The Child Abuse Industry
In her latest Newman Weekly, Muriel Newman takes to task those supporting the daft notion of licensing parents.
Muriel quotes academic Stephen Baskerville from his "Human Events" article;
How the Government Creates Child Abuse
“the real scandal is the armies of officials who have been allowed to acquire - using taxpayers' dollars - a vested interest in abused children. Devising child abuse programs makes us all feel good, but there is no evidence they make the slightest difference. In fact, they probably make the problem worse.
Child abuse is largely a product of the feminist-dominated family law and social work industries. It is a textbook example of the government creating a problem for itself to solve. Child abuse is entirely preventable. A few decades ago, there was no child abuse epidemic; it grew up with the welfare system and the divorce revolution. It continues because of entrenched interests who are employed pretending to combat it”
Muriel quotes academic Stephen Baskerville from his "Human Events" article;
How the Government Creates Child Abuse
“the real scandal is the armies of officials who have been allowed to acquire - using taxpayers' dollars - a vested interest in abused children. Devising child abuse programs makes us all feel good, but there is no evidence they make the slightest difference. In fact, they probably make the problem worse.
Child abuse is largely a product of the feminist-dominated family law and social work industries. It is a textbook example of the government creating a problem for itself to solve. Child abuse is entirely preventable. A few decades ago, there was no child abuse epidemic; it grew up with the welfare system and the divorce revolution. It continues because of entrenched interests who are employed pretending to combat it”
posted by Trevor Loudon at
9/24/2006 12:49:00 PM
1 Comments:
"Child abuse is largely a product of the feminist-dominated family law and social work industries. It is a textbook example of the government creating a problem for itself to solve."
I think this is being overly simplistic. If the article is trying to say that more behaviour that was previously unnoticed or not considered abuse is now qualifying then that is a change of definition rather than an increase in abuse. The factors that lead to the choice to abuse a child (by whatever definition one uses) are varied but I very much doubt that if the government decided not to take any further interest in the matter the rate of actual (as opposed to recorded) abuse would drop.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home