[pachyderm]

That is what this article says, though it says "things are getting better":

http://news.discovery.com/human/us-w...se-111023.html

Thanks, pachyderm. I am not surprised.

Sad but true. The culture of the USA does not include a standard practice for raising children. It appears that many people just wing it. In some cultures, there are strict traditions for child rearing. For instance, in Tibet, a parent is not allowed to let their child cry. When a child cries, the parent must attend to it immediately. I've always thought that child rearing training should be a part of sex education classes. Once, I told my mother that as my parent, she should be nuturing. She asked me what nuturing was . . .

[Sanada]

Never trust 'so - called' stat's that maintain a modern way of life.

Stat's are misleading for very good reasons. Political stat's are obvious. Charity stat's do the same.
Trust instinct, I could never believe that things are worse that 200 years ago.

200 years ago in the uk , poverty was mental and a way of life.
5% ruled , 95% were slaves, no matter where in society one was.

A modern stat is for me that, a 'modern stat'.
Meaning that in this modern time its really bad for a percentage of socitey.

I would choose to live and be born in the west than ever in a modern world than a devoloping world anytime.

I have done the Mathmatics of the chance of being born in the UK or Europe or the USA.
When compared to being born in a world in development I am lucky (even though I was massivly abused as a kid).

To be born in a 'civilised' world is about a chance of 1 in 10.000. That is about 10 years old stat. I am going to check again.

Abuse is not the society it lives in. Its in the people who expect nothing for nothing. That to me is the 'civilised' world.

Sorry if this offends.

[amandalouise]

Originally Posted by pachyderm

That is what this article says, though it says "things are getting better":

http://news.discovery.com/human/us-w...se-111023.html

part of the reason why the US ranges high in child abuse, adult abuse and the like is because the US has laws about mandated reporting, many places outside the USA do not have the same child protection laws that other places have. Another reason the US stats are high is because some of the things that the US considers to be abusive other locations outside the US do not have the same considerations of what is abuse, some locations dont even have a standard for abuse. Another reason the US stats are high is because the US has child labor laws because we consider putting children to work in the work force to be abusive. many other locations outside the us still use children for labor and work.

yup stats can sure be misleading. our stats may be higher than other places but abuse happens everywhere.

[Ygrec23]

Think back to a hundred or a hundred and fifty years ago, here or elsewhere. Not even the term "child abuse" was known or any other phrase for the same phenomenon. Or, for that matter, spouse abuse or elder abuse. In those days once you'd safely made it into the middle classes you were allowed to forget most of the sufferings of others. Even encouraged to forget. Sometimes I try to project myself back into such a world, a world in which people were free, to the extent their personal circumstances permitted, to live in a bubble of warm, self-created and perpetuated optimism and good feeling. Know Randy Newman's song about Dayton, Ohio, in 1903? He thinks about these things too. Do you?

So, Ygrec23, the terms did not exist. Are you saying abuse did not occur?

A rather panglossian view of the past. There were blizzards in North Dakota in Little House on the Prairie times. The outhouse did not come with a heater installed.

[Ygrec23]

Originally Posted by TheByzantine

So, Ygrec23, the terms did not exist. Are you saying abuse did not occur? A rather panglossian view of the past. There were blizzards in North Dakota in Little House on the Prairie times. The outhouse did not come with a heater installed.

By no means, Byz. All such things have existed for a very long time, probably forever. And of course they were fully present a hundred or a hundred and fifty years ago, in this country as everywhere else. People simply gave themselves license not to notice them. Even Freud. We were particularly good in this country, I think, at denying reality. Read Wisconsin Death Trip if you haven't. Look at Lewis Hine's photos. Or those of Jacob Riis. Read (especially) Jack London's books about being a hobo in this country (The Road) or a poor person in London (The People of the Abyss) around 1902-1903.

And it goes on and on. Actually, you could even go back and look into Ambroise Pare's memoirs. He was a military surgeon in the early 16th century, very famous and highly skilled. Of course, he was only employed to take care of the wealthiest, most aristocratic war wounded. But his peripheral descriptions of what happened to the conscripted peasants give some idea of quite how valueless those of the lower classes were considered by the luckier ones. Really worth a look. Take care.

[elliemay]

Just a quick thought here. Regardless of the stats, it's all bad. IMO saying one country is "better" than another is kind of like saying "I murdered fewer people today".

The fact is, regardless of the prevalence or reporting, it's all bad. We are dealing in shades of badness here.

[Sanada]

I agree with you elliemay 100% on that. We are dealing with shades of badness.

Abuse comes dressed in many forms. All the forms of abuse are evil, to pre-meditate abuse is sick. Even mindless abuse is a soldier of a devil.

Psychological abuse is torture for myself though.
As a kid I remember the song that went - 'Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me'. What a stupid little song.
I have scars from abuse from being a child. They are now nothing more than white scar tissue. The scars that are taking most working on to heal are the psych scars.
Names did (and do) hurt me.