Prevention of child abduction by Polish mother.

thanks for your prayers. My husband hit me once or twice and shouted at me alot, so I left, it was not that difficult.
What I find insulting is the suggestion that a man should be in control of himself all the time, even under severe provocation, whereas a woman is excused her bad behaviour, as though she cannot be responsible for her actions. Therefore she is expected to be LESSER. And it is feminists that promulgate this view. That is what I mean.

Polishmama if you yourself are in a bad situation, you can leave you know?

really? I thought this statistic shows just the opposite:


that leaves 20 percent for mothers, other family members and a world of strangers.

I'm sorry to hear that. This involved no children, I hope and assume? The laws make it much more complicated when children are involved. Many women I know choose to stay because they a. don't have income to have the retainer fee for the lawyer, b. are told by lawyers to expect that their children will be required to have visitation with the abusive father & ex-husband, and c. the statistics for women who are killed by their exes are substantially higher than if they stay in the marriage and keep their heads low, so to speak. At least, that's what domestic violence shelters tell them. Because the only thing protecting them is a piece of paper. Also, in some states, if the woman leaves the home, it automatically goes in the father's favor to have custody because the judge views it as disruptive to the children to have them move and go to a new school. And, if the father marries, it goes in his favor again because he can "provide a stable family home" for the children whereas a single mother "doesn't". This is according to fathers' rights lawyers here in the lovely state of IL. MD was different.

I'm still hung up on statistics. Then there is this:
A 1999 US Department of Justice study concluded that between 1976 and 1997 in the United States, mothers were responsible for a higher share of children killed during infancy, while fathers were more likely to have been responsible for the murders of children age 8 or older.

Interesting!

During infancy means most likely PPD without treatment or a support group around. Also, women who are abused or in an unstable relationship are more likely to suffer from PPD. PPD is nothing to scoff at or dismiss. Nor is it a weakness.

What is PPD?

PPD=Post Partum Depression. It comes from the sudden hormone drop immediately after birth.

Oh right, I know it as postnatal depression, are you a doctor?

what's the matter with you? Don't have to be a doctor to know about it

I'm grand

Making the leap that post natal depression may explain most infanticide is plausible especially when you consider people to be basically decent. A psychologist may be able to shed some light on this area which I'm sure is not the sole preserve of women.

I don’t believe in evil however there are sociopaths and that is gender neutral.

I believe in both evil and insanity. Often, they occupy the same space.

I'm not religious enough to accept evil as a force on Earth.

It's not religious to me. Some call it devil, some call it yin, some call it chaos. But we all like to believe that the balance is a given.

I think PND is the UK title for it. No, I'm not a doctor. I won't pretend to be an expert on it. It's what I was told when I was pregnant by my ob/gyn who was stressing that I keep vigilant of symptoms of PPD afterwards and to not hesitate to get help right away if I experience it. In college, I took a few psych courses, just enough to open my eyes and have more compassion for people. There are some interesting studies that were done on it but PPD is still new and often times rejected by doctors, health providers and even men who are supposed to be helping support the mother of their infant. I have a dr friend who was part of a team that was looking into it a few years ago and I learned a bit about it. This isn't from her, it's just some things I've found online.

womensmentalhealth.org/specialty-clinics/postpartum-psychiatric-disorders/
ghjournal.org/jgh-print/fall-2011-issue/intimate-partner-violence/
schs.state.nc.us/schs/pdf/schs121.pdf

It's not a far stretch to connect infanticide and severe PPD (especially given higher rate of severe PPD in abused mothers) when severe PPD symptoms include hallucinations, feeling out of touch with the baby or reality, helplessness, strange feelings about the baby (such as feeling it's an alien, etc.), thoughts of suicide and/or harming the baby. It's, therefore, not a far stretch to connect domestic violence with this as well. And giving the child to the father as an argument to a temporary illness is rewarding the abuser. PPD is treatable and goes away with medical help. The reasons why fathers kill their children tend not to be temporary and are more permanent, such as being a psychopath. I'm not saying women are better than men, I'm saying look at causes and numbers from all sides.

Btw, anyone here take Statistics math courses? I did. I also took some government and debate courses and one thing I was taught over and over in those courses was that statistics are true but their application is maliable, depending on the agenda of the person calculating the statistics. That the only way for statistics to be unbiased and complete is to look at them from all sides of an argument and find the entire picture on the topic. As well, you have to find any related but off topic statistics to see if they affect the full picture. Basically, statistics don't lie. People do by manipulating them. :P

Yes, in Europe it’s known as Post Natal Depression.


And I agreed with this above I would also add that Men who kill children also must suffer from some sort of imbalance

The data analysed is only as good as the sampling method used that’s where the difference in opinion comes from. Zimmy is correct in saying that family courts are institutionally biased against fathers. In a typical custody battle the word of the mother is given added weight in that the father has to battle allegations (True or not) before he achieves a level playing surface.

In Europe family courts are secret courts so there is a large black hole in the data right there.

I believe that people are essentially the same and the percentage of abusive males is the same as abusive females whatever form it takes, of course no one should stay in an abusive relationship and the result is that men almost always loose their children. Visiting rights are often disrupted for no good reason and often not "in the best interests of the child".

Barry, fair enough. Can't argue with that.

Only thing I want to point out is that, if the father is abusive toward the mother, it's likely he'll become or is abusive toward the child as well. Same for mothers, I'm sure. Now, if the father is abusive to either party, I see no reason why he should have visitation. How is it in the best interest of the child to have further exposure to someone who tore apart the family and sets an example of abusive behaviour for the child to later potentially emulate when they become older? In many US states, even if it is established with plenty of evidence that the father is abusive, he still gets supervised visitation, and if he doesn't harm the children during that trial period (no mention of harming the mother, of course), he can get unsupervised visitation and even petition for joint or full custody. If he is married or has a girlfriend, he is seen as providing a more stable home for the child who he previously abused. Even if he has a background of drug abuse, not working, mental illness, etc. Even if the mother works fulltime, has no such issues, and has been abused by the father. This is according to lawyers I know, in the state and county I live in, which currently does not offer legal assistance to abused mothers seeking divorce and custody. Btw, residing in this same county are some of the wealthiest people in USA. Some of whom are lobbyists for fathers rights.

This isn't every state, county or judge. It just all depends. And how much money each party has.

Thanks. You might find many of my ideas interesting.:)


It's another excuse for erratic, bizarre or even violent behavior. It's one of women-only defenses in murder cases (there are several).
The syndrome is real enough but there is no excuse for any violent activity following it. It's a choice, but some (not all) feminists suggest a 'trance' defense (what a surprise).

For example, our own sullen poster polishmama notes....


So if a woman kills her baby it is still, somehow connected to the idea that it's a man's fault. You do see a pattern don't you Barney?


I'm feeling the love :)


That's correct.
As an aside, and here I have to admit to a 'guilty pleasure', I was watching "Cheaters" which is a program dedicated to exposing spouse's who cheat. Camera crews follow the suspects, etc. In more than half the instances when the man cheats on the female, his spouse or girlfriend strikes him in some manner. This is usually done when he is busted with the other woman. I've never witnessed the opposite. Somehow, men know they have to be restrained but that doesn't stop the women from punching or kicking. It's acceptable, even on dumb shows like the Jerry Springer show, etc. These incidences are not officially reported as domestic violence but if a man smacked a woman on any of these shows, you know they'd haul him in. This sort of cultural acceptance is present in other areas and it's a subtle kind of prejudice that men face.

Nobody here said it's ok for women to hit men.

And your complete lack of comprehension regarding PPD is frankly terrifying. It's a documented and legitamite disorder. Did you even glance at the stats I presented? Please, read them and fully read my statement before you somehow distort what I said to mean that women killing their infant is the man's fault. I never said that. I didn't even insinuate that.

Look at the symptoms of severe PPD carefully. It's not controllable when it hits that point. No more than it is for a person suffering from severe schizophrenia. I would never excuse a mother from killing her children, she deserves a punishment for it, absolutely. But let's not disregard underlying causes. Jail alone doesn't fix things. America has the highest incarcaration rate in the world and it isn't because our police are the best or because our people are the worst. Nor are fathers around children less in the USA than in any other country in the world. Let's get facts straight here. There is a far broader picture.

The point is, look at the root causes of PPD, look at the fact that it goes away, unlike other psychological problems, look at the fact that it is treatable, and often times is preventable. If you want to quote statistics about who does what crime to prove that they are are the worse party, then you have to present the causes of said crimes. Or else, you are being biased in your presentation.

Why, again, is this so personal for you? The OP is gone and following his own agenda, his ex never came on here presenting the other side, and you just keep jumping on people and distorting and presenting only partial facts about an entire picture. Happy Easter.

I wonder why...

nij.gov/journals/266/murderfamilies.htm
trutv.com/library/crime/criminal_mind/psychology/fathers_wh o_kill/3.html
ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/230412.pdf

No matter what, no matter who does it, harming the partner (or ex-partner) and/or the children is plain out wrong.

The OP is getting on with what needs to be done.

Zimmy and Barney please keep up the good work. I really love the way you get them to put their heads in the noose and then skillfully kick the chair away.

My admiration gentlemen!

that is weird s.hit... I am starting to understand your ex a little.

I am sorry Rozumiemnic, but I have to laugh. It is just the way in which men can't seem to be understood or have valid point here. So when it all becomes a bit too silly for words you have to laugh a little.

It's like he has some kind of a comprehension problem.

Let the man hating begin!

Oh sorry, when did it ever stop!

The articles and reportage dealing with the subject almost always have it one-way though, you'd have to admit. That's why even you framed it that way until you neutralized the language.


You must terrify easily since in my post #144, I stated, "The syndrome is real enough....."


Fair enough.
You do know what I was getting at. The news is so "politically correct" when it comes to these issues that even a suggestion of blame about women is considered "sexist" and worse.


If you reread your posts you will find they possess more personal fervor than mine; although I admit that when I do allow passion to soar, it is in other areas. Oh - the fury of it all.....lol

I liked your 3 links in post 147. The discussion of causes was a bit thin. There was talk of access to guns, previous domestic violence history, etc. I fault the writers for omitting something which may be a primary factor. By far, most of the time the murders occur during divorce discussions or proceedings. I'd say that's very pertinent. I find many flaws in how news is reported or written about in virtually every subject matter. It's a major peeve of mine.


I only do that to feminists. ... figuratively of course.

what I was trying to figure out is if his ego could really be this big, or if it was actually pretty fragile that he had to protect it so fiercely.

But his assesment that this discussion is about man hating (or women hating, for that matter), is the "poor me" stance I've been waiting for.


And only in your imagination!

I thought size didn't matter? So you are taken aback by large things?


They are really harsh on you Anglik.You either have an ego too large or too small. Will these women ever be satisfied? lol


This woman has no empathy for you. Would her position be different if you signed on as Agnieska?

Later...... Alfred Hitchcock, here I come.

Of course I am so fragile, it has nothing to do with your bias which prohibits any meaningful discussion and your constant dredging up of the same old hackneyed sexist arguments which are so thinly veiled that it is laughable.

I don't think there is much woman hating here, or are you feeling threatened? Go on find me a study to prove otherwise!

So I either have a huge ego or I'm frightened, thank you Dr Freud for that most insightful piece of analysis. Just in case you didn't realise that was mocking sarcasm, sorry, but too funny!

It obviously has nothing to do with mocking your ridiculous view point which sees men as perpetrators of everything that goes wrong in the world. It is like a broken record!

I just can't take your posts seriously, sorry!

you're projecting again. And trying to talk like Zimmy. Let him take responsibility for that. LOL