# 2cd try! Help me change things because children are people too



## CerridwenLorelei (Aug 28, 2002)

Ok let me see if this time it won't get eaten!

Last night on the news a couple was arrested for beating their daughter age 5 to the point of critical condition. She wasn't breathing upon arrival to the medical center. Over potty training she was beaten with fists and slammed against the wall.
The ONLY thing they were charged with was "injury to a child"
An old Geraldo show covered this very thing. About how people did less time and were charged with less offenses if it was a child. As he put it "if I did it to you or you to me as an adult this would attempted murder." And he talked about how nothing would change unless we took up the cause. Back then and since then I have. I wrote everyone I could think of at a local, state and federal level.

Now recently a man was charged with capital murder for killing his gfs 2 yr old while she worked. But I know it wasn't easy for them to get that through and do that...and I know a lot of the TX codes from before I had to take off from my studies...

It shouldn't be hard for the DA to do that.

I want to help toughen laws up on this or put teeth in the exsisting ones.

Why is a child's health and life valued less than an adult???

Who else besides who I already do can I write and articulate this to?


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

I don't know why the lack of value on children's life and safety. We all know it's legal to hit children but illegal to hit adults, that is one example. But why do you get more time in jail for killing a police officer than you do for killing a child?

I think when you commit crimes against your own family, it's somehow seen as "not as bad" as commiting crimes against strangers. In my town and many others, it's becoming more common to give wife-beaters only a ticket, because "there isn't enough room in the jails." But they somehow find room in the jails if you are hitting an adult other than your spouse.


----------



## DebraBaker (Jan 9, 2002)

This happens in the news over and over again.

Hitting a child because the child wouldn't stop crying.

Hurting (or killing!!!) a child for potty accidents.

The general mentality that children are property damnes us as a culture.

Debra Baker


----------



## merpk (Dec 19, 2001)

Don't know about statistics as far as the convictions rates, etc., and the severity of the charges ... just from personal experience. In former good days (read: before children) I worked in Brooklyn Supreme Court, and worked *a lot* of trials with parents who beat children severely, some left as quadriplegics, some killed, and sexual abuse, and and and and ... and have to say those cases were handled by two *extremely* intelligent and competent judges in particular, BTW ... and they were not pussy-footed around, IYKWIM. They charges were severe, and the judges were absolutely happy to "max them out" at sentencing time.

Someone somewhere must have stats about such things ...


----------



## sleeping queen (Nov 10, 2003)

Quote:

Why is a child's health and life valued less than an adult???
How can you ask that? We have a country that supports the killing of unborn children on a daily basis. The childs life is not valuable until the mother says it is. We're conditioning our country to think this way about the unborn. This is a slippery slope that we've put our country in.

Quote:

Now recently a man was charged with capital murder for killing his gfs 2 yr old while she worked.
I also think statisticly that children have a higher risk of abuse by a boyfriend/live-in.


----------



## cappuccinosmom (Dec 28, 2003)

Oh gosh, beatings over potty training??????????????????????

We recently had several cases of baby/child killing around here. Mostly live-in males left with a baby, shaking or dropping them when they cried "too much". Then there was the couple that left thier two children in a car on a cold night while they spent 8 hours at a rave.







: And a little girl who was starved and beaten and locked in an attic, then smothered and put in a cooler in the garage.









Yuk.


----------



## Victorian (Jan 2, 2003)

sleeping queen said:


> How can you ask that? We have a country that supports the killing of unborn children on a daily basis. The childs life is not valuable until the mother says it is. We're conditioning our country to think this way about the unborn. This is a slippery slope that we've put our country in.
> 
> SQ - abortion didn't start in 1973 with Roe Vs. Wade - it has been happening for thousands and thousands of years. I don't think that this country started or that it is to blame for child abuse. But then I don't think that we are allowed to discuss this right now.
> 
> ...


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

Quote:

I also think statisticly that children have a higher risk of abuse by a boyfriend/live-in.
OK...so these women who are living with such abusive men should MARRY them? Then they will suddenly become less abusive?









I read a pamphlet put together by a religious organization







claiming that. It said that women who marry their partners rather than live with them have lower rates of domestic violence. My years working with DV survivors say differently - the vast majority of the women were married to their abusers, and almost all of them were mothers. Sometimes the abuse did not start until the women were pregnant - another antichild attitude.


----------



## Victorian (Jan 2, 2003)

its so amazing what a little band of gold can do isn't? Maybe they should marry all the violent offenders in prison to one another to cut down on prison uprisings. One more good use for gay marriage.

I read the other day that woman are MOST likely to be murdered (as opposed to murder at other times) while pregnant at the hands of the babies father.

Victorian


----------



## sleeping queen (Nov 10, 2003)

Greaseball, you missed my point, these live-ins/boyfriends usually aren't the childs bio dad.


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

So bio-dads never abuse their own children? If these mothers living with abusive boyfriends later have children with the man, does he suddenly reform and never abuse his biological child? My experience says no; I'm sure the religious organizations would disagree. It's yet another way to blame women for "living in sin" :LOL.

I just read the article about the dog attacks.







Can you imagine what the punishment would be if they had the dog attack a police officer? The president? A movie star? It would be more than 3 years, that's for sure! But because the victims were children, they are given a reduced punishment.

This reminds me of a time in high school when many students were complaining about vandalism done to their cars while the cars were parked at school. They were told there was nothing the school could do, and also told that it might be better for them to just ride the bus. Then one day a teacher's car was vandalized. Announcements were made over the loudspeaker every day, warning students what would happen to them if they were caught and asking anyone with any information to report it immediately. The message was that teachers' property is more valuable than that of children, and that it's OK to ignore complaints of children but not complaints of adults.


----------



## CerridwenLorelei (Aug 28, 2002)

They charges were severe, and the judges were absolutely happy to "max them out" at sentencing time."

HOORAY says I


----------



## sleeping queen (Nov 10, 2003)

Quote:

If these mothers living with abusive boyfriends later have children with the man, does he suddenly reform and never abuse his biological child? My experience says no;
I never said a bio dad didn't abuse, I said plenty of abuse comes at the hands of boyfriends/live-ins. According to the statement you quoted above combined with the reality of boyfriend/live-ins abusing children, it seems like women aren't watching out for their children, but place higher value on their current squeeze.


----------



## Victorian (Jan 2, 2003)

so then by this reasoning, mothers that are no longer married to the father of their child should never have sex again?


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

I blame the men for abusing the children in the first place. I don't blame the women, especially since they are usually being abused themselves.

It could also be that men who abuse children are also likely to refuse to marry a woman.

I think we can all say that no matter who abuses a child - whether it's a stepdad, biodad or woman - they will not get punished as severely as they would if they harmed another adult.


----------



## sleeping queen (Nov 10, 2003)

A women needs to take responsibility to what men she allows her children to be in contact with. Having children with a man you know is abusive is irresponsible.


----------



## darkpear (Jul 22, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sleeping queen*
A women needs to take responsibility to what men she allows her children to be in contact with. Having children with a man you know is abusive is irresponsible.

Yeah, good thing it's easy to tell the abusive ones from the good guys beforehand, since they all walk around with neon 'ABUSER' signs over their heads.

Oh, wait...


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

Yes, and abusive men NEVER rape their partners! They NEVER physically prevent them from using contraception! :LOL And of course the woman can't have an abortion; that would be WRONG...so once again the woman is blamed for the evils that men do to children.

Many of the formerly abusive men I've worked with say they like to keep their wives pregnant so they won't have an easy time leaving. They would tamper with birth control pills or remove condoms when the woman wasn't looking. They really are a sick bunch.


----------



## sleeping queen (Nov 10, 2003)

Greaseball, maybe you should do some reading up on domestic violence and abusive men. Our local shelter has great educational sources. Abusive men generally have behaviours that signal trouble. If a woman doesn't know a man well enough to know if he is a good guy why would should let him have contact with her children. Aren't mothers supposed to be protective and put her children's needs above her own?


----------



## goodcents (Dec 19, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sleeping queen*
A women needs to take responsibility to what men she allows her children to be in contact with. Having children with a man you know is abusive is irresponsible.


Oh my to the depths you have sunk! Didya ever think that many of these women are illequipped to handle or even process the information available in shelters? Did it ever even occur to you that some of these women are unable to recognize the behaviours you describe prior to entering the relationship?

Not everyone can handle their lives as well as you sleeping queen.

Have you an ounce of compassion?


----------



## sleeping queen (Nov 10, 2003)

My compassion lies with the children.


----------



## Shonahsmom (Mar 23, 2004)

You have compassion?


----------



## goodcents (Dec 19, 2002)

Sleeping Queen,
Address the real questions......

"Didya ever think that many of these women are illequipped to handle or even process the information available in shelters? Did it ever even occur to you that some of these women are unable to recognize the behaviours you describe prior to entering the relationship?"


----------



## Shonahsmom (Mar 23, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sleeping queen*
Greaseball, maybe you should do some reading up on domestic violence and abusive men. Our local shelter has great educational sources. Abusive men generally have behaviours that signal trouble. If a woman doesn't know a man well enough to know if he is a good guy why would should let him have contact with her children. Aren't mothers supposed to be protective and put her children's needs above her own?

Maybe you should follow your own advice and learn a little about what happens to women emotionally and mentally that are in abusive situations.

Maybe you should find the post on MDC of the pregnant mom who left her abuser and is now homeless because there are no funds left in her state to help her get on her feet.

SQ, the world isn't as black and white as you'd like to paint it.


----------



## mahdokht (Dec 2, 2002)

trolls survive on attention. if you feed them they will stay. dont feed the trolls!


----------



## CerridwenLorelei (Aug 28, 2002)

who else can I include in my letter writing that I don't already???


----------



## Unreal (Dec 15, 2002)

hmmm

who did you write? I know you said local, state, and national...
Did you write newspapers? Or maybe even parenting magazines?

Unfortunately, I think this is something that a lot of people don't think about when they read about abuse done to children. It is so easy to focus on how horrible the abuse is/was and that they have arrested the abuser...it takes more time to think through that *IF* they had done the same thing to an adult.

Bringing it to the public eye might be just as effective as writing politicians and the like...

Do you think it might be worthwhile to talk to local lawyers about it and see what they think about trying to push for changes? Or why the laws don't protect the children.

I have a feeling it may be because it is difficult to write laws (ones that will pass, anyhow) that don't intrude on a family's right to privacy/to raise their children as they see fit.

I'm not sure how to get around that...


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

I work at a great DV/rape crisis shelter. Trouble is, there is rarely a space available. We get calls every day from women all over the country who are willing to relocate because their abuser has been following them from state to state, shelter to shelter.

Sadly, in this kind of work I see new ways in which children are violated. For example, an adult who has been raped has the right to refuse a hospital exam. Not so with a child - if the law hears of a child who was raped, she will be forced to have a pelvic exam. Of course, this makes children more likely to keep rape a secret.

We always talk about how horrible the exam is, how it makes a woman feel like she is being raped all over again, how it must be done in the presence of a police officer and how the woman cannot even request a female officer - and then when it comes to children, the attitude is "Well, they may not like it but they have to do it and that's that!"









Recently there was an 8-year-old girl who was removed from the home due to sexual abuse. She would not agree to an interview with a MALE investigator, so the case was dropped! She's back home now.


----------



## Victorian (Jan 2, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sleeping queen*
My compassion lies with the children.

not if you use your vote to remove the social programs from the children. you can't have compassion for the children and at the same time punish their mothers for what you feel is their lack of morality.

I know, I know I am sorry.

Back on the subject. Try www.andrewvachss.com. I am sure that he has a lot of good resources. You can also email him as his organization is doing a lot to try and protect children.

Victorian


----------



## HoneymoonBaby (Mar 31, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Greaseball*
OK...so these women who are living with such abusive men should MARRY them? Then they will suddenly become less abusive?









nak

nooooooo, that's not what it means. it means they shouldn't be living with boyfriends in the first place. the kind of man who will patiently wait for marriage to live with and have sexual relations with a mother is a kind of man who is much less likely to be an abuser than an impulsive guy who just can't wait for the booty.


----------



## darkpear (Jul 22, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *HoneymoonBaby*
nak

nooooooo, that's not what it means. it means they shouldn't be living with boyfriends in the first place. the kind of man who will patiently wait for marriage to live with and have sexual relations with a mother is a kind of man who is much less likely to be an abuser than an impulsive guy who just can't wait for the booty.

There's so much wrong with this, I don't know where to begin.

Some people don't believe in marriage, for any number of reasons. Lots of other people are unwilling to enter into a marriage with someone without first knowing if they're compatible, both sexually and otherwise - and living together is a great way to figure that stuff out.

None of that has anything to do with being abusive. Plenty of women are abused in marriage. Plenty of unmarried couples have healthy happy relationships. I'm in one now, as a matter of fact.

MARRIAGE IS NOT A MAGIC BULLET.


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

Has anyone seen the childadvocacy.org website?

http://www.childadvocate.org/index.htm


----------



## simonee (Nov 21, 2001)

Hey, can the thread stay on topic please instead of deteriorating into yet another slamfest of the woman and what she does wrong when a CHILD is abused by someone else? thanks. I'm trying to learn something here, yaknow, something about how to access the legal system, and the sameoldsameold bashing of abortion rights and women-as-prize-for-patient-men are not on my curriculum this season. :cop:

Thanks for starting it CL







s these are the types of questions that can save children's lives. I just wish I had something useful to add. Just learning here.


----------



## girlndocs (Mar 12, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *simonee*
women-as-prize-for-patient-men









Oh, too true!

I know, I know, sorry ... carry on ...








:


----------



## CerridwenLorelei (Aug 28, 2002)

and thanks to everyone who stayed or answered my original topic and thanks for those links going to check them out this weekend
Unreal yes I do include newspapers, local politicos state and federal

I also include some of the people I used to volunteer with when I did my stretch with the Committee for prevention of child abuse

we saw quite a number of unwanted children which resulted in their having to be there

In my area CPS truly sucks and is the kind you hear nightmares about and goes after nothing and good families while ignoring those that need or could use help

Unreal you have a very valid ? and when I can focus better again I want to really go over that

How do you help without taking away rights from parents that are great decent and loving...? and get help for the ones that just need a hand to learn?

An example not reality people
I mean I don't want big brother either -I just want the same rules to apply...

If I punched you in the jaw I would face bodily assault and face stiff time
If I punched my 11 yr dd it would be a neglect or injury to a child which carries lesser penalties..


----------



## pie (Apr 7, 2006)

I will lose friends here for saying this.

I agree with sleeping queen that kids who live with mom's boyfriends are far more likely to be abused than by bio dad. That doesn't mean mom should only adhere to Christian standards (look where they've gotten us, anyway.)

It means that mom needs to be aware of this factor and not leave her kids alone with boyfriends until she REALLY KNOWS him. THat means mom needs to not parade her boyfriends through the house and the kids lives until she REALLY KNOWS them.

It's just common sense. You don't have people in your kids lives at home until you REALLY KNOW them.

A lot of abuse would not happen if women (and single fathers, of course) would stop thinking with their nethers and start thinking about the child's best interest.

Which is not, IMO, sq's idea of best interest, being christian mores. I am talking about plain old caution and protection.

And I think it's interesting that someone so against abortion because it's mean would shrug off the need for stricter enforcement of child protective laws for kids that are already here.

Funny sq, it's attitudes like yours that convince a lot of women not to have their unborn children. Our society proves daily it doesn't value the ones who are here. WHy bring in more to feed the machine?


----------



## pie (Apr 7, 2006)

re marriage

why buy the pig when you can get the sausage for free?

I just don't think that marriage is the answer. I do think waiting until bubba knows sissy longer than a month and a half is a start of an answer. It's RISKY to leave your kids alone with strangers! DUH.

And sorry if yall find this off topic. What can we do to see that laws are improved or better enforced? DON'T VOTE FOR BUSH.


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

Quote:

A lot of abuse would not happen if women (and single fathers, of course) would stop thinking with their nethers and start thinking about the child's best interest.
A lot of abuse would not happen if men decided not to abuse children.

Quote:

And I think it's interesting that someone so against abortion because it's mean would shrug off the need for stricter enforcement of child protective laws for kids that are already here.
Because that would mean TAX DOLLARS! Nope, we can't be expected to spend our tax dollars on children who were born into sinful unions.

I think it's interesting how a pro-life person can also be pro-spanking. Do we care about childrens' rights, or what some religion says?


----------



## pie (Apr 7, 2006)

good point, greaseball, but it is still the parent's responsibility not to bring strangers into the home and give them child rearing responsibilities until a good relationship has been established. I know it can still happen, but I can't believe none of you will, in your feminist musings, admit that parents are at the helm of preventing abuse. It doesn't mean it's the parent's fault if it does happen. It means it's our job to keep our kids safe, ultimately. It does no good to say, well, men shouldn't hurt kids. No shit they shouldn't!

It's true. Our tax dollars should be spent protecting the nation against gays and sending all our armed forces far far away overseas when what needs to be protected is here. Absololutely. :LOL


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

I agree, people should stop leaving their kids with just anyone. When I hear "mom's boyfriend" the first thing I think of is a complete flake.

But I think we as a culture encourage parents to get away from their children. I think we should stop relying on daycare centers to do a parent's job. I think we should stop sending children to school, unless for some reason that's what the children want. But our culture rewards women who leave their kids as soon as possible.

And, I don't believe the boyfriend starts off being abusive right away. Abusers usually are the model partner for awhile, often a very long while, to build trust, and then they start abusing. However long you need to get to know someone to feel comfortable leaving your child with them, that's how long they will wait before they abuse.

But, of course, anyone with any knowledge of DV already knows this, and it's a separate topic, but I think these childrens' rights issues go way deeper than just what happens in court, and I think there is a root to all that somewhere.


----------



## Victorian (Jan 2, 2003)

I am finding this conversation very interesting and informative. So Greaseball, are you thinking that a big reason that abuse happens/continues to happen is that parents are so out of touch with their children that they can't protect them adequatly?

Pie - I totally agree that parents have to be responsible for not introducing people into the home, but how do you know when someone is safe? There are some really crazy people out there that you would never suspect of abuse until it is too late. What if they are on medication and you don't know and then they stop taking it?

Maybe this is a symptom of a society that doesn't value children and tells you that unless they belong to you, you shouldn't have to see or hear them. A society that feels that children are disposable. A society that refuses to help poor/single mothers so that they can't afford daycare and have to leave them with people they hardly know.

There is this whole undercurrent in Christianity that I just don't understand, which is if you don't believe in Jesus/God/Ect. that you have no reason to be moral. It makes me glad that all those people that believe this are Christian and not running around moral-less.

I have always been a big advocate of not only sex-ed but parenting-ed. I think that if teens where taught how to be good parents, how to bond with and understand chidlren, the importance of natural birth and breastfeeding when possible, and how to spot abuse and abusive tendencies....maybe that would be a place to start?

SQ - I have been thinking more about your theories and how a perfect example of why it doesn't hold water....Me and dh vs. his brother and his family. Dh and myself wasted no time taking a frollic, we are not christian and got married 6 months into our relationship. No abuse here. On the other hand, BIL and wife dated for a year, no sex until marriage, and they are both Christian. There is emotional abuse there and I suspect physical as well (although I have no proof to that). Of course, BIL is crazy and she married him anyway. Just thought I would point out that no-sex and a ring and a bible do not = no abuse.

sorry rambling

Victorian


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

Quote:

So Greaseball, are you thinking that a big reason that abuse happens/continues to happen is that parents are so out of touch with their children that they can't protect them adequatly?
Yes, partly. One piece of advice given to parents on how to protect their children from abuse is to make it clear to everyone how involved you are with your child. Some people say that most kids who are abused do not have very involved parents.

Quote:

Maybe this is a symptom of a society that doesn't value children and tells you that unless they belong to you, you shouldn't have to see or hear them. A society that feels that children are disposable. A society that refuses to help poor/single mothers so that they can't afford daycare and have to leave them with people they hardly know.
ITA about not valuing all children. I am constantly hearing "Why should I have to do such-and-such for OTHER peoples' kids, why why why, etc." Well, why not? Why can't we just care about everyone's children? And the daycare thing...we are always saying "Don't leave your children with anyone you don't know or don't trust" and then turning around and telling single mothers to put their 6-week-old babies in daycare. Having a degree in childcare does not mean someone is right to be working with YOUR child. Passing a background check does not mean someone has not committed a crime. Daycare workers are "strangers" that we are supposed to feel good about leaving our children with.

I think the children-as-property and children-as-huge-inconvenience ideas are part of the problem. If they are just hugely inconvenient pieces of property, no one wants to hear about their rights.


----------



## sleeping queen (Nov 10, 2003)

Quote:

But I think we as a culture encourage parents to get away from their children. I think we should stop relying on daycare centers to do a parent's job. I think we should stop sending children to school, unless for some reason that's what the children want. But our culture rewards women who leave their kids as soon as possible.
ITA

It is not just my christian ideals (although, I do get validated more as a sahm mom in christian circles vs mainstream) it is my mother instinct within in me that is so strong that I would swim through shark infested waters to save my kids if I had to. I've seen to many children being placed behind careers and self-centered desires being hurt that it bring out such a sadness for these little ones. There is no amount of laws that can be created that will be effective unless the hearts and minds of people are changed. No matter how unfair it seems at time , us women are the protectors of our children. If a mother doesn't value her child how do we expect our culture to?


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

Hey look, SQ and I agree about something! :LOL

Another child-rights violation story I tell a lot - forgive me if you're all sick of hearing about this one - a few years ago in the town next to mine, there was a mother who was forcing her 11-year-old daughter to be a prostitute. People knew about this and called CPS several times, but they did not do anything. Then one day, someone called CPS and mentioned the girl was not going to school. Well, that got CPS' attention.







Imagine that, a mother who was not turning her child over to the appropriate learning authority! CPS went to the home and saw the girl was 6 months pregnant.

I actually don't remember what happened to the mother. I'm sure she was punished but it makes me sad that CPS only responded when they heard the child was not in an institution that would teach her to be a servant to adult society.


----------



## pie (Apr 7, 2006)

School's been pretty vital for my child's well being, so I'll have to say, I don't think we should stop sending our kids to school.

Until the day that women are not expected to raise their children basically alone, within a nuclear family unit, and without the village for support, then I would have to say I think school can be important.

I think society does push for women to be away from their kids, but I also think it's natural to hand, say, a four or five year old, over to the community for care part of the time. The problem is that our society doesn't operate on a level that is anthropologically correct, and so that violates our biology, and leads to any number of problems. By this I mean to refer to the isolation of the modern mother and as a result her children.

Regarding the person who asked me who we can trust with our children... I don't know. But I do think that parading influence after influence through a home raises greatly the chance that something bad might happen.


----------

