October 11, 2012

On October 3, 1992, while appearing on Saturday Night Live as a musical guest, Sinead O’Connor performed an a cappella version of the Bob Marley song War, during which she notoriously tore up a photograph of Pope John Paul II. She presented the photo of the Pope to the camera while singing the word “evil”, tore the photo into pieces, said “fight the real enemy”, and threw the pieces towards the camera.

O’Connor has since explained that she intended this behavior as a protest against widespread child abuse under Catholic power in Ireland. O’Connor has revealed and discussed the child abuse she herself underwent at the hands of her mother, as well as in Catholic school while growing up in Ireland. She underwent long-term physical, sexual, and emotional abuse.

Intending this symbolic protest as a “wake up call” to the world to recognize the corruption of the Catholic church and to look closely at the extent of the child abuse problem within Catholic institutions as well as in Ireland, O’Connor was vilified after the SNL incident. Not only did executive producer Lorne Michaels order that the applause sign not be used at the time, leading to absolute silence in the audience during the incident, but Sinead was thereafter mocked, ridiculed, as well as banned from SNL. NBC received more than 900 calls during the next two days, with all but seven criticizing O’Connor. It received 4,400 calls about the O’Connor situation in total.

O’Connor surprised SNL’s staff with the photo incident, having not brought out the photo of the Pope at all during dress rehearsal, and it took years before SNL’s executive producer Michaels was able to recognize the behavior as “a serious expression of belief”.

While protesting a serious issue, namely the child abuse epidemic in the Catholic church, of which she herself suffered deeply for many years, Sinead O’Connor nonetheless became the butt of many jokes and put-downs as a result of this incident. Even irreverent modern entertainers, such as Madonna and Joe Pesci, took strong public stands against her.

Joe Pesci, during his opening monologue as the following week’s host on SNL, held up the photo, explaining that he had taped it back together. Then, to huge applause, he tore up another photo, of O’Connor herself. Pesci also said that had it been his show, “I would have gave her such a smack.”

Madonna publicly denounced O’Connor for her criticism of the Catholic church, including two weeks later while herself hosting SNL, as well as in the press during interviews.

O’Connor was also booed off the stage at a Bob Dylan tribute concert two weeks after the SNL performance.

O’Connor suffered many forms of disparagement after her attempt to bring the suffering and cruelty behind child abuse to light, and it was only years later that the extent of the child abuse epidemic in the Catholic church became widely understood.

I think the world’s reaction to O’Connor’s stance, particularly in a country such as the United States with a strongly protected right to free speech, reflects the dynamic in families and groups in which child mistreatment is prevalent. The abused are blamed, while the reputation of abusers is often staunchly protected.

Please see the following recent article in the Atlantic providing a modern view of what happened: The Redemption of Sinead O’Connor.

September 26, 2012

Scientists have shown that child abuse and neglect lead to multiple health risks throughout life.

The “ACE Study” (or “Adverse Childhood Experiences Study”) led by Dr. Vincent Felitti at Kaiser Permanente has shown that trauma during childhood leads to adverse experiences throughout the child’s life including alcoholism, drug abuse, depression, suicide attempts, smoking, self-rated poor health, ≥50 sexual intercourse partners, sexually transmitted diseases, increase in physical inactivity, severe obesity, heart disease, cancer, chronic lung disease, skeletal fractures, and liver disease.

Childhood trauma, including abuse, neglect, or witnessing parental violence, has also been linked to premature aging, cognitive deficits, increase in cardiovascular disease, and other immune system deterioration.

In addition, research has shown that emotional abuse leads to increased risk for the development of psychiatric disorders, including schizophrenia, as well as linked childhood abuse with later development of schizophrenia.

You can take a look at the ACE Study’s new website and find links to multiple ACE Study publications at this link.

August 31, 2012

The National Catholic Register has removed an interview from its website in which Father Benedict Groeschel explained his experience working with priests involved in abuse.

In his interview, Groeschel, the former head of the Office of Spiritual Development for the Archdiocese of New York, expressed sympathy for Sandusky and said that those convicted of sexual abuse for the first time deserve no jail time.

Groeschel also pointed out that “sexual difficulties” were rarely prosecuted 10 or 15 years ago, and now if “any responsible person in society would become involved in a single sexual act — not necessarily intercourse — they’re done.”

“People have this picture in their minds of a person planning to — a psychopath. But that’s not the case,” he explained. “Suppose you have a man having a nervous breakdown, and a youngster comes after him. A lot of the cases, the youngster — 14, 16, 18 — is the seducer.”

The interview is no longer available at the National Catholic Register Website, but can still be accessed via Google’s cache.

While shocking to us in our modern mentality, this attitude is what has perpetuated abuse through the generations. Blaming the victim is a fundamental element of abuse.

Read more at: http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/sympathy-poor-guy-jerry-sandusky-pedophiles-new-york-friar-blames-youngsters-seduce-priests-coaches-article-1.1147848#ixzz258MJYP00

August 19, 2012

Brought into the spotlight through recent negative publicity (i.e., the infamous Time magazine breastfeeding cover), attachment parenting has gotten a bad rap.

I just read a wonderful article about attachment parenting in The Attached Family magazine which, describing the latest research on the subject, debunks the traditional and, dare I say, old-fashioned ideas behind the Time magazine editorial.

Current studies contradict the entrenched understanding of parental attachment expressed in Time magazine. Secure attachment is key to healthy human development.

Attachment theory is a widely accepted view of child development today. It is based on the concept that an infant needs to develop a strong mutual relationship of communication and response with the mother or primary caregiver for development to occur normally. Where the mother or primary caregiver doesn’t provide the needed security through the creation of a sensitive responsive relationship with the infant, the child may be unable to form healthy relationships in the future. Other problems can include inappropriate or inhibited responses or hypervigilant behaviors in social situations.

Recent scientific studies have demonstrated these consequences, among others.

Take a look at this fantastic article and see what you think: http://theattachedfamily.com/membersonly/?p=3250.

August 5, 2012

Norm Lee is an advocate of punishment-free parenting. The biography of his early years reads like a horror story. Abandoned by his mother due to severe abuse at his father’s hands, Norm suffered cruelty, forced servitude, beatings, abandonment by his father to a violent former housekeeper, among heaps of additional abuses.

As an adult, Norm dedicates time to promoting positive parenting, writing a regular report, referred to simply as “The Norm Letter”. The Norm Letter describes Norm’s theories about parenting. He believes that parenting should be positive and that discipline is unnecessary and harmful because children learn from their parents’ behaviors. He believes that children should be respected and trusted as human beings and that a home should be ruled democratically. Since children are entrusted to parents so that parents can protect them, nurture them, and provide for them, Norm sees punishment as a breach of trust, harmful to both parent and child.

Referring to the parental complaint, “I’ve tried all I know. I beat him and beat him, and he’s still violent”, Norm advises parents to polish their own mirrors, to work on their own morality, and to recognize that what appears to be child misbehavior is generally either normal child behavior or a reflection of parental modeling.

To many in our culture (one in which the majority of parents hold fast to the view that physical punishment of children is a parental right despite mounting scientific evidence that it is harmful), Norm’s views would be classified as radical. Personally, I think they are revolutionary.

Read the latest “Norm Letter” and decide for yourself: http://www.nopunish.net/index5.htm#normletter5.

July 26, 2012

A Kentucky social worker has been sentenced to five years in prison for her behavior in the investigation of child abuse cases.

According to Attorney General Jack Conway’s office, social worker Margaret “Geri” Murphy, formerly with the Cabinet for Health and Family Services, falsified a number of reports to make it appear that she had investigated cases in which there was evidence of child abuse, including a disturbing case involving sexual abuse by a three-year old’s own father. Prosecutors alleged that Murphy left children in homes in which they were abused and neglected, never looked into the claims, and lied to the state.

Murphy pleaded guilty to nine counts of falsifying documents. According to reports, she appeared surprised as she was taken into custody to serve the five year sentence, having requested probation.

Judge Charles Hickman said on the record that he was disturbed by the nature of the actions and non-actions taken by Murphy in specific instances.

“I feel like it sent a message,” commented Assistant Attorney General Barbara Whaley.

This is not an isolated incident. I have personally witnessed lack of investigation and complacency in the juvenile dependency system in my own work in California. Until the system starts looking at itself with a clear lens with a willingness to acknowledge its problems and deficiencies and until those working within the system start putting the safety of minors before personal interests, we will not be doing our part to protect our children.

See the following article in KYPost.com for more information on the Murphy case: http://www.kypost.com/dpp/news/state/Social-Worker-Charged_06037032.

July 12, 2012

Researchers from the UK recently completed a study which found that the risk of being physically, sexually, or emotionally abused is nearly four times higher for disabled children than for children who are not disabled.

The study was published in The Lancet online on July 11.

Examining 17 previous studies involving more than 18,000 children from the United States, the United Kingdom, Sweden, Finland, Spain and Israel including children primarily between the ages of 2 and 18 years, the investigators found that nearly 27 percent of children with disabilities had suffered some form of abuse. They also determined that lifetime levels of abuse for disabled children were high – 20 percent for physical violence and 14 percent for sexual violence.

“We know that specific strategies exist to prevent violence and mitigate its consequences. We now need to determine if these also work for children with disabilities. An agenda needs to be set for action,” said Dr. Etienne Krug, director of the World Health Organization’s department of violence and injury prevention and disability, which contributed to the study.

According to Mark Bellis of Liverpool John Moores University in England, one of the study’s authors, we need to continue to investigate these issues so that we can become better informed in this area.

The link to retrieve the Lancet publication (for purchase) can be found here: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/014067369390310D.

July 9, 2012

I ran across a very charming article written by a mother from India, Reshmi Chakraborty, in the online publication Citizen Matters, Bangalore on the subject of attachment parenting in Indian homes.

Ms. Chakraborty notes the controversy and disagreement over attachment parenting in the United States but writes that attachment parenting comes naturally to Indian parents, though they hadn’t given it that title in the past.

She notes that issues such as co-sleeping, which in Western homes may be debated, with a number of people believing it can lead to suffocation and others that it leads to bonding between parents and child, are pragmatically handled by Indian parents, such as with a separate bed which is placed as close to the parental bed as possible.

Personally, I find parenting in India, at least the type described by Ms. Chakraborty, involving a pragmatic approach to closeness and peace, refreshing.

You can find the article at this link: http://bangalore.citizenmatters.in/articles/view/4278-parenting-desi-style

September 25, 2014

June 30, 2012

When a scandal such as the Sandusky case breaks, people listen. They become outraged when they learn about the horrific abuse heaped on children while others stood by watching. When an individual case is brought to light, it becomes undeniable that something was wrong with the priorities of adults who knew about the abuse and chose to turn a blind eye.

But does the general public recognize that this case is only the tip of the iceberg and that this goes on every day? The prevalence of abuse and apathy is enormous.

One of the underlying themes in this scenario is national, personal, and social priorities with regard to power and innocence.

My thirteen year-old daughter asked me today about the impending California fois gras ban. She saw a film clip on the news of geese being force fed with tubes, and being the innocent, sensitive, smart, and sweet girl she is, asked how people can be so cruel to animals. As I talked about how humans were made to be capable of eating animals, I mentioned that our methods of raising the animals didn’t have to be so cruel. She wondered why no one eats people – “Well we’re at the top of the food chain,” I answered, but I realized that people manifest power frameworks in metaphorical ways. People are cruel to others, destroy others, feed off the pain of others – people like Sandusky.

This goes on throughout the world in multiple types of manifestations. Not only do people prioritize power and money over kindness, but people engage in abuse and cruelty toward the innocent as a form of weilding power and attempting to ease their own pain.

Abuse of the innocent is an ancient and continuing phenomenon, and it is so much more prevalent than we like to admit. It starts with children, and it leads to all types of power wielding activity, including governmental corruption, economic exploitation, and violence of all types.

The question is – do we have to be the victims or the perpetrators in the power scenario? Are people afraid that if they blow the whistle instead of standing by idly and watching, they will lose their power and turn into victims?

Here’s an interesting article in Boston Daily on the implications of the Sandusky case: http://blogs.bostonmagazine.com/boston_daily/2012/06/25/jerry-sandusky-abuse/