The Mens Rights Fallacy, PBS documentary Options

[ihavehorns]

http://www.cptv.org/pdf/BTS_pressrelease.pdf

Please watch the above documentary and get the real story about what's behind mens rights advocates.

[Sally]

Child Maltreatment 2003: Summary of Key Findings

Author(s): National Clearinghouse on Child Abuse and Neglect Information
http://nccanch.acf.hhs.gov/
Year Published: 2005

This factsheet presents excerpts from Child Maltreatment 2003, a report based on data submissions by the States for Federal Fiscal Year 2003. The National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System was developed by the Children's Bureau of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services in partnership with the States to collect annual statistics on child maltreatment from State child protective services (CPS) agencies.1

The press release announcing these data is available on the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services website at http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2005.html. The full Child Maltreatment 2003 report is available on the Children's Bureau website at http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/cb/public...s/cmreports.htm. Limited print copies are available from the National Clearinghouse on Child Abuse and Neglect Information.

Victims

An estimated 906,000 children were determined to be victims of child abuse or neglect in 2003. The rate of victimization per 1,000 children in the national population has dropped from 13.4 children in 1990 to 12.4 children in 2003.

More than 60 percent of child victims experienced neglect. Almost 19 percent were physically abused, 10 percent were sexually abused, and 5 percent were emotionally maltreated. In addition, 17 percent were associated with "other" types of maltreatment, based on specific State laws and policies.2

Children ages birth to 3 years had the highest rates of victimization at 16.4 per 1,000 children of the same age group. Girls were slightly more likely to be victims than boys.

Pacific Islander, American Indian or Alaska Native, and African-American children had the highest rates of victimization when compared to their national population. While the rate of White victims of child abuse or neglect was 11.0 per 1,000 children of the same race, the rate for Pacific Islanders was 21.4 per 1,000 children, the rate for American Indian or Alaska Natives was 21.3 per 1,000 children, and the rate for African-Americans was 20.4 per 1,000 children.

Reports of Child Abuse and Neglect

In 2003, an estimated 2.9 million referrals concerning the welfare of approximately 5.5 million children were made to CPS agencies throughout the United States. Of these, approximately two-thirds (an estimated 1.9 million) were accepted for investigation or assessment; one-third were not accepted.

More than one-half (57 percent) of all reports that alleged child abuse or neglect were made by such professionals as educators, law enforcement and legal personnel, social services personnel, medical personnel, mental health personnel, child daycare providers, and foster care providers. Such nonprofessionals as friends, neighbors, and relatives submitted approximately 43 percent of reports.

Approximately 30 percent of the reports that were investigated included at least one child who was found to be a victim of abuse or neglect. Fifty-eight percent of the reports were found to be unsubstantiated (including those that were intentionally false); the remaining reports were closed for additional reasons.

Fatalities

Child fatalities are the most tragic consequence of maltreatment. For 2003, an estimated 1,500 children died due to abuse or neglect. More than three-quarters (79 percent) of children who were killed were younger than 4 years old; 10 percent were 4 to 7 years old; 5 percent were 8 to 11 years old; and 6 percent were 12 to 17 years old.

Infant boys (younger than 1 year) had the highest rate of fatalities, with nearly 18 deaths per 100,000 boys of the same age in the national population. Infant girls (younger than 1 year) had a rate of 14 deaths per 100,000. The overall rate of child fatalities was 2 deaths per 100,000 children. More than one-third of child fatalities were attributed to neglect. Physical abuse also was a major contributor to fatalities.



Perpetrators

Approximately 80 percent of perpetrators were parents. Other relatives accounted for 6 percent, and unmarried partners of parents accounted for 4 percent of perpetrators. The remaining perpetrators included persons with other (camp counselor, school employee, etc.) or unknown relationships to the child victims.

Female perpetrators, who were mostly mothers, were typically younger than male perpetrators, who were mostly fathers. Women also comprised a larger percentage of all perpetrators than men: 58 percent compared to 42 percent.

Of all parents who were perpetrators, fewer than 3 percent were associated with sexual abuse. More than three-quarters of perpetrators who were friends or neighbors committed sexual abuse.

Services

Approximately 57 percent of victims and 25 percent of nonvictims received services as a result of an investigation or assessment. Additional analyses indicated that children who were prior victims of maltreatment were 52 percent more likely to receive services than first-time victims. Additionally, children with multiple types of maltreatment were 73 percent more likely to receive services than children who were victims of physically abuse only.

Services included both in-home and foster care services. Approximately 15 percent of child victims were placed in foster care. About 3 percent of nonvictims also experienced a removal-usually a short-term placement during the course of the investigation.

[Sally]

You need to understand how many people are going to loss funding as we, as a society, take a pragmatic look at how pervasive our abuse problem truly is in this country and start to apply methods that are effective in reducing it. We are on the cusp of change and people who have made their life's career pedaling ideological manure are at immanent risk of being out of jobs or their company's without a client base. But that's what happens when your life's work is based on a huge BS story.

There are three important details that smack in the face of today's ideologues whose views are the basis for our child abuse and domestic violence laws and the thread's lead-in information.

According to the US Department of Health & Human Services Child Maltreatment 2003: Summary of Key Findings, cited above; (http://nccanch.acf.hhs.gov/pubs/factsheets/canstats.cfm),

Women also comprised a larger percentage of all perpetrators than men: 58 percent compared to 42 percent.

and

Infant boys (younger than 1 year) had the highest rate of fatalities...

and

Fifty-eight percent of the reports were found to be unsubstantiated (including those that were intentionally false);

This information is provided in cooperation with the National Clearinghouse on Child Abuse and Neglect Information and the US Department of Health and Human Services.

The above facts shatter the myth that males are not victims and that men are the greater abusers. We need our domestic violence and child abuse laws and most important, their operation throughout the country reviewed under the highest level of scrutiny possible by qualified scientists, not ideologues that develop material to support any one agenda. This study needs to be comprehensive and well-funded.

Dr. Warren Farrell contributed to, "VAWA: A four letter word that means tyranny," an advocacy ad,

The study needs to evaluate and document the different ways the sexes assault and murder each other. Knowing what methods of abuse and homicide both sexes use and recognizing the symptoms will assist the people that treat the abused, collect evidence and enforce the laws.

"Breaking the Silence: Children's Stories" is just another agenda polluted ideologue's hallucination run amok. It is devoid of supportive facts and relies mainly on subjective empirical observations. Studies done using sound scientific methods consistently shatter the myths like those that this unconscionable piece of lie based trash tries to pawn off as truth.

Sorry folks, but their alleged facts don't seem to match the establish facts for such things among others as the abuse of children by mothers compared to that incurred to them by their fathers.

It is clear the creators of this abominable work of fiction were trying to make some point about Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS). They neglected to detail the American Psychiatric Association (APA) lists PAS in the "Guidelines for child Custody Evaluations" manual so it is evident that they acknowledge PAS. Since they are the world's leaders in custody evaluations either Breaking the Silence is dead wrong or every custody evaluation done by a APA certified Psychiatrist is flawed.

PAS, despite what the producers of Breaking the Silence dreamed up, has not been discredited by the APA, it is just not yet listed in their Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM). The DSM is only revised every 10 years or so with the next revision scheduled for the year 2011. To make the argument that no credible disorders will be recognized prior to that date is ridiculous. ADD and ADHD were not recognized in the DSM for many years. Does not mean that these disorders did not exist prior to inclusion and millions of children were forced to take addictive narcotics without any basis for their diagnosis? I hope not.

Like any disorder PAS has the potential to be over diagnosed and abused. So I wonder if the cases portrayed in this documentary were random abuse cases or if the producers sought out women who felt they were wrongly accused of PAS. I would imagine it is the latter. It is very obvious that the producers are taking a position on the validity of PAS, and in doing so in the manner they have, they have exposed themselves as hypocrites.

Once again, sorry folks, its just more manure from dysfunctional minds of people who have been making a living via one of the greatest BS stories in the history of American industrial development. This industry, the abuse industry, has just pedaling today's snake-oil to the ignorant masses for far too long. Time for a change after taking a proper look at what the problem is, then deciding how to approach it.

[Guest_Starling_*]

Tuesday evening, October 11, 2005, I attended the preview of the PBS special called "Breaking the Silence" by invitation through a friend at a local PBS affiliate. I was the only person there who viewed the entire film who was not a member of the choir. We then enjoyed a rather lively "discussion" following the film even though I was brutally out numbered. It would have been better had other non men-haters shown up as I had requested for the purpose of getting a balanced review, but I did what I could and got what I got.

The following is a description of the film, from notes taken in the dark, which I've sent to several newspapers and online news services that I frequently write for in the form of an Op/Ed-Review about this horrendous lie infested act of fraud. The film was totally venomous and contrived, and deserves widespread opposition and condemnation.

==========================

Breaking the Silence: A Liars Story
by: [me] 10/12/2005 [emphasis added]

"Breaking the Silence" is a series of programs being produced by PBS with funding from several radical feminist organizations. On Tuesday evening (Oct. 11) I was treated to a preview of the program sponsored by the local domestic violence industry and our local PBS affiliate, along with eight other women and three completely emasculated men.

As I viewed the film, the reasons for withdrawing government funding for PBS were affirmed to me for the first time. There hasn't been a program as biased as this since Germany's propaganda machine attacked the Jews. I sat with notebook in hand as the film began, but the lies came too fast for me to write them all down.

It began with the colossally false statement that "All over America, battered mothers are losing custody of their children" - "One third of mothers lose custody to abusive husbands" was the second lie. The narrator Lundy Bancroft, well known for his anti-male bias, then stated that one child is chosen in each family for abuse by the other family members, all orchestrated, of course, by the father.

The real intent of the film was made clear when Attorney Richard Ducote stated that "All experts have disavowed Dr.Richard Gardners' work on PAS (Parental Alienation Syndrome)." That was one of many blatant lies as many psychologists and psychiatrists do recognize PAS as a legitimate disorder and the American Psychological Association had included it in their "Guidelines for child Custody Evaluations" manual several years ago and is considering the inclusion of PAS in their list of mental aberrations.

Ducote claims that 75% of custody cases involve domestic violence, but did not make clear whether he meant real violence, or merely accusations. I suspect the latter, knowing through personal experience and witness as a court observer that accusations of domestic violence and child abuse are commonly used by attorneys for the women in divorce as a means of gaining an advantage in the proceedings. Moreover, groups such as that sponsoring the program last night, urge women seeking any form of public assistance to file charges whether violence has occurred or not as a prerequisite for receiving services.

As the diatribe against PAS continued, it was vilified as being an "invention" of Dr. Gardner, and was called "junk science."

The courts were taken to task for allowing PAS to be used by the father to reverse custody decisions. It was claimed that courts "forbid" mothers to protect their children, as children are "most often in danger from the father. At this point, the courts were accused of granting custody to abusive fathers in two thirds of all cases", an increase of one third over the previously used statistic. Atty. Ducote reinforced his false claim by stating that the well known bias favoring mothers in court was a myth. That lie flies in the face of government statistics that show mothers being awarded sole custody in 90(+)% of all contested custody cases.

Although judges do hear ex-parte' motions frequently, narrator Bancroft claims that doing so is illegal, and is being done to deprive mothers of custody. But the records of the US Department of Justice's Office on Domestic Violence clearly show that over 95% of ex-parte motions are filed by the biological mother of a minor child on behalf of the minor child. This is just another of the endless stream of blatant lies which this film is formed from.

To add to the excoriation of the courts, for failing to side with the mothers in their fight for custody, Attorney Joan Meier claims that many cases of abuse by fathers go unreported. Judges, she claims, get angry when abuse is alleged. Perhaps. But maybe the anger is directed at the documented fact that more than half of the claims of abuse are known to be false allegations child abuse and/or domestic violence and judges are beginning to recognize false claims when they hear them.

The intended emotional impact of the film was provided by parading a series of children before the cameras. Those children had been chosen because they were involved in a change of custody as a result of PAS determinations. One young girl described finding her pet rabbit with it's neck broken, and simply assumed that the father had killed it. That's one of the reactions children demonstrate when subjected to parental alienation.

Another child, an older male, accused his father of molesting his two sisters, although he admitted that he had never witnessed any abuse, nor did the sisters mention it. His testimony, not surprisingly, emulated to the proverbial "T" that of his mother's, whose alienation was affirmed in two separate trials. The supposedly abused sisters were now in the fathers custody, and had been for some time. They still visited their mother and brother, who continued to vilify the father.

The girls and he did not enjoy a close relationship, the brother admitted, because, he said, "They don't understand what I'm trying to do for them." There was no mention of abuse from the father, however, and it would appear that the girls were quite content to be living with their dad. Another young girl echoed her mothers' vilification of the father, but did not specifically say she had been abused. At the end of the film, the worst she could say about her dad was that he placed too much emphasis on money. Again, no mention of the abuse the mother alleged.

Of note was the statement of another girl who said she never would have believed her father would lie to her. Apparently, she still doesn't believe that her mother could lie, either. A particularly moving piece of testimony was the tape recorded call of a child begging to be returned to his mother.

No, he wasn't being abused, he said, nor was he being threatened. He just wanted out, and a return to his mother. That's the PAS at work! In point of fact, PAS is usually cited in cases where the mother is abusing the children. The father is most likely trying to protect his children, not abuse them.

The most glaring omission in this film was the fact, derived from government and university studies, that mothers are more likely than fathers to abuse their children. Yet all the cases presented in this film centered around the father as abuser. Furthermore, not one paragraph of the film involved the prevention of violence against children.

The entire focus of this film was to prevent PAS from being used to deprive mothers of custody. At the end of the film, it was noted that one father who had been invited to respond, declined to do so. The other fathers were never mentioned, never interviewed on camera, and never offered a chance to rebut the accusations against them. A discerning viewer will be left to wonder, if the other fathers were interviewed, were their answers too damaging to the film's obvious agenda to allow them to be aired?

The impression left that all the cases presented were recruited at a conference of "battered mothers" sponsored by NOW, the National Organization of Women, left no doubt that this PBS special had a political agenda, an attempt to brainwash the American public, the way children are brainwashed by abusive mothers through Parental Alienation Syndrome.

The film airs later in the month from the preview date, and if readers have the stomach to sit through it, they can judge the extent of the fraud it represents for themselves. One of the other eight women who attended the Tuesday evening screening couldn't, and left at the halfway point. I wish she would have stayed to help even out the odds for the "shout at me match" disguised as a debate we had after the viewing.

[ihavehorns]

There hasn't been a program as biased as this since Germany's propaganda machine attacked the Jews

Are you trying to be dramatic here or just ridiculous?

[Sally]

Are you trying to be dramatic here or just ridiculous?

This is positively hysterical; there are 18,639 characters (including spaces and punctuation), 3065 words in 129 lines (including paragraph breaks) posted to refute your false statement which you supported with only a link to an overt act of fraud and that's all you can comment on?

This post has been edited by Sally: Oct 18 2005, 11:25 AM

[Guest_Al Nudles_*]

This is positively hysterical; there are 18,639 characters (including spaces and punctuation), 3065 words in 129 lines (including paragraph breaks) posted to refute your false statement which you supported with only a link to an overt act of fraud and that's all you can comment on?

That's because there's nothing to refute. This is from Carey Roberts:

Scott Loeliger thought he had found the woman of his dreams when he married African-born Sadia. But after she assaulted Scott and spent a night in the Santa Clara County jail, Scott began to have his doubts.

Just seven months after the birth of their daughter Fatima, their marriage was on the rocks. After the divorce was finalized, an enraged Sadia stormed into Scott's home, assaulted his female roommate, and removed a screaming Fatima. As a result, the court awarded custody of the girl to her father.

In 1997 a child abuse investigator in Tehama County, California interviewed 7-year-old Fatima and wrote, "she has been hit with her mothers shoe which left bruises on her arm, a wire hangar which also left brown marks on her arms or hands, and her mother has hit her with her open hand."

After Sadia attacked her babysitter one day, the frightened woman reported the assault to the local authorities. She later testified in court that Sadia would "pick up anything near her to hit Sara [Fatima's cousin] if she is angry enough" and concluded, "I am afraid for the children and I am afraid for my life."

A year later the Tulare County Juvenile Court ruled that Sadia was guilty on eight counts of child abuse and had the children removed from her care.

But a vindictive Sadia refused to accept the verdict.

So she launched a campaign to alienate Fatima from her father. As Superior Court Judge Edward King noted in his 2003 decision, "the Court finds that the mom manipulated the minor's attitude toward her dad and undermined the relationship they had developed over a three-year period. In fact, the mom destroyed that relationship in less than three months."

We know all this from a series of shocking documents that were revealed last week by columnist Glenn Sacks. Legal transcripts, court findings, and child abuse reports all pointed to a simple yet disturbing truth: Sadia Loeliger was a serial child abuser who would stop at nothing to take Fatima away from her father. [www.glennsacks.com/pbs/loeliger.php]

A year or so after Judge King handed down his decision, Sadia brought her story to Dominique Lasseur, an acclaimed New York City producer. Lasseur's company was the beneficiary of a $400,000 plum from the Mary Kay Ash Foundation to produce an exposé how divorce courts often award custody of children to abusive fathers. And Sadia, a minority woman who could tell a compelling story in front of the camera, fit the script perfectly.

So when the Public Broadcasting Service unveiled Breaking the Silence: Children's Stories on October 20, Sadia Loeliger was depicted as a sympathetic underdog doing heroic battle against a legal system that was biased against women. Not a word was mentioned about the eight counts of child abuse, about the babysitter's frightened testimony, or about the alienation campaign.

So was Dominique Lasseur simply duped by Sadia's guile and charm, another unwary victim of her manipulative lies?

It turns out that beginning in April of this year, Scott Loeliger repeatedly warned Lasseur about his ex-wife's long history of child abuse. He pleaded that the footage about his daughter be cut. And he provided documents and photographs to back up his claims. [www.glennsacks.com/pbs/loeliger-producers-warned.php]

But Mr. Lasseur figured that in the court of public opinion, the self-assured testimony of an immigrant mom, pitched to a group of dewy-eyed women and set against appropriate background music, would prevail over the cold truth of child abuse reports, depositions, and court decisions.

Loving dads who go through a divorce often face a hellacious struggle trying to stay involved in their kids' lives. And Sadia Loeliger's campaign to alienate a young girl from her father reveals one reason why.

To date, PBS has refused to comment on the incriminating documents. Tight-lipped PBS execs will only concede, "The stories profiled in Breaking the Silence: Children's Stories document a statistically small but serious problem in our family court system."

[pzrschreck]

Take all children from the parents, give them to the state, and raise an army of Starship Trooper Poopers!

Is that what the radical left really wants?

Sadaam did that here with orphans...and we're still fighting them.

[Guest_Starling_*]

That's because there's nothing to refute.

They also have another problem; the last 150 cases Attorney Richard Ducote's testified in as an expert witness (so far) have been overturned due to misrepresented credentials he supplied to the courts.

He is under investigation by the Bar Association (they are only doing that so they won't go down in flames with him), and has over 60 pending Bar complaints to deal with. So far, none of the so-called "experts" presented in this blatant act of fraud can prove one word of what was broadcast. PBS is trying to soft pedal their role in this horrific breach of public trust, but I don't believe they are going to be able to just walk away from it completely.

Take all children from the parents, give them to the state, and raise an army of Starship Trooper Poopers!

Is that what the radical left really wants?

Sadaam did that here with orphans...and we're still fighting them.

That is in fact what the left wants. History shows socialism can not succeed in society with an intact family structure.

This post has been edited by Starling: Nov 9 2005, 03:48 PM

[Faulkner]

This is positively hysterical; there are 18,639 characters (including spaces and punctuation), 3065 words in 129 lines (including paragraph breaks) posted to refute your false statement which you supported with only a link to an overt act of fraud and that's all you can comment on?

You know very well that if you post something inflammatory, that is what people will react to. If you want to have a discussion, that's fine, but you always undercut your points by trying to alienate and get a rise out of people who disagree. Whether or not men are unnecessary, you are one person I could do without.

[pzrschreck]

Over my dead body (and in front of me will be 1,000 dead socialists).

[Becky]

They also have another problem; the last 150 cases Attorney Richard Ducote's testified in as an expert witness (so far) have been overturned due to misrepresented credentials he supplied to the courts.

He is under investigation by the Bar Association (they are only doing that so they won't go down in flames with him), and has over 60 pending Bar complaints to deal with.

Provide proof please. I googled Mr. Ducote and through the first 10 pages there is not one mention of this.

[Scalewoodman]

There was a time when I supported PBS... even spent some nights on camera taking pledges during the old Leo Buscaglia days when WITF was in Hershey... but those days are long gone... Government money shouldn't be wasted on these politically biased socialists. Sorry Horns, I will watch James Herriot or the Met or cooking shows but the heck with PBS.

Get out your checkbook, Horns... I won't ever be sending them a dime.

[Guest_Starling_*]

You know very well that if you post something inflammatory, that is what people will react to. If you want to have a discussion, that's fine, but you always undercut your points by trying to alienate and get a rise out of people who disagree. Whether or not men are unnecessary, you are one person I could do without.

Always? I don't agree and especially in the case of this thread. Someone posted a leading post purporting an absolute act of fraud, then tried to call it fact and was subsequently called on it. No one involved with that huge lie has been able to refute any of the facts that have been presented that prove the fraud they committed.

[Becky]

Please provide some facts, yourself, Starling, such as where I can find proof that "at least 150 cases have been overturned" due to misrepresented credentials by Dr. Richard Ducote. Proof. Facts, please.

This post has been edited by Chris: Nov 9 2005, 04:01 PM