Re: Male vs Female Abuse towards children

[" Kirk Witherspoon" <kirkwitherspoon@xxxxxxxx>]

Dear Maria,

Sad that you nearly have to apologize for adopting a scientific mindset
rather than advancing some agenda.  There seem to exist curious
pockets of reverse bias as well, e.e., the MSBP "profile" (which is not
scientifically supported) and which nearly always targets females.  Not
much good to ourselves & others if we lose our (attempt at) objectivity,
are we?

Kirk Witherspoon, Ph.D.
Clinical Psychologist
Moline, IL

----- Original Message -----
From: <MariaR1947@aol.com>
To: "Child Maltreatment Researchers"
<CHILD-MALTREATMENT-RESEARCH-L@cornell.edu>
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 3:26 AM
Subject: Re: Male vs Female Abuse towards children


> I realise from the reponses to this interesting question that I will be a
> very lone voice here and probably get much statistic throwing from various
> quarters.  However, it seems to me that people are 'bending over
backwards'
> to excuse or down play female abuse towards children.  (Incidentally I
would
> also add emotional/psychological abuse to the picture).
>
> I find it interesting that statistics for male abusers seem to get
accepted
> very readily but for women?  Well a very different picture - there is
> statistical bias, feminization of poverty, trickle down effect etc. etc.
In
> other words, women don't really abuse children, they just appear to.  I
would
> respectfully suggest that to the child concerned, the fact that their
mother
> hits them all the time and/or shouts at them constantly and/or tells them
> frequently that she wishes they'd never been born etc. and/or neglects
them
> is what is important and as women do have more access to children should
not
> the question be turned around and the impact of female abuse on children
> considered?
>
> I honestly believe that the result of female abuse (especially emotional
> abuse/neglect) has a devastating effect on children (particularly boys)
and
> particularly in relation to emotional and cognitive development.   I wish
> desperately that the consequences to the future adult of this type of
abuse
> is fully considered instead of academic arguments to explain the figures.
>
> At the moment, there seems to be a lack of any kind of discussion (or
> resistance to such a discussion) about the cruelty that women can and do
> perpetrate.  The cry 'mother blaming' goes up when the effects of
insensitive
> care on babies are mentioned thereby successfully stopping discussion of
the
> realities of how much babies and very young children need sensitive,
> consistent 'mothering'.
>
> 'Blame' is a concept which should never come into the picture anyway.  It
is
> unhelpful and inappropriate.  Women who abuse children have a
developmental
> history, cognitive approach and emotional attitude which results in this
> response. Men who abuse also have a history which almost inevitably
includes
> some form of neglect/abuse, although not necessarily a history of the
> particular abuse they are now perpetrating.   e.g. a chaotic family
> background in someone who sexually abuses.
>
> Surely, the factors which pre-dispose to abuse, consequences and
intervention
> are the important issues without trying to apparently downplay the figures
of
> female perpetrators?
>
> Incidentally, am I also the only person who finds the lumping together of
> violence towards 'women and children' worrying because a) violence towards
> women has a different dynamic to that of children and b) women are also
> violent towards children?
>
> Finally, (honest) just to put myself absolutely out on a limb, I also
believe
> that the lack of positive male role models and the total dismissal of what
> seemed to be  traditional 'male virtues' such as honesty, valour,
integrity,
> loyalty, protectors of the innocent etc. (you know all the wonderful 'boys
> own' stuff) - has caused a great many problems because males (and fathers)
> are so undervalued - well it seems so here in the UK!
>
> Best wishes to all
>
> Maria Robinson (with head above the parapet!)
>
>