This was posed by the NSPCC
2007-10-05 23:08:13 · 10 answers · asked by georgebonbon 4 in Social Science ➔ Gender Studies
Don't believe anything coming from the NSPCC (National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children) and don't give them any money. They have a political agenda all of their very own and that agenda ISN'T about caring for children.
2007-10-06 06:11:44 · answer #1 · answered by celtish 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Seven precious lives lost when their deaths could have possibly been prevented. But where are the statistics on children who die of disease, starvation, unsanitary living conditions and worst of all, neglect? Preventing children from seeing a parent is not a great idea, however, why does the NSPCC not look into the backgrounds of mothers and fathers who may have a history of abuse so that some of these deaths can be prevented?
2007-10-06 07:26:58 · answer #2 · answered by Chris B 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
And how many died in the family home? How many in the hands of a custodial parent? How many died at the hands of a boyfriend/live in lover? And how many died while in Care? And how many died in government intuitions? And what were the cause of death in each case?
Without all the facts that information is of no use.
Inflammatory remarks do not improve the overall safety of our most precious children.
2007-10-05 23:16:06 · answer #3 · answered by Barb Outhere 7 · 3⤊ 3⤋
Have we forgotten how many moms have drown their children in the tub, thrown them off bridges, and had their cars roll down the lake with babies inside...utterly digusting....
2007-10-07 03:00:14 · answer #4 · answered by zen 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Ha, Theodore suggests we look at both sides of the coin - and gets 4 thumbs down!?!? Sounds like some people don't want to look at both sides.... can't imagine why ;o)
Theodore, I'll give you a thumbs up for common sense.
2007-10-06 03:34:32 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
How about you tell us how many children died last year during contact/access with their mothers? Then we can legally stop contact between children and their mothers, which always has been a bad idea to begin with.
2007-10-06 01:53:44 · answer #6 · answered by Theodore H 6 · 2⤊ 5⤋
First we need to gather the facts; after that we decide what is the best course of action.
2007-10-06 15:37:29 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
No we shouldn't but I am sure somewhere some feminist is working on a way to make this statistic work for them toward limiting fathers even more.
2007-10-05 23:23:37 · answer #8 · answered by Chevalier 6 · 5⤊ 3⤋
more than 7,000 died in care accidents. lets stop all contact with cars.
2007-10-06 01:46:09 · answer #9 · answered by Apple 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Of course feminists and their leaders would consider this and not the worst abusers of children and that being mothers.
Hypocrits
2007-10-05 23:21:42 · answer #10 · answered by ! Answers 5 · 4⤊ 4⤋