A short assignment

I realize I have a sizable advantage because I work in the field, but
everybody reading this has access to the internet, so here it goes. Find one
famous violent criminal who was not spanked as a child. I know a lot of you
would like to prove the experts wrong, so do this one thing and properly
humiliate us. In all the law enforcement research involving thousands of
murderers, rapists, arsonists, bombers, child molesters, and kidnappers, I
have come across only one offender who did not receive corporal punishment
as a child. He was (not yet convicted) murderer/millionaire Robert Durst.
Find just one more reasonably famous offender who wasn’t spanked, and you
will best, not only me, but every expert in forensic psychology. Good luck.
I’ll check back later to see if anyone succeeded.

"mind candy" wrote in message
news:3f528818$1_4@newsfeed...

I realize I have a sizable advantage because I work in the field, but
everybody reading this has access to the internet, so here it goes. Find
one
famous violent criminal who was not spanked as a child. I know a lot of
you
would like to prove the experts wrong, so do this one thing and properly
humiliate us. In all the law enforcement research involving thousands of
murderers, rapists, arsonists, bombers, child molesters, and kidnappers, I
have come across only one offender who did not receive corporal punishment
as a child. He was (not yet convicted) murderer/millionaire Robert Durst.
Find just one more reasonably famous offender who wasn't spanked, and you
will best, not only me, but every expert in forensic psychology. Good
luck.
I'll check back later to see if anyone succeeded.


Hmm. Why? Just because you "work in the field", why does that give you
some advantage? I also work in the field, and I have yet to find any
correlation between CP and criminal activity. Criminals come from all walks
of life, rich, poor, spanked and unspanked. Some have even claimed to have
found a genetic reason for ciminal behavoirs.

"Born to Crime : The Genetic Causes of Criminal Behavior by Lawrence Taylor"
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/AS...041864-8231830

"forensic psychology" is only so much guesswork, and more than enough of
that. A Cultural Anthropologist would be a better choice, at least they
have some empirical evidence to back their claims. But this guy is
stretching the facts just a bit, as do forensic psychologists.

Ron

Hmm. Why? Just because you "work in the field", why does that give you
some advantage? I also work in the field, and I have yet to find any
correlation between CP and criminal activity. Criminals come from all
walks
of life, rich, poor, spanked and unspanked. Some have even claimed to
have
found a genetic reason for ciminal behavoirs.

"Born to Crime : The Genetic Causes of Criminal Behavior by Lawrence
Taylor"

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/AS...041864-8231830

"forensic psychology" is only so much guesswork, and more than enough of
that. A Cultural Anthropologist would be a better choice, at least they
have some empirical evidence to back their claims. But this guy is
stretching the facts just a bit, as do forensic psychologists.

Ron




Forensic: Relating to the use of science or technology in the investigation
and establishment of facts or evidence in a court of law.
Psychology: The science that deals with mental processes and behavior.



I claim to have an advantage, because I have access to the reports that
contain information the general public usually can't access. Most newspaper
reports are not going to say something like "the suspect was spanked as a
child" just like it won't say "the suspect was known to wet the bed until
the age of 19", or "the suspect routinely drove for hours on end, with no
destination in mind".

I'm not talking about criminal profiling (I assume that is what you mean by
guesswork), although that is part of what we do. I'm simply stating that
from research data we have garnered over the years, there is a correlation
between spanking and violent crime. In my practice EVERY violent offender
came from a home in which corporal punishment was used. This may be only
incidental. I'm equally sure many rapists enjoy ice cream, and I'm not about
to call for a ban on Chubby Hubby. I'm not claiming that spanking alone will
cause anti-social behavior, but the correlation still exists. I have met
many "successful" people who were never spanked as children; just I have met
many "successful" individuals who were spanked. There may be violent
criminals who were not spanked as children, but they are so markedly rare
that no one I've known has ever seen one (aside from the earlier mentioned
Durst). If you work in the field, perhaps you can enlighten me, I just need
one more (again relatively famous, or at least interviewed by a qualified
professional) offender to cause me to reevaluate my stance, and you claim to
know "Criminals come from all walks of life, rich, poor, spanked and
unspanked." I'm not a rabid anti-spanking advocate, and I'm not interested
in a flame war. I'm just a professional who has personally interviewed
hundreds of offenders and the connection I have noticed between growing up
spanked, and committing violent crime is too big to ignore. Change my mind.

Poor Mind Candy. 94% of American citizens have been spanked once.

Study some statistics- Correlation does NOT equal causation.

You obviously have never taken a course in basic statistics or psychology.

Mind Candy scribbles:

Subject: A short assignment
From: "mind candy"
Date: 9/1/2003 7:43 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id: 3f528818$1_4@newsfeed


I realize I have a sizable advantage because I work in the field, but
everybody reading this has access to the internet, so here it goes. Find one
famous violent criminal who was not spanked as a child. I know a lot of you
would like to prove the experts wrong, so do this one thing and properly
humiliate us. In all the law enforcement research involving thousands of
murderers, rapists, arsonists, bombers, child molesters, and kidnappers, I
have come across only one offender who did not receive corporal punishment
as a child. He was (not yet convicted) murderer/millionaire Robert Durst.
Find just one more reasonably famous offender who wasn’t spanked, and you
will best, not only me, but every expert in forensic psychology. Good luck.
I’ll check back later to see if anyone succeeded.

On 2 Sep 2003, Fern5827 wrote:

Poor Mind Candy. 94% of American citizens have been spanked once.

Study some statistics- Correlation does NOT equal causation.

You obviously have never taken a course in basic statistics or psychology.

Not to mention the fact that non-cp alternatives have not worked with
these individual either. Remember, our juvenile systems do not permit
corporal punishment and guess where most of them ended up! Let's turn
the question back and ask: can you find anyone, just one, where the
non-cp alternatives have not been tried?

Straus realized his mistake of forgetting that "correlation does not
equal causation" when he did his Straus & Mouradian (1998) study and
found that the correlation between anti-sociable behaviors and non-cp
alternatives were even stronger than with spanking!

"Perhaps the most difficult methodological problem in research on the
effects of CP is posed by the the fact that child behavior problems lead
parents to spank. Thus the repeated finding that the more CP parents use,
the worse the behavior problems of the child does not necessarily show
that CP has harmful effects, or even that CP is not effective in reducing
misbehavior (as I erroneously argued in the past)."

Doan

Reference:
Straus, Murray A. & Vera E. Mouradian. 1998 "Impulsive Corporal Punishment by
Mothers and Antisocial Behavior and Impulsiveness of children." Behavioral
Sciences and the Law. 16: 353-374.

Notes:
This study also looks at non-cp alternatives like:

1) Talking to the child calmly
2) Sent the child to the room
3) Time-out
4) Removal of privileges

All of these together "was found to have a much stronger relation than any of
the other variables."


"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. Consequently, if a stuy finds a correlation between
CP and misbehavior, the correlation my be interpreted just a plausibly as the
effet of misbehavior on CP, as the effect of CP on misbehavior. To control
for the effect of prior child misbehavior on later misbehavior requires a
longitudinal or experiemental study."

slice..........................................dic e.........................
..................slash


Poor Mind Candy. 94% of American citizens have been spanked once.
Spanked once? I would think that number should be considerably higher if we
are talking about a single swat to the bottom, garnered sometime in their
life. I was spanked as a child and hold no resentment to my parents or
school officials for it. I will repeat: I am NOT an anti spanking advocate.
I have never spanked my own children, but that doesn't mean I never will. I
have no ulterior motive, I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything. My
interest is purely academic.

Study some statistics- Correlation does NOT equal causation.

I believe I already stated that when I said "This may be only
incidental. I'm equally sure many rapists enjoy ice cream, and I'm not about
to call for a ban on Chubby Hubby. I'm not claiming that spanking alone will
cause anti-social behavior, but the correlation still exists."

You obviously have never taken a course in basic statistics or psychology.

As a rule, one must take "basic statistics and psychology courses" before
being awarded a doctorate. So, yes I've a little experience in the basic
stuff.

Snip.......................................snip... ..........................
.......................snip

...............................................Sni p..........................
.............................

Let's turn the question back and ask: can you find anyone, just one,
where the
non-cp alternatives have not been tried?

Brilliant question! I'm sure you will be a surprised as I was that I have
found several. One of my most often interviewed offenders (mass murderer of
both his own family and his next door neighbors) was raised in what is as
close to a Norman Rockwell life as exists. Spanking, either by hand or
paddle, was the only form of behavior modification utilized. He was never
"grounded", never had privileges taken away, and the only talking about his
behavior came when he was told why he was being spanked. There have been
others I've seen, but his case is the most puzzling, because his crime was
so much more extreme.

Straus realized his mistake of forgetting that "correlation does not
equal causation" when he did his Straus & Mouradian (1998) study and
found that the correlation between anti-sociable behaviors and non-cp
alternatives were even stronger than with spanking!

"Perhaps the most difficult methodological problem in research on the
effects of CP is posed by the the fact that child behavior problems lead
parents to spank. Thus the repeated finding that the more CP parents use,
the worse the behavior problems of the child does not necessarily show
that CP has harmful effects, or even that CP is not effective in reducing
misbehavior (as I erroneously argued in the past)."

I am familiar with the study, and I know many people (on both sides of the
argument) consider Dr. Straus the Alpha and Omega on the CP issue. However I
feel Dr. Strauss has, to put it bluntly, flip-flopped too many times to
retain full credibility. only months after the release of Straus &
Mouradian, Murray switched back again. In one of my colleagues classes at
Cornell University, Straus said (I believe it was a web discussion)
"Spanking is violence" , "spanking is hitting a child", "anyone saying
spanking works when other things do not, is incorrect", "spanking is never
necessary". "children should never be spanked" and "the only trend we have
seen in children who are spanked when they misbehave is an increase in
misbehavior". These may not be exact quotes, these were made 4 years ago and
I was not in the class that heard the remarks. However, I am supremely
confident that they are not misquotes, that the message- if not the exact
wording , is what Straus said. Perhaps someone out there has the direct
quotes from that Cornell class, and maybe someone can tell me how long the
interval between his "spanking is harmful" and "maybe not" positions lasted.
Again, I am not out to convince anyone, my interest is academic. I posted
here because I was told APS is "where the intelligent pro-spankers post", I
have found that statement to be true, to a degree. My only question is: Am I
correct to assume that no one can name a unspanked violent offender? If so
again let me thank you all for your contributions to my query, I truly
appreciate it..



Doan

Reference:
Straus, Murray A. & Vera E. Mouradian. 1998 "Impulsive Corporal Punishment
by
Mothers and Antisocial Behavior and Impulsiveness of children." Behavioral
Sciences and the Law. 16: 353-374.

Notes:
This study also looks at non-cp alternatives like:

1) Talking to the child calmly
2) Sent the child to the room
3) Time-out
4) Removal of privileges

All of these together "was found to have a much stronger relation than any
of
the other variables."


"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. Consequently, if a stuy finds a correlation
between
CP and misbehavior, the correlation my be interpreted just a plausibly as
the
effet of misbehavior on CP, as the effect of CP on misbehavior. To
control
for the effect of prior child misbehavior on later misbehavior requires a
longitudinal or experiemental study."

"mind candy" wrote in message
...


...............................................Sni p..........................
............................

Let's turn the question back and ask: can you find anyone, just one,
where the
non-cp alternatives have not been tried?

Brilliant question! I'm sure you will be a surprised as I was that I have
found several. One of my most often interviewed offenders (mass murderer
of
both his own family and his next door neighbors) was raised in what is as
close to a Norman Rockwell life as exists. Spanking, either by hand or
paddle, was the only form of behavior modification utilized. He was never
"grounded", never had privileges taken away, and the only talking about
his
behavior came when he was told why he was being spanked. There have been
others I've seen, but his case is the most puzzling, because his crime was
so much more extreme.

So, every transgression in this individuals life had only one consequence?
Sorry, I find that very difficult to believe.


Straus realized his mistake of forgetting that "correlation does not
equal causation" when he did his Straus & Mouradian (1998) study and
found that the correlation between anti-sociable behaviors and non-cp
alternatives were even stronger than with spanking!

"Perhaps the most difficult methodological problem in research on the
effects of CP is posed by the the fact that child behavior problems lead
parents to spank. Thus the repeated finding that the more CP parents
use,
the worse the behavior problems of the child does not necessarily show
that CP has harmful effects, or even that CP is not effective in
reducing
misbehavior (as I erroneously argued in the past)."

I am familiar with the study, and I know many people (on both sides of the
argument) consider Dr. Straus the Alpha and Omega on the CP issue. However
I
feel Dr. Strauss has, to put it bluntly, flip-flopped too many times to
retain full credibility. only months after the release of Straus &
Mouradian, Murray switched back again. In one of my colleagues classes at
Cornell University, Straus said (I believe it was a web discussion)
"Spanking is violence" , "spanking is hitting a child", "anyone saying
spanking works when other things do not, is incorrect", "spanking is never
necessary". "children should never be spanked" and "the only trend we have
seen in children who are spanked when they misbehave is an increase in
misbehavior". These may not be exact quotes, these were made 4 years ago
and
I was not in the class that heard the remarks. However, I am supremely
confident that they are not misquotes, that the message- if not the exact
wording , is what Straus said. Perhaps someone out there has the direct
quotes from that Cornell class, and maybe someone can tell me how long the
interval between his "spanking is harmful" and "maybe not" positions
lasted.
Again, I am not out to convince anyone, my interest is academic. I posted
here because I was told APS is "where the intelligent pro-spankers post",
I
have found that statement to be true, to a degree. My only question is: Am
I
correct to assume that no one can name a unspanked violent offender? If so
again let me thank you all for your contributions to my query, I truly
appreciate it..


In reference to: "Forensic: Relating to the use of science or technology in
the investigation and establishment of facts or evidence in a court of
law.Psychology: The science that deals with mental processes and behavior."

Hmmm,

Psycologists are still in the infant / testing stage of their theories.
There are many theories and studies out there, but none can say with
certainty, or anything close to it, that the methods they recommend are as
or more effective. Psychologists stumble and bumble around, trying to
understand the human mind, pronouncing findings from short term studies, as
if they actually know what they are talking about. But, when one is finally
pined down without any wiggle room, they all admit that their theories are
just that, theories. Unproven, and unproveable.

I don't really consider psycology a science as such, but more of an educated
guessing game. I had a young lady tell me today that she has a degree in
"Art Therapy". Art? Drawing? Painting? Therapy? Give me a break.

But I have to agree with you about both Strauss and the intelligence of the
posters (for the most part) in this ng. Most are quite intelligent (some
few are as dumb as stumps), and they present their arguments quite well.
But they are not about individuals. They are about the bigger picture. The
subject as a whole. You are very unlikely to find anyone able here to give
you the specific detail you ask for as most do not interact with criminals
at that level. I have, but as a law enforcement officer and not as a
psychologist. My job was to prevent additional criminal behavior
immediately, not 6 years down the road.

Good luck in your search, but you are really going to need to search
elsewhere if you want an answer.

Ron



Doan

Reference:
Straus, Murray A. & Vera E. Mouradian. 1998 "Impulsive Corporal
Punishment
by
Mothers and Antisocial Behavior and Impulsiveness of children."
Behavioral
Sciences and the Law. 16: 353-374.

Notes:
This study also looks at non-cp alternatives like:

1) Talking to the child calmly
2) Sent the child to the room
3) Time-out
4) Removal of privileges

All of these together "was found to have a much stronger relation than
any
of
the other variables."


"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. Consequently, if a stuy finds a correlation
between
CP and misbehavior, the correlation my be interpreted just a plausibly
as
the
effet of misbehavior on CP, as the effect of CP on misbehavior. To
control
for the effect of prior child misbehavior on later misbehavior requires
a
longitudinal or experiemental study."

-- much snippage throughout the post-------------------------------------

So, every transgression in this individuals life had only one consequence?
Sorry, I find that very difficult to believe.

Well, not if you include the really long timeout the court system gave him.
(sorry for the snide remark, couldn't resist)

Hmmm,

Psycologists are still in the infant / testing stage of their theories.
There are many theories and studies out there, but none can say with
certainty, or anything close to it, that the methods they recommend are as
or more effective. Psychologists stumble and bumble around, trying to
understand the human mind, pronouncing findings from short term studies,
as
if they actually know what they are talking about. But, when one is
finally
pined down without any wiggle room, they all admit that their theories are
just that, theories. Unproven, and unproveable.

Forensic Psychologists have no real concern with treatment, only
understanding and prediction.
For an analogy look to American football. If the offence is in a shotgun
formation, chances are they intend to pass. If the QB drops back a few
steps, the chances of a throw go up exponentially. Needless to say it could
be a trick play, but history tells us to prepare for the pass. This is the
same rough idea behind forensic psychology. To further the analogy:
Treating professionals are like the broadcaster, they analyze the game, and
try to explain what's going on.
Law enforcement is the defense, they try to stop the offence. The old
analogy comes to mind "Offence gets the glory, but defense wins the game".
The court system is like the referees, they try to make sure the rules are
followed. (And like justice, refs are all to often blind)
We are the odds makers, only our success rate is much, much higher than
Jimmy the Greek could ever have hoped for.
Also, our theories are "proven" everyday, and you know it. Every time a cop
nabs an offender who is behaving, speaking, living, dressing, and committing
crimes just like we said he would, we have validation. Due to the predictive
nature of our work we often times don't receive immediate confirmation,
but -as long as law enforcement is successful- we do get it. Remember Dr.
Brussels profile of George Metesky, the "mad bomber", probably the first
instance of applied forensic psychology the general public became aware of.
We have gotten better at what we do since then.



I don't really consider psycology a science as such, but more of an
educated
guessing game.

As that statement relates to Forensic Psychology, it is somewhat
understandable. But like I said before, we are astoundingly accurate in
those "guesses".

I had a young lady tell me today that she has a degree in
"Art Therapy". Art? Drawing? Painting? Therapy? Give me a break.

Don't ask me for answers, I agree with you. Maybe I'll go back to university
and major in "Checkers Therapy", I'm sure the money is good.

But I have to agree with you about both Strauss and the intelligence of
the
posters (for the most part) in this ng. Most are quite intelligent (some
few are as dumb as stumps), and they present their arguments quite well.
But they are not about individuals. They are about the bigger picture.
The
subject as a whole. You are very unlikely to find anyone able here to
give
you the specific detail you ask for as most do not interact with criminals
at that level. I have, but as a law enforcement officer and not as a
psychologist. My job was to prevent additional criminal behavior
immediately, not 6 years down the road.

I have nothing but respect for law enforcement professionals, I think they
are one of the most unfairly demonized groups in our society. That said, you
made subtle jabs at my profession- so allow me to return the favor. When a
case is getting out of hand, you guys call us, not the other way around. I
don't think embattled forces would continue to plead for assistance if what
we do isn't effective. Police departments all over the world beg for our
services, they constantly ask for help. We ask you guys for help only when
somebody steals our car, or breaks into our house. Who gets the most out of
the relationship?

Good luck in your search, but you are really going to need to search
elsewhere if you want an answer.

Ron

I would like to thank you all for putting up with me, and for the
intelligence and honesty most of you have displayed. I may lurk around for a
while, I do find your debates very intriguing, much better than the ones we
shrinks have between ourselves. Besides, I have kids and now I know where to
go if I ever have questions on the CP subject. God bless you all.

"Mind Candy" wrote:

Message-id:



-- much snippage throughout the post-------------------------------------

Also, our theories are "proven" everyday, and you know it. Every time a cop
nabs an offender who is behaving, speaking, living, dressing, and committing
crimes just like we said he would, we have validation. Due to the predictive
nature of our work we often times don't receive immediate confirmation,
but -as long as law enforcement is successful- we do get it. Remember Dr.
Brussels profile of George Metesky, the "mad bomber", probably the first
instance of applied forensic psychology the general public became aware of.
We have gotten better at what we do since then.


I don't really consider psycology a science as such, but more of an
educated guessing game.

As that statement relates to Forensic Psychology, it is somewhat
understandable. But like I said before, we are astoundingly accurate in
those "guesses".


"Astoundingly accurate"? Who do you think you're kidding? As I recall, the
astoundingly INaccurate profile of the Washington area sniper predicted the
killer was a white male loner.

Mark