321–330 of 380 posts
I find this to be the most telling stat: "In a few cases (N So roughly 5% (<5 of 84) of the control group were discovered to have themselves been abused and needed to be dropped from the study. I was once in a law lecture on medical ethics. We were discussing genetic testing of newborns and how this could detect incest/abuse. A medical doctor in the class was dead against such testing. In his experience, amongst preg…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It can be done with a noninvasive blood test of the mother. I am a firm proponent of mandatory testing so fathers aren’t financially responsible for children that aren’t theirs (without their knowledge and consent). Historically, if a father later determines they're not the biological parent, family court will still stick them with child support until the child is 18 (or even older, sometimes requiring college suppor…
What will that accomplish? If a putative father is already suspicious (and doesn’t want to be a father), sure, then having a NIPT would make sense. But there is already an avenue for that. You would want to make that mandatory for all pregnancies? Not everyone wants to know that information and having a mandatory test could force people (fathers) into situations they don’t want to be in. Kids are more than a financia…
If we determine that children are better of having such rights then the wishes of the parents tend to be disregarded, with some exceptions to religion which still supersede such ethical considerations.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Dealing with abused children is unfortunately common in pediatric medicine and is a huge reason for burnout in the field, because a doctor will know about neglect happening that’s not “bad enough” to call someone about, or if they do, they know nothing will happen because even the services to get kids out of neglectful situations are themselves rife with abuse.
The veterinary field is the same way. I saw a TON of abused pets & animals when I was doing vet tech work. I ultimately decided not to pursue vet school.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does this objection require that there be markers that predispose someone towards being a survivor of sexual assault? There probably are, but I'm sure that's not politic to say.
So I'm being downvoted, which I expected because of the subject matter, but I've done research in this area and many of the correlates they talk about are associated with familial and other ecological factors that tend to cluster very locally. I don't even personally believe that sexual abuse is not associated with the things they claim, but statistically speaking, you have many of these things clustering together (s…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What will that accomplish? If a putative father is already suspicious (and doesn’t want to be a father), sure, then having a NIPT would make sense. But there is already an avenue for that. You would want to make that mandatory for all pregnancies? Not everyone wants to know that information and having a mandatory test could force people (fathers) into situations they don’t want to be in. Kids are more than a financia…
Abortion is always a possibility for me and during the age when people talk about consent is the question really honest? It absolutely should be mandatory and men should have a sat in abortion itself as well, the bare minimum society can do when there's no consent is to erase the financial burden.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Norway just removed jury duty, and if I remembered correctly the last case that had jury duty the actual judges put the jury verdict aside as they all agreed the jury had misunderstood the law. Of course judges are not always good as well. In the US they are often elected by a blood thirsty population. If they are not elected that has other issues in that the will of the people is not held by the judges.
Why was the jury required to understand the law? That's not a reasonable expectation for random people off the street. In the US, juries typically decide questions of _fact_ that are not already agreed upon by both parties (i.e. are in dispute). Judges handle questions of law.
If a fact is not known, how can some random person produce it? Out of what.
E.g. in the situation of a crime: only activities like crime scene investigation, and interviewing of witnesses can produce anything that can be called a fact.
Now so from all that have some collection of real facts from the investigation which do not add up to an absolute proof that some particular defendant "dun it".
The next best thing you could do is use some sort of probabilistic reasoning.
Well, what training in probabilistic reasoning do the these random people off the street have?
Probabilities should be quantified in concrete numbers. Instead of some flaky "shadow of a doubt" nonsense, there should be some 99.99% (or whatever standard level) confidence which is somehow calculated.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why should locking up child abusers be controversial?
Because a doctor's duty is to their patient, not the justice system. Breaking up the family might not be the best thing for the pregnant girl or newborn. I'm not saying they actively cover up abuse, but doctors know not to ask questions they don't want answered. Blanket genetic testing determinative to determine parentage is very dangerous knowledge.
Ending abuse for the pregnant girl is certainly their prorogative
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What exactly are you talking about? This sounds an awful lot like what some Roma people practice here in the bad parts of Europe
I mean quite seriously that putting children in romantic, intimate relationships is legal in America. Only 6 states have banned marrying children. I’m emphasizing this because I want to point out the degree in which sexual violence is normalized, to the point where 5 percent of women in a study who believed they weren’t sexually abused might realize they have been and be dropped out of the study is totally within the…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If it's not your kid biologically, and you're not a willing participant, it's not your responsibility. Pursue the biological parent for support. To do otherwise is equivalent to fraud. We don't force foster kids on people without their informed consent. This is no different. Edit: We agree to disagree. I fall firmly in the mandatory testing camp for accuracy of paternity for all involved parties. Trust but verify.
If you’re not a willing participant, then you can still have the test. If you’re the type where if the kid isn’t your biological kid, then you wouldn’t want to be a father to them — then get a test. The question is — should it be mandatory for all pregnancies? Willing participant or otherwise. I’m not saying no one should have paternity testing. It should certainly be available. I just don’t think you should mandate…
Can testify it does a number on male development too
Interestingly, there's another child comment, flagged and dead [edit: it has been resurrected], that says simply, "Sh...no-one cares about men." It's not a great comment, as it lacks substance, but it reflects something real and important. Sexual abuse is to women as police violence is to black people. These classes of people are affected more (far more - perhaps 2x?) than others, but that doesn't mean others aren't…
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2011/jul/17/the-rape-of-...