G-spotter Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 Over the past 10 years, more than 20,000 American children are believed to have been killed in their own homes by family members. That is nearly four times the number of US soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. The child maltreatment death rate in the US is triple Canada's and 11 times that of Italy. Millions of children are reported as abused and neglected every year. Why is that? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-15193530 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 Don't like it? MOVE! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 It's so much more satisfying to torture them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 It's so much more satisfying to torture them. for sure. Have you seen american children? Fat, lazy, and whiny. GET BACK IN THE BASEMENT!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Off_White Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 That's a good question Dru, and for some reason, thinking about it and reading your link doesn't make me feel very flippant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 reading your link doesn't make me feel very flippant. why did you do that? I knew better. What a downer! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Off_White Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 Sorry, it's been a bad day for that sort of thing. Local guy just got arrested for beating his 16 YO daughter with willow switches he made the younger sister cut, then hacking away at her for 2 hours with a wooden sword, from 2am to 4am. The SCA armor & swords bit adds a hilarious veneer, but the basic facts are uber creepy. Dru's link just made me feel punched in the gut. YMMV. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 More evidence of the "Texas miracle" ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 It's interesting to look at the actual study: Link The headline data are taken from 07-08, when there were 479 combat deaths in Iraq and 1,740 children who were confirmed killed from child abuse. The rate of children confirmed killed by abuse was 2.4 in the US, 1.0 in Canada, and 1.4 in France. The sample size in each state is small enough that there's considerable variation from one year to the next, but it's interesting to look at the data from 2008 and ask - were there any states that had lower reported rates than France and if so, which were they. Ditto for the worst states. Best states: Alaska = 1.1 Arizona = 0.64 Connecticut = 0.74 Delaware = 0.97 Hawaii = 0.7 Idaho = 0.48 Montana = 0.45 South Dakota = 1.01 Vermont = 0.78 Wyoming = 0.78 (Washington was 1.49) Worst States: Arkansas = 2.99 Florida = 4.62 Georgia = 2.67 Michigan= 2.47 New Mexico = 3.78 Texas = 3.32 Tennessee = 3.72 Missouri = 2.95 The first thing that I think of is that sample size matters, and it's easy for a state with a small population to look really good or really terrible depending on which year the data is from. The second is that the South and the Rust Belt come out looking pretty bad - which is consistent with virtually all of the other statistical surveys of crime and violence in the US. These are fairly populous states, and the sample size is large enough to render YOY fluctuations less important. I suspect that the spatial distribution of child deaths by abuse and neglect in each state is highly non-random, and wouldn't surprise anyone who knew the character of each city/county in their state when they looked at a 10 year long density plot. I also suspect that the more familiarity you have with the data the less confident you are that there's a simple and effective way to combat this problem. If there's a tidy correlation between per-capita social services budgets (there might be) it isn't immediately obvious to me when looking at the statistical snapshot in the paper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-spotter Posted October 18, 2011 Author Share Posted October 18, 2011 JayB, your post reminds me of the bit in Bowling for Columbine where the guy is talking to Moore about why the US has a much higher rate of gun violence than does Canada despite similar rates of gun ownership and the guy hems and haws for a while and then says it's all because of the damn blacks, or something like that. Cut to the point. Make a graph with national social spending on one axis and child violence and death on the other and see where the US plots. Post it here. Please. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-spotter Posted October 18, 2011 Author Share Posted October 18, 2011 (edited) Stephen Pinker has a really interesting new book out whic hlooks at issues like this. Podcast link here: http://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode.cfm?id=steven-pinker-violence-is-lower-tha-11-10-18 Good book review here; http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-decline-of-violence Edited October 18, 2011 by G-spotter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 Also, there's not a state in the union with a pop. small enough for sample size variation to make any meaningful difference. I'd suggest reviewing your stats 101 text before posting next time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 You know, the one you keep on your nightstand next to the KY and your signed copy of 'Capitalism and Freedom'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 JayB, your post reminds me of the bit in Bowling for Columbine where the guy is talking to Moore about why the US has a much higher rate of gun violence than does Canada despite similar rates of gun ownership and the guy hems and haws for a while and then says it's all because of the damn blacks, or something like that. Cut to the point. Make a graph with national social spending on one axis and child violence and death on the other and see where the US plots. Post it here. Please. That's kind of a strange tack to take when I clearly wasn't disputing the data. It's there - but it's clearly distributed in non-random ways, just like gun violence. The US has 10X as many people as Canada does, and very strong regional differences that show up in things like crime stats. There are giant chunks of the US with a murder rate comparable to Canadas, and there are big chunks where the murder rate is at levels that would be unthinkable in Canada. If you really want to understand the "American" child abuse problem and why it's worse than in other countries (this is clearly not something that interests you, which is fine) the first questions you ask are "Where are the incidence and prevalence highest, where are they lowest, and what are the crucial differences between the worst and the best areas. It's that kind of analysis that can actually tell you things like whether or not there seems to be a negative correlation between having more social workers per capita and fewer dead kids. When you find those kinds of statistical correlations, that's a starting point for investigation rather than the end of it. Anyhow - here's per capita social spending. The child death stats are in the original link. If you can use both discover the secret that reveals a causal link between spending on social workers why people in Vermont are less likely to abuse their children to death than they are in Florida and Texas. Having spent some time in Vermont, I find the notion that they'd be abusing just as many of their kids to death as anywhere else if it weren't for a thin tweed line of case workers holding them back unconvincing - but if maybe that fits your model the best? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 Also, there's not a state in the union with a pop. small enough for sample size variation to make any meaningful difference. I'd suggest reviewing your stats 101 text before posting next time. You sure about that? The stats are there - so if you find that the standard deviation in the annual number of deaths in big and small states is roughly the same let me know. I think if you have some awful abuse case in Wyoming it's going to make the incidence per 100K spike in a huge way from one year to the next - and it'll make much less of a blip in a state like CA with ~70X more people, and these effects will make the standard deviations in Wyoming's data series higher than CA's, but it sounds like you know stats way better than I do so if that's a misconception on my part I'd be interested in learning why that assumption of mine is wrong. I don't think it explains anything close to all, or even most of the difference between Wyoming and California on any social stats - but IMO you have to be careful when applying statistical analysis to relatively rare events and take sample size variations into account. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 Stephen Pinker has a really interesting new book out whic hlooks at issues like this. Podcast link here: http://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode.cfm?id=steven-pinker-violence-is-lower-tha-11-10-18 Good book review here; http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-decline-of-violence I'm familiar with Pinker - but haven't read his book yet (saw the TED Talk). Here's his take on violence in the US: "My own guess is that Americans (particularly in the south and west) never really signed on to a social contract that gave government a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence, as Europe did. Americans not only retain the right to bear arms but believe it is their responsibility, not the government’s, to deter harm-doers. With private citizens, flush with self-serving biases, acting as judge, jury, and executioner, body counts can pile up as trigger-happy vigilantes mete out rough justice. This may be a legacy of the long periods of anarchy in the mountainous south and frontier west, and of the historical failure of the police and courts to serve African American communities." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prole Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 Legalize It! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-spotter Posted October 19, 2011 Author Share Posted October 19, 2011 Jay, those are red herrings. Overall murder rate is not child abuse rate. Rough justice is not killing your baby. Stick to the topic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 Having spent some time in Vermont, I find the notion that they'd be abusing just as many of their kids to death as anywhere else if it weren't for a thin tweed line of case workers holding them back unconvincing - but if maybe that fits your model the best? Strawman (and really lousy logic). Social spending won't prevent as many child abuse cases if the underlying socioeconomic causes of child abuse aren't present. If you look at the distribution of poverty by state, you'll instantly notice the correlation with child abuse rate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 Gee...the abuse (and every other documented measure of family dysfunction- teen pregs, divorce, etc.) is highly concentrated in the Bible Belt, where the practices of beating children and absolute male authority over the family, and early marriage are staunchly defended by evangelical fundamentalism. Must be lack of caseworkers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 Gee...the abuse (and every other documented measure of family dysfunction- teen pregs, divorce, etc.) is highly concentrated in the Bible Belt, where the practices of beating children and absolute male authority over the family, and early marriage are staunchly defended by evangelical fundamentalism. Must be lack of caseworkers. "Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up." (Hosea 13:16) Nice guy, that God. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Choada_Boy Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 Updated Oct 18, 2011 - 6:33 am Yelm man accused of abuse, forcing daughter to sword fight A Yelm man is accused of punishing his teen daughter by forcing her into an hours-long sword battle. Police say Fremon Seay was angry that his 16-year-old daughter had run away, so he forced her to dress up in Renaissance armor with a shield and wooden sword. "He armed himself with a piece of wood fashioned to look like a medieval sword," says Lieutenant Greg Elwin. Then, police say he made his daughter fight him for two hours. The battle ended when she collapsed. "He basically helped her back into the house and ordered her to strip down to her underwear," Elwin says. "Then he saw the bruising all over her body and made some comment 'Well I'm sorry that that happened, I just wish you hadn't have been so stubborn so I didn't have to go this far.'" According to Elwin, Seay also sat on the 16-year-old and whipped the backs of her legs with a willow switch. The girl's stepmother was also arrested for not intervening in the attack. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olyclimber Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZimZam Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 Updated Oct 18, 2011 - 6:33 am Yelm man accused of abuse, forcing daughter to sword fight A Yelm man is accused of punishing his teen daughter by forcing her into an hours-long sword battle. Police say Fremon Seay was angry that his 16-year-old daughter had run away, so he forced her to dress up in Renaissance armor with a shield and wooden sword. "He armed himself with a piece of wood fashioned to look like a medieval sword," says Lieutenant Greg Elwin. Then, police say he made his daughter fight him for two hours. The battle ended when she collapsed. "He basically helped her back into the house and ordered her to strip down to her underwear," Elwin says. "Then he saw the bruising all over her body and made some comment 'Well I'm sorry that that happened, I just wish you hadn't have been so stubborn so I didn't have to go this far.'" According to Elwin, Seay also sat on the 16-year-old and whipped the backs of her legs with a willow switch. The girl's stepmother was also arrested for not intervening in the attack. Sick fuck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olyclimber Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 thats what going to Ren. faires will do to ya Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.