
(28.3%)," according to the USDHHS. "Medical neglect accounted for 1.4
percent of fatalities."

Then remember that YOU are playing with children's lives for your sick
little games.

My post simply disproved your false claim that USDHHS reported 1,000
children died from physical abuse that began as spanking. In your zealous
tirade against spanking, you misrepresented data about children who had died
as the result of major maltreatment.

My original post you are avoiding of course. The one that cited the
USDHHS and the NEJM. Do you think the authors were lying? If so why not
TELL THEM. I am citing THEIR reference first, presuming they would not
publish if they did NOT have the data. After all, YOU aren't the only
asshole in the world that might want to argue with them.

GO...TELL THEM THEY ARE LYING. QUICK QUICK CHOP CHOP. Possibly THEY will
cite their source for you.

I notice you stayed miles away from the injury estimates.

My post simply disproved your claim that USDHHS said 1,000 children died as
the result of physical abuse that esculated from spanking.

You don't know what killed those children. And we don't know that 2004
was the year referenced or if it was an average. Go to the source I
posted in the original and stop playing dodge'em, like the weasel you
are and the weasels you associate with here.

I posted the
USDHHS figures that said 421 children died as the result of physical
abuse -- not 1,000.

You best go back.

My post simply disproved your suggestion that USDHHS
said ANYTHING about spanking being involved in ANY of 421 fatalities it did
report as being due to physical abuse.

I did not claim USDHHS made a claim about spanking. I offered SOME data
about fatalities. Logic speaks to how many were "spanked" to death by
overzealous parents.

Spanking, which is probably practiced by the major of caregivers, is not
fatal.

Neither is smoking cigarettes. You want to claim that ALL SPANKING IS
NOT FATAL?

Bull****. Not a super majority, that's for sure.

It has dropped so drastically as a belief these days that it's now below
60% of the population that believes in it.

So the "major"[sic] of them is just about to disappear.

Nor does it necessarily lead to increasingly violent behavior
resulting in homicide.

that has been disproven repeatedly. Nearly every singel case of fatal
child abuse had "spanking" as an element in it, and the parent went from
less to more severe spanking.

You are simply lying.

Your "nor does it necessarily" is spin, as usual. Of course it doesn't
in ALL cases, but it does in the majority of cases where physical abuse
kills. It started as corporal punishment.

Maybe all these people are lying. What do YOU think:

http://www.christianity.ca/church/life/2004/08.000.html

"Physical abuse defined: Physical abuse is the "deliberate application
of force to any part of a child's body, which results or may result in a
non-accidental injury." It is also defined as the beating of a child,
and can include burning, hitting, kicking, throwing, holding a child
under water, shaking, choking, biting, or any other harm or restraint.
Sometimes parents and care-givers' abusive behaviour toward children is
mistakenly called "discipline." However, this false type of "discipline"
has been found to escalate into more violent beatings.
Thirty-four percent of investigations of physical abuse in the 1998
nationwide CIS study were substantiated. The majority of these cases
involved inappropriate punishment (69 percent), and included the forms
of physical abuse mentioned above."

They know what goes on, and they are FOR spanking.

Are THEY LYING?

Look, you stupid little ****ant of a human being, we know, you and I
both, that the vast majority of physical abuse is by a carer that is
trying to control the child. Punishment.

Do you think people that shake a baby into permanent injury or death
just wanted to hear their brain rattle?

They were trying to control the child.

Tell, me, asshole, if someone beats a child to death or uses other
typical 'discipline' methods that get out of hand, what DO you think
their reason was...to deliberately kill the child?

Those are so rare as to be notable. Girl kills newborn. Parent kills
child for insurance. Those things rarely happen.

What DOES happen, and everyone KNOWS you are lying, Doug, is that people
lose control while trying to control a child.

Stop your ****ing lying, you scumbag.

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

increasingly, because of the prevalence of politics in social science,
peer review is not enough......................peer review has become
an appeal to authority.....................pure science never takes a
political stand.......................it is one of the few things that
can truly serve two masters....................

]:^ runs around her dog lot barking peer review................ peer
review................ peer review................ peer
review................ peer review................ peer
review................ peer review................

Doan wrote:
On Mon, 15 May 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
"1,000 CHILDREN OR MORE DEAD EVERY YEAR AT THE HANDS OF THEY PARENT
PRACTICING CP THAT ESCALATED?"

Lies, damn lies and anti-spanking zealotS! ;-)
The NEJM and the USDHHS?

The LIES from anti-spanking zealotS! Do you think you can impress people
by throwing around "New England Journal of Medicine"? Do you think peolpe
would be so STUPID as to fall for that? All they have to ask is which
issue of the NEJM and they will see the lies exposed! ;-)


Doan
You have a better source and better numbers?

Which issue of the NEJM?

Well not the one Doug claims is a "foreign" source....R R R R ...

How is it you let THOSE kinds of mistakes pass but want to split hairs
otherwise? Got an agenda, Drone, or are you lying about your neutrality
and "let them make up their own minds?" Or isn't that a position that
calls for neutrality, eh?





And you have not responded to my question..do you think that people just
go from non spanking to beating their children to death?

Actually, people go from non-cp to spanking. ;-)

Yes, that is common, but not to non-cp using parents. They do not stop
using non-cp methods and opt for cp. Or maybe you have some data to
prove they do?

Observer? Yes, but he was a spanker to begin with.

Please explain your reasoning, if you can?

"CP is typically a response to misbehavior, particularly after one or more
other intervention have been tried repeatedly and the misbehavior they are
meant to correct recurs." Straus & Mouradian (1998)

That refers to a CP using family, not a non-cp methods family. Or is
that too complex a concept for you? 0:-

Do you think, for instance, that Canada, your favorite "they have a
spanking permission law" might be much different from us?

http://www.bcifv.org/pubs/Under%20Scrutiny.pdf

"APPENDIX A – Child Abuse Statistics
The potentially fatal consequences of child abuse are highlighted in the
following statistics:
• Family members – mostly parents – were responsible for the deaths of
more than 1,200 children in Canada in homicide cases brought to the
attention of police during the years 1974-1999. These 1,200 homicides
represent only known and solved crimes. Younger children are most at
risk for familicide (murder by a family member), particularly children
under three years of age.
• According to Canada’s first national child abuse and neglect study
(CISCAN), a majority (69%) of more than 60,000 substantiated
investigations of child abuse conducted by Canadian child welfare
officials in 1998 involved inappropriate punishment."

You people make me sick.

Australia has done extensive work on this issue of spanking escalating
into injury and death. Are they lying, you jackinapes?

http://www.childhood.org.au/download...%20paper .pdf

"Physical punishment is an unpleasant experience for children. Yet
children may
perceive it as a parental right and unquestionably accept it as such
(Graziano et al.,
1996). This finding exposes the vulnerability and powerlessness of children.
Children’s physical integrity and physical survival may depend on the
care they
receive from their parents. Graziano et al. (1996) studied 320
middle-class, intact
families. Fathers, mothers and children were interviewed. They found
that 30% of
parents, despite being relatively socially advantaged, admitted that
sometimes they
inflicted physical punishment on their children that caused intense
pain, bruises or
raised welts. Moreover, 35% of the children reported that they had been
punished with
sticks, paddles, whips and cords. This finding adds support to the
possibility that
physical punishment and severe or even fatal child abuse may be linked.
This may
occur through a process of escalation 'not limited to economically
deprived families'
(Graziano et al., 1996:847). This finding also highlights the serious
harm to which physical punishment exposes children, even if infrequent,
unintended or accidental

Does physical punishment exist
on a continuum that escalates
into severe/fatal abuse?
Questionably, physical punishment can be viewed as existing at one end of a
continuum which can lead to a child’s death. Comments such as these are
commonly
found in the literatu
…most physical child abuse arises from excessive punishment rather
than deliberate maltreatment (Fergusson and Lynskey, 1997:628).
Is physical abuse simply too much of a good thing? (Garbarino,
1996:159).
It may be that few parents who do cross the line [from mild physical
punishment to excessive physical punishment] start out with the
intention of becoming abusive (Whipple and Richey, 1997:441).
Basically, child abuse is in pretty well every case conceived as a
form of punishment. A lot of research from the United Kingdom, the
US and Finland has shown that when parents who seriously abuse
their children are questioned about it, they almost invariably say that
it started off as their right to punish their child and, OK, it got a bit
out of hand (Murdoch, quoting Newell, The Sydney Morning Herald,
4/6/92:12).
The majority of incidents of physical abuse which come to the notice
of the authorities arise from situations where parents are attempting
to control or discipline their children…If the parents’ initial
command is ineffective and is ignored by the child the situation will
escalate and become more and more stressful until the only way the
abusive parents feel they can regain control is by resorting to
violence (Browne, 1995:126).
…there is a point along the continuum of physical punishment when
a smack or tap escalates into spanking into beating and so along the
line to the point where abuse laws or the criminal law can be invoked
(Boss, 1995:28).
Some professionals mandated to report abuse and some professionals
working in the
area of child protection continue to tolerate or even condone the
physical punishment
of children (see below). In some families, the sanctioning of physical
punishment may
contribute to its frequent use. In conditions of extreme stress, this
may lead to severe
or even fatal abuse:
…“triggers” that occur just before many fatal assaults on infants and
young children…include a baby’s inconsolable crying, feeding
difficulties, a toddler’s failed toilet training, and highly exaggerated
parental perceptions of acts of “disobedience”…most physical abuse."



Any simple google of the terms "child abuse" "fatal" or "deaths" will
show ample research that links "discipline" escalating into beatings
that result in deaths.

The idea that you stupid self serving asses want to foist that this is
not generally the case shows how patronizing of others and stupid YOU are.

You know what I have related here is TRUE and are either in denial or
are simply lying.

Do the search. See what you come up with.
http://www.bcifv.org/pubs/Under%20Scrutiny.pdf
http://nccanch.acf.hhs.gov/pubs/othe...n/children.pdf
http://ican-ncfr.org/documents/Nations-Shame.pdf
http://nccanch.acf.hhs.gov/pubs/othe...ssons/refs.cfm

Those would be just a tiny start above.

Why would you lie about this...children's LIVES? What kind of sick ****s
ARE you?



Kane







Doan

0:-



On 15 May 2006, Greegor wrote:

Don't you mean "maltreatment"?



--
"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




--
"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