WOMAN SUFFRAGE IN THE UNITED STATES
WOMAN SUFFRAGE IN THE UNITED STATES.
The Nineteenth Amendment, called the Susan B. Anthony Amendment, was ratified by Tennessee August 18, 1920. It became law August 26, 1920. Women in the United States gained the vote in 1920 after 72 years of the LARGEST civil rights movement in the history of the world.
What are we going to do with it now?
IN THIS COLLECTION:
THE WOMAN SUFFRAGE TIMELINE
Do you know what REALLY happened?
ABIGAIL ADAMS'S LETTERS TO JOHN ADAMS
She: " We will foment a rebellion."
He: "We will fight the despotism of the petticoat."
THE WOMAN SUFFRAGE TIMELINE BOOK LIST
References and materials used in preparation of the Timeline.
THE 1848 DECLARATION OF SENTIMENTS
The official commencement of the women's movement at Seneca Falls, NY. THIS SITE IS NOT JUST ABOUT VOTING RIGHTS, IS IT.
Voting rights are not just about voting, are they.
THE ABOLITIONIST MOVEMENT
A comment on the the abolitionist movement
and its connection with woman suffrage.
Sojourner Truth's Ain't I A Woman speech.
WHAT WAS THE E.R.A. REALLY ABOUT?
U.S. Commission Report June 1981
WOMEN'S LIBRARY OF HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS
Primary Source Documents; Women of Achievement
FATHERLESS AMERICA
The Childhoods of Historical Figures in American History
LIZNOTES:
Family Law in the United States
DID YOU KNOW: A little more than twenty years ago, married women in some U.S. States did not have the right to manage their own property, and all household property was deemed to belong to the husband upon divorce.
DID YOU KNOW: Only a few short years ago, it remained legal in seven states for a husband to rape his wife.
DID YOU KNOW: In 1981, the Federal Work Incentive Program, three out of four of whose participants were women, was required by law to give jobs preference to men, who also received jobs paying an average of 34% more per hour.
Husbands by law routinely were defined as "head of the household."
Hundreds of laws overtly discriminated against women, and
thousands of laws discriminated in effect.
Think by now it's all been "fixed?" Think again!
RELATED RESOURCES:
BASIC READINGS IN U.S. DEMOCRACY
DOCUMENTS FROM THE WOMEN'S LIBERATION MOVEMENT
LIVING THE LEGACY: 150 YEARS 1848-1998
Sponsored by the National Women's History Project
NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN
Many articles, including:
Twiss Butler's notes for a debate on feminism
(References at end to women's rights histories.)
The intentional exclusion of women
from the U.S. Constitution
Chronology of the E.R.A. 1923-1996
ERA history timeline
NOW's Current E.R.A. Campaign
NATIONAL WOMEN'S HISTORY PROJECT
UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, THE
The complete text, annotated at Cornell University -- and more
WOMEN AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS IN THE UNITED STATES
WOMEN'S HISTORY LIBRARY | WOMEN OF ACHIEVEMENT
Documents formerly at undelete.org, being regathered here.
WOMEN'S RESOURCES AT THE LIZ LIBRARY
Read about Jerrie Cobb and the Mercury 13.
Family Law Act aids abusive fathers, imperils children
http://www.theage.com.au/national/act-aids-abusive-fathers-imperils-children-20100623-yz3u.html
Act aids abusive fathers, imperils children
ADELE HORIN
June 24, 2010
THE Family Law Act is failing to protect children from ongoing trauma at the hands of abusive and violent fathers, a study has found.
The act's aims of protecting children from violence and giving them ''meaningful involvement'' with both parents was being resolved in favour of contact even in cases of severe domestic violence, the study reveals.
Sydney University education and social work senior lecturer Lesley Laing, the report's author, said more thought needed to be given to what formed a ''meaningful relationship'' when a parent had traumatised a child through domestic violence. ''There is no requirement that a parent who has harmed a child in this way must demonstrate they can offer a safe and meaningful relationship,'' she said.
The report is based on interviews with 22 women, contacted through domestic violence services, who were negotiating parenting arrangements in the family law system. It is the first study that has allowed women experiencing domestic violence to speak about the impact of the 2006 legal changes that put greater emphasis on shared parenting while still maintaining protection in cases of violence.
The women describe a situation where they are discouraged by legal advisers and others from raising violence issues in the Family Court for fear of being seen as an ''unfriendly'' or ''alienating'' parent unwilling to support contact with the father.
''Anything that you do to try and advocate for your children is somehow twisted into being high conflict and parental alienation,'' one woman said. ''So you are basically silenced. And the children are silenced.''
Another said she had agreed to the children having sleepovers at their father's place because she felt she had no choice. Her lawyer had convinced her that if she objected the judge would give the father even more contact.
Dr Laing said some women felt guilty they had escaped violent men but their children had not. ''Forty years ago some women could only escape domestic violence by leaving the children behind, and they were pilloried,'' she said. ''Now there is a new form of child abandonment, at least part time. It's a terrible thing we are asking women to do.''
The report shows the women are battling a complex and unco-ordinated system that often sees state child protection services shunting matters to the Family Court though the court with no powers of investigation.
As well, the women battled community attitudes that regarded them as liars who misused the system. Professionals constantly stressed to the women the importance of fathering, without regard to its quality. It was commonly assumed that at least some contact was inevitable, no matter what violence had occurred, and that supervised contact would eventually move to unsupervised contact.
The study, No Way to Live, will put further pressure on federal Attorney-General Robert McClelland to amend the Family Law Act. An earlier review he commissioned recommended amendments to provide greater protection.
No way to live Women’s experiences of negotiating the family law system in the context of domestic violence June 2010
88 Killer Dads: Fathers who ended their children’s lives in situations involving child custody, visitation, and/or child support (USA) Father Hood Initiatives
2010 APRIL 23
An update of our 76 Killer Dads posting–previously published in February. Remember, this is not a comprehensive list of all U.S. fathers who have killed their children in situations involving domestic violence and/or child abuse. This is limited to articles I have found personally where there was an identifiable child custody, visitation, and/or child support angle in the children’s deaths.
Franklin County
Father: PAUL GONZALEZ
Victim(s): Andrea Gonzalez (5 years)
Date of Death: Reported missing in Nov. 1993. Body never recovered.
Custodial father eventually pleads guilty to manslaughter. Stepmother charged with child abuse.
Jefferson County
Father: CORY RICE
Victim(s): Janiya Nicole Hale (1 year)
Date of Death: July 2009
Father, a registered sex offender, is charged with murder. Daughter died during overnight visitation.
ARIZONA
Cococino County
Father: RYAN PETERS
Victim(s): Teigan Peters (aka Teigan Brown) (3 years)
Date of Death: June 2009
Daughter killed in murder-suicide during court-ordered visitation . Mother had applied for orders of protection.
Maricopa County
Father: ALLEN CHAMBERS
Victim(s): Mindi Chambers (17 years)
Date of Death: Assumed to have been murdered around the time she went missing in 1982.
Custodial father ALLEN CHAMBERS is now presumed to have murdered Mindi Chambers around the time she went missing. Daughter had reported sexual abuse to the authorities. Not reported as officially missing til 1995.
Father: JEFFREY DUCHANE
Victim(s): Trenay Duchane (12 years)
Date of Death: Nov. 2008
Custodial father and stepmother convicted of murder.
Father: RAUL MOLINA GONZALEZ
Victim(s): Anthony Gonzalez (11 years)
Date of Death: Summer 2005
Father convicted of murdering son during summer visitation.
Father: NUSHAWN CAMPBELL
Victim(s): Unnamed son (5 years)
Date of Death: June 2009
Father with sole custody stabs son to death in failed murder-suicide. Mother had been trying to regain custody.
Father: ANDRE LETEVE
Victim(s): Alec Leteve (5 years), Asher Leteve (1 year)
Date of Death: March 2010
Parents in process of getting divorce, but had agreed to joint custody. Sons shot to death in failed murder-suicide. Father apparently "feared" mother would attempt moveaway.
CALIFORNIA
Contra Costa County
Father: ERHAN KAYIK
Victim(s): Volkan Kayik (16 years)
Date of Death: July 2007
Custodial father found guilty in 2009 of strangulation death of son.
El Dorado County
Father: DAVID ELIOTT
Victim(s): Chandler Nash-Eliott (11 years)
Date of Death: Dec. 2009
Father not charged in the "suicide" of son. Father had physical custody, parents had shared custody. Father had extensive history with CPS regarding neglect, abuse, lack of supervision, etc.
Los Angeles County
Father: DAVID HELMS
Victim(s): Lance Helms (2 1/2 years)
Date of Death: 1995
Custodial dad convicted in beating death of son. Father had obtained custody despite extensive history of violence, drug abuse.
Father: CAMERON BROWN
Victim(s): Lauren Sarene Key (4 years)
Date of Death: Nov. 2000
Father scheduled to go to trial for 3rd time for death of daughter. Daughter was allegedly pushed off cliff during visitation in order to avoid child support.
Orange County
Father: GIDEON WALTER OMONDI
Victim(s): Richie Omondi (4 years)
Date of Death: 2006
Father shared custody with the child’s mother. Convicted of 1st degree murder in Jan. 2010. Drowned son to avoid child support.
Sacramento County
Father: ADRIAN RAMON MCGRATH
Victim(s): Jeremiah McGrath (3 years)
Date of Death: March 2010
Son beaten to death in home of father, stepmother
San Bernadino County
Father: JESUS ROMAN FUENTES
Victim(s): Jesus Gabriel Fuentes (4 years)
Date of Death: Feb. 2010
Father crashes car, shoots to death son during visitation. Parents divorced. Father in critical condition from self-inflicted gun shot wound.
Father: STEPHEN CHARLES GARCIA
Victim(s): Wyatt Garcia (9 months)
Date of Death: Jan. 2010
Father kills son during court-ordered visitation. Murder-suicide. Parents never married. Mother had pleaded with 3 judges regarding father’s violence, threats.
San Diego County
Father: DENNIS POTTS
Victim(s): Tori Vienneau (22 years), Dean Springtube (10 months)
Date of Death: July 2006
Father is convicted Sept. 2009 in the murders of his former girlfriend and son. Father didn’t want to take paternity test, pay child support.
Ventura County
Father: JAMES MULVANEY
Victim(s): Jason Mulvaney (12 years), Jennifer Mulvaney (7 years)
Date of Death: Sept. 2009
Father stabs to death son and daughter in murder-suicide during overnight visitation. Parents had shared custody and were still involved in divorce, custody case.
COLORADO
Arapahoe County
Father: AARON THOMPSON
Victim(s): Aarone Thompson (7 years)
Date of Death: Reported missing in Nov. 2005. Body never recovered.
Father convicted in Sept. 2009 in daughter’s murder. Father had custody, as he had abducted the children from mother in Michigan.
Jefferson County
Father: JOSEPH TRUJILLO
Victim(s): Adrian Trujillo (5 months)
Date of Death: Jan. 2010
Father charged in death of infant son. Father had physical custody while mother in military. Father alleged to have left baby alone while father went out drinking for 7 hours. Baby later found dead.
CONNECTICUT
New Haven County
Father: MORRIES D. HILL SR.
Victim(s): Morries Hill Jr. (5 months)
Date of Death: 2008
Father charged in connection with the death of son. Baby died from "severe physical abuse." Infant died in father’s home during overnight visitation.
FLORIDA
Citrus County
Father: SPENCER WEAVER
Victim(s): Unnamed son (2 months)
Date of Death: February 2010
Father with extensive criminal background being investigated in death of infant son, who died during visitation with father.
Colllier County
Father: SAMUEL SEJOUR
Victim(s): Elijay Kye Aliazar (3 months)
Date of Death: Jan. 2009
Father had shared custody with infant’s mother. Son died of blunt force trauma to the head during visitation. Father charged w. 2nd-degree murder.
Duval County
Father: JOSI M. HALL
Victim(s): Kyla Hall (1 year)
Date of Death: 2008
Father had sole custody, and had been cleared of previous abuse allegations. Daughter died of blunt force trauma at home.
Hillsborough County
Father: CHAUNCEY ROBINSON
Victim(s): Chavon Robinson (22 months)
Date of Death: Feb. 2008
Father convicted Dec. 2009 of murdering child during visitation.
Jackson County
Father: WESLEY JONATHAN WILLIAMS
Victim(s): Danielle Baker (mother), sons Ahmaad (4 years) and Amarion (1 year), and unrelated infant.
Date of Death: 2005
Father allegedly committed quadruple murder because he was angry about child support.
Lake County
Father: RICHARD L. ADAMS
Victim(s): Kayla McKean (6 years)
Date of Death: 1998
Custodial father beat daughter to death. Had been subject of multiple CPS investigations.
Orange County
Father: ROOSEVELT BRADLEY II
Victim(s): Roosevelt Bradley III (8 months)
Date of Death: Aug. 2009
Father arrested for murder of infant during visitation.
Osceola County
Father: MELVIN ORTIZ
Victim(s): Unnamed Son (5 years)
Date of Death: July 2009
Son beaten to death while visiting father, stepmother.
Palm Beach County
Father: TONY CAMACHO
Victim(s): Crystal Camacho (8 years), Nelson Camacho (10 years)
Date of Death: Dec. 2006
Father and mother were finalizing divorce. During Christmas visitation, father stabbed daughter, then killed her and brother Nelson Camacho (10 years) in arson murder-suicide. Mother had unsucessfully petitioned for protection.
Pasco County
Father: THOMAS LUDWIG
Victim(s): Diella Ludwig (2 months)
Date of Death: Dec. 2008
CPS granted father THOMAS LUDWIG custody of infant twins. Father charged with 1st-degree murder in Diella’s death.
Seminole County
Father: FIDEL JUAREZ-AVILA, SR.
Victim(s): Aurelia Juarez (14 months)
Date of Death: June 2008
In March 2010, custodial father sentenced to 21 years in prison for aggravated manslaughter in death of daughter.
Volusia County
Father: MICHAEL REESE
Victim(s): Jeremiah Reese (14 years)
Date of Death: Sept. 2009
Jeremiah Reese died of "accidental overdose" at the home of his custodial father. Father had long history of abuse, neglect with CPS.
HAWAII
Honolulu County
Father: NAEEM WILLIAMS
Victim(s): Talia Williams (5 years)
Date of Death: 2005
Custodial father still facing charges in daughter’s death. Had gained custody just 7 months before murder.
IDAHO
Ada County
Father: NICHOLAS BACON
Victim(s): Bekm Bacon (8 months)
Date of Death: Feb. 2010
Father shot to death son in murder-suicide. Parents going through divorce, but had joint custody. Infant killed during visitation with father.
Jerome County
Father: ROBERT ARAGON
Victim(s): Sage Aragon (11 years)
Date of Death: Dec. 2008
Custodial father acquitted of involuntary manslaughter in hypothermia death of daughter. Father had told to her to walk to mother’s home during blizzard.
Twin Falls County
Father: JIM NICE JR.
Victim(s): Justin Nice (6 years), Spencer Nice (6 years), Raquel Anna Nice (2 years)
Date of Death: 2005
Father murdered children with rat poison during court-ordered visitation.
ILLINOIS
Cook County
Father: JAMES LARRY
Victim(s): Jahad Larry (7 months), Kalesh Larry (3 years), Keyshai Fields (16 years), Tawana Thompson Larry (19 years)
Date of Death: April 2010
Father with extensive criminal background charged in the murder of infant son, wife, two nieces. Had been awarded joint custody of infant through paternity action one week prior to killings.
McClean County
Father: MICHAEL CONNELLY
Victim(s): Duncan Connelly (6 years) and Jack Connelly (4 years)
Date of Death: March 2009
Father killed sons in murder-suicide during court-ordered visitation. Mother had extensive involvment with the courts trying to prevent contact with father.
Will County
Father: CHIDI ESI
Victim(s): Nathan Esi (19 months)
Date of Death: Oct. 2009
Father accused of drowning son during visitation.
INDIANA
Green County
Father: RONALD A. BOHANNON
Victim(s): Travis Bohannon (14 months)
Date of Death: Aug. 2009
Father separated from wife. Son "accidently" shot during visitation. Father convicted of reckless homicide Jan. 2010.
Lake County
Father: CORDELL RICHARDSON
Victim(s): Eboni Richardson (19 months)
Date of Death: Aug. 2009
Father shot daughter during visitation. Didn’t want child’s mother to do moveaway.
Father: TERRY BETHEL (aka Terry Noel)
Victim(s): Josiah Shaw (13 months)
Date of Death: Jan. 2008
Father allegedly arranged to have visitation with son, then shot him to death to avoid child support.
KANSAS
Shawnee County
Father: JAMES KRAIG KAHLER
Victim(s): Karen Kahler (44 years), Emily Kahler (18 years), Lauren Kahler (16 years), Dorothy Wight (89 years)
Date of Death: Nov. 2009
Parents were in the process of divorcing, reportedly "sparring over children."
Sumner County
Father: UNNAMED FATHER
Victim(s): Caden Michael Reemes (4 years)
Date of Death: Aug. 2009
Child asphyxiated at the home of his custodial UNNAMED FATHER.
KENTUCKY
Anderson County
Father: TIMOTHY FRAZIER
Victim(s): Cole Frazier (21 months)
Date of Death: May 2009
Father obtained custody with police assistance through fraudulent EPO. Shot son to death in murder-suicide. Mother suing police, city.
Clark County
Father: PATRICK WATKINS
Victim(s): Michaela Watkins (10 years)
Date of Death: 2007
Custodial father, stepmother found guilty of murder in girl’s death. Girl removed from mother’s home by social workers.
LOUISIANA
Pointe Coupee Parish
Father: AARON BOWMAN
Victim(s): Aaron Bowman, Jr.
Date of Death: Nov. 2009
Father had "temporary" custody of son, 2-year-old daughter when son beaten to death. Father charged with 1st-degree murder.
Orleans Parish
Father: DANNY PLATT
Victim: Ja’Shawn (2 years)
Date of Death: January 2010
Father arrested in murder of son during weekend visitation; alleged that father had been trying to avoid paying back child support.
MAINE
Kennebec County
Father: SHANE SOUCY
Victim(s): Connor Soucy (4 months)
Date of Death: Aug. 2009
Infant became "unresponsive" during visit with father. Later died at hospital.
MARYLAND
Baltimore County
Father: MARK CASTILLO
Victim(s): Anthony Castillo (6 years), Austin Castillo (4 years), Athena Castillo (2 years)
Date of Death: Mar. 2008
Mother had tried to stop father from having access, but blocked by courts. Children murdered during court-ordered visitation.
Father: STEPHEN NELSON
Victim(s): Turner Jordan Nelson (3 years)
Date of Death: Feb. 2008
Murdered by father by being thrown off bridge. Father and mother had argued in court over custody.
Father: TYRONE HAMBER
Victim(s): Melonia Hamber (2 years)
Date of Death: April 2010
Father charged in daughter’s beating death. Child had been visiting with father for two weeks prior to her death.
MASSACHUSETTS
Bristol County
Father: KRISTOPHER GRIFFIN
Victim(s): Kaitlyn (6 years)
Date of Death: July 2009
Father allegedly murdered daughter because he was concerned about possible moveaway.
Worcester County
Father: LESLIE G. SHULER
Victim(s): Nathaniel Turner (7 years)
Date of Death: June 2009
Father charged with beating death of son. Took place during father’s summer visitation.
MICHIGAN
Oakland County
Father: JOHN KELLY
Victim(s): unnamed infant (13 weeks)
Date of Death: Feb. 2010
Infant died during unsupervised visitation.
St. Clair County
Father: JOE GALVAN
Victim(s): Prhaze Galvan (3 years)
Date of Death: Jan. 2010
Child died of blunt force trauma in home of father, stepmother. Both face murder charges.
MISSOURI
Cass/Jackson Counties
Father: MARK GUENTHER
Victim(s): Elizabeth Guenther (18 months)
Date of Death: Feb. 2010
Father to be charged with 2nd degree murder. Baby suffered fatal skull fracture during father’s weekend visitation.
Father: DAN PORTER
Victim(s): Sam Porter (7 years), Lindsey Porter (8 years)
Date of Death: June 2004
Father murdered children during court-ordered visitation. Had extensive history of domestic violence.
Greene County
Father: KYLE BAYLOR
Victim(s): Vaniessa Baylor (1 year)
Date of Death: February 2010
Father charged with 2nd-degree murder in daughter’s death. Parents had separated, but father had been serving as "caregiver" for past week. Father had been scheduled to start paying child support to mother.
St. Louis County
Father: Nathaniel Robinson
Victim(s): Desmon Valenzuela (3 years)
Date of Death: 2007
Father obtained custody 1 month before child’s beating death. Convicted of involuntary manslaughter in Jan 2010.
NEVADA
Clark County
Father: BRANDON TODD ARDUINO
Victim(s): Brandon Christopher Arduino-Boggs (13 years)
Date of Death: Sept. 2009
Son killed in auto homicide case where father DUI. Parents had been in lengthy child custody case.
Father: ALEX KOPYSTENSKI
Victim(s): Giovani Kopystenski (5 years)
Date of Death: July 2009
Custodial father. Autistic son "accidentally" shoots himself in head after finding gun in father’s car.
Father: RICHARD MARTINO
Victims(2): Zander Martino (2 years)
Date of Death: July 2007
Father had gained custody just two months before son’s beating death.
NEW JERSEY
Passaic County
Father: EDELMIRO GONZALEZ
Victim(s): Adrian Gonzalez (7 years)
Date of Death: Nov. 2009
Father in "bitter custody dispute" with "estranged" wife. 7-year-old son shot to death, 11-year-old son, wife, in critical condition.
NEW MEXICO
Bernalillo County
Father: RICHARD ROBERT SANCHEZ
Victim(s): Richard Jr, Daniel, and Christopher Sanchez
Date of Death: Aug. 2001
Father "went missing" with sons during custodial visit. Bodies recovered, identified in July 2009.
NEW YORK
Columbia County
Father: FRANKLIN HANKERSON
Victim(s): Khliff Taylor Hankerson (5 years)
Date of Death: April 2010
Son killed in murder-suicide during visitation.
Erie County
Father: JAMES E. KENT
Victim(s); Joshua Kent (3 years)
Date of Death: Mar. 2005
Sole custody father beats son to death.
Genessee County
Father: UNNAMED FATHER
Victim(s); Marcus Peters (6 years)
Date of Death: Oct. 2009
Child dies during weekend visitation with father, but authorities say death not "suspicious."
Monroe County
Father: MARK RESCH
Victim(s): Hunter Resch (7 years)
Date of Death: Feb. 2010
Child shot to death in murder-suicide during court-ordered visitation. Father had history of DV, mother had filed two orders of protection.
Orange County
Father: CHRISTOPHER RHODES
Victim(s): Jerica Rhodes (7 years)
Date of Death: Jan. 2005
Sole custody father convicted in daughter’s stabbing death. Had extensive history of DV.
NORTH CAROLINA
Edgecombe County
Father: BRICE MCMILLAN
Victim(s): Tyler Brice (13 years)
Date of Death: June 2008
Custodial father, stepmother convicted of 2nd-degree murder. Boy tied to tree, died of dehydration, heat exhaustion.
OKLAHOMA
Bryan County
Father: WOLF ABEL
Victim(s): Cheyenne Wolf (11 years)
Date of Death: April 2008
Custodial father, stepmother charged in girl’s death.
OHIO
Cuyahoga County
Father: ANTHONY JOHNSON
Victim(s) Anthony Johnson Jr.
Date of Death: Aug. 2009
Father accused of beating child to death during visitation.
Franklin/Delaware Counties
Father: DANIEL J. DOBSON
Victim(s): Nicole Dobson (15 years), Sarah Dobson (11 years)
Date of Death: Dec. 2009
Father had physical placement of 15-year-old daughter. "Shared parenting" plan in place with divorced mother. Girls shot to death in murder-suicide.
Highland County
Father: WESLEY COONROD
Victim(s): Steven Coonrod (3 years), Thomas Coonrod (4 years)
Date of Death: March 2010
Father with temporary custody charged with murder in arson deaths of two sons.
Stark County
Father: JAMES MAMMONE III
Victim(s): Macy Mammone (5 years), James Mammone (3 years), Margaret Eakin (57 years)
Date of Death: June 2009
Divorced father convicted of stabbing children, beating to death former mother-in-law in Jan. 2010.
OREGON
Clackamas County
Father: DONALD L. COCKRELL
Victim(s): Alexis Pounder (3 years)
Date of Death: Jan. 2010
Father, mother had shared custody. Father, girlfriend charged with beating, starving girl to death. Mother allegedly blocked from seeing child by father.
Mutnomah County
Father: CHRISTOPHER ROSILLO
Victim(s): Oleander Labier (5 years)
Date of Death: April 2010
Custodial father, fiancee charged in girl’s death.
PENNSYLVANIA
Philadelphia County
Father: DOMINGO "ANIBAL" FERREIRA
Victim(s) Charlenni Ferreira (10 years)
Date of Death: Oct. 2009
Girl died from abuse in the home of her custodial father, stepmother. Father later (allegedly) committed suicide in jail cell.
SOUTH CAROLINA
Anderson County
Father: JAMES T. DICKERSON
Victim(s): Jeremy Dickerson (7 years)
Date of Death: July 2009
Father with "full custody" charged in son’s beating death.
Chester County
Father: UNNAMED FATHER
Victim(s): Xymerra Evans (11 months)
Date of Death: Sept. 2009
Child sexually abused, beaten during visitation with father. Later died at hospital.
TENNESSEE
Shelby County
Father: CURTIS LEE MORRIS, JR.
Victim(s): Isaiah Snipes (16 months)
Date of Death: Nov. 2009
Father had just obtained custody of son, 3-year-old daughter in Sept. 2009. Father charged w. 2nd-degree murder.
Warren County
Father: MITCHELL STONE
Victim(s): Kayndace (3 years), Akeelia (1 year)
Date of Death: May 2009
Custodial father, stepmother charged in deaths of two girls.
TEXAS
Denton County
Father: DUKE WATROUS
Victim(s): Ashley Watrous (10 years)
Date of Death: Dec. 2009
Custodial father charged in shooting death.
Gaines/Yoakum Counties
Father: MARIO ROMERO
Victim(s): Mitchell Romero (3 years), unnamed mother
Date of Death: Oct. – Nov. 2009
Mother reportedly murdered by father during child abduction. Son later killed in car accident.
Jasper County
Father: LEO DESMOREAUX IV
Victim(s): Triston Dobbins (21 months)
Date of Death: Dec. 2007
Boy died of head injuries while visiting father, stepmother. Father on trial for capital murder Jan. 2010.
VIRGINIA
Norfolk County
Father: JOSHUA SAWYER
Victim(s): Carly Sawyer (5 years)
Date of Death: June 2009
Custodial father, stepmother charged with 2nd-degree murder. Mother lost custody during divorce, father denied mother contact.
WEST VIRGINIA
Mercer County
Father: RONALD HOLCOMB
Victim(s): Brooklyn Holcomb (5 years)
Date of Death: Jan. 2007
Custodial father convicted of 2nd-degree murder in daughter’s death. Mother had lost custody the year before after applying for child support.
Posted by silverside at 9:10 AM
Labels: child custody, child death, child murder, custodial dad, custodial father, custody/visitation, murder, statistics
Blogger Labels: Killer,Dads,children,custody,Father,APRIL,February,Remember,violence,ALABAMA,Franklin,PAUL,GONZALEZ,Victim,Andrea,Date,Death,Body,Custodial,manslaughter,Stepmother,Jefferson,CORY,RICE,Janiya,Nicole,Hale,offender,Daughter,ARIZONA,Cococino,RYAN,PETERS,Teigan,Brown,June,Mother,orders,protection,Maricopa,ALLEN,Mindi,authorities,JEFFREY,DUCHANE,Trenay,RAUL,MOLINA,Anthony,Summer,NUSHAWN,CAMPBELL,ANDRE,LETEVE,Alec,Asher,March,Parents,Sons,CALIFORNIA,Contra,Costa,ERHAN,KAYIK,Volkan,Dorado,DAVID,ELIOTT,Chandler,Nash,history,supervision,Angeles,Lance,drug,CAMERON,Lauren,Sarene,cliff,Orange,GIDEON,WALTER,OMONDI,Richie,degree,Sacramento,ADRIAN,RAMON,MCGRATH,Jeremiah,Bernadino,JESUS,ROMAN,FUENTES,Gabriel,self,STEPHEN,CHARLES,GARCIA,Wyatt,Murder,judges,threats,Diego,DENNIS,POTTS,Tori,Vienneau,Dean,Springtube,Sept,Ventura,JAMES,MULVANEY,Jason,Jennifer,COLORADO,Arapahoe,AARON,THOMPSON,Michigan,JOSEPH,TRUJILLO,infant,Baby,CONNECTICUT,Haven,MORRIES,HILL,connection,FLORIDA,Citrus,SPENCER,WEAVER,background,Colllier,SAMUEL,SEJOUR,Elijay,Aliazar,trauma,Duval,JOSI,HALL,Kyla,Hillsborough,CHAUNCEY,ROBINSON,Chavon,Jackson,WESLEY,JONATHAN,WILLIAMS,Danielle,Baker,Ahmaad,Amarion,Lake,RICHARD,ADAMS,Kayla,McKean,subject,ROOSEVELT,BRADLEY,Osceola,MELVIN,ORTIZ,Palm,Beach,TONY,CAMACHO,Crystal,Nelson,Christmas,Pasco,THOMAS,LUDWIG,Diella,Seminole,FIDEL,JUAREZ,AVILA,Aurelia,prison,Volusia,MICHAEL,REESE,HAWAII,Honolulu,NAEEM,Talia,IDAHO,NICHOLAS,BACON,Bekm,Jerome,ROBERT,ARAGON,Sage,blizzard,Twin,Falls,NICE,Justin,Raquel,Anna,ILLINOIS,Cook,LARRY,Jahad,Kalesh,Keyshai,Tawana,wife,action,McClean,Duncan,Jack,courts,CHIDI,Nathan,INDIANA,RONALD,BOHANNON,Travis,homicide,CORDELL,RICHARDSON,Eboni,Didn,TERRY,BETHEL,Noel,Josiah,Shaw,KANSAS,Shawnee,KRAIG,KAHLER,Karen,Dorothy,Sumner,Caden,Reemes,Child,KENTUCKY,Anderson,TIMOTHY,FRAZIER,Cole,assistance,Shot,Clark,PATRICK,WATKINS,Michaela,girl,workers,LOUISIANA,Pointe,Coupee,Parish,BOWMAN,Orleans,DANNY,PLATT,Shawn,January,MAINE,Kennebec,SHANE,SOUCY,Connor,Later,hospital,MARYLAND,MARK,CASTILLO,Austin,Athena,Turner,Jordan,bridge,HAMBER,Melonia,MASSACHUSETTS,Bristol,KRISTOPHER,GRIFFIN,Kaitlyn,Worcester,LESLIE,SHULER,Nathaniel,Oakland,JOHN,Clair,GALVAN,Prhaze,Both,MISSOURI,Cass,GUENTHER,Elizabeth,skull,PORTER,Lindsey,Greene,KYLE,BAYLOR,Vaniessa,Louis,Desmon,Valenzuela,NEVADA,BRANDON,TODD,ARDUINO,Christopher,Boggs,auto,ALEX,KOPYSTENSKI,Giovani,Autistic,MARTINO,Victims,Zander,JERSEY,Passaic,EDELMIRO,MEXICO,Bernalillo,SANCHEZ,Daniel,YORK,Columbia,HANKERSON,Khliff,Taylor,Erie,KENT,Joshua,Sole,Genessee,Marcus,Monroe,RESCH,Hunter,RHODES,Jerica,NORTH,CAROLINA,Edgecombe,BRICE,MCMILLAN,Tyler,tree,dehydration,exhaustion,OKLAHOMA,Bryan,WOLF,ABEL,Cheyenne,OHIO,Cuyahoga,JOHNSON,Delaware,DOBSON,Sarah,placement,Girls,Highland,COONROD,Steven,Stark,Macy,Margaret,Eakin,OREGON,Clackamas,DONALD,COCKRELL,Alexis,Pounder,Mutnomah,ROSILLO,Oleander,Labier,PENNSYLVANIA,Philadelphia,DOMINGO,ANIBAL,FERREIRA,Charlenni,cell,SOUTH,DICKERSON,Jeremy,Chester,Xymerra,Evans,TENNESSEE,Shelby,CURTIS,MORRIS,Isaiah,Snipes,Warren,MITCHELL,Kayndace,Akeelia,TEXAS,Denton,DUKE,WATROUS,Ashley,Gaines,Yoakum,MARIO,ROMERO,abduction,accident,Jasper,DESMOREAUX,Triston,Dobbins,capital,VIRGINIA,Norfolk,SAWYER,WEST,Mercer,HOLCOMB,Brooklyn,statistics,Fathers,situations,articles,deaths,CHAMBERS,HELMS,allegations,investigations,injuries,visitation,suicide,months,girlfriend,week,weekend,weeksThe National Fatherhood Initiative: Supporting a Misogynistic Agenda
In Re: The National Fatherhood Initiative: supporting a misogynistic agenda with "politically correct" jock straps. Also read this important article on the National Fatherhood agenda on theSilver Rights blogspot.
liz responds to Wade Horn's
The Importance of Being Father.
HORN: Despite conventional wisdom, which has held -- and in many quarters still does -- that children do not pay a price when fathers are absent from their lives, research data depict a much different reality. Violent criminals are overwhelmingly males who grew up without fathers, including 60 percent of America's rapists, 72 percent of adolescent murderers and 70 percent of long term prison inmates. Children living in a father-absent home are also more likely to be suspended or expelled from school, or to drop out; require treatment for an emotional or behavioral problem; commit suicide as adolescents; and be victims of child abuse or neglect.
LIZ: Let's stop right here. Research on widowed homes, and research which has been done on divorced mother-headed homes which are financially comfortable and unstressed indicates that there is virtually no difference in child rearing outcomes between these children and children raised in intact homes with a mother and father present.
Moreover, the research does not indicate that these percentages of violent criminals, et al. grew up through their entire childhoods (as implied) sans a father in the household, but rather, that they grew up in homes in which that father was absent for some period of their childhood. So right in the first paragraph, you perpetuate two blatant misrepresentations. Your argument, Wade, also misleads in another way: the overwhelming MOST of single mother households do NOT exhibit these childrearing problems.
If children tend to pay any price at all when the father is absent, that price is largely in their standard of living. It's financial. But growing up poor in and of itself also does not necessitate a bad child rearing outcome. The actual causes of negative child rearing problems correlating with the disparate and nonhomogeneous classification of "fatherless homes" (or "single mother households") are disguised and distorted by statistics which lump into that category, not only demographic groups which do NOT exhibit these bad child-rearing outcomes, but also all those homes which are "fatherless" precisely because of the very same factors which down the road affected the children. These factors include: adultery, wife and child abuse; addictions to alcohol, sex, and drugs, other personality dysfunctions; conflict, and plain old abandonment, financial irresponsibility and failure to support (emotionally or financially.) The other primary and telling difference between "fatherless homes" which do and do not have problems is the relative financial stability, educational level, and comfort of the mother.
It is true that a disproportionate number of violent criminals have been shown to have hailed from homes where the biological father was indeed absent at some point, but this ignores that he also was present at some point, and during those periods preceding his abandonment of the family, or the family's flight from him, often left the legacy of his criminality, addiction, abuse, and/or character flaws, as well as his genes. There is a generational dysfunction that is usually ignored by these studies. The absent dad of that violent criminal might have been merely alcoholic, rather than a criminal himself, but he was unlikely to have been an absent Ward Cleaver.
HORN: Why are fathers so important for the well-being of children? The answer is embedded in the larger question of why families are important. The family's importance is nothing short of ensuring the continuity of civilization. The family does this in two ways: first, by propagating the species, and second, by socializing children.
LIZ: Having failed to establish the first premise as true, Wade, you throw out a nonsequitor, a gratuitous plea for reinstatement of the patriarchal "family," which ostensibly is important because fathers are important, because, apparently, if a father is not there, it's not a "family." It's a circular argument: fathers are important because when fathers are there, there is a family (you don't think so, otherwise), and the family is important because (this is a stretch) it is necessary to "propagate the species" and "socialize children."
Well, first off, it's pretty obvious that families (in the Wade Horn sense) are not necessary at all to "propagate the species." Rather, a "family" is what nature creates when a mother bears young, father-presence or not. That leaves us with your argument that the father-headed family is necessary to "socialize children." Obviously, it's not, since MOST single mother-headed households have perfectly well socialized children.Claiming that "most criminals come from fatherless homes" is a far cry from claiming that most "fatherless homes" produce criminals. Clearly, they do not.
It's also well-established that there is plenty of generational dysfunction in male-female two-parent families, but it's of the sort that's more easily disguised under the umbrella of circumstances that mirror "normality" in the society in which this sort of family is considered ideal: e.g. alcoholism, abuse, sex perversion, overeating, secret-keeping.
Your argument goes on to explain why "fatherless" children, presumably being improperly "socialized," are at risk of some sort (you hope) even though research into causation (versus bean-counting) indicates that father-presence or absence in and of itself is not a factor in childrearing outcomes. Father involvement hasn't been shown to have effect to correct the statistics in joint custody situations post-divorce, no matter how high that involvement (in fact, the reverse has been correlated.)
HORN: Proper socialization requires the development of self-control in order to follow the rules of society. Well-socialized children have learned not to strike out at others to get what they want; under-socialized children often have not. Well-socialized children have learned to listen to and obey the directions of legitimate authority figures, such as parents and teachers; under-socialized children often have not. Well-socialized children have learned to cooperate and share with others; under-socialized children many times have not. In short, well-socialized children have developed the ability to self-regulate impulse gratification; under-socialized children often have not.
LIZ: You claim that what's wrong with juvenile delinquents is a lack of proper "socialization, i.e. "self-control." This is a quite pat answer to why we have juvenile criminals. Of course, we could beg the question, and say: well if children turn into juvenile delinquents then they have not been properly socialized by definition, and therefore lack of proper socialization has caused them to become juvenile delinquents, i.e., they are what they are because of what they are. But this doesn't actually work to make a point. Gang members in certain cultures are quite well socialized into their culture; it happens to be one antagonistic to the culture in control, however.
What is the telling factor causing juvenile crime? There are many, not just one. And primary among them, when we look at differences among the various demographic groups comprised in the umbrella of "fatherless" homes, and compare them to "intact" homes, is, not the father, but themother, and not all mothers are alike, or are situated alike.
The singlemost important contribution that a loving father may make to an intact household is to the emotional and financial comfort and happiness of the mother -- and THIS, the mother's personality and situation, has been shown to be the singlemost common common denominator across the board affecting child rearing outcomes. No study has indicated any benefit to the mere presence of the father, where that contribution is factored out. Widowed homes, which typically are without continued post-divorce stress or custody/visitation issues, which are financially more comfortable than never-married or divorced households, which benefit from increased extended family and community support, and in which the mothers have buck-stops-here parental authority, simply do not share these touted "fatherless home" negatives.
HORN: A civil society is totally dependent upon most of its adult citizenry having developed self-control. Absent a significant majority of such well-socialized adults, storekeepers would have to post armed guards in front of every display counter; every woman would live in constant fear of being raped by roaming bands of marauding men; and, children would be largely left to fend for themselves or be exploited for the gratification of their parents.
LIZ: Apparently, in your world, women don't naturally feel protective or loving of their infants -- they only care for their children out of some disciplined sense of "self-control." Or are you implying a natural male lack of parental feelings? To extend your argument, it further would appear that in your world, men must exert learned self-control over themselves in order to suppress a natural drive to gang-rape.
[I thought he was a psychologist. Or is this merely the propagandist's argument ad consequentiam ploy -- disagree with the "father-family values" agenda, and children will starve and women will be gang-raped...?]
Self-control. The something supposedly lacking in the teaching of children in single mother households, according to Horn. Would this be the sort of self-control exhibited by the sires of all those unwed teenage households, most of them adults and most of them involved with or married to other women? Or would this be the sort of self-control exhibited by fathers in many of the divorced households who were wife beaters, alcoholics, cheaters, drug addicts, or spent a few years in jail, and that's why the household is now "fatherless?"
Wade, you imply that there is something about having a man -- any man, so long as he is bio-dad -- being in the family which creates civilisation and self-control. The corollary is that women simply don't have this sort of self-control, civilization, or ability to impart it. This is as ridiculous a notion as it sounds. (And you don't agree with it yourself, below.)
MOST single mother households don't have bad childrearing outcomes. MOST are successful. So, it's not father presence or absence, but the presence or absence of some other factor or factors in SOME of those "fatherless homes" which is key -- not the presence or absence of the father. What are those factors? There are loads to choose from, none of which require the strained sort of argument you have to make in order to "explain" the ostensible importance of the "father factor." Here's the preface to that strained argument:
HORN: Parents socialize children through two mechanisms. Most obviously, children learn through direct tuition reinforced by a combination of rewards and punishments for acceptable and unacceptable behavior. Children are first told how they should behave and then reinforced for following the rules and punished for disobedience to the rules. But children also learn by observing others. Of the two processes, observing others is by far the more important. In fact, most complex human behavior is acquired not through direct instruction, but through observational learning. Children are much more likely to do as a parent does than what the parent says. This is why parents who lie and cheat invariably have children who lie and cheat, despite any direct instruction to the contrary.
LIZ: How true. All of this buildup is simply a reiteration of generally accepted child development theory (although I would argue with the superior placement of "punishment" in the paragraph.) Children learn mostly by modeling themselves after example.
Stating truisms is the best way to pave the way for a con: the best cons mix truth in with false conclusions. Remember that right at the beginning statement of this article was a whopper of a subtle lie: that most violent criminals et al. hail from "fatherless homes," the implication being that there was an absence of a necessary paternal role model. No, they don't hail from "fatherless homes," not if we properly count the numbers to reflect "fatherless" -- as it implies -- as not having that father around during those early and impressionable years. There was indeed a role model of a biological father for part of the time in most of these homes breeding our future criminals, and it was a bad one. And, moreover, most "fatherless" homes do not rear criminals of any sort, violent or otherwise. Do some children require a paternal role model and others not?
The FR movement conveniently describes as "hailing from a fatherless" home, any individual who spent any portion of childhood outside of the traditional patriarchal intact family. In doing so, the FR movement also conveniently gets to leave the impression that "dad's" genes or role modeling or abuse could not possibly have been responsible for any bad trait, genetic or modeled, that has affected the children in these homes. Rather, it was his "absence."
That's ridiculous. The ploy ignores the glaringly obvious: that there likely were some pretty dysfunctional things going on all around, and they likely involved that biological father, which is why the homes are "fatherless" in the first place. And it conveniently ignores all the other factors, from the stress of divorce itself, to the difficulty our social and employment constructs unnecessarily present for women with children, and so forth, which also contribute negatively, but in and of themselves, are irrelevant to father presence or absence. And most of all, it ignoresthe most important factor, and the ONLY one which holds steady through all kinds of studies and groups as affecting childrearing outcomes: the personality, education, situation and overall happiness and comfort of the children's primary caregiver, usually their mother.
HORN: The socialization of children simply does not get done as well when fathers are absent from the home. When fathers are absent, boys often develop conduct problems -- they act out aggressively and sometimes quite violently toward others. Girls also act out when fathers are absent, but in a different way -- they often become sexually promiscuous. In short, the presence of involved fathers is absolutely critical if we are to successfully socialize children.
LIZ: Isn't this a misogynistic load of crap! Widowed homes don't have these childrearing problems. Neither do most other single mother homes. All that build-up and your argument comes right back to the oft-repeated false correlation between negative childrearing outcomes and "fatherless" homes. The correlation is not true except as to a subset group within "fatherless" homes, and in none of them is father presence or absence per se the causative factor of anything. The blathering about "socialization" and "self-control," as nowhere as it goes, is really just the obfuscating precursor to a theory which, in essence, is "a difference in search of a purpose," below:
WADE: There appear to be at least three reasons for this. First, mothers and fathers tend to parent different. Beginning at the birth of a child, mothers tend to be more verbal with their children, whereas fathers are more physical. Mothers also tend to encourage caution, whereas fathers are more challenging of achievement and independence. But most importantly, mothers tend to be more powerful nurturant figures and fathers stronger disciplinarians. Why should this difference in parenting style make such a difference for children?
LIZ: Gender stereotyping? I suppose we are to ignore all the homes in which Daddy is the indulgent parent and Mom is the disciplinarian -- the majority of them! Apparently we also are to ignore that talk about fathers' early contributions just doesn't fly as an argument regarding outcomes in divorced homes, because all those divorced "fatherless homes" you are talking about become "fatherless" on average, well after the infancy of the children. As for the ones that start out that way -- well take a look at the biological fathers. These men certainly are no disciplinarians, not even of themselves. Abusers, maybe. And apparently, we also are to supposed to suspend belief in your earlier hypothesis, above, that lacking appropriate "self-control," the promiscuous unwed teenage mother, being improperly socialized herself, will be "leaving her children to fend for themselves," not exhibiting warm, overly concerned caution.
What fathers are like, and the function they may serve in homes where the fathers are loving, mature, appreciated, and involved -- well that's what these fathers may indeed be and do in these particular homes. But these are the particular fathers they are, and they are in the successful intact homes they are in, precisely because they DO have attributes which fathers from fatherless homes are far more likely to Just Not Have.
Other than having male reproductive facility in common, there is just no reason to assume that the biological sires of children who hail from fatherless homes share character or parenting attributes in common with the men who also have the sort of personalities and functionality which have enabled them to succeed at maintaining a loving intact marriage.
It's more likely that the fathers from "fatherless" homes just don't have the same talent for maintaining a relationship, or a loving marriage. Quite likely they are not as desirable to have around for a number of reasons, if only for the reason that they do not have a satisfactory level of love and respect for the mother in question, and this in turn affects all sorts of other things.And look at how you completely denigrate and ignore differences in women: heck, they're all the same, whether a 15-year-old teenage girl with an 8th grade education or a divorced 40-year-old college professor.
HORN: We used to believe that families socialize children best when parents demonstrate high levels of love and relatively low levels of control. Research has shown, however, that when children are reared with high levels of warmth and low levels of control there are very predictable results -- they act-out, both aggressively and sexually. In contrast to these 1960's ideas of how to parent children, research has consistently shown that families socialize children best when they use a combination of nurturance and control.
LIZ: On the contrary: we have known for years that the best parent is one who is both loving and authoritative (that's authoritative, not authoritarian.) Even the fleeting trend of "permissive parenting" never actually was about parents relinquishing "control" or letting their households run amuck. Convenient as it has been for a few decades now to blame that straw man for parenting "failures" (it was supposedly the reason for the hippy generation), it never actually caught on with any widespread popularity, particularly among homes with less education and lower socioeconomic status. These homes, which were least likely to have adopted the 1960s "permissive parenting" pseudo-trend (largely a hallmark of the intellectual and financial elite), still yielded the least successful childrearing outcomes.
One of the reasons for negative child-rearing outcomes in divorced homes in which there is something other than sole authority in the custodial parent, e.g. the variety of joint custody "solutions," is precisely that at every turn, the authority of the head of the children's household IS in fact undermined. That is one reason widowed homes, and homes in which one parent is completely absent actually do so much BETTER than every situation of shared, joint, split, switched, and otherwise flipflopped and mixed-up custody.
Additionally, and debunking theories steeped in the presumption of male "discipline" in intact homes, Shere Hite has written extensively on how women as parents are authoritatively undermined in the patriarchal system such that where two parents are present, the constant subtle messages of second class woman status along with father-figure exaltation ultimately (by adolescence) diminish the mother's authority in the eyes of children of both sexes. This is an artificially-created "problem" with mother-parenting. Introduce a higher boss, and then blame her for not "being authoritative" or able to command adequate respect.
By contrast, the children of women who are on their own as parents, and LEFT alone -- those who have no divorce stress or custody hassles undermining authority, and no financial problems or social pariah status or social worker meddling (compare widowed mothers versus welfare mothers versus struggling working single mother with young children) -- do just fine. These mothers are in fact authoritative as well as loving. In fact, in these households, the child rearingoutcomes are comparable to those from intact homes. [Also see liznotes on the problems with joint custody.]
Even with the patriarchal systemic status boost, it remains purely a myth that fathers are the disciplinarians in most households. Studies of parents' interactions and roles in intact households instead indicate that most time spent by fathers with their children is in the areas of play, and in most households, the modeling of self-control, the primary nurturing AND the discipline all are tasks befalling the primary caregiver -- most of the time, the mother.
So why do violent inner city boys hailing from those "fatherless" homes appear to exhibit lack of socialization? It's not because they don't have the half hour evening at home of father around or the paternal "discipline" (as the term is misused to mean an occasional whop with a belt.) It's because they are in fact "socialized" quite well, actually, into a culture that doesn't fit in with our civilized notions, and into an outside surrounding world of poverty, drugs (blame the war on drugs for a lot of this), gangs and violence.
Is this new, stemming from the last three decades of feminism? Heck no. Take a look at what we were "socializing" in the inner cities quite similarly earlier in this century during Prohibition.
As for girls' "acting out" sexually (not boys -- or is that not a problem?): how is this really different from the obsessing over coupling we as a culture continually have encouraged in young girls vis a vis their appearance, their popularity, and their "success" with the opposite sex? This is nothing new. Girls have forever in our culture sought attention from boys -- the patriarchal culture demands it, and measures girls' worth by their sexual attractiveness, which in turn is measured by numbers of "conquests." Girls are not engaging in sex for love and attention -- they are engaging in sex because it's become pervasively "out there" in the culture. There are many reasons for that, including a loosening of sexual attitudes generally, and the pervasive sexual messages in the media on television, etc. But it's the same psychological dynamics and behaviors simply carried to a somewhat higher degree. The pregnancies?
Young teenage girls who both eschew marriage and continue their pregnancies are not looking for male love, but babies, and possibly a rite of passage into an adult world that otherwise holds little in the way of potential milestones and achievements for them. They are choosing to not terminate their pregnancies. And according to the Guttmacher Institute, MOST (71%) of unwed "teenage" pregnancies involve males who are not teenagers at all, but men over the age of majority, so perhaps we ought to look harder at male adult, not girl child behaviors here.
Most odd, is that most of the same pro-patriarchy politicos and propagandists who point to teenage pregnancies as a peculiar problem stemming from "fatherlessness" -- a difficult and complex concept to define, let alone solve as a "problem" -- if indeed it is one at all -- are against the simple solution: against sex education, contraceptives, and abortion. The problem for these men isn't the emotional well-being of teenage girls at all. It's the age-old abhorrence of the sexual freedom of women. It's the perception of their OWN lack of control, which is threatening to them.
There are fewer teenage girls having babies today (1998) than there were forty years ago (1958.) The difference is that in 1958 they were married. Were teenage girls in the 1950s getting married so young because they were obsessively looking for father-love they didn't get in their intact homes?
HORN: Given that mothers tend toward nurturance and fathers toward control, children reared in single mother households are likely to experience high levels of warmth, but low control. Conversely, children reared in single father households are likely to be exposed to lower levels of warmth and higher control. Either way, socialization does not go as well compared to when children experience both high warmth and moderately high control.
LIZ: You not only spout a false stereotype here, but then speculate from it. Women soft and sweet and warm, fathers sensible and objective and in control. The speculation is neither true nor rational. Your attempt to assign to women all that is weak and hesitant, and to men all that is strong and brave, breeds an inconsistency and oversimplification in your thesis. As you know yourself, where control is tight, children are LESS likely to develop an internal sense of self-control. And high control is the essence of overtly discouraging risk-taking and exerting undue amounts of caution. Depending upon balance and degree, a controlling parent can cultivate either effect in children: fear and underachieving, or reckless irresponsibility. So which is it. Neither. It's not this simple at all. This is all gender-biased poppycock.
Men and women are equally likely to have either kind of personality, controlling or nurturing, or a combination of both or a lack of both, and the childrearing outcome also depends upon the innate temperament of the child. Aside from all this, and back to the stereotyping: where would we ever be able to observe and compare mothers' and fathers' parenting styles side by side under similar circumstances except in the context of an intact home. (See Shere Hite, above.) There indeed may be some observable reversion to expected role-playing in most intact homes, where male and female parents tend to fall into artificially heightened socially expected gender roles. But, then again, how do we explain the persistence of the father = disciplinarian myth?
And, this still says nothing at all about single parent homes. In fact, a study released last summer (1997) indicated that children reared in sole single mother households compare favorably to children reared in intact homes, and, interestingly, FAR better than children reared in single father homes and other familial arrangements.
HORN: The point here is not to denigrate the parenting style of either mothers or fathers. But contrary to the claims of some, gender differences in parental behavior do not need to be minimized for parents to raise well-adjusted and well-socialized children. Indeed, what children need to grow up to become well-adjusted adults is the combination of parenting styles that mothers and fathers provide.
LIZ: Nonsense. These parenting "gender differences" are myth in the first place. And the point is precisely to denigrate the parenting styles of "women," and render them -- the natural parent of children -- artificially incapable of rearing their own young sans male leadership.
The motivation for this blather really isn't that fathers are needed; it's that patriarchists perceive fathers as needing a special status to be accorded within a patriarchal family system, including the right to control women's reproductive capabilities and lives. (See, e.g. Daniel Amneus's The War Against Patriarchy. ) It's not about children, but about some men's fears that their pro-male, comfortably organized world is crumbling. (Ibid.) Any excuse which sounds more altruistic and benign, however, such as the well-being of children, or "society" (!) and less like what it really is, an attempt to fulfill the needs and wants of the adult men in question, will do as ostensible rationale.
HORN: The second reason why fathers are so critical in the socialization of children is that children -- and boys in particular -- learn to keep their aggressive impulses in check through the observation of a male figure in the home who consistently and regularly controls himself. It is through a boy's observation of the way his father deals with frustration, anger and sadness that boys learn how men cope with such emotions. It is also through a boy's observation of the way his father treats the boy's mother that he learns how to treat women. If the father treats the mother with respect and dignity, than it is likely that his son will grow up to treat women with dignity and respect. If the father treats the mother with disdain and cruelty, then -- unfortunately -- his son is likely to grow up to do the same.
LIZ: Well, dang if this doesn't shoot your entire thesis! So if the father treats the mother with disdain and cruelty... a "fatherless" home would be better, would it not? And women cannot be aggressive, do not ever have anger to be controlled, and cannot role model human (not gender-specific) emotions and reactions?
Bunk. It's the primary parent whose behavior is that primarily observed by the children, balancing all the little tedious chores of the day, organizing, planning, doing, and so forth. Your comments about the significance of role modeling in and of themselves are unassailable. But self-control is hardly a genderized trait that requires role modeling by a specific gender. And peppering a false argument with true statements about child development does not render misogyny more credible and less despicable.
No, this is woman-defamation surfacing: those hussy single mothers, wild and wanton, who have no self-control; the never-married whore who has child out-of-wedlock; the hot-to-trot divorcee; the sweet, soft-spoken, helpless-little-woman mother, etc. The fathers rights arguments don't have to make sense. They only need repeat the buzz-words and phrases often enough to leave the intended impression. It's part and parcel of the pervasive backlash theme that women are out of control, and we need to clamp down on them and clip their wings via traditional patriarchy, marry them off where they can be properly "husbanded."
[And note the classic progression of Horn's claims here: from "children pay a price" to "fathers are important" to "fathers are critical" to "fathers are absolutely critical." Propaganda.]
Wade, according to your comments in your June 1998 Father's Day newspaper essay, you would agree with me that paternal role modeling simply cannot be duplicated via joint custody and visitation schemes post-divorce, or other schemes of sometime father presence. It's all about intact homes. And GOOD fathers; not just any fathers.
Even so, it bears pointing out the inherent contradictions in the male role modeling argument: nothing about it explains the insistence that fatherNESS requires biological paternity; only (we might surmise) a permanent and consistent from-the-beginning father-figure presence. (Where this is an adoptive father or step-father, however, the lesson will be undermined by the irregular, conflicting and confusing occasional presence of the biological father.)
Regardless of the difficulties, touting continuing marriage to the bio-dad come-hell-or-high-water just makes absolutely no sense where that biological father is NOT an admirable role model, does not comport himself appropriately, does not love and respect the children's mother, or has other dysfunctions. And encouraging hissometime presence in an unwed or divorce situation simply does not achieve this particular role modeling.
Ignored through all of the father-necessary arguments is any recognition that failure of the father in question to be the sort of father you describe as "critical" to a child's well-being is a primary reason for the existence of the "fatherless homes" in the first place.
HORN: Finally, for girls, fathers are critical for learning mastery of their sexuality. Indeed, one of the predictable results of father absence for girls is early and promiscuous sexual activity. In contrast, if a girl experiences the love of a father who places her well-being above his own and who acts as a natural protector, than the girl is likely to delay sexual relations until she finds such a man herself. If she is denied such fatherly love, then the girl is likely to try to seek it elsewhere -- often inappropriately and often at very young ages.
LIZ: What unbelievable woman-denigrating arrogance! Boys must have men to learn to be men, but young women also must have men to learn how to be women, rather than older women? This obnoxious claim -- that absent father guidance, girls will be prematurely sexual -- falls apart completely when one looks at the ages of marriage in "intact family times." Delayed sexual relations in the patriarchal society? Nope. Take a look at the relative ages of marriages of women in the most patriarchal familial systems, and the average ages of marriages in the past in the United States.
And, of course, this men-train-girl's sexuality thesis glosses over the issue of fathers who are no longer in "fatherless homes" precisely because they are just not the sort of men who will provide healthy other-centered parenting, and likely have quite harmful and damaging outlooks and attitudes about women and women's sexuality. There's a big "if" in there: "if a girl experiences..." We are, it appears to ignore the significant portion of not-there fathers, perhaps the majority of absent fathers, who are not because they are the cheaters, the pornography users, the abusers, the denigrators and degraders, and the ones who lacked respect and love for the child's mother. No girl's budding sexuality needs to be influenced by this. [liznote]
HORN: Given this understanding of what happens in individual families when fathers are absent due to divorce or abandonment, what should we expect as a society when father absence becomes, not the exception, but the norm? Answer: increasing violence and increasing sexual acting-out. That is precisely what we are seeing.
Children are the fastest growing segment of the criminal population in the United States. Between 1982 and 1991, the rate juveniles were arrested for murder increased 93 percent, for aggravated assault 72 percent, for forcible rape 24 percent and for car theft 97 percent. And although homicide rates have increased for all ages, those for teenagers have increased more rapidly than those of adults.
LIZ: Take a look at the "war on drugs" and its effects here, as well as shifts in the economy, the rise in the population, the rise of media violence and pornography since the inception of television and later, television itself, video games, the relative decrease in per capita student spending on academics in the schools, and the increase in gun ownership and availability. In fact, in the last thirty years in the United States we also haven't had a war to speak of, something which tends to focus young men on getting more serious about their responsibilities, their studies and their futures. Correlation is not causation. (By the way, what about all the children raised by their mothers alone during all those periods in history in which men were off to war, at sea, trapping in the frontier wilds, emigrated to another country...?) [liznote]
HORN: We also know that each and every day: 7,700 teenagers become sexually active; 1,100 teenagers have abortions; 600 teenagers get syphilis or gonorrhea; 2,500 children are born out of wedlock; and 6 teenagers commit suicide.
LIZ: And how many children get tuberculosis or rickets, drop out of school at age 12 or 13 (as in past decades), or attend at least some college, compared with previous decades? There were more teenage pregnancies in past decades -- along with younger marriages -- and far fewer girls who attended college! Floating numbers and "problems" completely out of context is ridiculous.The problem is the father's rightster perception of "fatherless homes." On balance, does society have more problems than in the past? It all depends upon what one chooses to focus, what one personally thinks is important when comparing uncomparable "ills," and the weight one chooses to accord value-wise to the factors and circumstances arbitrarily focused on.
Which is worse: more teenage girls having unwed sex, or more teenage girls getting married, having babies and not getting educated? 600 cases of syphillis or gonorrhea, curable with penicillin, or 6000 cases of polio, incurable? Some young men (often homosexual boys, by the way, shamed and devasted by patriarchal "family values" attitudes) committing suicide, or young men proudly enlisting in (or sent off by old men to) a war which kills or maims them?
HORN: Father absence may not be the sole cause of each of these social ills -- but it certainly makes each one worse. Americans need to remember the important work that fathers do in helping to rear children successfully. We must resolve to restore the institution of good and responsible fatherhood in America. The well-being of our children -- and ultimately our nation -- depends upon us rediscovering the importance of being father.
Wade F. Horn, Ph.D., is director of The National Fatherhood Initiative.
I don't think so, Wade. "Father-absence" may not only not be the sole cause of "social ills"; it's likely not the cause of any social ills at all. If it's anything; if it's even about "social ills" at all, it is as a symptom, versus an arbitrary definition of what is "social wellness," i.e. "normal."
"The institution of good and responsible fatherhood in America" is what yielded centuries of woman-slavery, denied women the right to autonomy over their very bodies and lives, and prevented or restricted women from being educated, from participating in the economy, from being able to support themselves, from owning property, and from having the right to vote.
The "fatherhood movement" around the world now -- and it is a trend, usually couched in religious fundamentalist rubric --can be seen carried to its logical ends in the Taliban in Afghanistan, in the Middle East, and in other horrid, tyrranical and repressive regimes that are rising to power.
How far back, and to which decade shall we return to in the United States in forcing women as individuals once again to kowtow to the dictates of "society" -- men -- regarding when they may have sex, how they may use their own bodies, and how they may live their lives, all for a theory of social welfare?
It's easy to say (as these "fathers" like to say) that all the ills of the brief last three decades are attributable to "fatherlessness" and feminism. Men such as yourself, Horn, with pleasant-sounding, but specious pap, fuel the fires of fundamentalist tyrants. This is an old refrain, from Old Testament Biblical days onward. Change hardly is going to happen instantaneously such that all the pieces fit perfectly at once, and change always has some measure of discomfort. It's not a very smart idea to judge a pudding before it's finished, is it.
And lawyers and legislators take note: these theories do not support post-divorce sometime "fathering." The statistics freely comprise and decry those households as "fatherless." This is all about (see HORN, second paragraph, above) the importance of FAMILIES (as defined to include the father.)
What's this stuff really all about? Behind this movement is not just divorce reform or "getting fathers involved," as the ostensibly harmless, even beneficent, but farcical rhetoric of the National Fatherhood Initiative puts it.. It's a first step in an agenda to get those women back under "control." A patriarchal backlash.
Consider this: even if everything Horn and his ilk claim about intact homes were true, it still wouldn't present a viable argument. This is a "problem" without an acceptable solution. We also could violate individual rights and autonomy in all kinds of nasty and intrusive ways in order to create a society which appears more seemly, neat, utopian, homogeneous, orderly.
We could make the argument that turning another segment of the population, e.g. "blacks," back into slaves would enhance production and the economy (as that argument was made in the old south) and the standard of living for everyone else. We could make an argument for castration of any male caught having sex out of wedlock -- now THAT would solve some of the fatherless family problem, wouldn't it. Similarly, we could pass laws preventing women from exiting marriages, punishing adultery, requiring father custody or control of households. (And if these didn't accomplish a thing for the welfare of children, well at least they would please some self-and-other-controlling men, wouldn't they.) We could pass all manner of oppressive and draconian laws which would prevent and eliminate all kinds of perceived social "ills" and unseemliness. How about sterilizing lesbians? Some of this fathers-rights-anti-woman agenda is succeeding because of the willingness of most to simply presume as a belief that into which they have been inculcated in this father-loving society since childhood: the necessity of having a "father." All we need is a claimed compelling reason, specious or otherwise, to trample again on women's lives, such as a purported "need" of children for two parents, one of each sex.
Most of us have fathers; most of us adore our daddies. But that's not proof of a thing. When it's about willingness to sacrifice one individual's welfare for the sake of another's, the crucial threshhold questions mustbe examined and answered first. In general, with regard to father's rights rhetoric, that has not been done. It makes for great political soundbites.
By contrast, the position that children may NOT "need" two parents, and that this really may be all about what MEN need, elicits high emotion and shocked horror. It is just too upsetting a thought for many to contemplate -- oh my, who would posit such a terrible idea, I love MY daddy, etc. That children "need" two parents, one of each sex, has been presumed, and it's the reason why over the past few years, many of the fathers rights groups have added "children" into the names of their organizations. Being fooled by that is not good scholarship and it's not intelligent.
But to the point: if "fatherlessness" is a problem, then how is it supposed to be cured?With the feel-good prattle of the National Fatherhood Initiative et al. giving lipservice to ineffectual programs, child support collections and such things as the innocuous-sounding "working with men to get them 're-involved' in 'broken homes?' "
Please. Traditionally, patriarchy has cured "fatherlessness" with restrictions (not placed on men) regarding on how women may live their adult lives, and use their very own bodies. This is, when all is said and done, what is implied to follow the yammering about the "problem" of "fatherlessness." Next come the solutions.
First are the "step ones," such as restrictions on divorce, requirements that women name fathers on birth certificates or name their children after the men, the imposition of the accutrements of marriage and "normal family structure" onto the families created by women out of wedlock. After that come the "step twos," a la Father's Manifesto, that women and women's sexuality further be controlled, restricted, and reined in again in all kinds of other ways, legal and social: from restricting entry into jobs, to ending their suffrage, eliminating their right to own and manage property, and otherwise going back the panoply of historical measures that traditionally have been used to "encourage" women to get into marriages and remain married. Pandering to Judaic and Christian religious notions -- completely inappropriate as a basis for law in the United States -- also plays a major role here, as these religions essentially are about the exaltation of "fatherhood" and patriarchy, and originally came about for the purpose of institutionalizing this social ordering scheme.
Fathers are not in the home? Those who are concerned about this, and think it important, should work on making living with men more attractive to women. Obviously, some marriages succeed, and I doubt that many of those in this age of readily available divorce are enduring merely out of altruistic misery and abstract social commitment on the part of the persons in them.
A little cessation of the silly and counterproductive talk about how fathers "parent differently," are "important," are the "authoritative" ones, are the "spiritual leaders," and are "critical" to rearing children, and a little more talk about how men ought to get off that high horse, role up their sleeves, cut the superiority drivel, and pitch in with the housework, might go a lot further toward restoring marriage as a viable and enduring institution. Sorry, guys: your way didn't work for the majority of the population, and the clock is just not going back.
liz
Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS)
Blogger Labels: National,Initiative,Misogynistic,Agenda,Also,article,Silver,Rights,Wade,Horn,Importance,Father,text,Despite,wisdom,children,data,Violent,America,prison,treatment,adolescents,victims,Research,difference,Moreover,period,paragraph,argument,MOST,problems,outcome,classification,statistics,category,road,adultery,wife,abandonment,failure,legacy,addiction,Ward,Cleaver,civilization,species,premise,plea,reinstatement,Rather,nature,male,parent,umbrella,perversion,absence,factor,involvement,custody,fact,Proper,development,self,rules,figures,times,impulse,gratification,definition,Gang,culture,crime,contribution,situation,citizenry,Absent,woman,world,feelings,ploy,drug,corollary,notion,SOME,Here,preface,Parents,tuition,combination,rewards,behavior,disobedience,human,instruction,buildup,reiteration,theory,placement,punishment,example,truth,Remember,statement,whopper,implication,role,numbers,movement,portion,trait,employment,education,Girls,Neither,correlation,subset,precursor,essence,purpose,achievement,independence,Gender,Daddy,disciplinarian,contributions,infancy,Abusers,belief,hypothesis,Just,marriage,talent,relationship,Quite,girl,college,professor,results,ideas,trend,Convenient,generation,status,hallmark,BETTER,presumption,Shere,Hite,system,messages,exaltation,adolescence,Introduce,LEFT,pariah,worker,welfare,myth,interactions,tasks,notions,violence,Heck,Take,Prohibition,appearance,attention,demands,measures,worth,television,degree,Young,babies,rite,Guttmacher,Institute,teenagers,concept,solution,abhorrence,freedom,perception,Given,Either,Women,speculation,inconsistency,oversimplification,thesis,poppycock,temperament,Aside,context,reversion,persistence,arrangements,Nonsense,leadership,motivation,blather,Daniel,Amneus,Against,Patriarchy,fears,Ibid,needs,rationale,observation,frustration,Bunk,comments,significance,defamation,wedlock,arguments,words,backlash,theme,progression,Propaganda,June,newspaper,essay,insistence,Where,lesson,hell,recognition,existence,places,protector,arrogance,guidance,Nope,exception,norm,Answer,segment,population,theft,homicide,rates,inception,student,ownership,haven,responsibilities,history,frontier,wilds,accord,cases,Americans,institution,nation,director,symptom,autonomy,ends,Taliban,Afghanistan,Middle,East,individuals,Testament,Biblical,Change,discomfort,Behind,rhetoric,Consider,production,manner,emotion,horror,scholarship,prattle,lipservice,restrictions,requirements,imposition,Manifesto,Judaic,Christian,basis,plays,misery,commitment,persons,cessation,leaders,horse,drivel,Sorry,clock,Parental,Alienation,Syndrome,fathers,murderers,inmates,outcomes,percentages,misrepresentations,factors,addictions,periods,flaws,situations,teachers,members,cultures,differences,storekeepers,bands,infants,addicts,mechanisms,punishments,truisms,conclusions,disciplinarians,failures,solutions,theories,roles,areas,gangs,conquests,attitudes,achievements,impulses,emotions,reactions,statements,contradictions,marriages,systems,glosses,users,regimes,tyrants,pieces,lawyers,organizations,collections,certificates,religions,liznotes,males,suicide,itself,demographic,drugs,dysfunctions,genes,generational,dysfunction,himself,patriarchal,causation,socialization,doesn,singlemost,visitation,adults,fend,rape,sires,cheaters,caregiver,three,ones,herself,reproductive,nurturance,decades,feminism,sexual,behaviors,pregnancies,didn,depends,pornography,liznote,gonorrhea,fundamentalist,wouldn
