Abuse Of And Violence Against Children by Women

In Family Rights on July 25, 2009 at 7:58 pm

The federal government says women committ more child abuse and killing of babies than men. A dirty little secret the feminist like you to believe is that all domestic violence is from men. Read the report or ignore it.

A 1998 report from the Department of Health and Human Services, Child Maltreatment in the United States, finds that women aged twenty to forty-nine are almost twice as likely as males to be “…perpetrators of child maltreatment” or about two-thirds were female.

For cases of neglect and medical neglect, the estimate is that three-quarters of the perpetrators are female.

We know that child abuse takes place overwhelmingly in the homes of single parents, who are almost exclusively mothers. A British study found children in single-parent homes up to 33 times more likely to be abused when a live-in boyfriend or stepfather is present.

Neonatacide, or the murder of children aged one year or less is almost exclusively a female crime.

by Charles E. Corry, Ph.D.


Combat amongst adults pales to insignificance when compared to violence against children by adults, particularly where the adults are the child’s parents. By this I do not mean to criticize the normal discipline, including controlled, limited spankings, or other physical discipline and restraints that a parent must impose on their children as part of their upbringing.

Time and time again tales of men being arrested for domestic violence against women come to my attention where the biological father was attempting to protect his children from abuse by their mother. Though data are sparse, it seems apparent that women who abuse their partners are also very likely to abuse their children as well or, as in two cases below, the woman begins with child abuse and then becomes violent towards her partner.

Anyone still inclined to blame family violence on the patriarchy and male aggression should look at the statistics on violence against children.

A 1998 report from the Department of Health and Human Services, Child Maltreatment in the United States, finds that women aged twenty to forty-nine are almost twice as likely as males to be “…perpetrators of child maltreatment” or about two-thirds were female.

For cases of neglect and medical neglect, the estimate is that three-quarters of the perpetrators are female.

We know that child abuse takes place overwhelmingly in the homes of single parents, who are almost exclusively mothers. A British study found children in single-parent homes up to 33 times more likely to be abused when a live-in boyfriend or stepfather is present.

Neonatacide, or the murder of children aged one year or less is almost exclusively a female crime.

No reliable statistics exist but estimates range up to 5,000 infants a year killed in the United States.


Get a copy of Patricia Pearson’s book When She Was Bad, How and Why Women Get Away With Murder. Or read the stories below. Or take Fred Reed’s outlook on child abuse as the cops see it from the streets.

Another chilling view of child abuse is given in Margaret Talbot’s Femme Fatales where British researchers videotaped women (and a few men) smothering, poisoning, and, in one case, deliberately breaking the arm of their children.

Recognizing that it is virtually impossible to distinguish at autopsy between Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) and accidental or deliberate asphyxiation with a soft object such as a pillow, the American Academy of Pediatrics now calls for an investigation by a child abuse expert in all such deaths. The updated guidelines were published in the February, 2001, issue of the journal Pediatrics. These guidelines are based in part on the work of the British researchers referenced above, as well as The Death of Innocents about a New York woman who killed five children of hers claiming SIDS before she was caught.

Obviously, if we are to fix the problem of child abuse it would be more profitable to begin with women. Not, however, in the sense of simply placing the blame, but in determining what factors can be improved or changed that minimize the risk of women abusing children.

For example, Fagan has pointed out that “…the greatest danger many American children face is not from drugs, gangs or lead poisoning. It is from Mom and her live-in boyfriend.” Our approaches to these problems are addressed in family evolution.

Take for example the story reported by Linda Chavez in February, 2001, as summarized here:

“Clarence, 7, and Ernest, 8, are now being treated in New York’s Presbyterian Hospital, the victims of multiple facial stabbings and beatings by their mother, Linda A. Harley, 38, who now sits in jail awaiting trial on 41 counts of abuse. Harley is no stranger to the criminal justice system. She has been arrested at least 29 times for drug possession, prostitution and for stabbing the boys’ father, Ernest Wright, 18 times. Her children, including three older children, have spent most of their lives apart from their mother because of her history of violence and abuse.”

According to a 1994 Department of Justice report, mothers are responsible in 55% of cases in which children are killed by their parents. The National Center on Child Abuse Prevention attributes 50% of the child abuse fatalities that occurred between 1986 and 1993 to the natural mother, 23% to the natural father, and 27% percent to boyfriends and others.

The role of fathers in raising children is indisputable. For example, Stephen Baskerville has pointed out that:

Recent figures from the Department of Health and Human Services confirm that violent crime, drug and alcohol abuse, teenage pregnancy, emotional and behavioral disorders, teen suicide, poor school performance and truancy all correlate more strongly to fatherless homes than to any other single factor, surpassing both poverty and race. The overwhelming majority of prisoners, juvenile detention inmates, high school dropouts, pregnant teenagers, adolescent murderers, and rapists all come from fatherless homes.

We must give credence to fathers who are trying to protect their children from abusive mothers. All too commonly, women who abuse their husbands and lovers abuse their children in turn. The following story is fairly typical of what comes to our attention (edited for grammar and spelling):

“I heard my wife beating my five year-old daughter upstairs for falling asleep while watching television at 8:00 P.M. on a school night. When I went up to investigate she was beating the child on her bare bottom as hard as she could.

I pushed my wife away and grabbed my daughter. That sent my wife into a rage and she began beating me and throwing things.

She then went downstairs and came back up with a butcher knife and stick. She began beating me with the stick and waiving the knife saying: ‘I’ll kill you if you ever interfere again.’

I took my daughter into my bedroom and called 911. After the police arrived they took my wife’s statement first and arrested me on the spot. After being released and reading the police report, I found out my wife (as the police put it), had a blood dot under her nose and claimed that I had pulled a knife on her.

They examined the child’s bottom over an hour after the beating and claimed only to see a faint redness. The police further stated, after arresting me, that I had no right to interfere with the child’s punishment.

I could not afford an attorney this time and represented myself ( Ed . In such cases it is rare that the police are only called to a house once). My wife refused to testify, but also refused to tell the truth, believing she would be in trouble. The State then called the three responding officers to the stand to read off her statement. One officer saw a tiny dot of blood and two didn’t. [Note: Such evidence based prosecution is now prohibited by the Crawford v Washington decision of the US Supreme Court.]

In is my opinion the Judge convicted me based mainly on the fact that there had previously been twelve 911 calls placed from my house. The end result was that I was given a six months suspended sentence, placed on six months probation, and ordered to attend domestic violence classes again.”

As might be imagined, such stories seldom have a happy ending, and the couple are now divorced with the child living with her abusive mother. The chances of this little girl developing normally range from zero to none. Drugs, alcohol, teenage pregnancy, school dropout, and other problems are a virtual certainty, whether she remains in the home of her mother, or child protective agencies eventually place her in a foster home. That prognosis would likely be quite different if she lived with her father but in today’s climate that is almost certainly not going to happen. Thus, she will likely become another child of what Amneus calls “The Garbage Generation.”

We receive far too many stories of this sort, and three with documented evidence are given below, to suggest these are isolated incidents and that the fathers are simply trying to cover up their own misdeeds.

Bob and Jane in Portland, Oregon


Note that extensive documentation has been provided for the facts stated below. Names have been changed but the locale is Portland, Oregon, in the United States of America.

The story begins as an office romance. Jane wants some excitement in her life. Bob is handy, she flirts, he is single, she is attractive but married. After about a year of working together, while things heat up, he gives her what she wants. She wants more of it but ends up pregnant. This isn’t her first child as she has two older daughters from her husband, whom she still messes with.

Bob wasn’t the only excitement Jane craved, and the boy has cocaine in his system when he is born in June, 1993, according to hospital and social worker records. Bob doesn’t even find out he is the father until a month later.

Jane also has problems with alcohol abuse.

Jane’s husband isn’t exactly thrilled about all this but she deludes him for a time with the notion that the boy is his. However, the little boy doesn’t look like her husband nor exhibit features common to the two older daughters. A separation follows that revelation.

Having been told by two doctors that he could never father a child, Bob wants to become involved with his boy. They move in together at her suggestion. Result is Jane has a two-month premature baby girl in August, 1994. Jane isn’t big on prenatal care, obviously, and the baby suffers from anemia and respiratory distress, but lives.

Jane isn’t showing any signs of settling down and, as you might imagine, the affair becomes a rocky one as Bob isn’t the only man she enjoys. After tolerating her behavior for a year, he moves out.

Mom has some living expenses and figures Dad should contribute a little more. So while Bob and the kids are at church one Sunday during the summer of 1995 she boosts the oldest girl through the window of his house to unlock the door. Bob makes a police report but nothing is done as it is a “domestic” and the “victim” in such circumstances can’t be a man.

Jane isn’t the type to tolerate bother and noise, and cocaine does tend to make one irritable. In September, 1995, children services are notified that she has given the oldest daughter a bloody nose. The report states: “Both of mother’s former partners report Mom has substance abuse problems and the oldest girl reports that Mom hits her and her siblings.” Girl also points out small, healed scars on her arms and tells the social worker that her mother inflicted them. Mom also is given to shaking the baby girl when angry.

Bob then has custody of his two kids but in June, 1996, Jane stops by and picks them up from a day care center despite being on file not to be allowed to take them. Mom claims she will be back in 10 minutes. Doesn’t happen. Note that is very unlikely a father on such a list would have been given the kids in the first place. Day care worker thinks Jane is on drugs at the time when she reports to children’s services but gave Jane the kids anyway.

One doesn’t imagine that things are all sweetness and light with maternal love dominating Jane’s home, but the next reported incident isn’t until May, 1997. The report states that Jane hit the then 3-year old girl in the face with the screen door, splitting her lip and knocking out half of a front tooth. As a result, police give the kids to Bob to take care of while a custody evaluation is conducted through the summer.

In October, 1997, Bob is awarded custody of his son and shared custody of his daughter in a court settlement conference before Judge LaMar.

Jane doesn’t take kindly to this decision and their 4 year-old son tells a therapist his Mom said she was going to kill his Daddy. A couple of weeks later she gives it a go and hits him with a car in front of the three kids and two witnesses willing to sign affidavits they saw her run down. Bob was then looking at complete knee replacement surgery and was out of work for about four months.

Bob is granted a restraining order against Jane in November, 1997, by Judge Merri Souther-Wyatt. Like most such women, Jane doesn’t think a restraining order, or any other law, applies to her. But when she violates it she is sent to jail. That doesn’t do much for harmony and quality time for the kids with their parents. As a result, custody of the children is disputed by Jane.

On December 12, 1997, the court appointed a guardian ad litem, or GAL, for the children and ordered that the son remain with his father until a custody hearing can be held. The three daughters all go with their mother.

Moving with remarkable speed in such proceedings, on December 15-18, 1997, Judge Merri Souther-Wyatt held a custody hearing. During the hearing she:

• Vacated the court order appointing counsel for the children.

• Vacated Jane’s restraining order.

• Ignored expert testimony about abuse of children by Jane.

• Ignored evidence of Jane’s drug and alcohol abuse.

• Ignored evidence of Jane’s motor vehicle assault on Bob, telling him from the bench that: “You probably provoked her to hit you with the car.”

• Terminated Bob’s rights to review and consult with doctors and the counselors treating the children, and he is refused access to any of the children’s therapists, school, medical, or children protective services records.

• Bob is granted visitation so long as he is: “clean, sober, not agitated, and doesn’t question children about their mother and her family.” Note that Bob does not have a problem with drugs or alcohol and has evidence that he does not use either.

• Ordered that son be returned to his mother, together with the three girls who were already in her custody.

• Bob is further barred from making any reports of abuse and having the children examined or photographed for evidence of abuse.

As most divorced fathers will recognize, she hasn’t yet played her denial of visitation rights card. That game begins a couple of months later in February, 1998. Phone message left for Bob saying she will be out of town this weekend with the kids so don’t bother to stop by for them.

In early March, 1998, the children talked with people at a day care center. Bob’s son demonstrated with stuffed animals what his mother did to him. Documents indicate Jane performed fellatio on her four year-old son until he was erect and then mounted him. His daughter was examined and found to have sores on her buttocks as the result of sleeping in her own urine.

When Jane finds out she has been reported again, this time for sexual abuse, she calls Bob and tells him if he doesn’t forget about the molestation he’ll never see his kids again. She also tells him the boy: “Can’t do for me what a man can do.” Bob wisely records such calls, including this one.

Bob then filed a report with the child protective services despite the court order not to by Judge Merri Souther-Wyatt. As a result, he is asked to take a lie detector test. The person administering test states Bob: “Could be guilty because O. J. Simpson and Jeffrey Dahmer were.” Bob walks out without taking test.

Bob is then required to appear before Judge Merri Souther-Wyatt on March 9, 1998. She prohibits him from playing back any of the recorded phone messages and finds in favor of Jane. When told of Jane’s sexual molestation of their son, she storms off the bench.

After speaking with Judge Souther-Wyatt, detectives are sent to Bob’s house, allegedly to speak with the children, but instead they issue him a citation for a criminal misdemeanor alleging two counts of making false reports about his children being molested by Jane. In the meantime, Bob has gone to the governor’s advocacy office, who tell him: “If you feel that there has been abuse, immediately take them to a third-party mandatory reporter.”

On March 31, 1998, Bob appeared again before Judge Merri Souther-Wyatt. During that proceeding she dismissed the citation and terminated all his parental rights except for child support obligations. Visitors in the courtroom were aghast at her actions and demeanor, and she had two of them forcibly removed when they murmured sotto voce “What about the children?” One of the state social workers present attempted to intimidate Bob in such a threatening manner that three other men forcibly restrained the state employee, and a state trooper came to calm Bob down.

Since then Bob has not seen his children for nearly three years and the only contact has been through cards and telephone calls. The first week of September 1998, the youngest girl had to spend a week in the hospital for reasons Bob can’t discover due to Judge Merri Souther-Wyatt’s order. He only knows of it only through billing by his health insurance.

“Bob” has had strong support from his church and community and on January 6, 2000, filed a civil suit for violation of his civil rights under 42 U.S.C. 1983 et seq. in the United States District Court, District of Oregon, case no. CV 00-0035 and asked for relief of $15,000,000 under the Civil Rights Act of 1871. His complaint was dismissed by Federal Judge Ancer L. Haggerty on September 20, 2000.

However, the Federal court has given Bob the right to amend his complaint and sue Judge Merri Souther-Wyatt and the Children Services Division personnel in their individual capacities. He was also told that he could not act for the children and needs to find an attorney to represent them.

The case is now on appeal with the United States 9 th Circuit Court of Appeals, docket no. 00-35991 as of November 24, 2000.

Abuse Of And Violence Against Children by Charles E. Corry, Ph.D..

  1. The United Kingdom – a research team of King’ S College and University College of London discovered that the progesterone rate present in saliva makes it possible to determine the risk of premature birth.

  2. […] Abuse Of And Violence Against Children by Women […]

  3. In Indiana, women are seen as second class citizens, as children are seen as a means for the state to profit. DCS is allowed to commit perjury & falsification of court documents, as children are literally removed from innocent parents without probable cause. This is Indiana, the land of suffering, abused, or dead children.

  4. Many children die in Indiana by negligence of Dept. of Children, that is suppose to protect.

    Part 1

    Part 2

    Part 3

    Here in Indiana, children are literally stolen from safe homes without probable cause, parents are defamed, and Dept of Children will commit perjury with their own made up lies to terminate parental rights, just to sell/adopt a child, for the federal grant incentive reimbursement. We are denied an Ombudsman, but DCS was given an Ombudsman, to protect DCS from those who confront DCS of the perjury & falsification of court documents, done so by DCS, Child Protection Services, of which many of those children who die under state care. If the deaths are even found out, will have an autopsy done without any findings of what caused the death, to protect the foster parents, institutions, and DCS/CPS. Though our Attorney General is aware of the magnitude of crimes done by DCS toward children & parents, AG protects the governmental agency, DCS. How many babies are stolen all over the state by a government agency, called DCS, that is no more than an agency that claims to “protect”, but they make large amounts of money from the tax payers and the federal bonuses and grants? {Human Marketing & Human Trafficking} How many children are alienated from the parents and siblings without true cause in Indiana?

    Over 7000 children are removed from their homes in Indiana every year, the highest national average. Indiana targets single, low income, battered and abused, or uneducated, women to steal their children. What Indiana Hoosiers stands for: As two Indiana children sit at the lunch table during school, one child asks another child, “Why is Indiana called the Hoosier State, and what does Hoosier mean?” The other child replied quite quickly, “Oh, that is easy. It is because it is the most used words in Indiana by many. Hoos ier mommy? Hoos ier daddy? Hoos ier sister? Hoos ier brother? Hoos ier grandma and grandpa?” The inquiring child sat quietly, then tearfully responded, “You’re right. Do you know Hoos ier mommy?” The other child sadly responded, “No, but I am given an anti-depressant so I don’t think about my mommy a lot. I was told my brother was beaten to death by his foster dad, and my sister was in 11 different foster homes, and now, she is homeless.”

    Would anyone want to live in Indiana? Those of us who are still employeed, continue to pay high taxes for DCS to cause harm and deaht to innocent children, and DCS is never audited, accountable, or held responsible.

    Currently a little girl is crying for help from the man that bashed in her head, now suffering brain trauma, but Indiana does not care. Her complaints of pain & holding self, with noted vaginal irritation with police report made, is completely ignored, as IMPD stated the prosecutor would just roll their eyes. The judge ignores GAL recommendations to never allow child with man alone, as he has left psych units AMA, with diagnosis of self mutilator, bi-polar,manic depressive, poly-substance abuser, and criminal history of assault & battery. Marion Co. Indiana, prosecutor’ office, laughed at the 911 tape of the mother of child, being beaten, as the man is a IMPD snitch. In Indiana, children are to either be sold for profit of state or buried, never allowed the safety of their own family. Governor Daniels, simply turns his back on the innocent, precious, children. http://www.honkforkids.com

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: