'safer with their dads'

[blackice]

Link

Co-founder of the controversial Men's Rights Agency, Sue Price, told the inquiry despite the "maternal preference" of the Family Law Court in custody battles, statistics showed children were more likely to be abused, or even killed, when in the custody of their mothers.

These "controversial" groups echo statistics that are found world wide..

An Australian Institute of Health and Welfare report had found 42 per cent of substantiated abuse – including physical, emotional and sexual abuse – happened in single-female-parent families, she said.

Over 50% here in Canada.

The report said only 4 per cent of abuse occurred in single-male-parent families.

Less than 2% here in Canada.

The studies exposed the myth that most child abuse was perpetrated "by all these violent men out there".

One by one the fem-nazis "myths" are being exposed as fraud. We have an entire culture built on these frauds, "myths" let alone a court systems...

Think of the damage to all these children in the world all the the sake of power. And we think Bush is bad, the amount of child killed or damaged mentally or other wise because of these "myths", fraud is staggering.

I continue to post this stuff simply to try and keep people aware of the "childrens" issues. While most percieve these issues as anti-female fluff. Thats in most to the media, the real issues here are the children and the harm being done to them, world wide by male hating fem-nazis.

I hope everyone takes a deep breath and thinks before you call a "male" for the child rights activists a whinner...
That attitude simply shows a lack of knowledge about the subject, let alone a shallow media driven thought process...

Chew on this one of awhile:

Kids also learn self-control while simply roughhousing with Dad. "These are mini practice sessions on self-regulation. If a kid gets out of hand, Dad stops it." says Wade Horn, assistant director of the Administration for Children and Families.

Fatherless boys seldom learn these limits. Dr. Popenoe notes that 60 percent of America's rapists, 72 percent of adolescent murderers and 70 percent of long-term prison inmates are fatherless.

Damage thier is no doubt about it, fatherless girls fair no differently...

[mrmitchell]

Is it possible that most single parent families are single parent female families? That would explain 42% vs 4%.

But I agree with you here--maybe the statistics aren't as skewed in male favor, but "women are always better at raising children" is still a bit of a myth.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by mrmitchell
"women are always better at raising children" is still a bit of a myth.

A myth that, unfortunately, the courts support.

[Whaleboy]

Women imo, tend to be either really good, or really terrible at raising children. Judging by my dad, in my earlier days, he was more of a "lead by example" guy, though he didn't encourage diversity whereas others including myself would.

Is it fair to say that, as the oldest of four brothers (18 (me), 16, 11 and 5), that I would be, like for like, better with kids than say my youngest brother when he grows up?

If so, I think the parents childhood background is also an important consideration. Power to the first born!

[blackice]

A study just released by the Heritage Foundation confirms that children are up to 33 times more likely to be abused in a single-parent home than in an intact family. "Contrary to public perception," write Patrick Fagan and Dorothy Hanks, "research shows that the most likely physical abuser of a young child will be that child's mother, not a male in the household." A 1996 HHS study found that "almost two-thirds [of child abusers] were females," and mothers accounted for 55% of child murders according to a 1994 Justice Department report.

The statistics hold true for two parent house holds, until this massive remove the father program...the stats were not exposed as much. Now they can do a comparision between "motherless" homes and "fatherless" homes. The results are quite staggering men over all are less violent with thier sibblings...

[blackice]

As Maggie Gallagher writes in her 1996 book, The Abolition of Marriage:

"The person most likely to abuse a child physically is a single mother. The person most likely to abuse a child sexually is the mother's boyfriend or second husband...Divorce, though usually portrayed as a protection against domestic violence, is far more frequently a contributing cause."

The only thing unusual in the sensational case of Andrea Yates is that the couple remained married. Most child abusers first eliminate the father through unilateral divorce or separation, whereupon they can abuse his children with impunity.

As the Heritage report confirms, the safest place for a child is an intact, two-parent home — that is, a home with a father in it. Children's natural protectors are their fathers. Even feminist Adrienne Burgess observes that "fathers have often played the protector role inside families." Removing the father is what exposes the children to danger.

Yet removing fathers is precisely what family court judges routinely do at the mere request of mothers, who file two-thirds to nine-tenths of divorces. Ironically, this is often effected with trumped-up charges of child abuse, though statistically biological fathers seldom abuse their children (6.5% of child murders, according to the DOJ study). Judges claim they remove the father, even when no evidence of abuse has occurred, to "err on the side of caution." In fact they are erring on the side of danger, and it is difficult to believe they do not realize it.

Dickens observed "the one great principle of the...law is to make business for itself." In this instance, family courts and child protective bureaucracies make business for themselves by eliminating the father from the home, thus creating the environment conducive to abused children. Appalling as it sounds, the conclusion seems inescapable that we have created a massive governmental machine staffed by officials with a vested professional interest in abused children.

This is a shocking statement, but it proceeds predictably from the logic inherent to all bureaucracies: to perpetuate the problem they ostensibly exist to address.

The logic is marvelously self-justifying and self-perpetuating, since by eliminating the father, government officials can then present themselves as the solution to the problem they themselves create. The more child abuse — whether by parents or even by the social work bureaucracies themselves — the more the proffered solution is to further expand the child abuse bureaucracy. Waxing indignant about a string of child deaths at the hands of social workers in the District of Columbia, federal judges and the Washington Post find solace in the D.C. government's solution: hire more social workers (and lawyers too for some unspecified reason). "Olivia Golden, the Child and Family Services' latest director...will use her increased budget to recruit more social workers and double the number of lawyers." Lawyers, not fathers, now protect children.

If we do not have the courage to tell the truth about who is abusing children and the role of government in permitting and even encouraging them to do it, then all our professed concern for children is mere posturing. We do no service to children or to public awareness by funding groups and programs with an interest in obscuring the truth and exacerbating the problem.

[Lincoln]

Re: 'safer with their dads'

Originally posted by blackice

Fatherless boys seldom learn these limits. Dr. Popenoe notes that 60 percent of America's rapists, 72 percent of adolescent murderers and 70 percent of long-term prison inmates are fatherless.

Damage there is no doubt about it, fatherless girls fair no differently...

Having worked in prison and with young people in general for quite a few years I must say that I cannot remember more than a handful of boys or men in prison who had a decent father for a role model.

[Whaleboy]

men over all are less violent with thier sibblings

Come live with me for a week Little sods can't go for one hour without trying to kill each other.

I think a mother+father home is best. You get the best aspects of the mother, and best of the father, at least ideally. It can go wrong when theyre not great parents, but one assumes best case scenario, which would be family "unit".

[Al B. Sure!]

i dont get this whole issue about fathers wanting custody of their children... what father wants custody of his children? mothers are kind of forced to have it, especially since it's clear that mothers are the actual mothers of their children (the 'fathers' might actually not be without DNA test verification). so where are all these fathers rushing to take care of their kids?

[Whaleboy]

Albert: Part of it is probably a means of getting back at the mother. If the father loves his kids and he cant (for whatever reason, not least because the mother lays down the rules) see his kids, he's going to want to see them, as is the case with my dad. Hence, unlimited access is better. Sometimes he can see that its in the kids best interest.. for example, say he's brining in more money, or the mother is doing what all divorced middle aged women do.. try to recapture their lost youth .

The father will usually of course love his kids so much that he doesnt want to be apart from them. Not all men are reluctant or unwilling parents.

[Solly]

I'm sorry but you're all being homophobic. Two women or two men can offer just as much love and support. It's not the sex of the parent that counts, it's the personality.

[Al B. Sure!]

i still dont know about this... the few cases that i can think of among people i know who are in single-father homes... what happens is they end up being real ****ed up what with their father doing drugs and all that. grown women i dont think take drugs as much as grown men do.

[Kuciwalker]

Where's che? We need someone to call us rapists and woman-haters for not blindly accepting radical feminism.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Albert Speer
i still dont know about this... the few cases that i can think of among people i know who are in single-father homes... what happens is they end up being real ****ed up what with their father doing drugs and all that. grown women i dont think take drugs as much as grown men do.

I bet the statistics will show otherwise, AS.

[Whaleboy]

Bodds Park: That goes without saying, but since they are so rare at the moment, it doesn't really affect the debate. Unless its artificial insemination, the child still has an actual father who is aware of the birth (unless its an accident but thats another story).

Nonetheless, as I think personality is dictated by sex to some degree, of course a homosexual couple wont be able to offer the same childcare as a heterosexual couple, like for like that is.. of course there will be fantastic exceptions. Lets also not forget the stigma that bigots would attach to that.

I'm not being homophobic, but I'm not being politically correct to the extent that I would veneer over anything that could be viewed as "touchy" or potentially offensive.