Majority of Child Abusers Are MOMS, single parents, poor parents, etc.
SKIP TO FIRST POST FOR STUDY
THIS IS A SUMMARY OF CHILD ABUSE FINDINGS:
The latest periodic study of child abuse mandated by the Congress of the United States has made the following findings:
The highest incidences of child abuse and/or neglect were seen in these categories:
Black families
Non-disabled children
Non-working parents
Low socioeconomic status households
Single parents with a cohabiting partner
Families with 4 or more children
Biological parents
Females
Perpetrator's alcohol use, drug use, and mental illness:
overall:
alcohol/drug use equal (11%)
mental illness (7%)
physical/mental abuse:
alcohol more than drug use
emotional neglect:
drug use
Race/ethnicity.
In
nearly all cases, the rates of maltreatment for Black children were
significantly higher than those for White and Hispanic children.
Disability.
children
with confirmed disabilities had significantly lower rates of physical
abuse and of moderate harm from maltreatment, but they had significantly
higher rates of emotional neglect and of serious injury or harm.
Parents’
employment.
the incidence of maltreatment and of all severities of
injury or harm was higher for children with no parent in the labor force
and those with an unemployed parent and lowest for those with employed
parents.
Socioeconomic status.
Children in low socioeconomic
status households had significantly higher rates of maltreatment in all
categories and across both definitional standards. They experienced some
type of maltreatment at more than 5 times the rate of other children;
they were more than 3 times as likely to be abused and about 7 times as
likely to be neglected.
Family structure and living
arrangement.
Children living with their married biological parents
universally had the lowest rate, whereas those living with a single
parent who had a cohabiting partner in the household had the highest
rate in all maltreatment categories.
those whose single parent
had a live-in partner had more than 8 times the rate of maltreatment
overall, over 10 times the rate of abuse, and nearly 8 times the rate of
neglect.
the incidence of maltreatment and levels of harm
increased since the NIS–3 for children living with one parent but
decreased for those living with two parents.
Family size.
the
incidence rates were highest for children in the largest families
(those with 4 or more children), intermediate for “only” children and
those in households with 3 children, and lowest for children in families
with two children.
the incidence rates for children in the
largest households were more than twice the rates for children in
households with 2 children.
Perpetrator’s relationship to the
child.
(81%) were maltreated by their biological parents.
The
pattern was distinctly different for sexual abuse. More than two-fifths
(42%) of the sexually abused children were sexually abused by someone
other than a parent (whether biological or nonbiological) or a parent’s
partner,
A physically abused child was more likely to sustain a
serious injury when the abuser was not a parent.
Perpetrator’s
sex.
68% of the maltreated children were maltreated by a female,
whereas 48% were maltreated by a male.
male perpetrators were
more common for children maltreated by nonbiological parents or parents’
partners (64%) or by other persons (75%).
The prevalence of
male perpetrators was strongest in the category of sexual abuse, where
87% of children were abused by a male compared to only 11% by a female.
Perpetrator’s
alcohol use, drug use, and mental illness.
Perpetrator’s alcohol use
and drug use were approximately equivalent factors in Harm Standard
maltreatment, each applying to 11% of the countable children, while
mental illness was a factor in the maltreatment of 7% of the children.
Alcohol
use was most involved in emotional abuse (22% of the children), while
drug use was most involved in emotional neglect (21% of the children).
The perpetrator’s mental illness was most often cited as a factor in
emotional abuse (17% of the children).
SEE ORIGINAL POST FOR SUMMARY
New Study: Married Biological Parents Best
A new government study just
came out that looks at child abuse.
Question: What kind of family
structure best protects children from child abuse?
Answer: Married
biological parents.
All the other family structures
studied (which does not include same-sex parent families probably
because these are such a small part of the population), but does
include solo parents, other married parents (remarried primarily),
single parents living with a partner, cohabiting parents, and no
parents.
The big gap is between the intact married biological family
and every other family form. Children living with both their mom and
dad united by marriage have one-third the rate of serious child abuse,
compared to children in any other family structure.
http://nomblog.com/723/
Fourth National Incidence Study
of Child Abuse
and Neglect (NIS–4)
Report to Congress
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
AND HUMAN SERVICES
Following are excerpts from the study. To read the study in it's entirety, please use the link provided at the end of this document.
Race/ethnicity. Unlike previous NIS cycles, the NIS–4 found strong and pervasive race differences in the incidence of maltreatment. In nearly all cases, the rates of maltreatment for Black children were significantly higher than those for White and Hispanic children.
Disability. The
NIS–4
is the first NIS cycle to examine the relationship between the
incidence of maltreatment and children’s disability status. Under the
Harm Standard, children with
confirmed disabilities had significantly
lower rates of physical abuse and of moderate harm from maltreatment,
but they had significantly higher rates of emotional neglect and of
serious injury or harm.
Parents’ employment. Unemployed
parents were
those described as unemployed or laid off but looking for work
either currently (at the time of maltreatment) or at any time during the
past year. Employed parents were those who had steady full-or part-time
work, with no reported unemployment currently or in the previous year.
Parents who were not in the labor force were not employed or actively
looking for work. These included parents who were retired, disabled,
homemakers, receiving Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), on
maternity leave, in the hospital, or in jail. Under both definitional
standards, the incidence of
maltreatment and of all severities of injury
or harm was higher for children with no parent in the labor force and
those with an unemployed parent and lowest for those with employed
parents. Compared to children with employed parents, those with
no
parent in the labor force had 2 to 3 times the rate of maltreatment
overall, about 2 times the rate of abuse, and 3 or more times the rate
of neglect. Children with unemployed parents had 2 to 3 times higher
rates of neglect than those with employed parents.
Socioeconomic status.
Low socioeconomic status households were those in the bottom
tier on
any indicator: household income below $15,000 a year, parents’ highest
education level less than high school, or any member of the household a
participant in a poverty program, such as TANF, food stamps, public
housing, energy assistance, or subsidized school meals. Children in low
socioeconomic status households had significantly higher rates of
maltreatment in all categories and across both definitional standards.
They experienced some type of maltreatment at more than 5 times the rate
of other children; they were more than 3 times as likely to be abused
and about 7 times as likely to be neglected.
Family structure and living
arrangement. Family structure reflects the number of
parents in the household and their relationship to the child; living
arrangement reflects their marital or cohabitation status. Considering
both factors, the NIS–4 classified children into six categories: living
with two married biological parents, living with other married parents
(e.g., step-parent, adoptive parent), living with two unmarried parents,
living with one parent who had an unmarried partner in the household,
living with one parent who had no partner in the household, and
living with no parent. The groups differed in rates of every
maltreatment category and across both definitional standards. Children
living with their married biological parents universally had the lowest
rate, whereas those living with a single parent who had a cohabiting
partner in the household had the highest rate in all maltreatment
categories. Compared to children living with married biological
parents, those whose single parent
had a live-in partner had more than 8
times the rate of maltreatment overall, over 10 times the rate of
abuse, and nearly 8 times the rate of neglect. Comparable data
were
available to assess changes since the NIS–3 in maltreatment rates
for two groups of children: those living with two parents and those
living with one parent. In nearly all categories, the incidence of
maltreatment and levels of harm increased since the NIS–3 for children
living with one parent but decreased for those living with two parents.
The largest rate increase for children with one parent was in
Endangerment Standard neglect (58% higher in NIS–4 than in NIS–3),
especially the specific category of emotional neglect (a 194% increase).
The largest decrease for children living with two parents occurred in
the rate of Harm Standard sexual abuse, which declined by 61% from its
level at the time of the NIS–3.
Family size. The
incidence of maltreatment was related to the number of dependent
children in the family, in Harm Standard categories of overall
maltreatment and all neglect and in Endangerment Standard maltreatment,
abuse, neglect, and in physical and emotional maltreatment, both abuse
and neglect. The general pattern was nonlinear: the incidence rates were
highest for children in the largest families (those with 4 or more
children), intermediate for “only” children and those in households with
3 children, and lowest for children in families with two children. The
largest differences occurred in the Endangerment Standard maltreatment
rates, especially for the neglect categories, where the incidence rates
for children in the largest households were more than twice the rates
for children in households with 2 children.
Perpetrator’s relationship to
the child. The
majority of all children countable under
the Harm Standard (81%) were
maltreated by their biological parents.
This held true both for the abused children (64% were abused by
biological parents) and for those neglected (92% were neglected by
biological parents). Biological parents were the most closely related
perpetrators for 71% of physically abused children and for 73% of
emotionally abused children. The
pattern was distinctly different for
sexual abuse. More than two-fifths (42%) of the sexually abused children
were sexually abused by someone other than a parent (whether biological
or nonbiological) or a parent’s partner, whereas just over
one-third (36%) were sexually abused by a biological parent. In
addition, severity of harm from physical abuse varied by the
perpetrator’s relationship to the child. A physically abused child was
more likely to sustain a serious injury when the abuser was not a
parent.
Perpetrator’s
sex. Children were somewhat more likely to be maltreated
by female
perpetrators than by males: 68% of
the maltreated children were
maltreated by a female, whereas 48% were maltreated by a male. (Some
children were maltreated by both.) Of children maltreated by biological
parents, mothers maltreated the majority (75%) whereas fathers
maltreated a sizable minority (43%). In contrast, male perpetrators were
more common for children maltreated by nonbiological parents or
parents’ partners (64%) or by other persons (75%). The
predominant sex
of perpetrators of abuse was different from that of neglect. Female
perpetrators were more often responsible for neglect (86% of children
neglected by females versus 38% by males). This finding is congruent
with the fact that mothers (biological or other) tend to be the primary
caretakers and are the primary persons held accountable for any
omissions and/or failings in caretaking. In contrast, males more
often were abusers (62% of children were abused by males versus 41% by
females). The prevalence of male
perpetrators was strongest in the
category of sexual abuse, where 87% of children were abused by a male
compared to only 11% by a female. Among all abused children,
those
abused by their biological parents were about equally likely to have
been abused by mothers as by fathers (51% and 54%, respectively), but
those abused by nonbiological parents or parents’ partners, or by other,
perpetrators were much more likely to be abused by males (74% or
more by males versus 26% or less by females).
Perpetrator’s alcohol use,
drug use, and mental illness. CPS investigators and NIS–4
sentinels indicated whether they considered these issues to be factors
in the child’s maltreatment. Perpetrator’s
alcohol use and drug use were
approximately equivalent factors in Harm Standard maltreatment, each
applying to 11% of the countable children, while mental illness was a
factor in the maltreatment of 7% of the children. Perpetrator’s
alcohol
use was slightly more often implicated in abuse situations than drug use
(13% versus 10%), largely because alcohol was more frequently involved
in physical abuse and emotional abuse. Alcohol use was most involved in
emotional abuse (22% of the children), while drug use was most involved
in emotional neglect (21% of the children). The perpetrator’s mental
illness was most often cited as a factor in emotional abuse (17% of the
children). All three factors were more often involved in
maltreatment
when the perpetrator was a biological parent.
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/opre/abuse_neglect/natl_incid/index.html
I'll summarize this and edit the first post to make it easier to read.
I completely understand that. It makes one wonder how much abuse goes unreported, and what categories it would fall into, or if it would change the stats in any of the posted categories.
Quoting RmeWifey01:I completely understand that. It makes one wonder how much abuse goes unreported, and what categories it would fall into, or if it would change the stats in any of the posted categories.
Thank-you for reading this. I summarized it even further, I hope some will read the newest version, lol.
Quoting iluv2meow:teenagers still should not have babies!
LMAO!!!!!!!!!
Check out these Tasty Treats from The Stir's partners:
Ashley's Husband Made it Home From a Deployment in Iraq - And Then Tragedy Struck
- futureshock
on Jun. 14, 2010 at 12:32 PM