An article in USA Today takes a look at increased rates of child abuse in the deployed military:
Sending soldiers to war puts their children left at home at higher risk of abuse and neglect, says a study out Tuesday.
The study among military families shows that reports of emotional, physical and sexual abuse and child neglect peaked during the main deployment of troops to Iraq. When deployments began, reports of abuse quickly jumped from 5 in 1,000 children to 10 in 1,000.
The study found that victims were typically age 4 or younger and the abuser was usually the parent who remained at home while a spouse was deployed. Military families had lower rates of child maltreatment than civilian families before war. The study found that abuse rates soared when parents were sent to active duty.
And why is this? Here’s the answer they give:
“The stress of war extends beyond the soldier and the military personnel to impact the family,” said lead researcher Danielle Rent
But is that really it? I doubted it, so I did a quick google search on single parents and child abuse. Without going past the first page, I found this:
A recent British study found that the rate of child abuse is lowest in intact families, six times higher in blended families, 13 times higher in single-mother families and 20 times higher in single-father families.
Here is a chart from a Unicef study using data from the US in 1993 showing a less dramatic, but still significant, result:
So the “stress of war” is more likely to be the “stress of single parenting.”
This is not to say that having a family member in a war zone is not stressful on the rest of the family – it certainly is. But before attributing an increase in child abuse to the war itself, one should account for the more mundane influences that affect this behavior.
May 8, 2007 at 8:37 am
Am I missing something? Aren’t they forced to be single parents *because* of the war? (i.e., if we didn’t have the war, we wouldn’t have the problem)
May 8, 2007 at 8:48 am
Of course, Mark. But they are claiming an exotic effect that goes beyond the well-documented single-parenting effect. That is to say, if they’re that concerned about the fraction of the 160,000 troops who have children, they should be more concerned with the 13.5 million single parents who deal with this over much longer time periods.
You see? One is big news, the other is never mentioned. Guess which is which.
May 8, 2007 at 9:54 am
Your response spurred me to actually read the original USA Today article and I can see why it pissed you off — the egregious omission of stats like yours that show non-war single-parent family incidences makes for an intellectually dishonest article.
Here’s how they can make up for it: after victory is declared in Iraq and the boys come home, USA Today can publish an article that shows how defeating the terrorists helped *decrease* the rate of child abuse in military families. :-)
May 8, 2007 at 12:00 pm
Unfortunately, trying to create a net positive by writing two crappy articles is rarely a successful strategy.
May 8, 2007 at 5:53 pm
I personally know of one case where the mother had gotten custody somehow (I say “somehow” because she cheated on the father; if I were a judge, I would NEVER award custody to the cheating person, on the grounds that that individual has demonstrated unfitness for parenthood). Later, the father got deployed to Iraq (he’s an Army surgeon). While he was gone, it turned out that the man the mother had married was abusing the children. He was slicing strips of skin off their bodies. Twin girls, about three or four at the time, iirc.
Fortunately, there is a happy ending. The father managed to get leave and come back to get custody of his children (his mother and stepfather were willing to take charge of them while he was in Iraq). The judge did award him custody, and the mother got visitation rights iff she never again saw the abusive man, whom she had divorced at that point. The father has finished his tour and is engaged now; I haven’t met her yet, but she’s apparently a very lovely and intelligent lady who understands the value of discipline, and whom the kids love. The mother does still have visitation rights, much to the children’s dismay, but they are definitely much better off than they were before.
May 9, 2007 at 10:48 am
Not to be nitpicky, but cheating does not make a person unfit for parenthood.
If it did…well, let’s just say that there are several people I know- with wonderful, fallable, human parents- who would not exist right now, or who would have been raised by strangers.
A person can be a shitty spouse and a terrific parent. Children do not require perfect moral examples. It’s nice if they get one, but not an absolute.
Did I ever tell you about the time my Dad and I stole parts off a parked car together?
May 9, 2007 at 4:48 pm
But if you cheat on your partner, then you’re disloyal, dishonest, untrustworthy, and irresponsible. Sounds like a recipe for a nightmare parent to me.
(Yes, loyalty is the number one most important thing to me in a relationship, and no, I never, ever trust twice. One strike and you’re out.)
May 10, 2007 at 7:56 am
People aren’t that simple.
Yes, a character flaw can affect all areas of life. But most people compartmentalize a lot.
Frankly, you’ve just insulted several of my family members. Only one of whom I would characterize as ‘disloyal.’ The rest of those adjectives are just plain silly and do not describe them, though they may have committed the sin.
Good people sometimes do bad things. I do not throw them away like trash. I’d be very interested in your philosophical views about forgiveness.
Furthermore, people who do not cheat on their spouses can still make terrible parents. There are so many ways to be awful to children.
May 10, 2007 at 8:52 am
You know what would be interesting? If people were willing to admit terrible things they’ve done at some point in their lives. I think you’d be very surprised at who did what.
But realistically, nobody admits it. People of good conscience hide these things from themselves. Otherwise, how could they sleep?
My Dad did some terrible shit when I was a kid- he was not an abusive parent, I want to make that clear- but whenever we talk about those days, he has a very different recollection of it than everybody else in the family.
He has excused and even excised many an incident in which he behaved badly. We have a great relationship now.
May 10, 2007 at 9:09 am
Man, this brings back a lot of memories. My family used to be really mixed up.
May 10, 2007 at 2:48 pm
I do apologize for the offense, as I said in my email.
May 11, 2007 at 5:33 am
You and your dad swiped parts from a parked car together?
Awesome! Most dads would not see that as a bonding experience.
I think I gave my philosophy of parenting on an AoS thread, so I won’t be (terribly) redundant – kids have a remarkable capacity for grace and forgiveness. If you can suck it up when you screw up (and you will, Lord knows I have), and admit your failing, and ask for forgiveness, you’ll be ok. The most important step you take is the one after you make a goof.
May 11, 2007 at 6:23 am
Ugh, I am such a jackhole, Mrs. Peel. Tone comes across poorly here…let’s just say that I don’t remotely give a crap if somebody insults my family members.
I wasn’t trying to create a huffy little drama. Just wanted to grab on to that little detail of your thoughts and open it up.
I’ll even let you hit my sister’s kids. Get the boy first. I’ll hold him down for you, he’s wiggly.
Off to respond to your email.
May 11, 2007 at 11:44 am
Tone comes across poorly here…
Oh sure, blame my sound system. I’ll have you know that this site offers the finest tone reproduction system that can be had for free.
Good day, madam!