Child-Maltreatment-Research-L (CMRL) List Serve
Browse All Past CMRL Messages
Welcome to the archive of past Child-Maltreatment-Research-L (CMRL) list serve messages (11,000+). The table below contains all past CMRL messages (text only, no attachments) from Nov. 20, 1996 - February 2, 2026 and is updated every two months.
Instructions: Postings are listed for browsing with the newest messages first. Click on the linked ID number to open a message.
Message ID: 3165
Date: 2000-12-12
Author:Davis, Michael B MAJ IACH
Subject:FW: Male vs Female Abuse towards children
-----Original Message-----
From: Cooper, Gina [mailto:GCooperpd.co.riley.ks.us]
Sent: Friday, December 08, 2000 1245
To: 'Davis, Michael B MAJ IACH'
Subject: RE: Male vs Female Abuse towards children
My 2 cents' worth:
I don't think any of us are in denial about risks to children - both men and
women can and do abuse their children. Some of it is linked to partner
abuse, some is not. Data may be interesting in pointing to trends and may
inform us on how best to spend our energies, but in the reality of
day-to-day interventions, I'm skeptical about its usefulness. There is so
much we do not yet know.
All of the data notwithstanding on the subject, and I think I have seen most
of it (much of it conflicting and I have problems with the methodology in
much of it too) I am comforted by our local struggles and commitment towards
accomplishing the most careful, comprehensive screening in both child/spouse
cases that we can devise and gathering as much data as possible from
multiple systems and points of entry (law enforcement, advocates, personal
interviews, probation etc.) For what it's worth - I think we are
definitely on the right track and out of it will come the best possible
interventions. None of this is simple. And it shouldn't be. The details
matter!
On this very subject, you would have found the information given at
yesterday's training in Topeka by Susan Schechter very informative (she gave
an excellent overview of all the 81 studies to date on the child/spouse
abuse correlation and effects on children), and it all points in the same
direction - METICULOUS SCREENING AND ASSESSMENT BY MULTIPLE SYSTEMS. The
details matter. We will get you copies of the materials.
Peace, Gina
-----Original Message-----
From: Davis, Michael B MAJ IACH
[mailto:Michael.Davis@CEN.AMEDD.ARMY.MIL]
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 10:48 AM
To: 'Cooper, Gina'
Subject: FW: Male vs Female Abuse towards children
Hi Gina,
This is one of many messages on this subject. Interested in getting your
thoughts on this touchy subject.
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: Kirk Witherspoon [mailto:kirkwitherspoon@home.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 0856
To: Child Maltreatment Researchers
Subject: Re: Male vs Female Abuse towards children
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:
To: "Child Maltreatment Researchers"
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!)
>
>
-----Original Message-----
From: Cooper, Gina [mailto:GCooperpd.co.riley.ks.us]
Sent: Friday, December 08, 2000 1245
To: 'Davis, Michael B MAJ IACH'
Subject: RE: Male vs Female Abuse towards children
My 2 cents' worth:
I don't think any of us are in denial about risks to children - both men and
women can and do abuse their children. Some of it is linked to partner
abuse, some is not. Data may be interesting in pointing to trends and may
inform us on how best to spend our energies, but in the reality of
day-to-day interventions, I'm skeptical about its usefulness. There is so
much we do not yet know.
All of the data notwithstanding on the subject, and I think I have seen most
of it (much of it conflicting and I have problems with the methodology in
much of it too) I am comforted by our local struggles and commitment towards
accomplishing the most careful, comprehensive screening in both child/spouse
cases that we can devise and gathering as much data as possible from
multiple systems and points of entry (law enforcement, advocates, personal
interviews, probation etc.) For what it's worth - I think we are
definitely on the right track and out of it will come the best possible
interventions. None of this is simple. And it shouldn't be. The details
matter!
On this very subject, you would have found the information given at
yesterday's training in Topeka by Susan Schechter very informative (she gave
an excellent overview of all the 81 studies to date on the child/spouse
abuse correlation and effects on children), and it all points in the same
direction - METICULOUS SCREENING AND ASSESSMENT BY MULTIPLE SYSTEMS. The
details matter. We will get you copies of the materials.
Peace, Gina
-----Original Message-----
From: Davis, Michael B MAJ IACH
[mailto:Michael.DavisCEN.AMEDD.ARMY.MIL]
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 10:48 AM
To: 'Cooper, Gina'
Subject: FW: Male vs Female Abuse towards children
Hi Gina,
This is one of many messages on this subject. Interested in getting your
thoughts on this touchy subject.
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: Kirk Witherspoon [mailto:kirkwitherspoonhome.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 0856
To: Child Maltreatment Researchers
Subject: Re: Male vs Female Abuse towards children
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:
To: "Child Maltreatment Researchers"
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!)
>
>
Author:Davis, Michael B MAJ IACH
Subject:FW: Male vs Female Abuse towards children
-----Original Message-----
From: Cooper, Gina [mailto:GCooperpd.co.riley.ks.us]
Sent: Friday, December 08, 2000 1245
To: 'Davis, Michael B MAJ IACH'
Subject: RE: Male vs Female Abuse towards children
My 2 cents' worth:
I don't think any of us are in denial about risks to children - both men and
women can and do abuse their children. Some of it is linked to partner
abuse, some is not. Data may be interesting in pointing to trends and may
inform us on how best to spend our energies, but in the reality of
day-to-day interventions, I'm skeptical about its usefulness. There is so
much we do not yet know.
All of the data notwithstanding on the subject, and I think I have seen most
of it (much of it conflicting and I have problems with the methodology in
much of it too) I am comforted by our local struggles and commitment towards
accomplishing the most careful, comprehensive screening in both child/spouse
cases that we can devise and gathering as much data as possible from
multiple systems and points of entry (law enforcement, advocates, personal
interviews, probation etc.) For what it's worth - I think we are
definitely on the right track and out of it will come the best possible
interventions. None of this is simple. And it shouldn't be. The details
matter!
On this very subject, you would have found the information given at
yesterday's training in Topeka by Susan Schechter very informative (she gave
an excellent overview of all the 81 studies to date on the child/spouse
abuse correlation and effects on children), and it all points in the same
direction - METICULOUS SCREENING AND ASSESSMENT BY MULTIPLE SYSTEMS. The
details matter. We will get you copies of the materials.
Peace, Gina
-----Original Message-----
From: Davis, Michael B MAJ IACH
[mailto:Michael.Davis@CEN.AMEDD.ARMY.MIL]
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 10:48 AM
To: 'Cooper, Gina'
Subject: FW: Male vs Female Abuse towards children
Hi Gina,
This is one of many messages on this subject. Interested in getting your
thoughts on this touchy subject.
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: Kirk Witherspoon [mailto:kirkwitherspoon@home.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 0856
To: Child Maltreatment Researchers
Subject: Re: Male vs Female Abuse towards children
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:
To: "Child Maltreatment Researchers"
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!)
>
>
-----Original Message-----
From: Cooper, Gina [mailto:GCooperpd.co.riley.ks.us]
Sent: Friday, December 08, 2000 1245
To: 'Davis, Michael B MAJ IACH'
Subject: RE: Male vs Female Abuse towards children
My 2 cents' worth:
I don't think any of us are in denial about risks to children - both men and
women can and do abuse their children. Some of it is linked to partner
abuse, some is not. Data may be interesting in pointing to trends and may
inform us on how best to spend our energies, but in the reality of
day-to-day interventions, I'm skeptical about its usefulness. There is so
much we do not yet know.
All of the data notwithstanding on the subject, and I think I have seen most
of it (much of it conflicting and I have problems with the methodology in
much of it too) I am comforted by our local struggles and commitment towards
accomplishing the most careful, comprehensive screening in both child/spouse
cases that we can devise and gathering as much data as possible from
multiple systems and points of entry (law enforcement, advocates, personal
interviews, probation etc.) For what it's worth - I think we are
definitely on the right track and out of it will come the best possible
interventions. None of this is simple. And it shouldn't be. The details
matter!
On this very subject, you would have found the information given at
yesterday's training in Topeka by Susan Schechter very informative (she gave
an excellent overview of all the 81 studies to date on the child/spouse
abuse correlation and effects on children), and it all points in the same
direction - METICULOUS SCREENING AND ASSESSMENT BY MULTIPLE SYSTEMS. The
details matter. We will get you copies of the materials.
Peace, Gina
-----Original Message-----
From: Davis, Michael B MAJ IACH
[mailto:Michael.DavisCEN.AMEDD.ARMY.MIL]
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 10:48 AM
To: 'Cooper, Gina'
Subject: FW: Male vs Female Abuse towards children
Hi Gina,
This is one of many messages on this subject. Interested in getting your
thoughts on this touchy subject.
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: Kirk Witherspoon [mailto:kirkwitherspoonhome.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 0856
To: Child Maltreatment Researchers
Subject: Re: Male vs Female Abuse towards children
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:
To: "Child Maltreatment Researchers"
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!)
>
>
/
